For decades, USAID has been a cornerstone of American soft power, originally established at the height of the Cold War to counter Soviet influence. Now, the Trump administration is moving to dismantle the agency – a decision already reshaping global geopolitics and crippling Ukrainian aid organizations operating on the frontline.
As Politico recently reported, China is quickly stepping in to fill the gaps left by USAID’s withdrawal, offering development funding in Nepal, the Cook Islands, and Colombia. This shift has sparked bipartisan concern, with former USAID officials warning that scaling back the agency will undercut US global competitiveness. USAID has long served as a counterweight to Chinese influence around the world.
While some Republicans argue that reform was necessary, critics warn that a full withdrawal only strengthens Beijing’s hand. Meanwhile, House Democrats are preparing to criticize the Trump administration for ceding ground to China, though Republican leaders have largely remained silent, Politico noted. President Trump also fired USAID Inspector General Paul Martin a day after his office released a report criticizing the administration’s foreign aid freeze.
Ironically, some of Trump’s own top officials once championed USAID’s role in countering China’s influence. As recently as 2022, Marco Rubio, now serving as Secretary of State, was a vocal advocate for maintaining robust USAID funding. A longtime defender of US foreign aid, Rubio repeatedly argued that it was both vital to national interests and an insignificant portion of the federal budget, pushing back against critics who called for cuts.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/131d2/131d297e311925929d82206cbb2d5bc50e136760" alt="Trump Calling Zelensky a Dictator Is ‘Wrong and Dangerous’: Scholz"
Trump Calling Zelensky a Dictator Is ‘Wrong and Dangerous’: Scholz
Trump’s past skepticism toward Kyiv, coupled with his broader agenda of reducing foreign aid, has raised alarm bells among Ukrainian officials.
In speeches from 2013 to 2019, Rubio emphasized that foreign aid helped prevent anti-American sentiment and terrorism, calling claims that slashing it would balance the budget “a lie.” Now, as Secretary of State, he is overseeing a dramatic shift – bringing USAID under tighter administration control and curbing its independence. Among the places where this policy shift is most acutely felt is Ukraine, where many frontline organizations reliant on USAID funding are struggling to survive.
The suspension of USAID operations is already causing widespread disruption across Ukraine, forcing charities, businesses, and government agencies to scramble for alternative funding. Organizations like Dostupno, which aids wounded soldiers and people with disabilities, are struggling to pay staff, while Ukraine’s agricultural sector, previously supported by USAID grants and resources, now faces uncertainty.
With USAID having played a crucial role in stabilizing Ukraine’s power grid, healthcare, and education sectors, the abrupt funding halt threatens to deepen economic and humanitarian challenges at a time when Ukraine remains under constant Russian attack.
Serhii Kuzan, chair of the Ukrainian Security and Cooperation Center and former adviser to Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense, emphasized that the information space is one of Russia’s key battlegrounds in its war against Ukraine. Countering Russia’s powerful disinformation machine requires frontline outlets actively challenging its narratives.
However, with USAID withdrawing funding from many Ukrainian organizations, regional media is facing severe financial strain. According to one media advocacy group, “nine out of ten outlets rely on subsidies, with USAID serving as their primary donor.”
Recognizing the urgency of the situation, various organizations are stepping in to try and fill the gap.
“So far, I only see the consequences of Trump’s presidency,” said Alina Holovko, lead coordinator of Dobra Sprava, an organization that provides aid to frontline civilians and evacuates refugees. “Many charitable and youth development projects funded by USAID have already shut down,” she added.
Beyond the immediate impact on Ukraine, experts warn that USAID’s dismantling carries broader geopolitical risks, particularly for US soft power.
According to Treston Wheat, Chief Geopolitical Officer at Insight Forward and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University, the impact of USAID’s disruption has been overwhelmingly negative. “The drama with USAID is having a mixed impact on US soft power abroad, but it’s mostly negative. One exception is El Salvador, where President Bukele believes USAID funded his opposition. However, in much of Latin America and across Africa, the effect has been extremely damaging.”
Beyond the realm of soft power, the sudden and arbitrary cutting off of aid has deeper strategic consequences. “The sudden and arbitrary cutting off of aid has sent a clear signal to several countries that the US is not a reliable partner. Over the medium term, this will likely make countries more hesitant to align with Washington,” Wheat explained. This uncertainty risks pushing some nations toward alternative sources of support, including China and Russia, both of which have been expanding their own economic and diplomatic footprints in regions historically influenced by the US.
For Ukraine, the shifting landscape of US foreign assistance presents even greater concerns. Trump’s past skepticism toward Kyiv, coupled with his broader agenda of reducing foreign aid, has raised alarm bells among Ukrainian officials.
“Ukraine should be worried about what Trump is doing for two reasons. First, while he has talked tough on Russia, he’s not a big supporter of Ukraine or Zelensky,” Wheat noted. “Even if he imposes sanctions or other punitive measures on Moscow, he’s unlikely to maintain the same level of support that Biden did.”
Additionally, Trump’s broader foreign policy philosophy leans toward cutting overseas assistance, regardless of whether it’s military or humanitarian aid. “Trump generally wants to cut foreign aid, whether military or humanitarian,” Wheat said. “Even if he decides to continue supporting Ukraine, it will be at a much lower level.”
If military aid for Ukraine diminishes under a second Trump administration, Kyiv – already heavily dependent on American support – will be forced to seek alternative sources of assistance.
The question for Ukraine remains: is Europe both willing and capable of filling the gap of America’s retreat? The EU’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said in January that the European Union is prepared to take the lead in supporting Ukraine if US backing declines.
However, European nations face their own economic and political constraints, raising doubts about whether they can fully replace US aid. Germany, Europe’s largest power, is already having trouble passing military aid for Ukraine ahead of the Bundestag elections.
For now, the world watches as America steps back, leaving uncertainty in its wake.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post.
You can also highlight the text and press Ctrl + Enter