«Радикальные сумасшедшие» или спасители мира? Политические войны вокруг USAID (продолжение)

We will remind that the US Agency for International Development temporarily put it on pause financing of programs in Ukraine for at least 3 months through the audit of foreign aid. The agency has been criticized for non-transparent spending, including financing initiatives with dubious feasibility — such as musicals, comics and support for LGBT communities in various countries. There are accusations of inefficient use of funds, corruption and financing of projects that could support terrorist groups.

Senator Joni Ernst and Elon Musk have publicly criticized USAID, and the Trump administration is considering merging it with the State Department, which would reduce the agency’s autonomy. At the same time, the organization remains an important instrument of US soft power, providing significant aid to countries, in particular Ukraine, where it financed the restoration of infrastructure and medical facilities.

USAID is also accused of using the funding as political leverage. Some governments, including Bolivia and Slovakia, accused the agency of meddling in domestic politics and expelled it from their countries. Discussions about USAID’s future continue as pressure mounts on its transparency and effectiveness.

How different presidents and political parties in the USA have treated the activities of USAID

USAID is more than just an agency. It is an instrument of American foreign policy that has survived wars, political scandals and even the threat of closure. Each president of the United States shaped his mission in his own way — from expansion of influence to severe reduction.

USAID was created during the Cold War, when John F. Kennedy decided that international aid could help against communism. It was an influence strategy, not just charity.

Later Ronald Reagan used USAID in the fight against communism in Latin America and Eastern Europe, financing economic and military projects. Then the Agency became part of a big geopolitical game.

For Bill Clinton USAID changed its goal — focused more on the fight against disease and poverty. HIV/AIDS programs have saved millions of lives, but skeptics have questioned their effectiveness.

In turn, President George W. Bush initiated large-scale aid programs, including the HIV/AIDS Emergency Response Plan, and made USAID part of the international fight against terrorism, investing billions in stabilizing Afghanistan and Iraq. However, this money often went in an unknown direction, giving rise to corruption scandals.

Under Barack Obama, the agency received record budgets and new missions — fighting poverty, protecting the climate, and developing democracy. But critics asked again: «Is money wasted?”

Finally, Donald Trump did not hide his attitude: USAID is «black hole”, which drains money. During his last year in office, he tried to cut the agency’s budget, and now he has frozen funding and is considering closing it entirely.

Democrats are defending the agency, Republicans are criticizing it, and the world is watching: Will USAID remain an instrument of US soft power or become a victim of a grand political game?

USAID contractors, aid-accepting non-governmental organizations with a dubious reputation

USAID works with numerous contractors and non-governmental organizations to implement its programs around the world. Among the main contractors are Chemonics International, DAI Global, RTI International and FHI 360. These companies implement projects in the fields of health care, education, economic development, etc.

It also plays a key role in the activities of USAID play back non-governmental organizations. Among them are CARE, Save the Children, World Vision and the International Rescue Committee. These NGOs receive financing for the implementation of humanitarian and development projects.

Some organizations that receive funds from the Agency, criticized for dubious reputation and inefficient use of funds. For example, the Chemonics International company was involved in a scandal due to inappropriate use of funds and low efficiency of projects. In addition, some non-governmental organizations are accused of non-transparency of financial activities and insufficient control over expenses.

The relationship between financed projects and destabilization in certain regions

USAID’s initiatives were well-intentioned, but sometimes backfired. Economic development projects sometimes increased social inequality when only certain groups of people benefited, causing tensions and conflicts.

In the 1980s, the United States actively supported Afghan Mujahideen in their struggle against the Soviet occupation. USAID, along with others, provided funding and arms that strengthened these groups. After the withdrawal of Soviet troops, some of the Mujahideen became radical groups like the Taliban, which later became the enemy of the United States in the region.

During the Syrian conflict, USAID funded programs to support civil society and democratic initiatives. However, some aid acceptors were associated with opposition groups participating in armed conflict. This led to the escalation of the conflict and further destabilization of the region.

Among the resonant episodes that remember in connection with the agency’s activities, the launch in 2014 in Cuba of the social platform ZunZuneo, which, according to critics, was used to gather information and provoke anti-government protests. Similar accusations were made about Georgia, where in 2024 USAID, according to opponents, supported opposition activists and contributed to the destabilization of the political situation. In 2008, the president of Bolivia, Evo Morales, openly accused the agency of facilitating the opposition, and in Bangladesh in 2019-2022 similar accusations of interference in the internal affairs of the state were made.

The list of coups and political crises in which the structure was allegedly involved includes Honduras in 2009, where Manuel Zelaya was ousted from power, Egypt in 2011 with the ouster of Hosni Mubarak, Serbia in the 2000s, when Slobodan Milosevic’s regime collapsed, and Nicaragua and Venezuela, where there were attempted coups. There are rumors that USAID could finance protest movements, organize trainings for activists and provide technical and material assistance to those who opposed the current governments.

In the discussion about USAID’s role in political processes, the events in Ukraine in 2014 are also mentioned. Robert Kennedy Jr. hinted at the agency’s possible involvement in the Maidan.

In countries with authoritarian regimes, the promotion of democratic reforms has sometimes provoked repression by governments, leading to destabilization and violence. This shows that international aid can be difficult and risky, even with the best intentions, because local specificities and contexts are not always taken into account.

Does USAID promote gender programs or support LGBT activism?

USAID does not only deal with roads, hospitals and humanitarian aid. Agency too promotes social change — gender equality and support of LGBTIQ+ communities. This causes different opinions: some consider it important for an inclusive society, others — an ideological imposition.

USAID supports human rights programs for representatives of LGBTIQ+ communities in Eastern Europe and Africa. Funding goes to educational campaigns, human rights advocacy, and the development of LGBT organizations.

USAID funds initiatives for equality of rights between men and women. Thus, the agency helped assess gender equality in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and implements European equality standards. Agency in cooperation with UNFPA created mobile teams of psychological support for women who have suffered from domestic violence.

60 teams provide assistance to victims in different regions of Ukraine. Odesa region received funding from USAID for a project to help the LGBT community. The money went to training, consultations and support for professional development and employment.

Which countries or international organizations have publicly criticized USAID’s activities

Consequently, the Agency is accused of meddling, financing dubious projects, and even having ties to terrorist groups.

As discussed above, Senator Joni Ernst stated, that $9 million of American money could go to terrorist groups, which caused a big scandal. The White House called for a review of all USAID grant programs.

Another controversial case: USAID highlighted funds for programs for the transgender community in Latin America. Conservatives in the US were outraged, saying that taxpayers’ money was being used for «ideological experiments.»

Kremlin a long time ago blames USAID in financing opposition movements and independent mass media. Russia closed the agency’s office in 2012 and supports Donald Trump’s initiative to freeze its funding. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán also criticizes USAID for supporting organizations that oppose his policies.

At the same time, the Vatican charity, Caritas Internationalis, condemned Trump’s decision to stop USAID funding. The Catholic Church has warned that aid cuts could put the lives of millions of people in developing countries at risk.

… Can an organization with billions at its disposal avoid the political storm? When Trump calls her «black hole”, Democrats are demanding reforms, and international partners are hesitating whether it can be trusted, USAID finds itself at a crossroads. Will this be a moment of fundamental change, or will the agency go down in history as another symbol of global scandals and waste?

Tetyana Viktorova