USAID is not worth defending blindly

Earlier this month, the Democrats of Congress made one of their first important protests of Trump’s new era. Prominent democratic legislators recovered Outside the closed headquarters of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which is in the process of being Die by Elon Musk and President Donald Trump. Politicians criticized Musk’s efforts to eliminate almost all agency employees and denounced the acquisition of the federal government by a single private citizen.

But when they hurried to Usaid’s defense, the Democrats also inadvertently stood out an uncomfortable truth about the agency: that, for decades, it has been an essential arm of American imperialism that often serves as a tool for regime change, the electoral interference and the destabilization of countries around the world.

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, for example, Jacted That the use of “fight against terrorist groups worldwide”, pursues China worldwide to make sure that it does not “monopolize critical mineral contracts and port infrastructure”, and “support the combatants of freedom” wherever it is Let them (and yet the United States defines that term). Maryland Senator Chris van Hollen, meanwhile, called The effort to close Usaid “an absolute gift for our adversaries, to Russia, to China, to Iran and others.”

Samantha Power, the former USAID director, also exposed how the United States armed humanitarian aid by masking her strategic interests with the rhetoric of altruism. In a recent one New York Times Opinion articlePower acknowledged that the agency “generated large political capital stores” in countries where it works and uses its influence to reinforce US financial interests, such as helping an American company to “enter a new market.” The New Jersey senator, Andy Kim, a Democrat who once worked for USAID, was even more forceful. “Usaid is not charity,” he wrote in a mail in X. “It is a foreign policy tool with bipartisan origins that is critical in this dangerous global environment. Gutting it means giving our ability to compete and keep the United States safe. “

To be clear, Musk’s attempt to destroy the agency is not a reason for celebration. The assault of Musk and Trump to USAID, and the federal written bureaucracy is illegal and antidemocratic. Programs that come out in all the world have been thrown into chaosincluding health and HIV services and almost one billion dollars in food aid that is now at risk of deterioration. The Trump administration also plans to absorb the agency in the State Department, which would be much worse. (These movements are already face a series of legal challenges.

Musk has tried to justify repression from several different angles, entrepreneur conspiracies, deceptive statements and direct falsehoods. He called Usaid “a nest of viper of radicals of the left that hate the United States” and a “criminal organization.” Lied about Power’s salary at the agency and falsely said that we use funds Political. At one time, Musk even promoted a position that called the agency “the most gigantic global terrorist organization in history”, which seems to refer to the well -documented paper of Usaid as a vehicle for the change of regime and political interference.

But this is not an anti -imperialist recognition of principles. In 2020, musk declared In a shameless tweet: “Let’s hit who we want! Deal with that ”, referring to those supported by the United States bang Against Evo Morales in Bolivia, a country rich in lithium and other essential minerals for the production of Musk electric vehicles.

But anyway, there is no reason to blindly defend USAID.

It is no secret that the agency is an extension of the aggressive foreign policy of the United States. It was first created by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 to counteract the influence of the Soviet Union during the Cold War. In later decades, USAID has juice to Key paper In efforts designed to crush socialist movements, regime change and safeguard US corporate interests worldwide. It has also been significantly ineffective In real development. The majority of USAID’s expenses strictly go to US companies or sources, and not to local organizations, which actively undermines development in these nations and keeps vulnerable dependents of the United States. It is also known that the United States government uses the agency to finance and disguise its propaganda outlets abroad. In 2010, for example, the USAID led a project for secretly create A “Cuban Twitter” intended to stir the disturbances to trigger regime change.

United States frequently conviction groups like hutis, who have accused The United States and Israel of the use of humanitarian aid as a cover for espionage, attacking help or blocking humanitarian access. But how can Washington claim the moral land when your own officials proudly admit that your aid programs are strategic tools instead of purely humanitarian? If American help is often a Trojan horse for broader geopolitical ambitions, then it is reasonable that any foreign government is skeptical of help programs linked to the United States. At the moment when the US ATE openly helps mineral extraction, political manipulation and its global power games, that help ceases to be benevolent in any significant sense.

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a group of DC -based experts, recently published a piece On the “discouragement” of the agitation of the American foreign aid of the Trump administration. However, when presenting his case in defense of USAID, they confirm what critics of American foreign policy have argued for a long time.

“The idea that American foreign aid has been a kind of festival of generous beneficial organization disconnected from the interests of the United States is ridiculous,” wrote Thomas Carothers, director of the Democracy, conflict and governance program of Carnegie. “Just look at the list of The greatest American aid receptors– It is no coincidence that they are almost all security partners or security concern countries. ”

He is right. And while it is important that people face the illegal assaults of Musk and Trump to the government, it is equally important not to pretend that these institutions are decency failures. We need to go beyond these simplistic binaries and press for a model that rejects both Trump’s fascism and the type of imperialism that has defined USAID for so long.

Aída Chávez

Aída Chávez is a communications director and policy advisor in foreign policy. She was previously The nationDC correspondent and a reporter in The intersection, More perfect unionand other points of sale.

More than The nation

Jamie Raskin establishes the legal strategy to oppose Trump, but says: “We are not going to leave a political crisis”: Democrats need a political organization strategy.

Questions and Answers

/

Chris Lehmann

Does Kennedy’s name represent liberalism or oligarchy?

Jeet Heer

Trump and his habilitators have launched an assault unprecedented to US society and values.

Sasha Abramsky