Trump: is this the end of aid?

As Donald Trump reclaims the White House, his America First doctrine has sent an existential shock through the global aid community, with Africa Africa bearing the brunt of the burden.

One of his first presidential decrees abruptly suspended over $8 billion in foreign aid to the continent, throwing health programmes, humanitarian assistance, and economic development initiatives into disarray.  

So extreme was the impact of the decree, that Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who initially exempted only emergency food programmes and military aid to Israel and Egypt, was forced within days to extend exemptions to some other essential humanitarian programmes. And a Trump-nominated district judge, Carl Nichols, has suspended until Feb 14th the imposition of administrative leave on 2,200 USAID staff, reinstating another 500 who have already been furloughed.

Could Trump's retreat from development assistance mean the end of aid as we know it? The next major player to watch is Germany. With economic pressures at home and a insurgent farce right, could they be the to pull back from the aid arena? And will Trump's measures drive Africa further into the orbit of China and Russia? And what does this mean for the long-term prospects of the continent – home to 500 million of the world’s poorest people?

Instant fallout: where the cuts hurt most

Africa has long been a major recipient of U.S. foreign aid, with the bulk of allocation directed toward humanitarian assistance (47%) and health (29%), economic development (14%), and democracy and security initiatives (10%). These funds support everything from antiretroviral treatments for HIV/AIDS to food security programmes and infrastructure development. Of countries which supply data, the US provides the largest overseas development assistance (ODA) by a significant margin. Comparable figures for Russia and China are not available, revealed only when it suits their strategic interests. 

Trump’s executive order has put an immediate halt to these disbursements, with devastating consequences for key sectors:

• Health Services: The biggest hit comes to PEPFAR, which provides lifesaving HIV/AIDS treatment to over 20 million people, primarily in sub-Saharan Africa. Without continued funding, millions risk losing access to vital medication. The U.S. withdrawal from the World Health Organisation (WHO) further jeopardises efforts to combat malaria, tuberculosis, and emerging pandemics.

• Humanitarian Aid: Refugee camps and food security programmes in Ethiopia, South Sudan, and the Sahel region rely heavily on U.S. aid. The suspension has already disrupted supply chains, placing vulnerable populations at greater risk of famine and displacement.

• Economic and Trade Support: U.S. initiatives aimed at supporting African entrepreneurs, SMEs, and infrastructure projects have stalled. In countries like Kenya and Ghana, which depend on duty-free access under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), uncertainty around future trade policies threatens jobs in the textile, clothing, and agricultural sectors.

  
  

Implementation of Trump’s decree has been brutal. In country after impoverished country, USAID’s website replaced warm words about aid and partnership with an announcement that all direct hire staff were placed on immediate administrative leave.

China and Russia: the new benefactors?

As America steps back from its role as prime benefactor to the world’s poorest countries, China and Russia are poised to step into the breach.

Beijing has spent the past two decades embedding itself as Africa’s largest infrastructure investor, financing railways, ports, and energy projects under its Belt and Road Initiative. In return, China secures strategic resource deals and growing political influence across the continent.

Russia, on the other hand, has focused on military and security cooperation with deleterious results. Through mercenary groups like Wagner, Moscow has expanded its footprint in conflict zones, offering African governments military support in exchange for resource concessions.

An argument I have long since supported is that China’s approach to economic support for Africa —focused on infrastructure and trade— can be more beneficial for long-term growth. This is not to condone the country’s disregard for human rights or its propensity for environmental destruction. Rather, that the emphasis on economic partnerships and large-scale investment projects has the potential to foster sustainable growth. However, China’s heavy lending has been criticised for burdening African nations with unsustainable debt. Meanwhile Russian involvement has triggered greater political instability, and corrupted both governance and economic management. If Africa leans too heavily on either of these powers, it risks falling into new forms of dependency.

“America First”: re-evaluation and strategic alliance

Trump’s order is currently a 90 day “pause” in US foreign aid – not an indefinite halt. Programmes deemed strategically valuable may be retained, provided, they are “in the national interest.”

This alone flies in the face of the traditional approach of aid: that it should be provided on the basis of needs of the poorest and not linked to donor interests. The Trumpian approach benefits countries rich in fossil fuels, like Nigeria and Angola, and those where the US has significant interest in counterterrorism cooperation, such as Kenya and Niger.

Each African nation faces a crucial decision: what strategic value can they offer the U.S. to remain on Washington’s priority list? Oil producers may leverage their reserves, while others may highlight their geopolitical significance in countering terrorism or managing migration flows. The shifting landscape demands proactive diplomacy from African leaders, ensuring their nations are not left behind in a recalibrated U.S. foreign policy.

Trumpism: a new world order?

Trump’s withdrawal of aid is more than an economic challenge—it signals a seismic shift in global power dynamics, an end to the western consensus that has shaped development assistance for the past half century. The question for African leaders then is how will they fill the vacuum? Will they use the opportunity to forge a new era of self-reliance, or allow their countries to  be swept into yet another power play between China, Russia, and other global actors?

The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), the largest free trade agreement in the world by number of countries, presents Africa with a critical opportunity. By fostering intra-African trade, reducing reliance on external markets, and strengthening regional supply chains, it could provide the foundations for economic independence and see the end of the poverty that blights parts of the continent..

The choice is stark: will African leaders seize the opportunity to shape their nations’  future, or will they allow external powers to dictate the continent’s next chapter? One thing is clear: Trump’s retreat cannot be the end of the battle to overcome entrenched poverty.

For further reading see https://www.developmentaid.org/news-stream/post/191101/u-s-foreign-aid-freeze-threatens-critical-programs-in-africa)