Why Trump Should Continue USAID Funding In Africa (OPINION)
By Isaac Asabor
The question of whether U.S. President Donald Trump, or any American leader, should reconsider U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) funding to Africa is a pressing one. This is not because Africa does not need financial aid, but rather because much of the aid intended for development and poverty alleviation ends up in the pockets of corrupt leaders and their cronies. The cycle of looting has become an institutionalized plague, depriving millions of Africans of the much-needed benefits that such funding is meant to provide. If USAID funding is being squandered through corruption, then the question arises: Should the U.S. continue providing financial assistance to Africa under such conditions?
Without any iota of exaggeration, the USAID Mission is a noble intention thwarted by corruption. For the sake of clarity, USAID was established with the goal of promoting economic development, democracy, and humanitarian assistance around the world. In Africa, the agency has played a critical role in addressing poverty, healthcare crises, and infrastructural development. From funding malaria and HIV/AIDS prevention programs to providing relief during famines and pandemics, USAID has been instrumental in improving the quality of life for millions.
However, despite these noble intentions, the impact of USAID funding has often been diluted by systemic corruption. Instead of ensuring that these resources reach the people who need them most, corrupt government officials, bureaucrats, and elites siphon off large portions of the funds, enriching themselves while leaving the masses in abject poverty. Transparency International and other anti-corruption watchdogs have repeatedly exposed shocking cases of embezzlement, with some African leaders stashing stolen funds in offshore accounts or investing in luxurious properties abroad.
At this juncture, it is expedient to throw insight into how African leaders squander USAID funds. This is as there are numerous documented instances of aid money being misappropriated or misused by African governments.
For instance, several African countries receive millions of dollars annually from USAID to fight diseases like malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS. However, reports have shown that funds meant for purchasing medical equipment and drugs are often mismanaged or embezzled, leading to a lack of essential medicines in public hospitals.
In a similar vein, infrastructure projects funded by international aid are frequently over-inflated or never completed. Corrupt officials often award contracts to bogus companies, diverting large sums into personal accounts while leaving roads, hospitals, and schools in decrepit conditions.
In fact, some leaders and their associates set up dubious non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to access foreign aid, only to divert the funds for personal use. These organizations exist merely on paper, while the funds are channeled into private businesses and real estate ventures.
Even when USAID funds are disbursed, they are often distributed through corrupt networks, with money reaching only those with political connections. Many public service projects are executed based on favoritism, rather than need-based assessments.
Given the foregoing insights, it is not an exaggeration to opine that the human cost of corruption in this context is colossal. This is as the looting of aid funds is not just an economic crime, it is a moral and humanitarian crisis and the effects are dire.
For instance it has resulted to poverty and unemployment. The reason for the foregoing cannot be farfetched as given the development funds being stolen, millions remain trapped in poverty, with little hope for economic empowerment. Worse still, youth unemployment rates continue to soar, creating fertile ground for crime, violence, and migration crises.
In a similar vein, it engenders poor healthcare and education. In fact, the inability to channel funds into the health and education sectors has left many Africans without access to quality medical care or proper schooling. Many hospitals lack basic medical supplies, and classrooms are overcrowded with underpaid teachers struggling to educate future generations.
Also in a similar vein is the political instability the malfeasance leads to. This is as corruption leads to frustration, social unrest, and in some cases, violent uprisings. Citizens who feel betrayed by their governments often turn to protests or even armed conflicts, further destabilizing already fragile states.
Given the foregoing, the question on everyone lips, and asking no one in particular is, “Should the U.S. Withdraw Aid?”
To answer the foregoing question, it is expedient to opine that given these grim realities, it is understandable why Trump and other American policymakers might question the wisdom of continuing USAID funding in Africa. After all, why should American taxpayers’ money be funneled into a system that enriches corrupt elites rather than addressing the actual needs of the people?
Yet, a complete withdrawal of USAID funding could also have catastrophic consequences. Millions rely on this aid for food, healthcare, and emergency relief. Cutting off funding could worsen hunger crises, increase disease outbreaks, and further entrench poverty. Instead of outright discontinuation, a more effective strategy would be to implement stricter monitoring and accountability measures.
Against the backdrop of the foregoing view, it is salient to suggest that reforming the aid distribution from USAID is the way forward.
Therefore, to ensure that USAID funds serve their intended purpose, the U.S. government, in collaboration with African institutions, should adopt measures that cut across direct funding to credible NGOs, adoption of stringent accountability mechanism, adoption of empowerment over handouts, collaboration with Civil Society and Whistleblowers and promotion of good governance.
Explanatorily put, rather than routing funds through corrupt governments, USAID should work directly with reputable NGOs and grassroots organizations that have a proven track record of accountability.
In a similar vein, USAID should enhance its auditing systems to track every dollar spent. Any country found to be mismanaging funds should face sanctions, including suspension of aid until reforms are made.
Still in a similar vein, instead of just giving aid, USAID should prioritize economic empowerment programs that create jobs and support local enterprises. Initiatives that provide skills training, entrepreneurship support, and microfinance opportunities can help Africans build self-sustaining economies.
Besides, civil society groups and investigative journalists should be empowered to expose corruption. USAID should establish partnerships with these watchdog organizations to identify and eliminate fraudulent activities.
Again, the U.S. can leverage aid as a tool to push for governance reforms. Only countries that demonstrate progress in fighting corruption and upholding democracy should continue receiving full aid packages.
Without a doubt, the debate over USAID funding in Africa is not about whether Africa needs help, it does. The real question is whether aid can be delivered in a way that ensures it benefits ordinary people rather than enriching corrupt leaders. While Trump and other policymakers may have valid concerns about aid mismanagement, an outright withdrawal of USAID funding would do more harm than good. Instead, a more stringent, accountable, and reform-driven approach must be adopted to curb corruption and ensure that aid fulfills its purpose of improving lives.
Ultimately, the fate of Africa rests in the hands of its leaders. If African governments refuse to tackle corruption, then no amount of foreign aid will be enough to lift the continent out of poverty. African citizens, civil society organizations, and international partners must hold their leaders accountable to ensure that development funds serve their rightful purpose. Only then can the vision of a prosperous Africa become a reality.
