February 3, 2025 - 11:10am
Heavy howitzer fire continued in the American Blob, as the Trump administration’s DOGE team set about regime-changing the United States Agency for International Development, or USAID. Following a day-one executive order temporarily freezing all US international aid pending a review to ensure it was consistent with the President’s “America First” policy, CNN has reported that top security officials at the agency have been put on administrative leave after refusing to comply with DOGE requests for information. At the time of writing, USAID’s website remains down.
Elon Musk has been combative in his statements, posting on X yesterday that USAID is “a criminal organization”. Trump left only slightly more room for manoeuvre, telling Fox News that USAID is “run by radical lunatics” and that “we’re getting them out, and then we’ll make a decision.”
It’s difficult to overstate how revolutionary this is. The United States provides some 40% of the world’s humanitarian assistance, and with an annual budget of over $50 billion USAID is one of the biggest development agencies in the world. Founded by John F. Kennedy in 1961, it was intended to follow in the footsteps of the Marshall Plan by using aid to advance US foreign policy interests. It employs around 15,000 people in Washington, DC, with thousands more overseas and a great many more indirectly via grant funding.
USAID has long been criticised by the international radical Left as “a tool of U.S. capitalist and imperialist interests”. These critics claim its purpose isn’t helping foreign states on their own terms, but instead creating opportunities for American businesses, as well as funding NGOs that foment political unrest abroad in line with US interests. Russia expelled USAID in 2012, blaming its “attempts to influence political processes through its grants”. And China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs accuses US international development practice of “using aid as a bargaining chip” to compel political and economic changes overseas in America’s interest.
El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, a Trump ally, echoed this critique yesterday. He declared that most governments don’t want USAID money flowing into their country because while “marketed as support for development, democracy, and human rights”, most of the money received is “funneled into opposition groups, NGOs with political agendas, and destabilizing movements”.
Much Western reporting on the freeze focused on famine relief and other humanitarian projects. However, some coverage tacitly acknowledged the aspect of USAID critiqued by Bukele and others. In Moldova, for example, ABC reported that “pro-democracy groups, independent media, civil society initiatives and local governments” are now “scrambling to make ends meet”. In other words: liberal political activists funded by American “development” money have abruptly been left exposed.
It seems, then, that Trump is now doing within USAID what USAID-funded groups do abroad: using politically aligned funding and personnel changes to transform the body’s overall political orientation. But why would the “America First” President be at war with a body which stands accused of always prioritising the US?
Trump is regime-changing USAID in response to profound intra-elite domestic disagreement over what it means to put America first. USAID has hitherto operated on a broadly shared consensus in this respect: open markets, business-friendly regulations, and democratic regimes. In other words: the America-led globalisation that has formed the backdrop to all of international politics and economics since the end of the Cold War. Now, though, this programme is being contested not just outside “the West” but within it. It’s not yet entirely clear what “America First” will mean in practice, but Trump has evidently concluded that unless he radically reforms America’s principal vehicle for overseas soft power, it won’t mean anything at all.
It’s a reasonable bet that, notwithstanding Musk’s declaration that it’s “Time for it to die”, USAID — or at least something broadly resembling it — will survive the 90-day freeze and personnel shake-up. “The smiling face of imperialism” is surely too potent a tool to discard entirely. But if Trump’s internal colour revolution succeeds, the values and people that order this institution will surely march to a different drum for much longer than the next four years.
There is a lesson here for the British Right. The recently-departed Tory regime whined endlessly about “the Blob”, without ever so much as lifting a finger to change any of its entrenched personnel, institutions, or regulatory structures. Any prospective Right-wing administration in Britain should be studying the Trumpian approach to regime change closely, and working on equivalent plans.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeAnd will be stopped.
What bunch of nonsense this article is, over 50% of the military budget is salaries and benefits, unless Trump intends to fire tens of thousands of military personnel and eliminate their benefits there will be no cuts. Another 25% of the budget is maintaining the military bases in the country and around the world, does he really plan on closing many of those bases and letting go thousands in personnel and contractors that support them. Musk knows nothing about building planes and weapons, he ban barely build a decent electric car that most people want to buy and space x is a joke, so what if they built a useless rocket to go into orbit. Musk is a farce, military equipment like fighter planes and advanced missiles are at a whole other level, may beyond the Musk cult. And are they really going to cut procurement needed to replace aging and depleting equipment, and risk falling behind China and other countries in r and d. That is the other 25% of the budget. These people are a farce and their supporters need to get a grip and stop living in their alternate universe. Prediction: the military budget will increase to a trillion $ in 4 years.
