The Dismantling of Foreign Aid: A Transatlantic Trend?

A Judge's Gavel and a Global Shockwave

In a dramatic turn of events, a federal judge declared the Trump administration's dismantling of USAID unconstitutional in March 2025. This ruling came shortly after Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced a staggering 83% cut to the agency's programs. USAID, a cornerstone of American international development since 1961, funded crucial health and humanitarian initiatives in over 130 countries. Ironically, its $40 billion budget represented a mere 0.7% of federal spending, a seemingly small price to pay for global stability and goodwill.

This abrupt dismantling has reverberated globally, raising concerns about America's role on the world stage. However, this assault on foreign aid is not an isolated incident. A similar scenario unfolded across the Atlantic just a few years earlier.

Echoes of a British Precedent

In 2020, then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, citing budgetary constraints, effectively shuttered the Department for International Development (DFID), Britain's counterpart to USAID. This move came amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, raising questions about the timing and true motivations behind the decision.

Both USAID and DFID have long been subjects of debate, sparking discussions about the interplay between development, diplomacy, and national security. While proponents highlight the altruistic benefits and strategic advantages of foreign aid, critics argue about its effectiveness and potential to serve donor interests over recipient needs.

The DFID Merger: A Case Study in Unintended Consequences

DFID, established in 1997, had earned a reputation as a model donor, even garnering praise from organizations like Doctors Without Borders for its relative independence from political influence.

"I have never heard of someone being told, as a result of accepting DFID funds, what to do, either explicitly or behind closed doors," a Doctors Without Borders staffer revealed in a 2006 interview, highlighting the agency's commitment to impartial aid delivery.

Despite its positive image, DFID was merged with the Foreign Office, ostensibly to achieve "maximum value for the British taxpayer." However, the merger resulted in a significant reduction in foreign aid, sparking concern among development professionals who felt it undermined Britain's global commitment, particularly during a global health crisis.

Less Funding, Less Impact: The Aftermath of the DFID Merger

Years later, the promised efficiency gains remain elusive. While a 2025 UK National Audit Office report acknowledged some improvements in crisis response, it also revealed significant merger costs and a lack of clear vision. The merged entity also suffered a loss of expertise due to pay cuts and hiring restrictions.

The Center for Global Development highlighted the loss of "development expertise" and the inability to maintain the "rigorous, long-term focus necessary to make a real impact." A 2022 study even suggested the move was primarily political, devoid of substantive policy analysis.

A "Clear and Easy Target": The Vulnerability of Standalone Agencies

USAID, with its significantly larger budget, faces an even graver threat. The administration's aim appears not to streamline aid but to drastically reduce it. This poses a significant risk to vital global health programs, including the highly successful PEPFAR initiative, credited with saving millions of lives.

While independent agencies like USAID and DFID are often seen as better equipped to prioritize the needs of the poor, their visibility makes them vulnerable to political maneuvering. As one expert observed, DFID became a "clear and easy target" during budget cuts. Now, it appears USAID faces a similar fate.