United States’ global development efforts criticized for self-interest and inconsistent policy approaches
The United States stands as a dominant yet dramatically changed force in global development. Following President Trump’s unprecedented decision to shut down the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in early 2025, America’s approach to international development has undergone a fundamental transformation. This article explores America’s evolving role in global development, highlighting both historical contributions and current realities.
The USAID Shutdown: A Seismic Shift
President Trump’s administration dismantled USAID shortly after his January 2025 inauguration. This decision marked a profound break from six decades of American development policy. Since 1961, USAID had led most American development efforts, operating in over 100 countries. The agency focused on sectors like health, education, and governance while partnering with NGOs and private companies.
The shutdown redirected billions in foreign assistance funding. Instead of traditional aid programs, the administration now channels resources through direct bilateral agreements and military assistance packages. Additionally, development responsibilities have been fragmented across State Department bureaus and defense agencies.
Critics view this restructuring as effectively ending America’s leadership in global development. However, supporters argue it eliminates bureaucracy and allows for more strategic allocation of resources. The long-term impact remains unclear but will likely reshape development landscapes worldwide.
Foreign Aid Transformation
Despite institutional changes, the United States still provides billions in foreign assistance annually. However, the nature of this funding has shifted dramatically. Military and security assistance now comprises a larger percentage of the total package. Furthermore, bilateral economic agreements increasingly replace traditional grant-based aid.
Previously successful initiatives face uncertain futures. The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which saved millions of lives since 2003, now operates with reduced scope and funding. Similarly, Feed the Future has transitioned from a comprehensive hunger initiative to a more limited agricultural trade program.
Private Sector Dominance
Unlike the previous balanced approach, U.S. development strategy now overwhelmingly emphasizes private sector solutions. The Development Finance Corporation (DFC) has expanded its investment portfolio in emerging markets. Consequently, American companies have gained significant advantages in developing regions.
Public-private partnerships remain a cornerstone of current development strategy. However, these collaborations now prioritize American business interests more explicitly. For instance, Power Africa continues but with stronger requirements for U.S. technology purchases. As a result, American companies secure more contracts while local solution providers face additional barriers.
Digital Innovation Continues
American technology companies still drive digital transformation in developing countries. Programs connecting entrepreneurs with Silicon Valley expertise continue to expand. Likewise, U.S.-backed initiatives support fintech solutions for the unbanked, though with stronger emphasis on American payment systems.
Internet freedom promotion remains active but increasingly selective. Through funding and technical assistance, America helps allied nations protect online spaces. Nevertheless, critics note growing inconsistency in these efforts based on political alignment with Washington.
Critical Perspectives Intensify
Following USAID’s dismantling, American development policy faces heightened criticism. Many experts now question both methods and motivations more forcefully than before.
Explicitly Political Aid
Without USAID’s institutional guardrails, aid allocation now more openly follows political objectives. For example, the largest recipients align almost exclusively with strategic security interests rather than development needs. Countries voting with the U.S. in international forums receive preferential treatment regardless of poverty levels.
The administration frequently and explicitly leverages assistance as a foreign policy tool. Aid increases or decreases based on political alignment with striking transparency. Consequently, development outcomes clearly take a backseat to geopolitical goals.
Tax Policy Contradictions Worsen
America’s tax policies continue to undermine development efforts abroad. Recent corporate tax changes have further enabled profit shifting from developing countries. American multinationals enjoy additional incentives to extract resources without corresponding development benefits.
The administration has actively blocked international tax cooperation efforts. Furthermore, America has expanded its status as the world’s largest tax haven for non-Americans. States like Delaware, Nevada, and Wyoming offer even more secretive company formation with minimal disclosure requirements, attracting billions from developing countries.
Developing nations lose an estimated $100-150 billion annually to tax avoidance facilitated by U.S. policies. This figure exceeds the total global official development assistance. Moreover, the situation worsens as tax competition intensifies between jurisdictions.
Climate Action Abandoned
American development rhetoric no longer emphasizes climate resilience. The U.S. withdrew from the Paris Agreement again in early 2025. Domestic emissions policies have been reversed, eliminating many environmental protections.
U.S. development finance actively promotes fossil fuel projects in developing countries. In fact, oil and gas investments have significantly increased through various agencies. Meanwhile, climate finance commitments have been eliminated entirely. This dramatic shift undermines global climate efforts when action remains most urgent.
Aid Conditionality Expands
The United States now attaches even more stringent conditions to aid than before. These requirements explicitly reflect American political priorities rather than recipient needs. For instance, expanded restrictions affect healthcare organizations receiving any U.S. funding.
“Buy American” provisions have strengthened, requiring nearly exclusive purchasing of American goods and services with aid dollars. Consequently, even less money actually reaches developing countries. Recent studies show that this highly tied aid reduces value by up to 40% compared to untied assistance.
Looking Forward
As global challenges intensify, the United States faces crucial choices about its development approach. Climate change, pandemic vulnerabilities, and growing inequality demand coordinated solutions. Additionally, China’s Belt and Road Initiative offers an alternative development model, challenging American influence.
Despite institutional upheaval, American innovation, resources, and technical expertise remain potentially valuable for global development progress. By reconsidering recent policy shifts and embracing more equal partnerships, the United States could still play a constructive role in international development efforts.
The question remains whether America will rebuild its development infrastructure or continue on its current path. Either way, the global development landscape has fundamentally changed following USAID’s closure, creating both challenges and opportunities for nations worldwide.
United States
United States of America (USA)
Population
339,665,118 (2023 est.)
332,639,102 (2020)
326,625,791 (2017)
Capital: Washington, DC
Internet country code: .us
Government
U.S. Department of State: state.gov
USA.gov: usa.gov
The World Factbook: cia.gov/the-world-factbook
Background
Britain’s American colonies broke with the mother country in 1776 and were recognized as the new nation of the United States of America following the Treaty of Paris in 1783. During the 19th and 20th centuries, 37 new states were added to the original 13 as the nation expanded across the North American continent and acquired a number of overseas possessions. The two most traumatic experiences in the nation’s history were the Civil War (1861-65), in which a northern Union of states defeated a secessionist Confederacy of 11 southern slave states, and the Great Depression of the 1930s, an economic downturn during which about a quarter of the labor force lost its jobs. Buoyed by victories in World Wars I and II and the end of the Cold War in 1991, the US remains the world’s most powerful nation state. Since the end of World War II, the economy has achieved relatively steady growth, low unemployment and inflation, and rapid advances in technology.