The United States Agency for International Development (USAID), a critical player in global development and humanitarian relief, finds itself in turbulent waters as President Donald Trump’s administration explores moves that could significantly weaken or even dismantle the agency.
According to sources familiar with the matter, the president’s team is reportedly considering folding USAID into the State Department. Though no official announcements have been made, insiders suggest the agency’s independence is under threat. Five sources close to the administration indicated that they were unaware of definitive plans but noted USAID’s future autonomy is far from guaranteed.
One USAID spokesperson dismissed the speculation as “purely speculative,” asserting that “no deliberations have taken place.” Despite this denial, the pattern of recent administrative actions paints a grim picture for the agency.
Billions Frozen, Workforce Diminished
Under Trump, USAID has faced a barrage of destabilizing measures. The administration has frozen billions of dollars in foreign aid, directly impacting countless development programs worldwide. Furthermore, approximately 60 senior USAID officials have been placed on leave, and hundreds of contractors have been either fired or furloughed.
Adding to the agency’s uncertainty is the absence of a named administrator, leaving USAID effectively overseen by State Department officials, many of whom lack development expertise.
Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, expressed concern about the implications of such moves. “If the objective is to advance American interests, my Republican colleagues who talk a big game about outcompeting China and its global investments should explain how this will do anything but shoot us in the foot,” Meeks said.
Analysts warn that undermining USAID could not only disrupt critical humanitarian efforts but also diminish America’s ability to exert soft power in an increasingly competitive global arena.
Established by Congress in 1961, USAID operates as an independent agency with a distinct mission to tackle development challenges worldwide. Its work complements but remains separate from the State Department’s diplomatic efforts.
Over the decades, administrations from both parties have floated the idea of merging USAID with the State Department, but none have succeeded due to bipartisan support for the agency’s autonomy. Proponents argue that USAID’s workforce, with its specialized expertise, plays a unique role in areas ranging from health care delivery to agricultural development.
Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho), chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, acknowledged the long-standing debate but framed it as a pragmatic consideration. “This idea has been floated by nearly every administration since USAID was established by Congress in 1998,” Risch said. “I’m supportive of efforts to reform and restructure the agency in a way that better serves U.S. national security interests.”
Nonetheless, past attempts to merge USAID with the State Department, including a push by the Trump administration in 2017, were abandoned due to bipartisan opposition.
Humanitarian and Diplomatic Consequences
Critics of the proposed changes, including both former and current USAID officials, warn of dire consequences for global development and humanitarian aid.
“It’s a separate agency for a reason,” a Democratic congressional aide said. “These are professionals who know how to do their jobs and deliver life-saving assistance on a daily basis. They’re the ones best qualified to do that.”
USAID’s programs have long served as a cornerstone of American foreign policy. From delivering life-saving medicines in conflict zones to training farmers in developing countries, the agency’s work often transcends traditional diplomatic efforts.
“Gutting USAID would be a disaster not only for global humanitarian work but also for America’s reputation abroad,” said a former senior agency official.
China’s rapid global investments and influence campaigns make USAID’s role even more critical, analysts argue. The agency’s work not only saves lives but also strengthens America’s strategic relationships and influence in fragile regions.
A Path to Marginalization
Even without a formal merger, the Trump administration could effectively sideline USAID through other mechanisms.
One potential move involves transferring USAID’s financial management system, the Phoenix program, to the State Department. The agency has denied this is underway, but sources within USAID suggest it remains a possibility.
Another option is having the USAID administrator also serve as the State Department’s director of foreign assistance, a role that traditionally works closely with USAID.
Additionally, officials point to the growing influence of Pete Marocco, a senior figure in the State Department overseeing foreign assistance, as a sign of the administration’s approach. Marocco, who previously worked at USAID, has faced backlash for controversial attempts to restructure the agency. His tenure triggered a dissent memo from agency staff, and he was put on leave after just three months.
A Partisan Battle Brewing
The lack of clarity around the Trump administration’s intentions has heightened anxiety among Democrats, who are already preparing for a fight.
“Trump has already frozen virtually all our foreign aid — what about that would lead anyone to believe he gives a damn about USAID?” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said. “It is a terrible idea to functionally dismantle one of our most effective soft power tools.”
Despite the Democratic outcry, there are signs that some Republicans may support moves to reorganize or shrink USAID. Proponents argue that integrating USAID into the State Department could streamline foreign aid operations and reduce redundancy.
However, critics counter that USAID’s mission requires a level of expertise and independence that cannot be replicated within the State Department.
“If you look at the actions in totality, it adds up to really paint a picture that seeks to marginalize USAID,” a Democratic congressional aide said.
What’s Next for USAID?
While the Trump administration’s ultimate intentions remain unclear, many observers believe the agency is at a critical crossroads.
Congress may ultimately serve as a check on any drastic changes, given its historical support for USAID’s autonomy. However, as the administration continues its broader effort to shrink the federal government, the future of USAID remains uncertain.
In the meantime, USAID officials and their allies in Congress vow to resist any attempts to undermine the agency’s mission.
“The people who work at USAID are some of the most dedicated and knowledgeable individuals in government service,” said a former agency official. “They deserve better than being pawns in a political game.”
As global challenges like pandemics, food insecurity, and climate change intensify, USAID’s defenders argue that America can ill afford to weaken one of its most vital tools for addressing those crises.
For now, the world is watching — and waiting — to see whether the Trump administration will press forward with what could be one of the most consequential shake-ups in U.S. foreign aid history.
