Musk has been jettisoned: a key element of US soft power has been destroyed

Ilon Musk's agency has begun restructuring the Agency for International Development, better known as USAID. The office of the organization is closed, the management and many employees are fired or put on leave, operations are frozen. The White House continues to attack the Democrats' major projects. What USAID was actually doing and how much money it was spending, Izvestia tells us.

"It's time to die."

On Friday evening, representatives of the State Department and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) headed by Ilon Musk arrived at the USAID office in Washington and demanded immediate access to all offices of the agency. What was happening resembled an assault - it was possible to get inside only after threats to call the U.S. Marshals Service. ABC reports that the bickering with the guards ended with a number of USAID employees locked inside the building.

Just a couple of days after DOGE employees gained access to the agency's database, Musk began publishing details of USAID's activities that they had uncovered. The billionaire called the agency itself a criminal organization, "a division of left-wing radical globalists" that "it's time to die."

Previously appointed USAID administrator (i.e., head) Matt Hopson resigned after only a few days on the job. Secretary of State Marco Rubio became acting on Monday, February 3, having previously stated that the agency had ceased to take into account the national interests of the United States (which is enshrined in law) and was undermining the work of government agencies.

Thus, USAID, formerly under the de facto control of the U.S. National Security Council, is now directly subordinated to the U.S. foreign policy establishment. Rubio announced that the agency will not be destroyed, but structurally reformed. "This is not about ending the programs that USAID does. There are things that the agency is doing well and we will continue those activities, but there are projects about which we have serious questions," he reportedly said.

The seriousness of the questions raised by Trump's team is articulated in a White House statement that lists some of the tens of thousands of programs USAID previously ran. These include $10 million worth of food supplies to al-Qaeda (terrorist organization, banned in Russia) fighters, a "transgender opera" in Colombia, "transgender comics" in Peru, $2 million for gender reassignment and "LGBT activism" (movement recognized as extremist, banned in Russia) in Guatemala, $4.67 million to benefit the EcoHealth Alliance NPO engaged in "research in a Wuhan lab," and so on.

USAID implements, finances and administers tens of thousands of projects around the world. The agency's total budget is just over $50 billion, but this figure does not take into account the amounts directed by partner organizations, intelligence agencies, and foreign governments into joint projects. As a result, the figures characterizing the real effect of USAID's activities are about 10 times larger, or as conservative media outlets put it - about 1% of the U.S. budget.

The Trump team is taking the most radical measures or, at any rate, striving to demonstrate the most appropriate attitude to the issue of redirecting the resources used in foreign policy to the directions it deems necessary, points out Sergei Mikhailov, a leading RISI expert.

- We are witnessing a radical revision of previous approaches to the use of "soft power" resources, which has always been the most powerful tool in American politics. During Trump's first term, the organization managed to reach an agreement with the White House and retain funding. Now we see a radically different approach. Much will depend on the lobbying abilities of Secretary of State Marco Rubio," the expert comments.

In turn, American political scientist Malek Dudakov notes Trump's little interest in "soft power", to which he prefers "power to build peace".

- In the States itself, there have always been many questions about how the agency has utilized its budgets. The $60 billion allocated to USAID is more than was directed to the activities of almost all U.S. intelligence agencies. Of course, in certain countries, the agency and its cooperating organizations have been quite successful in swaying the domestic situation. However, Trump perceives it as a laundering office and a feeding trough for Democrats and forces close to them. Therefore, the agency's activities are now being terminated. Democrats, of course, are hysterical and screaming about China's strengthening humanitarian efforts. But that won't stop Trump, who doesn't really believe in "soft power" and is primarily focused on repairing the consequences of Joe Biden's presidency. The $2 trillion budget hole must be closed somehow, and external tranches are an important part of this process," Dudakov emphasized.

Experts expect Trump to continue using USAID for its intended purpose, but before that he will make massive cuts in staff and spending. A huge bureaucratic machine requires a massive overhaul, and the agency plays a very significant role in this mechanism. At the same time, with the fall of USAID, the United States will not lose its soft power tools completely, emphasizes Andrei Evseev, deputy director of the Institute of the United States and Canada, associate professor at the State University of Washington.

