State Department issues guidance defending aid freeze

Amid the confusion surrounding the Trump administration’s decision to temporarily halt most U.S. foreign assistance, the State Department put out an FAQ media note today — but it seemed to focus more on defending the aid freeze than on answering the myriad questions that the aid community has about what is going on. Yesterday, hopes were raised after Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a waiver exempting “life-saving humanitarian assistance” from the 90-day freeze, but questions remain about what exactly falls under that definition. On a broader level, the FAQ — titled “Prioritizing America’s National Interests One Dollar at A Time” — further cemented the administration’s will to move full steam ahead with its "America First" action plan and its push to nix foreign assistance programs that it deems wasteful. “Americans are a hardworking and generous people, who have sacrificed their blood and treasure to help their fellow man across the globe. But no foreign nation is entitled to those benefits, and no foreign aid program is above scrutiny,” the note said, reiterating the administration’s refrain that every program “must make America safer, stronger, and more prosperous.” It also claimed that “even at this early stage, over $1,000,000,000 in spending not aligned with an America First agenda has been prevented.” While it didn’t offer specifics on that $1 billion figure, it did cite specific programs that don’t meet the administration’s standards. “Without the pause, U.S. taxpayers would have provided condoms (and other contraceptive services) in Gaza, climate justice marketing services in Gabon, clean energy programs for women in Fiji, gender development programs in D.C., family planning throughout Latin America, sex education and pro-abortion programs for young girls globally, and much more,” it said. It pointed out that the department has exempted a number of programs already, including emergency food aid as well as “life-saving medicine, medical services, food, shelter, and subsistence assistance, as well as supplies and reasonable administrative costs as necessary to deliver such assistance.” It also offered some additional details on how to apply for a waiver, while adding that the original stop-work guidance on Jan. 24 was “straight forward,” though many NGOs and implementing partners might beg to differ — especially given the lack of follow-up from USAID and the State Department on which programs fall under the umbrella of emergency food aid and lifesaving humanitarian assistance. It also implied that many programs may not survive the 90-day review period, noting that, “In just a few days, the Department received billions of dollars in waiver requests. Many of those requests are still under a merit-based review as they are not considered emergency or life threatening.” “Even setting aside generous support for Ukraine over the past several years, the U.S. is spending roughly $70 billion in foreign aid annually. That is more than the GDP of multiple U.S. states and accounts for four out of every 10 dollars in global humanitarian aid,” it added, while failing to mention that U.S. foreign aid spending accounts for less than 1% of the federal budget. In all, it defended the freeze, despite the blowback it’s received from those in the aid community, whether that be smaller NGOs or large implementing partners. “It is impossible to evaluate programs on autopilot because the participants – both inside and outside of government – have little to no incentive to share programmatic-level details so long as the dollars continue to flow,” it asserted. “A temporary pause, with commonsense waivers for truly life-threatening situations, is the only way to scrutinize and prevent waste.”