Space X is no joke. It’s an amazing achievement, as are Tesla and his other enterprises. But, respecting his comments on the F35, I suspect that he is more focused on the procurement processes and a stripped-down number of suppliers that have little threat of competition. I agree that rocket science is less demanding than fighter plane and anti-missile science. Your numbers on where the defense budget goes are compelling.
In his latest comments, he said that he would sit down with the Russians and the Chinese and make the case that they should all be spending less of their economic output on their militaries. Yeah, because we can trust the Russians and the Chinese. They seem like decent chaps after all….
Because you can trust western governments? (Not One Inch)
There is so much potential for radical change. When I think of all that Trump is doing and proposing, it feels like I’ve won the lottery. It’s breathtaking. I hope SCOTUS clears the path.
It really puts in stark relief all the self-serving leaders who have gone before. If they had even done a fraction of what Trump is attempting, we would be much better off.
What he is attempting is to ensure that the US loses the forthcoming war with China. Not sure how that’s a good thing though.
I just read somewhere else that F35 cost $2 trillion more than budget not just $2T total. Wonder which it was.
He won’t “take on” the Military Industrial Complex, he’ll merely transfer its contracts over to Musk & Co.
It’s amazing how Musks political convictions swung to Biden when he was in charge then pivoted 180 to Trump when it looked like he’d be getting the keys to the White House
Seriously? Musk became enemy number one in the Biden administration the day he bought twitter and relaxed the censorship rules. He suffered from as much lawfare as Trump. If Musk was only interested in enriching himself, he would have donated millions and stayed in the shadows. He has put a target on his back by being so public and active.
This is correct. A very important part of the Musk psychology is that he doesn’t like being picked on (as he was when he was young). He doesn’t seem to forget those who have done so.
Musk does not crave money. He’s got more than anyone. He craves the freedom not to be told what he can and cannot do, as well as admiration, though not necessarily acceptance.
Correct. He is the same creepy little kid that got the hell beaten out of him at school. His problem is that he still has the same personality defects that caused it to happen.
Really? Well, hopefully someone, somewhere is a halfway decent shot (speaking figuratively, of course).
The UK has a benefits-industrial complex. There’s no more capacious mammary gland than long-term sickness disability benefit.
The growling Lord Dannatt may urge Starmer to increase defence spending, but to judge from Ukraine’s experience, the main components required are drones and mines. And of course, in the UK’s case, an humanitarian flotilla to ‘rescue’ migrants from the French Channel.
Is there a way to downvote articles?
Definitely not Dennis you always press the green up button to support.
All the best Tony
Still early days, but he might turn out to be the first anti-MIC president since Kennedy. Apropos of that, do we know any more about the young chap who shot Trump’s ear?
Under JFK, military expenditures exploded, and not only for his entry into the Vietnam mess. Eisenhower kept costs down a bit by relying upon the nuclear threat. Military spending as a percentage of GDP was much higher than today. In the shadow of WWII and Korea, the public grasped the threat of the USSR. In any event, Trump’s statement needs to be taken along with him calling for an Iron Dome for the US. Billions have already been spent since Reagan proposed what opponents named “Star Wars”, which has led to current capacities. Better won’t be cheap.
We know what happened to JFK.
Is he really “taking on” the military-industrial complex, or the educated-progressive Marxian elite?
Are the congressmen advocating that parts of the F-35 be made in their districts Marxists? That’s a curiously broad brush.
“Marxian”?
Odd comment about Starmer being in a driverless train.
Quite the opposite. He is relishing what he is doing.
Hiding the Labour-Muslim-vote corruption. (Not reported on Unherd)
Preventing a national Pakistani rape-gang inquiry. (Silence from the shameful Unherd Feminists)
Defending the cv-lying Reeves while she crashes the economy. (Ignored by Unherd)
Imprisoning Facebook posters. (Ignored by Unherd)
Prioritising international law over British interests. (The Chagos scandal. All Starmer’s lawyer friends involved. The Starmer-Hermer-Sands team. All ignored by Unherd.)
He is fully in control.
Perhaps the author meant a runaway train? There are no brakes, the engine cannot be stopped, the sharp curve approaches.
Perhaps. But to me Starmer is in full control of his party. And this is the strange one, given a free pass by the media.
He doesn’t get a free pass on UnHerd though.