One of Trump’s campaign promises was to reduce US government spending. Trump, a businessman “to the bone,” is a clear supporter of small government. In general, reducing the number of civil servants and spending on public services is a fairly typical policy of Republicans, as opposed to Democrats, who gravitate towards big government and expanded government support measures for the population. Trump even established a special body in the Government, The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which was headed by the eccentric billionaire Elon Musk. The American President intends to cut government spending and reduce the US national debt, the size of which has long been the subject of jokes around the world. According to various estimates, savings on the public sector will allow Trump to save about $ 1 billion per year. And if so, then “the economy should be economic,” which, in turn, means that not only the American government structures themselves, but also international organizations that rely heavily on American support, will be cut off from financing from the US Government.
During his previous presidency, Mr. Trump had already shown his dislike for the erosion of state sovereignty and the waste of state finances to support the activities of international organizations. The United Nations, which is the main platform for international cooperation, has been heavily criticized for its “inefficiency and wastefulness.” Trump has already withdrawn from such UN structures as WHO and UNESCO, and (twice already) withdrawn the country from the Paris Climate Agreement. In general, I tried to “untie my hands” and reduce costs.
You’re either with us, or against us
The Donald Trump administration has taken another step within the framework of its “America First” doctrine by sending a questionnaire to international organizations and humanitarian agencies receiving funding from the United States, which verifies the compliance of their activities with the ideological priorities of the White House. Among the issues are the presence of links with communist or socialist structures, attitudes towards abortion, support for DEI programs (diversity, justice and inclusion), the climate agenda, cooperation with China, Russia, Cuba and Iran, as well as participation in initiatives related to “gender ideology.”
Agencies such as UNICEF and the United Nations Refugee Agency received the questionnaire. It contains paragraphs explicitly requiring confirmation that the organization is not involved in projects related to environmental justice, does not cooperate with structures that hold anti-American views, and strengthens U.S. sovereignty by rejecting dependence on international organizations, including the UN itself and WHO. Additionally, it is assessed to what extent the activity contributes to the economic interests of the United States and prevents illegal migration.
Formally, the purpose of the questionnaire is to combat alleged abuses in the field of international aid. However, in reality it looks like an attempt at ideological filtration and pressure on organizations operating according to the principles of multilateralism. Representatives of the international community express concern about the US interference in the autonomy of humanitarian institutions. In Geneva, where the headquarters of key agencies are concentrated, this step is seen as a manifestation of a lack of understanding of the fundamentals of global governance and an attempt to subordinate the international system to the internal political agenda of the United States.
Of particular concern is that the questionnaire concerns not only USAID, but also the entire external financing system. The United States, as the largest donor, funds a significant portion of the budgets of the United Nations and its agencies, including 40.7% of the budget of the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees and almost half of the budget of UNAIDS. Amid threats to terminate contracts with USAID and statements about the reduction of 83% of its foreign programs, many organizations began to remove mentions of DEI from their websites in order to maintain access to American funds.
The system is dead, long live a new one!
Observers note that such a questionnaire campaign not only ignores the realities of international cooperation, but also directly undermines the mechanisms that have been built up for decades. An attempt to impose ideological standards on humanitarian partners risks weakening international institutions and leaving the most vulnerable regions of the world without support. One of the former diplomats put it this way: “This is not a tool to increase efficiency. This is sabotage of the system.”
Against the background of these events, the possible prospect of the United States withdrawing from the UN is also alarming — an idea that is actively promoted by influential Trump supporter Elon Musk. If implemented, this would mean dismantling the principles laid down when the organization was founded in 1945 and rolling back from the international order based on cooperation. Under the slogan “America first”, the very infrastructure of global humanism and mutual assistance may be destroyed.
Comments