There
has been considerable controversy surrounding the Trump administration
decision to cutback on government agencies that are ostensibly committed
to charitable, educational and other nation building activities both
overseas and in the United States. This spending, amounting to scores of
billions of dollars, has helped produce budget deficits that ballooned
in the twenty-first century, largely due to the surge in overseas
activity that occurred after the trauma of 9/11 when Jewish Supremacists
decided the United States should serve as Israel’s policeman in the
Middle East to enable the Jewish state’s expansion under the cover of
making it “safe.” As the US is now verging on bankruptcy due to its
unsustainable debts, the second incarnation of the Trump Administration
has focused on cutting budgets in areas that it considers to be enemy
occupied, often meaning “woke” or institutionally allied to the
Democrats. Social programs as well as the bloated defense department
spending were considered to be suitable targets so starting during the
first week in February, the White House brought down the hammer when it went after a number of government agencies, inter alia calling for huge cuts in Pentagon spending and the complete elimination of the Education Department.
The White House also shut down the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), firing nearly all of its 10,000 employees, reportedly leaving only little more than 600 employees
in place to assist in the shutting down or downsizing of facilities in
the US and in foreign countries. Also, about 800 awards and contracts
that are administered through USAID were reportedly being canceled.
There have reportedly been some judicial delays in the firings due to
the complexity of removing thousands of employees and families from overseas offices and housing, though the pause is likely to be only temporary.
Tax dollars are traditionally used corruptly to fund
projects and policies dear to the hearts of politicians, which is why
Ron Paul and others have called for sweeping audits, including of the
Federal Reserve system and the Pentagon in particular. This hidden
spending is particularly difficult to identify if the program is somehow
linked to foreign policy and/or national security, which have
traditionally been protected from scrutiny by denying nearly all public
access to sensitive information based on the “need to know” principle to
safeguard sources and vulnerable activities.
USAID
was founded in 1961 during the John F. Kennedy administration to unite
several foreign assistance organizations and programs under one agency.
At first it was seriously intended to be a mechanism for the US to aid
in health, disaster relief, socioeconomic development, environmental
protection, democratic governance and education. Its focus, however,
eventually became to guide development in parts of the world that
suffered from what were considered to be dysfunctional governments and
institutions in terms of American interests. USAID has always been
funded by the federal government and its upper management has worked
closely with the Department of State, to which it is technically
accountable, and the intelligence agencies in particular. Its budget in
2023 was $43 billion. Trump’s reduction in force (RIF) of USAID has been
accompanied by a shake-up in its management, its remaining
responsibilities now being in the hands of the Secretary of State Marco
Rubio, who has considerable experience in special agency management
after having served on the Board of the National Endowment for
Democracy’s (NED) Republican subsidiary component, the International
Republican Institute (IRI). NED, which operates extensively overseas, has also been stripped of funding by Trump.
The
dismantling of USAID does not necessarily mean the organization will
completely go away, it will just be much reduced and under new
management. It will likely have a new mission, though no one is at this
point sure what that will mean. And USAID and NED are not alone as the
presidential memo has called for a halt
to the funding of all the government components that are dependent on
taxpayer generated funds to provide what is perhaps euphemistically
referred to as “foreign aid.” USAID and NED do have humanitarian
projects, i.e. feeding the hungry, but they are primarily politically
driven. The NED component IRI puts it this way on its website “Our
mission at IRI—advancing democracy worldwide—is a battle with many
fronts. I am proud to say that IRI is supportive of every endeavor that
will bring freedom to more people. We have made progress in our mission
by giving hope to those who wish to protest on a city street, run for
office, or cast a ballot.”
So
the aid organizations overtly have a political role, but how does it
translate in practice and does it extend to playing favorites with the
US media and political parties? Trump has put it another way, declaring
that USAID leaders were “radical left lunatics.” This is what he claims on his website Truth Social:
“LOOKS LIKE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS HAVE BEEN STOLEN AT USAID, AND OTHER
AGENCIES, MUCH OF IT GOING TO THE FAKE NEWS MEDIA AS A ‘PAYOFF’ FOR
CREATING GOOD STORIES ABOUT THE DEMOCRATS. THE LEFT WING ‘RAG,’ KNOWN AS
‘POLITICO,’ SEEMS TO HAVE RECEIVED $8,000,000. Did the New York Times
receive money??? Who else did??? THIS COULD BE THE BIGGEST SCANDAL OF
THEM ALL, PERHAPS THE BIGGEST IN HISTORY! THE DEMOCRATS CAN’T HIDE FROM
THIS ONE. TOO BIG, TOO DIRTY!”
