Trump and Elon Musk Crushed USAID. Hunger and Violence Followed. – Image for illustrative purposes only (Image credits: Pexels)
Days after President Donald Trump’s inauguration last year, a sweeping stop-work order froze nearly all overseas programs run by the U.S. Agency for International Development. The move, followed months later by the agency’s informal dissolution, marked the largest pullback of American foreign aid in more than six decades. In many of the world’s most food-insecure regions, the sudden absence of funding for health, nutrition, and disaster relief left communities without critical support.
Decades of Work Brought to an Abrupt Halt
USAID had long operated in fragile states across Africa, supporting agricultural markets, emergency food programs, and basic health services. Those efforts helped stabilize communities facing poverty, malnutrition, and climate shocks. When the funding stopped, local systems that relied on consistent aid faced immediate strain.
Experts note that food security and political stability often reinforce each other. Disruptions in one area quickly affect the other, especially where institutions are already weak. The withdrawal removed a buffer that had previously helped limit the spread of unrest in vulnerable zones.
Study Finds Clear Patterns in Conflict Data
A new analysis published in the journal Science examined 870 subnational regions in Africa that had received varying levels of USAID support. Researchers compared conflict trends before and after the aid freeze using global datasets on funding and violence. In areas with historically high USAID involvement, overall conflict rose by roughly 12 percent in the ten months that followed.
Armed battles increased by about 7 percent, while protests and riots climbed nearly 7 percent. Battle-related deaths also edged higher. The study suggests the changes were most pronounced in places that had depended most heavily on the agency’s programs. Still, the authors stress that the observation window remains short and that other simultaneous policy shifts may have played a role.
University of Chicago researcher Austin Wright, a co-author, described the scale of the shutdown as unprecedented in modern history. He noted that no prior recorded event matches the speed and breadth of ending a major country’s global development commitment at once. The findings point to measurable shifts, yet they leave room for further investigation into exactly how aid reductions translated into greater instability.
Experts Weigh In on What the Numbers Show
Outside specialists caution against drawing firm conclusions too quickly. Food-security researcher Zia Mehrabi at the University of Colorado Boulder reviewed the data and found the results tentative. He pointed out that the analysis period is brief, the baseline funding figures come from an earlier period, and the study focuses only on Africa.
Mehrabi also noted that the paper does not fully separate USAID cuts from other reductions in U.S. international spending. He argues that more equitable arrangements around resource extraction in countries such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo could ultimately matter more for long-term stability than traditional aid. Chelsea Marcho, a former USAID official now at the Food Security Leadership Council, emphasized that the agency’s work had strengthened local institutions in ways that helped contain violence. She said the study’s results align with that view but stressed the need for continued monitoring.
Monitoring Systems Themselves Face New Gaps
Beyond direct program cuts, the end of USAID disrupted key data-collection efforts. Weather monitoring, famine early-warning systems, and other tools that tracked hunger and conflict risks lost critical support. Some functions have since been restored, yet gaps remain that make it harder to assess current conditions on the ground.
Marcho observed that visibility into food security is declining just as risks appear to be rising. Without reliable information, responses to emerging crises become slower and less targeted. The loss of these measurement tools adds another layer of uncertainty to any assessment of the aid withdrawal’s full effects.
Rebuilding Capacity Will Take Time
Wright warned that simply restoring funding or creating a new agency cannot instantly reverse the damage. Institutions built over more than six decades cannot be recreated overnight. The study’s authors and outside reviewers alike agree that longer-term research will be needed to understand the lasting consequences.
Communities that once counted on steady support now navigate greater uncertainty. How those changes unfold in the years ahead remains an open question for researchers and policymakers alike.
