fbpx

Middle East experts split over recent moves to slash U.S. foreign aid, USAID

While some believe the agency is in serious need of reform and oversight, others worry a vacuum of U.S. engagement could empower American adversaries and undermine U.S. interests

Middle East experts are split on the potential impacts of the Trump administration’s near-blanket halt of U.S. foreign assistance and efforts to eliminate the U.S. Agency for International Development as an independent agency.

While proponents of the recent shakeups say that they will help reform and realign the priorities of an agency beset by cumbersome bureaucracy and systemic mismanagement, opponents argue that the disruption to and pauses in U.S. aid programs in the Middle East could have destabilizing effects on the region.

The administration, with White House advisor Elon Musk at the helm, has announced plans to fold the independent humanitarian and development aid agency into the State Department. It reportedly recalled all USAID employees from foreign missions this week, placed nearly all staff globally on leave and closed the agency’s headquarters in Washington. U.S. agencies have also issued stop-work orders on nearly all foreign aid programs, both through USAID and other departments, including military aid.

In the Middle East, USAID is the primary vector for U.S. humanitarian support for the West Bank and Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and various other parts of the region, aiming to help provide stability and basic resources. Outside of USAID, the U.S. also provides military aid and training to Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and other partners (which has been paused with the exception of Israel and Egypt) and training and other support for Palestinian Authority security forces in the West Bank.

“USAID was unable to make simple, critical changes to their policy which then hampered MEPPA’s progress,” said Heather Johnston, the CEO of the U.S.-Israel Education Association, who until December sat on the board of the Middle East Partnership for Peace Act (MEPPA). “USAID is bogged down in old thinking and could benefit from the type of intense scrutiny being applied by the Trump administration.”

Backers of the Trump administration’s efforts say the agency is, at best, an inefficient and unresponsive bureaucracy badly in need of reform and, at worst, plagued by systemic failures that have put money in the hands of individuals and groups linked to terrorist activity.

U.S.-Israel Education Association CEO Heather Johnston, who until December sat on the board of the Middle East Partnership for Peace Act (MEPPA), a grant program designed to promote Israeli-Palestinian cooperation that is run through USAID, said USAID’s bureaucracy had hampered the program’s effectiveness.

“USAID was unable to make simple, critical changes to their policy which then hampered MEPPA’s progress,” Johnston told Jewish Insider. “USAID is bogged down in old thinking and could benefit from the type of intense scrutiny being applied by the Trump administration.”

She said that the program consequently failed to live up to its aspirations and vision.

Mark Dubowitz, the CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said in an op-ed with FDD senior analyst Ben Cohen that the move to shutter USAID shows Trump “will bring accountability and efficiency to foreign aid,” while arguing that its soft power mission should be preserved.

“While in theory, it was the right vision and idea and seemed so promising, MEPPA missed the mark in seizing the transformative opportunity to support economic type programs to incentivize and strengthen Israelis and Palestinians who want to work together in Judea and Samaria,” Johnston continued, referring to the West Bank by its biblical name.

She explained that the agency was “biased against Israeli companies in Judea and Samaria” and denied applications for funding without providing specific reasoning.

Mark Dubowitz, the CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said in an op-ed with FDD senior analyst Ben Cohen that the move to shutter USAID shows Trump “will bring accountability and efficiency to foreign aid,” while arguing that its soft power mission should be preserved. Dubowitz and Cohen said that the agency’s mission had been undermined by the injection of “fringe political ideologies” and funding had been sent to “radical causes and organizations.”


“Freezing and stopping work and just shutting down missions like this … there’s no way for somebody else or another government or another organization to take it over, and people’s lives are at risk,” Dana Stroul, the former deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East and the current director of research at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told JI. “It could potentially be more destabilizing and terrible for us, the American reputation and U.S. credibility abroad.”

The op-ed described the Middle East as an illustration of USAID’s failures, highlighting that while the U.S. surged funding to Gaza and the West Bank post-Oct. 7, 2023 and after the war in Gaza began, it ended up sending funds to groups with close ties to terrorist organizations and whose leaders had praised the Oct. 7 attacks.

Critics of the Trump administration’s recent moves argue that the freeze could have far-reaching and destabilizing effects on the Middle East.

Dana Stroul, the former deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East and the current director of research at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told JI that the “long-standing bipartisan consensus” has supported U.S. aid programs as an effective way to support stability,prevent dangers that could generate threats to the homeland and generate goodwill and cooperation with foreign populations and governments.

“Freezing and stopping work and just shutting down missions like this … there’s no way for somebody else or another government or another organization to take it over, and people’s lives are at risk,” Stroul said. “It could potentially be more destabilizing and terrible for us, the American reputation and U.S. credibility abroad.”

