It is hard to assess the short- and long-term adverse implications of the White House’s proposed budget cuts to the State Department, major international organizations, and across key diplomatic and security institutions—halving the budget for the State Department and general humanitarian assistance, and eliminating 90 percent of all funds for international organizations, including an end to NATO and UN funding. Whereas a periodic review of these international organizations is necessary for streamlining their operations, cutting unnecessary expenditure, and reducing, in some instances, inflated bureaucracy, putting all these vital organizations on the chopping block without due review and auditing is shortsighted and highly damaging to the US’ international standing. But then again, there is no surprise here. Trump is on a rampage, and there are no adults in the room to warn him that such careless actions only undermine America’s national and overseas interests and influence, which by far outweigh any expenditure.
To put Trump’s thoughtless decision in the context of the US annual budget, foreign aid in 2023 amounted to $71.9 billion, which represents only 1.2 percent—a minuscule amount—of the US’ total federal budget of that year. However, the cut will have a massive adverse impact on multiple institutions worldwide, which will feel the dire effects of these arbitrary budget cuts.
These cuts include closures to overseas diplomatic missions and reductions in consular services, which will cause significant delays for Americans living overseas. They would face considerable delays in passport renewals and visa processing, further impeding emergency assistance when needed. This will also have even more dire consequences in Europe and Africa, where Trump plans multiple closures. More troubling is that shutting down America’s diplomatic posts in regions where there are significant conflicts could dramatically hinder gathering information from public sources, which is particularly important for US counterterrorism efforts.
Besides, what is beyond the pale is the White House’s utter lack of consideration for how such closures strain relations with America’s European partners, because the contemplated withdrawal of US engagement erodes trust, vital to maintaining a durable and healthy relationship. As disconcerting is the White House’s shortsightedness in gauging how such cuts open the door for China to enhance its geopolitical dominance, especially in Africa and Asia. On top of that, financial cuts will significantly reduce cultural exchange programs, which are vital to maintaining long-term partnerships.
Financial cuts to the United Nations and its agencies will cause instant cash deficits, disrupting humanitarian aid and health programs. We have seen similar impacts from the Trump administration’s previous elimination of funding for USAID. As Abby Maxman, Oxfam America’s President and CEO, stated, “There is not a single area of development and humanitarian assistance USAID has not been involved in.”
Several critically important agencies, including WHO, UNICEF, and UNRWA, would stop vaccinations, food assistance, and disaster relief. Here, too, China and Russia would rush to fill the vacuum and expand their influence in UN agencies, which could potentially alter international obligations and norms, particularly about human rights and climate change. In addition, cuts to the UN would weaken its ability to coordinate responses to pandemics or conflicts.
Further review of the proposed cuts shows that slashing diplomatic staff could delay crisis responses because layoffs of local employees, who comprise two-thirds of mission staff, would severely undermine regional know-how and the capacity to address emerging threats like pandemics or conflicts.
NATO member states may resist filling the funding gap, precipitating conflicts over defense spending while slowing NATO’s ongoing modernization plans and readiness to respond to any unexpected crisis. Should the cuts be implemented, the Alliance may well pursue an independent security framework, thereby rupturing transatlantic unity while reducing the US’ leverage and lessening its role in shaping NATO’s mission.
In addition, defunding UN peacekeeping in various countries could compel these peacekeeping forces to withdraw, undermining crisis response abilities and causing instability and potentially renewed conflict. Peacekeeping has historically been a cost-effective approach, and cuts could force costlier military interventions later. It is ironic that Trump, who does not want an eruption of new or reigniting of old violent conflicts under his watch, is removing one of the most important guardrails to prevent that.
As of 2023, peacekeeping missions in 11 countries, including Cyprus, Kosovo, South Sudan, and India and Pakistan, have proven to be most effective in maintaining peace. Indeed, these drastic, ill-fated actions do not serve Trump’s America First agenda. It is a contradiction that Trump himself does not seem to understand or care to reconcile.
Sadly, Trump, who enjoys creating controversies, does not grasp that his continuing dismantling of foreign and domestic agencies that have been rendering invaluable service, are saving the lives of millions, averting mass starvation and arresting diseases, and in this case, maintaining the peace. Losing America’s seat at the head of the table signals the beginning of the decline of the American empire. With all its mistakes and shortcomings, America has been the greatest benevolent empire in human history. Since the end of World War II, no country or combination of countries has been able to step into filling the shoes of America.
Even more harmful is Trump’s utter disregard for America’s moral obligations. Living up to moral commitments made America stand out, engendering trust, respect, and confidence in its policies and actions. Although we are still at the early stages of assessing the long-term harm that Trump inflicted on America, we are already witnessing the global backlash resulting from his backsliding on America’s traditional moral commitments.
Sadly, Trump’s indifference to people in need at home and abroad will have a devastating impact on those who depend on American aid. The more alarming impact is on America’s long-term global moral standing.
