Visualizing the international reach of U.S. funding cut by Trump

Visualizing the international reach of U.S. funding cut by Trump

Using graphics to illustrate the scope of U.S. foreign aid spending and analyzing how the Trump administration’s sweeping cuts could play out across the world.

By Cate Brown

, 

Dan Keating

 and 

Dylan Moriarty

In a matter of weeks, President Donald Trump has moved to dismantle a vast international aid system built up by Republican and Democratic administrations over decades.

More than $60 billion in foreign assistance has been frozen for 90 days, pending a government review. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said the U.S. Agency for International Development may be abolished. On Friday, a federal judge blocked the administration from placing about 2,7000 staffers on paid leave and recalling nearly all of those posted abroad.

In a letter to lawmakers last week, Rubio cited “conflicting, overlapping, and duplicative” activities by USAID resulting in “discord in the foreign policy and foreign relations of the United States.”

“CLOSE IT DOWN,” Trump posted Friday on social media.

Without U.S. support, humanitarian experts warn that already precarious global aid efforts could collapse, putting millions of lives at risk. Some former government officials said the sudden changes would undercut U.S. foreign policy and national security.

“We are not only less safe, but we have abandoned people all over the world,” said Brittany Brown, a former USAID official.

On Wednesday, Trump’s former USAID counselor Chris Mulligan condemned the funding pause. “Every minute that assistance is frozen weakens America, makes us less secure and costs us jobs,” he said.

Here’s a breakdown of U.S. foreign assistance and a look at how the new administration’s sweeping cuts could play out across the world.

Foreign aid by country, 2023 FY

25B

10B

Ukraine

$17.2B

1B

100M

Israel

$3.3B

Foreign aid spending by region

Europe and

Eurasia

$20.2B

Sub-Saharan

Africa

15.7B

Worldwide

programs

15.7B

Middle East and

North Africa

10.6B

South and

Central Asia

3.9B

Western

Hemisphere

3.8B

East Asia

and Oceania

2.1B

The U.S. government is the world’s single largest humanitarian donor, according to the United Nations, though foreign assistance represented less than 1 percent of the congressional budget in fiscal 2023. That adds up to about $210 a year for the average taxpayer, compared with more than $2,800 per year for defense.

President Harry S. Truman introduced the country’s first major foreign aid package in the aftermath of World War II, arguing that strategic assistance could insulate states against the spread of communism. A decade later, President John F. Kennedy signed the Foreign Assistance Act into law and created USAID by executive order.

Key allies, such as Ukraine, Israel and Egypt, rely on U.S. funding to secure their borders and protect shared interests. Other top recipients, including Jordan, Iraq and countries across sub-Saharan Africa, rely on American aid to combat the debilitating effects of war, drought and disease.

Experts warn that the 90-day funding pause could be particularly devastating for countries on the brink of famine, such as Sudan. The World Food Program there relies on the United States for more than 60 cents of every dollar spent on aid.

“The United States is the financial foundation of the entire humanitarian system,” said Nathaniel Raymond, executive director of the Humanitarian Research Lab at the Yale School of Public Health. “How will the house stand if you rip down the foundation?”

Global health and food aid

Emergency food assistance

$5.3B

Material relief assistance

and services

5.2B

Health

$23.7 billion

STD control including HIV/AIDS

5.1B

Relief co-ordination; protection

and support services

3.7B

Other 4.4B

Countries with largest spending of health funds

Ethiopia

Nigeria

Congo (Kinshasa)

880M

802M

$1.2B

Afghanistan

Syria

728M

769M

Ukraine

1.1B

Yemen

Kenya

South Sudan

699M

679M

617M

Somalia

881M

A third of the U.S. foreign aid budget in 2023 was spent on emergency food and global health.

In Ethiopia, the largest recipient of U.S. food assistance, WFP estimates that over 15 million people rely on emergency aid, following a years-long drought that wrecked crops and an armed conflict in Tigray that left communities on the brink of famine.