While Stroul said that “constant vigilance” over U.S. funding is appropriate and necessary, she emphasized that every foreign aid grant from USAID and other branches of the federal government is reviewed and can be blocked by congressional leaders, and said that the current halts violate the law. She said auditors, inspectors general and other checks are already in place.

“This is a full cut-off of an entire department in all programs. It’s taking a hammer where a scalpel would be more appropriate,” Stroul said. “It’s about dismantling this entire apparatus.”

Ilan Goldenberg, who served as an advisor to the National Security Council and former Vice President Kamala Harris on the Middle East in the previous administration, argued that resuming humanitarian aid to Gaza is particularly critical at the current juncture.

“Eventually, It becomes a major problem with implementing the cease-fire,” Goldenberg, who previously authored a report for the Center for a New American Security on USAID and other assistance programs in the Middle East, said. Increased humanitarian aid to Gaza is a key pillar of the three-phase deal.

Stroul noted that, while the U.S. is the top bilateral aid donor in Gaza, the United Nations oversees significant funding and aid work on the ground.

But she emphasized that the stop-work orders issued by the administration may not only cut off future support but halted ongoing programs as well — “even if they had pallets on trucks ready to go,” they would not be able to move, Stroul said.

“There has been such an effort over the past 15 months of Israel’s campaign in Gaza to try to get humanitarian aid to Palestinian civilians, so I imagine it will have an effect,” Stroul continued, adding that the U.S. suddenly withdrawing its support might also dissuade other partners whom the U.S. wants to become involved in Gaza from doing so.

Stroul and Goldenberg said that halting U.S. aid to Syria would also undermine U.S. goals there.

“The United States is basically taking its cards off the table and taking off the table the possibility of influencing the trajectory of this [new] government,” Stroul said, leaving opportunities for U.S. adversaries to reassert themselves.

“It’s going to make all of these places less stable, less amenable to U.S. interests, more likely to have challenges,” Goldenberg said. “A lot of aid is a pretty good deal. It’s a lot cheaper to provide this kind of assistance and make the situation meaningfully better with not that much money. If one of these situations really erodes to the point where it becomes a crisis, then you get drawn in at a much higher expense.”

Outside the purview of USAID, Goldenberg argued that halting cooperation with and support for the Lebanese Armed Forces could hamper the implementation of the cease-fire in Lebanon and empower Hezbollah, as well as undermine the Palestinian security forces in the West Bank.

“While we welcome continued support for Israel — including both military assistance and economic cooperation programs — we must be mindful of what harmful impact decreased support for other nations throughout the Middle East could have on regional stability,” the AJC said. “U.S. global leadership remains the best protection of our values and interests — for Americans and our allies, and for the Jewish people. “

Stroul added that, given its key position in the region and its role in assisting Israeli security, “the United States has an objective interest in stability in Jordan and a partnership with Jordan.” She also noted that U.S. military aid to Jordan ultimately supports U.S. manufacturing and American jobs.

And she said it’s ”hard to see what outside actor” could step into the U.S.’ place to support the Palestinian security forces, which have worked to tamp down violence in the West Bank and which some hope will ultimately assume a role in post-war Gaza.

The American Jewish Committee raised concerns about the administration’s moves in a statement.

“While we welcome continued support for Israel — including both military assistance and economic cooperation programs — we must be mindful of what harmful impact decreased support for other nations throughout the Middle East could have on regional stability,” the AJC said. “U.S. global leadership remains the best protection of our values and interests — for Americans and our allies, and for the Jewish people. “

The group warned that recent moves will be seen globally  as “as an abdication of American leadership” and an opportunity for U.S. adversaries, while saying that it is “appropriate” for the administration to review existing programs.

On Capitol Hill, the divide over USAID’s future has largely fallen along party lines.

Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in a statement that he supports efforts to “reform and restructure” USAID, including by folding it into the State Department, in response to the national security threat posed by “skyrocketing national debt.”

Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he’s “excited to work” with the administration to “fix our broken foreign assistance system,” and defended the effort’s legality. 

On the other side, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) led a letter with 37 other Senate Democrats to Secretary of State Marco Rubio blasting the USAID shutdown as “brazen and illegal” and a violation of Congress’ constitutional duties, as well as a serious risk to U.S. national security that would empower China, Russia and Iran.

Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, also condemned the move, accusing Musk and the administration of “trying to pull wool over the eyes of the American people and kill a key arm of U.S. national security in the dead of night.”

Jewish Insider’s Gabby Deutch contributed reporting.

Subscribe now to
the Daily Kickoff

The politics and business news you need to stay up to date, delivered each morning in a must-read newsletter.