There are, in fact, credible reports
that the 2019 impeachment of Trump was driven by the actions and
disinformation coming from CIA, FBI and USAID operatives, so it is
plausible to assume that Trump is now settling scores. Beyond that,
USAID and NED are both notorious for their roles in the business of
covertly supporting opposition political parties worldwide and assisting
in regime change. Billionaire philanthropist George Soros, through his
network of organizations, received $260 milllion
from USAID for funneling funds to non-governmental-organizations (NGOs)
connected with Soros’ Open Society Foundations, which are known for
advocating for radical policies and regime changes globally. Soros is
also a Democratic Party favorite and major fund raiser, having recently received at a White House ceremony the honor of the Presidential Medal of Freedom presented in absentia to his son Alex from outgoing President Joe Biden.
As a
result, both USAID and NED have been banned from foreign countries,
including Russia, due to their meddling in local politics. Hungarian
Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who was often a target of USAID activity,
immediately thanked Trump for his decision to cancel USAID. Both USAID
and NED were deeply involved in Eastern Europe. Former Acting Deputy
Secretary of State Victoria Nuland has revealed that
the aid agencies were deeply engaged in the multiple source $5 billion
dollar multiyear US “investment” in Ukraine that culminated in regime
change in 2013 and led to the current war with Russia. In government
circles it has frequently been asserted that USAID and NED and other
such organizations now do what the CIA used to do routinely in terms of
regime change between its founding and the 1990s.
One
might suggest that recent US governments, operating through their
various subsidiaries like USAID and NED have been funding just about
everything to control a world community in line with American interests.
Mainstream media worldwide that is directly or indirectly funded
reportedly includes journalists, news outlets, and activist NGOs and
sites – and that’s just through USAID. That would appear to include
Reuters, Associated Press, BBC, The Guardian, NBC, CNN, NPR, NYT,
Politico, PBS, The Financial Times, The Atlantic, The Daily Telegraph,
as well as much more media in the developing world. The anti-China
hysteria media “ecosystem” currently depends on US government funding,
and is already complaining about the impending shutdown of USAID
support. To cite only one example of how it is packaged, Reuters news
service has received millions in funding from the US government
specifically for “active social engineering.”
Labor
unions are also funded by USAID which is also behind the recent
political unrest in Slovakia. It has also paid for multiple coup
attempts in Venezuela, funded high profile trips to Ukraine’s Volodymyr
Zelensky to improve his image and popularity, and funded al-Qaeda linked
groups in Syria to successfully overthrow the government in Damascus.
Going back to Trump’s first term of office, it is interesting to observe
that most of the “aid” to opposition parties to overthrow Nicolas
Maduro in Venezuela was delivered during 2019, so Trump, guided by
hardliners John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, was not at that time shy about
regime change. In fact, Voice Of America (VOA), which often served as a
CIA mouthpiece, even reported that Trump had tripled aid to opposition
figure Juan Guaido to $56 million. Those asking themselves why Trump has
now decided to “oppose” the very semi-covert agency that he’s also been
using for regime change have a point, but it might be appropriate to
see the shakeup as a warning against government information, law
enforcement and intelligence agencies again becoming tools of the
Democratic Party politicians.
Defenders
of USAID are arguing that the agency is being maligned, that in
addition to its political profile it is heavily engaged in promoting
health and wellness worldwide. The head of USAID under Joe Biden was the
highly controversial and very much “woke” Samantha Power, who claims somewhat disingenuously that
the agency budget of $38 billion in 2023 included something like $20
billion in spending that should appropriately be described as
humanitarian. Those who are the recipients of the programs, mostly in
the third world, will consequently suffer from the defunding of aid. If
that is actually so, it perhaps would make sense to roll such programs
into a mechanism that would not be tied to regime change and corruption
of local governments and media.
There
is some question even in Congress concerning whether there will be a
new centralized aid agency and what it will be called or do now that it
has been reduced in size and will likely have a tiny budget relative to
what it once enjoyed. It is early days and the answer to that question
will likely emerge before too long, but it should be observed that at no
point has Rubio or anyone else in the Trump administration actually
condemned aggressive US engagement abroad or claimed they will bring it
to an end. The State Department has even officially said the only goal
is to ensure the good things that USAID did will continue by “advancing
American interests abroad.” Given some of the recent aggressive
positions taken by the Trump Administration over Gaza, Panama, Canada,
Mexico, Iran and Greenland as well as the tendency on the part of its
top officials to increase pressure on perceived adversaries, it may be
that the US isn’t changing course at all. It quite plausibly might be
doubling down, and organizations like USAID and NED, even if their
names, roles and leadership change, will likely be integral to that
process.
Philip
M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the
National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation
(Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S.
foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157,
Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.