The majority of people receive direct food aid, rather than cash, which means that working supply chains are vital to staving off hunger.

Although Rubio issued a waiver to exempt emergency food programs from the 90-day aid pause, WFP administrators said the entire production line in Ethiopia has ground to a halt.

Warehouses in Djibouti are stocked with next month’s food supply, but truck drivers and program officers have been fired, furloughed or ordered to stop work. Without transportation or staff, palettes of taxpayer-funded flour, lentils and iodized salt may go to waste.

Aid workers say they have been given no guidance from administrators on whether essential workers can return.

“They got rid of all the senior lawyers,” said a senior USAID civil servant, now placed on administrative leave, speaking like others in this story on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution. “The people who would be working to clarify these things aren’t around.”

An internal WFP memo viewed by The Washington Post warned of an “imminent” break in Ethiopia’s emergency assistance pipeline. Officials fear the disruption could set off a chain reaction of violence, starvation and migration.

The impact on global health could be just as swift and far-reaching. Multimillion-dollar programs to combat malaria, Ebola and tuberculosis have been put on hold. Some U.S.-funded clinics were ordered to close. And medical providers that receive U.S. support said that they have started to ration supplies or halt nonessential services in anticipation of funding gaps.

“We’re reading that an agency is closing down, but it’s not an agency: It’s someone for people to see when they go into labor or their child gets sick with malaria,” said Colin Puzo Smith, director of global policy at the nonpartisan advocacy group Results.

Over the past decade, there’s been a bipartisan effort to give local communities more control over health programs — often placing USAID in a supporting role.

“USAID is not footing the bill for the majority of health needs worldwide, but they often support a key part of the system,” said Puzo Smith. “When you turn that off overnight, it throws the whole system into disarray.”

Under a waiver granted by Rubio to the United States’ flagship HIV prevention program, PEPFAR, doctors are free to administer “lifesaving HIV care and treatment services,” but some say they are afraid to proceed because U.S.-funded systems to track pharmaceutical supplies are disabled and access to USAID’s global payment system has not been restored.

Global security

Stabilization operations

and security sector reform

$9.1B

Global security

$9.9 billion budget

Conflict mitigation and reconciliation

$349M

Combating weapons of mass destruction

$278M

Peace and security - general

$157M

$10M

Other

Countries with largest spending of security funds

Egypt

1.2B

Ukraine

Jordan

654M

429M

Israel

$3.3B

Iraq

Lebanon

Somalia

318M

215M

181M

Ecuador

Taiwan

Colombia

162M

135M

113M

The United States spends nearly $10 billion on programs designed to reduce global conflict.

One third of “stabilization” funding was given directly to Israel in 2023, followed by large contributions to Ukraine and Egypt. U.S. support to Israel increased dramatically after the Hamas-led attacks on Oct. 7, 2023, and the war in Gaza. Trump issued a waiver for Israel and Egypt that allows U.S. funding to continue throughout the pause.

The United States also leads efforts to combat violent extremism in Syria, Iraq and across North Africa.

At Al Hol, a desert camp in northeast Syria that houses thousands of former Islamic State fighters and their families, a collection of U.S. contractors provide food, water and fuel to residents, and train the camp’s security forces.

Although some programs have resumed following a State Department waiver, the future of key contractors may be in jeopardy because USAID has not issued payments for other regional programs in December and January, according to Proximity International. The U.S.-based contractor says it is owed more than $2 million.

“We will fail because USAID does not have a working mechanism to pay us back for money we have already spent on allowable expenses,” said Courtney Brown, Proximity International’s CEO.

In Iraq, the future of a flagship effort to resettle the families of former Islamic State fighters is also in doubt.

The U.S.-backed program “facilitated security clearances, cross-border transit and rehabilitation support for the new arrivals,” said a former USAID senior staff member. “Now all of that is on pause.”

The former staffer fears that the breakdown in U.S. programming will undercut years of local trust-building and strengthen the hand of Tehran.

