The United States government has officially terminated 83 per cent of the programs run by the United States Agency for International Development and canceled 5,200 contracts previously awarded by the agency.
This announcement was made by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Monday, following a six-week review of USAID’s activities conducted in collaboration with Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency.
Rubio stated, “The 5,200 contracts that are now canceled spent tens of billions of dollars in ways that did not serve, and in some cases even harmed, the core national interests of the United States.” He added, “In consultation with Congress, we intend for the remaining 18% of programs we are keeping, approximately 1,000, to be administered more effectively under the State Department.”
This decision follows President Donald Trump’s earlier suspension of all foreign assistance and a stop-work order on USAID’s activities, which has raised global concerns. In Nigeria, the impact has already been felt, with clinics and research centers shutting down since Trump signed an executive order on January 20, cutting off funding for several health, education, and humanitarian relief projects.
Many developing countries in Africa, which rely heavily on U.S. foreign aid, have expressed alarm over the cuts. The reduction in funding threatens to disrupt critical programs that support healthcare, education, and poverty alleviation in these nations.
Meanwhile, the U.S. stock market reacted negatively to the news, with the S&P 500 dropping by over three percent on Monday. The market slump deepened after Trump refused to rule out a recession when asked about the impact of his trade policies. The trade situation has further escalated as the Canadian province of Ontario imposed retaliatory tariffs on energy exports to Michigan, Minnesota, and New York, while China also began placing tariffs on American farm products.
The U.S. government has defended the changes to USAID funding, stating that they are part of broader efforts to streamline foreign assistance and prioritize national interests. However, critics argue that the cuts could have severe consequences for global health, education, and humanitarian efforts, particularly in developing countries that depend on U.S. support.