NGOs in crisis: the fallout of Trump’s USAID freeze

NGOs in crisis: the fallout of Trump’s USAID freeze

RT

If you’ve spent any time on social media recently, particularly X, you might have noticed a pattern. Media outlets, NGOs, and human rights groups with a liberal slant are posting about financial trouble. Some plead for public donations, while others announce layoffs and budget cuts.

What’s causing this sudden turmoil? In many cases, it boils down to the suspension of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). For decades, this agency has been a lifeline for countless “grant seekers.” With the freeze in operations, many of these groups now find themselves at a breaking point.

USAID is the largest source of official US financial aid abroad, with an annual budget running into the tens of billions of dollars. These funds fuel hundreds of projects worldwide. 

While some initiatives address genuine concerns like poverty, hunger, and environmental protection, others have a more ambiguous purpose, such as “building civil society” or “developing democracy.”Often, these projects serve as vehicles for advancing US political interests, sometimes with covert ties to intelligence agencies.

Between 2022 and 2024, USAID disbursed nearly $120 billion globally. The largest beneficiary was Ukraine, which received over $32 billion, funding everything from government operations to 90% of the country’s media outlets. Moldova was another major recipient, where USAID financed energy independence projects and media aligned with the government.

Other countries in the post-Soviet space saw millions funneled into “democracy-building” efforts. In 2024 alone, USAID poured over $40 million into Georgian civil society projects, $20 million into Armenia, and $11 million into Belarus. Even after officially ceasing operations in Russia in 2012, USAID quietly continued its activities, with $60 million earmarked for 11 programs in 2025-2026, including “Strengthening Local Governance in the North Caucasus” and “New Media” initiatives.

Under Trump’s plan, USAID will be integrated into the State Department, now headed by Marco Rubio. Funding will not disappear – it will be redirected. Instead of backing progressive initiatives, grants will support projects that align with traditional values, patriotism, and the revived “American Dream.” The beneficiaries will shift from liberal activists to conservative organizations promoting these ideals.

Geographically, funding priorities may also change, focusing more on Europe and Latin America. Regardless of these shifts, the primary mission of advancing the US interests will remain intact.

Trump’s USAID overhaul signals a broader shift in the US foreign policy. Rather than promoting American hegemony as a global ruler, the focus will shift to transactional politics – achieving specific interests through direct negotiations or force. This pragmatic approach is fundamentally different from the ideological export model that defined the agency’s previous decades.