Merged USAID: is it really a bunch of crazy leftists? / Trump Was Absolutely Right to Shut Down USAID

[Trausti]

Far from being a tragedy for Africa, the demise of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) at the hands of President Donald Trump's administration should be cause for celebration, argues Arikana Chihombori-Quao, the former ambassador of the African Union to the US.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Far from being a tragedy for Africa, the demise of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) at the hands of President Donald Trump's administration should be cause for celebration, argues Arikana Chihombori-Quao, the former ambassador of the African Union to the US.

From 2016 to 2019, Arikana Chihombori-Quao served as ambassador from the African Union to the United States. In November 2019, she was removed from that position. As reported by NPR:

The African Union fired its U.S. ambassador this month. Her supporters say it was because of her anti-colonial speeches. However, a recent AU internal report alleges abuse of funds and office.

For more details, read the NPR story.

Dr Chihombori-Quao is a medical doctor in Murfreesboro, TN, specializing in family medicine. In March of last year (2025), as DOGE was dismantling USAID, she accused USAID of "promoting agendas tied to environmental, human rights, and social justice issues, which she believes were not always aligned with the continent’s priorities." She also "criticized the tendency of some African governments to seek stronger ties with the United States," urging "African nations to focus on...collaborations that prioritize the continent’s interests." She said "the majority of African leaders, and not just African leaders, but leaders in the developing world, are celebrating" USAID's exit from the African continent.

Elon Musk agreed with her.

More recently, Elon Musk issued a public challenge for anyone to “cite a single name of someone who died” as a result of USAID's demise. When Nicholas Kristof responded by naming names, did Musk dispute Kristof's names? No, Musk began to call Kristof names: “Kristof is utterly evil,” “Kristof is lying through his teeth,” “Nothing that Kristoff [sic] has said is true,” “He is an utter piece of ◊◊◊◊ and liar,” and then Musk said again “You’re an utter piece of ◊◊◊◊ and a liar.”

We are of course accustomed to Musk's habitual mode of argument, and to Musk's apologists making excuses for “the world's richest man killing the world's poorest children.” (Musk responded to that statement by saying “Gates is a huge liar.”)

As resported by Forbes:

In a post on X on Monday, Musk wrote: “Deaths in Africa DECREASED after USAID funding was cut, because they’re no longer able to push for violent revolution to install leftist regimes!” There is no available evidence supporting Musk’s claim. Some indicators point in the opposite direction...

In its next paragraph, that Forbes article cites estimates ranging from 163,000 to over a million deaths during just the first year. One of the more careful studies estimates half a million deaths of children during that year could be attributed to the demise of USAID, and another quarter million adult deaths.

 

[Ziggurat]

In its next paragraph, that Forbes article cites estimates ranging from 163,000 to over a million deaths during just the first year. One of the more careful studies estimates half a million deaths of children during that year could be attributed to the demise of USAID, and another quarter million adult deaths.

Do these show up in actual measured mortality? If so, where? If not, why not?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

no matter what you think about the how and why of US foreign aid, the way it was abruptly ended was unworthy of a civilized nation.
Arguing about the degree to which others managed to prevent the worst or not is just a distraction from that.
The US lost the goodwill of many nation it had build up over decades and the trust of everyone.

 

[arthwollipot]

This is why they are so upset. Wanted to keep that taxpayer-funded gravy train going.

It costs money to provide aid. No agency can possibly allocate 100% of its funding to aid programmes. It's just impossible. That's not fraud, it's reality.

Rightists love to throw around the word "fraud" as if it doesn't actually mean anything clear and definable. Show me one instance of fraud, one clearly definable, documented instance of literal legal fraud, and I'll show you a teeny-tiny drop in a large, but still insufficiently large, bucket.

The real problem is the aid agencies that take donated money and use it for religious proselytisation, not the ones that use it for administration.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Of course, any non-profit is free to grift has much as possible - that's just business

 

[gypsyjackson]

It costs money to provide aid. No agency can possibly allocate 100% of its funding to aid programmes. It's just impossible. That's not fraud, it's reality.