“A more stable Iraq was a more sovereign Iraq that could stand up to Iranian pressure,” he said.

Governance

Macroeconomic

foundation

for growth

$14.6B

Governance funds

$17.8 billion

Rule of law and

human rights 933M

Good governance 749M

Civil society 749M

Other 937M

Countries with largest spending of governance funds

Moldova

151M

Colombia

92M

Mexico

73M

Ukraine

West Bank

and Gaza

14.7B

66M

Honduras

58M

El Salvador

54M

Tunisia

52M

Somalia

49M

Bangladesh

49M

U.S. investments in global governance range from anti-corruption initiatives to programs that help safeguard elections.

The Biden administration committed more than $14 billion to Ukraine to soften the political and economic damage from Russia’s war with the nation. It also poured funding into Eastern European countries, such as Moldova, to counteract Russian influence.

Colombia, a key South American ally, is home to one of the most robust governance programs. The country has recently seen an upsurge in fighting between rival rebel groups and is hosting more than 3 million Venezuelan migrants. USAID was leading efforts to integrate new arrivals and reduce the flow of migrants to the north — a Trump administration priority.

“We used all the tools of national security: defense, diplomacy and development,” said Susan Reichle, a retired USAID mission director. “You need all three to help a country, particularly after conflict.”

Reichle fears the sudden U.S. departure will create a power vacuum.

“We are breaking our partners’ trust,” she said. “And this is going to force them into the arms of China and Russia.”🔺

Islandwide Power Outage: CEB

 

Islandwide Power Outage: CEB Update

12.47 PM : The Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) has announced that it may take several hours to fully restore power across the island following a sudden nationwide outage today.

According to the CEB’s System Control Division, restoration efforts are underway in stages, but some areas may experience del

12.30 : A monkey clashing with the Panadura grid substation caused the islandwide power outage, according to Power Minister Jayakodi. The Minister stated that the incident led to a major disruption in the electricity grid, affecting supply across the country.

However, the Ministry of Power and Energy later described the situation as an “emergency at the Panadura substation,” without confirming the Minister’s claim. Restoration efforts are ongoing, with teams working to bring power back as soon as possible.

The Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) has yet to issue an official explanation for the outage. Further updates are expected. (NewsWire)

12.20 : A sudden islandwide power outage has been reported, affecting multiple regions across Sri Lanka. The Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) has acknowledged the issue and stated that steps are being taken to restore the power supply as soon as possible.

“The current islandwide power failure has been caused by an imbalance in the National Grid” Ministry of Power said.

“The System Control Centre of the Ceylon Electricity Board is currently in the process of restoring the islandwide power outage” CEB said in an update.

Authorities urge the public to remain patient as restoration efforts are underway. (NewsWire)

OPINION: Lavrov Compares Trump’s ‘America First’ to Nazi propaganda

 

OPINION: Lavrov Compares Trump’s ‘America First’ to Nazi propaganda

Moscow, unsure of how Trump will turn out, are showing signs of unease by dispensing with diplomacy and lashing out.

By Peter Dickinson February 8, 2025

In a move likely to cause considerable offense in the White House, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has compared US President Donald Trump’s “America First” concept to Nazi propaganda. This provocative statement from Russia’s top diplomat offers an indication of the mood in Moscow as the United States and Russia engage in preliminary talks over a possible deal to end the invasion of Ukraine.

In an article published on Feb. 4 by the Russia in Global Affairs journal, Lavrov accused the US of undermining the international order with “cowboy attacks,” and claimed that the rhetoric of the Trump administration was reminiscent of Nazi Germany. “The ‘America First’ concept has disturbing similarities to the ‘Germany Above All’ slogan of the Hitler period,” he wrote.

Such attacks are nothing new, of course. The Kremlin has a long history of branding critics and adversaries as Nazis that can be traced all the way back to the height of the Cold War. When the Hungarians rebelled against Soviet occupation in 1956, Moscow condemned the uprising as a “fascist rebellion” before sending in the tanks. It was a similar story during the Soviet suppression of the Prague Spring of 1968. Communist officials even referred to the Berlin Wall itself as “the Anti-Fascist Protective Wall.”

