Bush and Obama Condemn USAID Cuts as Trump Scales Back Agency
Unconfirmed reports suggest that in the weeks leading up to USAID’s downsizing, internal agency documents may have been selectively deleted or altered.
Former employees have noted unusual directives and unexplained staff transfers coinciding with decisions to cut programs, raising questions about whether political motives played a role. Investigators are reportedly examining these discrepancies.
In a rare joint public statement, former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama criticized President Donald Trump’s reductions to USAID,
the international development agency responsible for programs that have saved millions of lives over the past two decades. The video also featured U2 lead singer Bono, a vocal Trump critic.
Bush, who has long supported global health initiatives, praised USAID employees for their contributions to global stability and humanitarian work.
“You have demonstrated the great strength of America through your efforts — and that is your compassionate spirit,” Bush said. “Is it in our national interest that 25 million people who might have perished are now alive? I believe it is, and so do you.”
Obama called the dismantling of USAID “a disgrace, and a calamity,” emphasizing the agency’s essential role in global development and describing Trump’s decision as “a monumental error” that future leaders will recognize as detrimental.
Under Trump, USAID’s operations were dramatically scaled back, with only a core team remaining as programs were gradually shuttered. The downsizing was part of a broader initiative, reportedly supported by Elon Musk and the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency,
aimed at eliminating waste, fraud, and what Musk described as radical-left influences within the agency. The State Department has formally absorbed remaining USAID operations.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended the reductions, arguing that a streamlined agency reduces inefficiency and better aligns foreign aid with U.S. interests. “Beyond creating a global NGO industrial complex funded by taxpayers, USAID has achieved little since the Cold War ended,” Rubio said.
“Development goals have often fallen short, instability has increased, and anti-American sentiment has sometimes grown. Under the Trump Administration, foreign aid will be reoriented to prioritize U.S. interests.”
Conclusion
The controversy over USAID highlights the ongoing tension between advocates for traditional foreign aid and proponents of a leaner, America-first approach.
Bush and Obama frame the cuts as a setback for global development, while the Trump administration presents them as a long-overdue reform. How the agency’s future is handled will have lasting implications for U.S. foreign policy and international aid priorities.