Rightists love to throw around the word "fraud" as if it doesn't actually mean anything clear and definable. Show me one instance of fraud, one clearly definable, documented instance of literal legal fraud, and I'll show you a teeny-tiny drop in a large, but still insufficiently large, bucket.

The real problem is the aid agencies that take donated money and use it for religious proselytisation, not the ones that use it for administration.

How about this fraud case?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_business_fraud_lawsuit_against_the_Trump_Organization

 

[arthwollipot]

How about this fraud case?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_business_fraud_lawsuit_against_the_Trump_Organization

Is the Trump Organization [sic] an international aid charity? If not, then it is irrelevant to my point.

 

[Trausti]

In its next paragraph, that Forbes article cites estimates ranging from 163,000 to over a million deaths during just the first year. One of the more careful studies estimates half a million deaths of children during that year could be attributed to the demise of USAID, and another quarter million adult deaths.

Ah, no.

Africa Death Rate | Historical Data | Chart | 1950-2026

 

[Trausti]

no matter what you think about the how and why of US foreign aid, the way it was abruptly ended was unworthy of a civilized nation.
Arguing about the degree to which others managed to prevent the worst or not is just a distraction from that.
The US lost the goodwill of many nation it had build up over decades and the trust of everyone.

Yes, it was a really big hit against bureaucracy. All those NGOs no longer able to gorge on taxpayer dollars.

 

[Trausti]

It costs money to provide aid. No agency can possibly allocate 100% of its funding to aid programmes. It's just impossible. That's not fraud, it's reality.

It just like any charity that uses some emotional issue to gather funds, then funnel those funds for salaries. Of course, they'd be upset that USAID ended. Whatever bad thing they're fighting against, they don't won't it go away. They want it to last forever. If after all these decades and billions spent the alleged bad thing still exists, those feeding off taxpayers dollars clearly have no interest in ended it. And it just feeds the Western paternalism that non-Westerners are helpless children.

 

[gypsyjackson]

Is the Trump Organization [sic] an international aid charity? If not, then it is irrelevant to my point.

No, I just wanted to highlight an actual fraud that some people in this thread are totally happy to ignore.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

In the third of a three-part series ProPublica wrote, "Rose ran out of food less than three weeks ago after the World Food Program cut rations across the camp. At the hospital, she learns why: WFP lost its funding from the United States, the program’s biggest donor. What she doesn’t know is that aid workers and government officials from both the U.S. and Kenya spent the previous months begging and warning Trump administration leaders that families like hers depended on that food to survive. But for months, nothing changed. So Rose and thousands of other mothers watched their children starve." An update to this story indicated that her son died of malnutrition.

 

[arthwollipot]

It just like any charity that uses some emotional issue to gather funds, then funnel those funds for salaries.

Would you work for no pay?

Of course, they'd be upset that USAID ended. Whatever bad thing they're fighting against, they don't won't it go away. They want it to last forever.

That is egregiously offensive to people I have personally worked with. I guarantee that if all the world's poverty were solved in one fell swoop, like Elon Musk could do if he really wanted to, all those people in aid agencies would be thrilled to be out of work.

If after all these decades and billions spent the alleged bad thing still exists, those feeding off taxpayers dollars clearly have no interest in ended it.

Surely you're not saying we have the resources to save the poor from their lot? There will be poor always pathetically struggling, look at the good things you've got.

- Jesus Christ (according to Tim Rice)

And it just feeds the Western paternalism that non-Westerners are helpless children.

Which is yet another lie told by Rightist oligarchs because they would prefer to see poor children starve to death than take any responsibility for saving them.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

At Science-based Medicine Steven Novella discussed the Ebola outbreak. He wrote, "Well, here we are. The Trump administration has pulled out of the WHO and has “fed USAID into a woodchipper”. This has gutted the infrastructure we had in place to respond to outbreaks. This lack of infrastructure and networks makes it harder to detect new cases, which means our response to a new outbreak is delayed. The WHO has lost 20% of its workforce, which it uses to back up the fragile health infrastructure in much of sub-Saharan Africa. The CDC has perhaps been even more affected, as I recently discussed. In the previous large outbreak, the CDC sent 2,000 health workers to help contain the outbreak. This time they sent 100, and their primary goal is to prevent spread to the US, not to contain the outbreak itself. The US has given over $182 million in assistance. However, you cannot simply throw money at this problem. The money is given to local governments, but the network of experts that we had in place is essentially gone, down the woodchipper with USAID...The lack of a well-funded and coordinated response, through an established network of experts armed with early detection, is a main reason why this is the fastest-spreading Ebola outbreak in history. This is a human and political failure of epic proportions."

