ProPublica is a nonprofit investigative newsroom dedicated to exposing abuses of power and advocating for transparency. Subscribe to receive our most impactful stories as soon as they are published.
U.S. Diplomatic Warnings Reveal Escalating Humanitarian Crises Post-Withdrawal
Recent internal reports from American diplomats stationed in at least two nations highlight a troubling reality: the abrupt cessation of U.S. foreign aid under the Trump administration is fueling increased violence and disorder in regions already vulnerable to instability. These firsthand accounts, obtained by ProPublica, suggest that the consequences of withdrawing humanitarian support are more severe than initially anticipated, with some experts warning that the situation could deteriorate further.
Destabilization in Fragile Regions
Following the U.S. retreat from its international aid commitments, several of the world’s most delicate areas have experienced heightened unrest. Refugee camps, in particular, are facing escalating turmoil, with reports indicating a surge in criminal activities, sexual violence, and human trafficking. These developments are not mere predictions but documented events, underscoring the tangible fallout of policy shifts. Diplomats cautioned that halting aid could undermine efforts to combat terrorism and stabilize these regions, potentially creating a breeding ground for extremism.
Case Studies from Africa
In Malawi, a country often viewed as a relatively stable nation amid the chaos of neighboring conflicts, U.S. funding cuts to the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) have led to alarming consequences. According to late-April reports from the U.S. embassy, the reduction in aid has caused a sharp increase in illegal activities, including trafficking and sexual violence within refugee camps. The WFP, which relies heavily on U.S. support-accounting for nearly half of its global budget-has projected a 40% decrease in funding for 2025. As a result, food rations in Malawi’s Dzaleka refugee camp have been slashed by a third, leaving thousands of vulnerable individuals at risk of starvation.
To the north, in Kenya, the impact of aid reductions has been equally severe. The U.S. embassy reported that cuts to food assistance triggered violent protests, with police opening fire and injuring four individuals during a disturbance in early May. Tragically, at least one pregnant woman died amid a stampede at a food distribution site. Officials warn that as desperation grows among displaced populations, further violence and injuries are likely, especially as impoverished households become increasingly desperate.
Expert Perspectives and Official Responses
Eric Schwartz, a former assistant secretary of state and a member of the National Security Council during Democratic administrations, described the situation as devastating but predictable. “This is exactly what national security experts warned about,” Schwartz told ProPublica. “The level of chaos we’re witnessing is a direct result of policy choices.” He expressed concern that the ongoing destabilization could have long-term repercussions, including increased threats to U.S. security interests.
A spokesperson for the State Department responded to inquiries, emphasizing that blaming unrest solely on U.S. aid cuts is misleading. “It is unreasonable to expect the United States to provide for every individual worldwide,” the official stated via email. They also noted that most of the existing WFP programs in countries like Malawi and Kenya remain operational, despite the funding shortfalls. However, the administration has yet to allocate new funds for 2025, forcing the WFP to significantly reduce its aid efforts.
Impact on Food Security and Humanitarian Efforts
In Kenya, the WFP plans to cut food rations to just 28% of the normal amount by June, equating to fewer than 600 calories daily-far below the minimum recommended intake of 2,100 calories for adults. Lauren Landis, the WFP’s Kenya director, described the situation as dire, noting that the country is “living off the remnants” of aid delivered earlier in the year. She observed malnourished children resembling “walking skeletons,” a sight she hadn’t seen in over a decade.
Since assuming office, President Donald Trump has prioritized restoring security and stability globally. Simultaneously, his administration, in partnership with Elon Musk’s Department of Efficiency, has dismantled numerous foreign aid programs, citing wastefulness. Over 80% of USAID’s operations have been terminated, severely impairing humanitarian initiatives worldwide. Musk has publicly dismissed concerns about aid reductions, claiming that cuts to cryptocurrency-based relief efforts like DOGE have not contributed to increased mortality, a statement met with skepticism by aid organizations and experts.
The Strategic Role of Humanitarian Diplomacy
Historically, U.S. foreign aid has served as a form of “soft power,” fostering stability in volatile regions and preventing conflicts that could threaten American interests. Experts argue that these investments help mitigate regional conflicts and reduce the likelihood of U.S. military involvement. Jim Mattis, then defense secretary, emphasized in 2013 that neglecting aid could lead to increased military expenditures, illustrating the interconnectedness of diplomacy and security.
Rising Food Insecurity and Political Instability
Food insecurity has long been intertwined with regional unrest. Despite assurances from Secretary of State Marco Rubio that aid would continue, the Trump administration has halted funding to the WFP in numerous countries. In 2024, nearly half of the WFP’s budget was U.S.-funded, underscoring the critical role of American support.
Diplomatic cables from early 2025 reveal urgent warnings from U.S. officials about the potential for aid cuts to exacerbate crises and empower terrorist groups like the Taliban and ISIS. Concerns include the destabilization of transitioning regions, increased illegal activities, and threats to U.S. personnel and interests abroad. Embassies in Africa and the Middle East have expressed particular alarm, citing risks of violence, loss of oversight, and the diversion of aid to criminal entities.
On-the-Ground Consequences in Refugee Camps
In Ethiopia, South Sudanese refugees have pleaded with visiting U.S. officials not to reduce food aid further, fearing worsening hunger and violence. Similarly, in North Africa, camp managers warn that funding shortages could lead to protests and attacks on aid facilities, further endangering both refugees and local communities.
In Malawi, the situation is especially precarious. A decade-long refugee camp in Dzaleka, which now hosts over 55,000 individuals-far exceeding its original capacity-faces imminent aid cuts. Refugees like Iradukunda Devota, who has lived in the camp for 23 years, report rising crime, substance abuse, and desperation as food supplies dwindle. The Malawian government is considering closing borders to refugees altogether due to the funding crisis, a move that could leave thousands more vulnerable.
Looking Ahead: The Future of U.S. Humanitarian Policy
As aid programs face unprecedented reductions, experts warn of a worsening humanitarian crisis that could have far-reaching implications for regional stability and U.S. security. The WFP anticipates that aid in Dzaleka will cease entirely by July, risking violent protests and further destabilization. The international community remains concerned that these policies may undermine decades of progress in global health and stability efforts.
ProPublica will continue to monitor the evolving situation, seeking insights from affected communities and policymakers. We invite readers to share their perspectives and stay informed about the ongoing impacts of U.S. foreign aid policies.
