In recent years, discussions around foreign assistance have proliferated, with the termination of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) often being a focal point. As a special forces officer who has served in regions such as the Middle East, Southwest Asia, and Africa, I have witnessed firsthand the vital role USAID plays in enhancing both humanitarian efforts and national security strategies. The implications of cutting foreign assistance are not merely bureaucratic; they can lead to severe consequences for global stability and peace.
The military is undeniably a key player in addressing crises across the world, yet it operates best in tandem with civilian agencies like USAID. Special operations forces work closely with USAID personnel to fill critical gaps in counterinsurgency missions. Together, they foster relationships within local communities, addressing immediate needs while simultaneously building long-term trust. My experiences alongside brave USAID staff reveal that such collaborative efforts are instrumental in creating a foundation for sustained peace and security.
It is baffling to observe policymakers, such as members of the Trump administration—including individuals like Secretary of State Marco Rubio and influential tech leader Elon Musk—making decisions on matters they have little real-world experience in. Their positions are often shaped by political calculus rather than the tangible realities of life on the ground. Many in the administration possess youth and inexperience in international aid or military operations, leading to recommendations that overlook crucial aspects of effective foreign policy. When leaders are disconnected from the consequences of their decisions, the results can be detrimental not only to those directly affected but also to America’s standing in the world.
USAID’s role is not merely philanthropic; it is a matter of national security. Current estimates suggest that the cuts to foreign assistance proposed could jeopardize the lives of approximately 14 million individuals globally over the next five years, a staggering statistic that includes countless vulnerable children. By withdrawing support, the U.S. would not only abandon those in dire situations but also cede influence to rivals like China and Russia, who are eager to fill any vacuums left by America’s reticence.
The humanitarian assistance provided by USAID is crucial in curbing the spread of diseases and addressing critical issues that pose risks to global health. By fostering partnerships and goodwill in the communities where aid is distributed, America strengthens its international relationships and enhances its reputation. These efforts help to build alliances that counter extremist narratives and mitigate the factors that can lead to instability.
Furthermore, the recent legislation passed under the Trump administration to raise the debt ceiling by $4 trillion reveals a disconcerting paradox: while the administration seeks to cut vital foreign assistance, it simultaneously increases the national debt. Investing in foreign aid is, in essence, an investment in our own security. Failure to recognize the significance of this connection represents a shortsighted approach that will likely have long-lasting repercussions.
In conclusion, USAID is not merely an agency; it is a lifeline for millions in desperate need. Its mission should be preserved and strengthened, not severed or relegated to the purview of military operations. The complexity of modern conflicts necessitates civilian expertise and the compassionate outreach that USAID uniquely provides. To dismantle or weaken this mission will ultimately make the path to recovery and stability far more challenging. It is time for policymakers to recognize the invaluable contributions of USAID and ensure that America remains a leader in promoting peace and prosperity on a global scale.
Donald C. Bolduc