Major Cut: USA Cancels 83% of International Development Programs

USAID Programs Face Drastic Cuts adn State Department Integration

In a meaningful restructuring of U.S. foreign aid, the Trump administration is moving forward with plans to dramatically scale back programs at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). As of March 10, 2025, an estimated 83% of USAID programs are being canceled, with the remaining programs slated for integration under the State Department’s management.

Major program Cancellations Announced

Sen. Marco Rubio announced the sweeping changes via social media, stating, “After a six -week examination, we officially cancel 83 percent of USAID programs. Tens of billions of dollars have been killed within 5200 contracts that are now canceled.This is how they did not serve the basic national interests of the United States (and in certain specific cases even harmed them).”

State Department to Oversee Remaining Programs

The remaining 18% of USAID programs, approximately 1,000 in number, will be managed by the State Department.the Minister of Foreign affairs commented, “After consultation with Congress, 18 percent of the programs (approximately 1000) intend to manage the remaining programs (approximately 1000) under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Thank you DOGE and our hardworking employees who worked for very long hours to achieve this historical reform, which was to come long ago.”

Musk’s Reaction and Prior Abolition Intentions

Elon Musk responded to Rubio’s announcement,characterizing the move as “Rough,but necessary. I worked well with you. Crucial USAID parts should always be under the Foreign Ministry.” Both Musk and President Trump have previously expressed intentions to completely abolish the independent federal agency.

timeline and Federal Court Ruling

The announcement of these cuts came sooner than anticipated.Just prior to the announcement, officials were instructed to complete detailed questionnaires for each project by March 12th. In related news, a federal court is expected to rule on a deadline for the U.S. goverment to pay nearly $2 billion. This stems from the Supreme Court rejecting the Trump administration’s request to freeze payments to non-profit organizations and other USAID suppliers for work already completed.

Potential Impact and Future Implications

The abrupt cancellation of USAID programs raises questions about the future of U.S.foreign aid and its impact on global initiatives. The consolidation of remaining programs under the State Department could streamline operations. However, critics worry about the potential loss of specialized expertise and the impact on international development efforts.

These changes will undoubtedly have far-reaching consequences for international relations and the effectiveness of U.S.foreign policy. As the situation develops, it is crucial to monitor the effects of these cancellations and the integration process within the State Department. Stay informed and engage in discussions about the future of U.S. foreign aid.

What specific metrics shoudl be used to assess the effectiveness of the State Department in managing the remaining growth programs?

USAID Programs Face Drastic Cuts: An Interview wiht Dr. Anya Sharma

The recent declaration of massive USAID program cancellations and the shift towards State Department management has sent ripples through the international development community. To delve deeper into these changes and their implications, Archyde News Editor speaks with Dr. Anya Sharma, a leading expert in foreign aid policy at the fictional Global Development Institute.

Understanding the USAID Restructuring

Archyde: Dr. Sharma, thank you for joining us. What’s your initial reaction to the meaningful USAID program cuts – the reported 83% cancellation rate?

Dr. Sharma: Thank you for having me. Frankly,I’m deeply concerned. While streamlining can be beneficial, such drastic cuts to USAID raise serious questions about the U.S.’s commitment to global development and its role in addressing critical issues like poverty, health, and climate change.

The State Department’s New Role

Archyde: The remaining USAID programs are slated to be managed under the State Department. What potential benefits and drawbacks do you see with this integration?

Dr. sharma: Ther’s a potential for improved coordination between foreign policy objectives and development initiatives. However, a key concern is whether the State Department has the specialized expertise and capacity to effectively manage development programs. USAID has built decades of institutional knowledge; losing that expertise could considerably impact project effectiveness. The focus on diplomacy might overshadow the crucial longer-term development goals that USAID previously championed.

Impact on International Development Efforts

Archyde: Senator Rubio cited national interests as a justification for these cuts. How might these actions affect U.S. influence and relationships abroad?

Dr. Sharma: foreign aid,when implemented effectively,isn’t just about charity; it’s a critical tool for promoting stability,building alliances,and advancing U.S. interests. reducing or eliminating programs that address global challenges might inadvertently create instability in vulnerable regions, potentially undermining U.S. security in the long run. It’s a delicate balance.

The Court Ruling and Financial Implications

Archyde: A federal court is expected to rule on pending payments to USAID suppliers. how dose this add to the complexities of this transition?

Dr. Sharma: The court ruling adds another layer of turmoil. If the U.S. government is compelled to pay these outstanding debts stemming from cancelled USAID programs,it could necessitate even further austerity measures elsewhere,impacting future initiatives and potentially damaging the reputation of the U.S. as a reliable partner in international development.

A Thought-Provoking Question

Archyde: Dr. Sharma, considering these significant shifts in U.S. foreign aid policy, what safeguards could be implemented to ensure that the most vulnerable populations don’t bear the brunt of these cuts? What specific metrics should be used to assess the effectiveness of the State Department in managing the remaining development programs?

Dr. Sharma: That’s the million-dollar question. Transparency and rigorous evaluation are crucial. independent assessments are required, focusing on impact on beneficiaries, accountability of funds, and overall effectiveness of remaining programs. Furthermore, active engagement with civil society organizations and affected communities is essential to ensure aid efforts remain responsive and relevant.

Archyde: Dr. Sharma, thank you for your insights on these significant changes concerning USAID and its programs. It’s clear there are many challenges and opportunities ahead.

Dr. Sharma: Thank you for having me. It’s a conversation that needs to continue.