 

[Emily's Cat]

At Science-based Medicine Steven Novella discussed the Ebola outbreak. He wrote, "Well, here we are. The Trump administration has pulled out of the WHO and has “fed USAID into a woodchipper”. This has gutted the infrastructure we had in place to respond to outbreaks. This lack of infrastructure and networks makes it harder to detect new cases, which means our response to a new outbreak is delayed. The WHO has lost 20% of its workforce, which it uses to back up the fragile health infrastructure in much of sub-Saharan Africa. The CDC has perhaps been even more affected, as I recently discussed. In the previous large outbreak, the CDC sent 2,000 health workers to help contain the outbreak. This time they sent 100, and their primary goal is to prevent spread to the US, not to contain the outbreak itself. The US has given over $182 million in assistance. However, you cannot simply throw money at this problem. The money is given to local governments, but the network of experts that we had in place is essentially gone, down the woodchipper with USAID...The lack of a well-funded and coordinated response, through an established network of experts armed with early detection, is a main reason why this is the fastest-spreading Ebola outbreak in history. This is a human and political failure of epic proportions."

Some comments on this, for consideration.

USAID was never a charitable foundation, it was never a program for providing aid in crisis. It's objective was to project US power and priorities onto the rest of the world, to invest in shaping developing nations in ways that benefit the US. It was a means of interfering in other countries to benefit the US.

If the US was funding 20% of the WHO workforce, that really ought to give you pause. WHO had membership from 194 out of 195 countries on the planet, and the US constitutes just a bit over 4% of the global population. If the US had no poverty and no problems to sort out, I probably wouldn't have an issue with the level of generosity being expected of US taxpayers. As it stands, I think we need to pu ton our own oxygen mask before helping others with theirs.

CDC isn't funded by USAID. Cuts to CDC may be an issue worthy of discussion, but it's not something that can be blamed on rolling US-backed charitable actions into the State Department and reducing spend that was deemed unnecessary. By all means, disagree with it being deemed unnecessary if you want - but this isn't a USAID issue.

This article is simultaneously deriding the US for reducing the amount of taxpayer money spent in foreign countries... and complaining that the US sent taxpayer money to foreign countries.

 

[Helen]

Before the US left the WHO, EU institutions and countries contributed around 57% of the costs. So almost three times as much as the US, despite having less wealth (79 trillion vs185 trillion), and more citizens (452 million, 320 million in the USA). Poor countries aren't expected to contribute. Obvious, I would have thought.

And yes, it's not only about charity, but the people whose lives are save by aid really don't care.

Besides, you may regret the soft power you've lost, as China moves in and takes over. Especially now, when you are turning your back on your old allies, and are looking for new ones in all the wrong places. USAID has also been instrumental in keeping Americans healthy - even if you don't care about anyone else, it has been important for keeping track of potential pandemics, and the spreading of other diseases. The CDC have also relied on it for information.

USAID has helped keep the world stable, using their soft power. The EU has done even more, of course, and will eventually be able to pick up some of the slack. But not all of it. And all the USAID research is lost, as are the workers, as well as the lives of people who relied on it. A slow withdrawal, and information of it beforehand, might have saved both research and lives,

So how much have the poor, poor US taxpayers gained?

 

[Ziggurat]

Besides, you may regret the soft power you've lost, as China moves in and tajes over.

Um... China already took over. Did you not pay attention to what the WHO was doing during Covid?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Um... China already took over. Did you not pay attention to what the WHO was doing during Covid?

stunning non-sequitur.

 

[Helen]

Um... China already took over. Did you not pay attention to what the WHO was doing during Covid?

That is why I can say with certainty that they will move in where yoou have left the barn door wide open. Before you scuttled off under the cover of night, they had less room for maneuver.