The United States has been well-known for being the main contributor to organisations such as the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the World Health Organization (WHO). These organisations have been tremendously involved with global health and development, and humanitarian aid for decades, assisting during times of disaster, poverty, and economic strife. USAID responded to almost 240 global crises and natural disasters between 2017 and 2020, and in 2016 provided food assistance to over 53 million people worldwide. They are also well-known for their active participation in AIDS relief, aiding 9.5 million people in obtaining life-saving AIDS treatments in 2015 alone.
Working Together to Make the World A Healthier Place
WHO has similarly had its fair share of success stories. WHO prides itself in assisting in the development of National Health Policies and Plans for their Member States, establishing a vision, strategies, and steps to take to safeguard the health of that country and its inhabitants. They contributed to the global eradication of smallpox in 1980, one of the most significant public health achievements in history, and subdued the 2016 yellow fever outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo. They have developed health initiatives in over 40 countries and, to date, we have not heard of another yellow fever outbreak.
The US Abandoning Its Soft Power and the People in Need
Of late, the US has decided to withdraw its contributions to both WHO and USAID. The U.S. is one of WHO’s largest funders, and USAID relies on US government support to function. Funding reductions as severe as these could weaken global disease prevention, thus increasing the prevalence of diseases formerly under control (e.g., HIV/AIDS), disrupt humanitarian aid, and leave various communities without critical resources. The U.S is majorly concerned about its own interests, understandably so. However, this move will further marginalise already disadvantaged communities globally and exacerbate systemic inequalities that these organizations had been working actively against. It has also created a gap that interested countries like China are stepping in to fill, but the question remains as to if this would simply be placing lives in the hands of the same giant with a different name.
Humanitarian Aid: Helping Hand or Influencing Pressure?
On the other hand, some countries may be excited to gain independence from these organizations that have contributed to governmental conflict. Both WHO and USAID have been criticised for overstepping their boundaries and exerting undue influence in the countries that they assist, mostly in African regions. In particular, their interactions with governing bodies can potentially be overbearing. WHO has been accused of bureaucratic inefficiencies and slow responses to crises motivated by potential financial benefit. Similarly, USAID has faced scrutiny over the political influence of its aid and the effectiveness, or lack thereof, of its projects.
WHO and USAID are more than just organisations—they are lifelines for millions around the world. Their work in healthcare, disaster relief, and development cannot and should not be diminished despite the rumours and speculation. However, their departure from certain countries may be more of a blessing than a curse. This might be the time for some countries, specifically in Africa, to band together and “Make Themselves Great Again.”
We offer practical DEI programs tailored to help you apply inclusive practices effectively in everyday business. Discover our workshops to see what’s available.