This trend survived the Soviet collapse and has been enthusiastically embraced by the Putin regime. Labeling opponents as Nazis is regarded as a particularly effective tactic in modern Russia as it strikes an emotive chord among audiences raised to revere the staggering Soviet sacrifices in the fight against Hitler’s Germany.

Throughout Putin’s reign, domestic political opponents including Alexei Navalny have been routinely demonized as Nazis. The same strategy is frequently employed in the international arena. When Estonia sought to remove a Soviet World War II monument from Tallinn city center in 2007, the Kremlin media went into a frenzy about “Fascist Estonia,” sparking riots among Estonia’s sizable ethnic Russian population. A long list of other international critics and adversaries have faced the same Nazi slurs.

The most notorious Russian accusations of Nazism have been leveled at Ukraine. Ever since Ukraine’s 2004 Orange Revolution, Russian state propaganda has sought to portray Ukrainian national identity as a modern form of fascism that is virtually indistinguishable from Nazism. This propaganda campaign is rooted in Soviet era attempts to discredit Ukraine’s independence movement via association with World War II collaboration. It reached new lows in 2014 as Putin attempted to legitimize the occupation of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula and Donbas region.

Moscow’s efforts to portray Ukraine as a Nazi state escalated further following the onset of the full-scale invasion three years ago, with a massive spike in references to “Nazi Ukraine” throughout the Kremlin-controlled Russian media. In this increasingly unhinged environment, few were surprised when Putin announced that one of his two principal war aims was the “denazification” of Ukraine.

It has since become abundantly clear that Putin’s frequent talk of “denazification” is actually Kremlin code for “deukrainianization.” In other words, the ultimate goal of Russia’s current invasion is to create a Ukraine without Ukrainians, with false accusations of Nazism serving as a convenient excuse to justify the destruction of the Ukrainian state and nation.

It has since become abundantly clear that Putin’s frequent talk of “denazification” is actually Kremlin code for “deukrainianization.”

The history of nationalist politics in independent Ukraine is far removed from the Kremlin’s fascist fantasies. In reality, Ukrainian far-right parties have never come close to holding political power and typically receive far fewer votes than nationalist candidates in most other European countries.

When Ukraine’s frustrated and marginalized nationalists banded together into a single bloc for the country’s last prewar parliamentary election in 2019, they managed to secure a meager 2.16 percent of the vote. Meanwhile, Russian-speaking Jewish comedian Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s landslide victory in Ukraine’s presidential election of the same year served to further highlight the absurdity of Russia’s entire “Nazi Ukraine” narrative.

Ever since Zelenskyy’s election, Russian officials have been tying themselves in knots attempting to explain how a supposedly Nazi state could elect a Jewish leader. In one particularly infamous incident during a spring 2022 interview with Italian TV show Zona Bianca, foreign minister Lavrov responded to questioning about Zelenskyy’s Jewish heritage by claiming that Adolf Hitler “also had Jewish blood.”

Lavrov’s latest comments do not signal a significant shift in the Kremlin position toward the United States and should not be blown out of proportion. Nevertheless, it is always worth paying attention when Russia plays the Nazi card. In this instance, the decision to target Trump personally with Nazi slurs by comparing one of his core political messages to Hitler’s propaganda suggests a degree of unease in Moscow over what the Kremlin can expect from the new US administration.

If Trump follows through on his threats to pressure Putin into peace talks, this unease may soon give way to outright hostility. At that point, we can expect to see yet more lurid Russian accusations of Nazism, this time aimed at the United States. That, after all, is how the Kremlin propaganda machine works. Putin claims to venerate the memory of World War II, but he has done more than anyone to distort the legacy of the conflict for his own political gain.🔺

Peter Dickinson is editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert service.