- This step will be painful only for representatives of the U.S. federal bureaucracy responsible for the distribution of international aid. The U.S. has a rather extensive system of support for allies and situational partners," the Izvestia interlocutor reminds.

What USAID was doing

USAID was created as a "conglomerate" of previously separate programs and projects. Its conceptual "base" was the plan for the post-war reconstruction of Europe, better known as the Marshall Plan, while the CIA became the de facto "mother" organization, which transferred to USAID the functions of financing projects abroad. The prioritization of certain goals or regions of the agency was enshrined in legislation.

All major global non-profit organizations cooperated with USAID: Rockefeller Foundation, Open Society Foundation (recognized as an undesirable organization in the Russian Federation), Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Ford Foundation, National Endowment for Democracy (NED - another CIA project, recognized as an undesirable organization in the Russian Federation). In addition, major transnational corporations (from Coca-Cola to Shell), UN structures (UNICEF, World Bank) and many others were involved in joint work with the agency.

It should be noted that throughout its history the agency has been engaged not only in the implementation of various initiatives and projects, but also lobbied for the interests of large corporate businesses. For example, Bulmont was engaged in road construction in Afghanistan, Halliburton was rebuilding critical infrastructure in Iraq destroyed by the U.S. army. In India, USAID promoted the interests of Visa and Mastercard as part of a program to introduce cashless payments.

The soft American baton

Of course, the most important function of the agency was to promote elements of U.S. "soft power," and here the post-Soviet space remained an area of special attention. And the priority in the last three decades was not Russia (where USAID activities were recognized as undesirable and curtailed in 2012), but Ukraine and Georgia. According to El Pais, Trump's decision to audit USAID has left more than a hundred Ukrainian cultural and media organizations without a livelihood.

In our country, USAID supported such organizations as FBK (included by the Ministry of Justice in the register of organizations performing the functions of a foreign agent, recognized as an extremist organization and banned in Russia), Golos (included by the Ministry of Justice in the register of organizations performing the functions of a foreign agent), Memorial (included by the Ministry of Justice in the register of organizations performing the functions of a foreign agent, liquidated by decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation), the Moscow Helsinki Group (liquidated by decision of the Moscow City Court) and many media outlets.

USAID was a cover for the CIA's foreign operations, Australian political scientist Mark Lowe told Izvestia.

- "It was just a nice package: 'Here's our help, but by the way, you need to do this and this.' They attract NGOs who come in and undermine governments and collapse them. Ukraine is a perfect example. The crisis started during the Orange Revolution in 2004. The crisis has a long history. They know what they are doing, and they are doing it very well. But there is a positive side - countries are starting to recognize the signs of these coups. Georgia is a perfect example of this. Georgia realized what was happening, did not play into the hands of NGOs and managed to survive the coup," the expert states.

It should be noted that the agency's influence was not only in the regions of concern to the United States. USAID was actively engaged in promoting the agenda in countries that are considered to be allies of the United States. For example, it is the second largest contributor to the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) - £ 2.6 million, with USAID's annual allocation twice as much as its EU receipts.

The information flurry raised after the agency ceased operations is also attributed to the possibility of the publication of previously classified data on its activities. Musk has already taken the first step by accusing USAID of funding the development of biological weapons. At the same time, any disclosure of such information would be aimed at hitting political opponents, notes Malek Dudakov.

- I quite admit the declassification of documents on corruption that existed during democratic administrations. Another thing is that I don't really believe in declassification of the activities of American biolaboratories using USAID money. If it happens (which I think would be a very good thing), it will be a blow to the Democrats' positions. It will be a statement of their violation of American laws both in terms of sponsoring this kind of research and in terms of financing terrorist groups," the expert believes.

Next stop - Pennsylvania Avenue

The next target for attack is the Treasury Department. According to The New York Times, DOGE agents gained access to the Treasury's payment system, through which more than $6 trillion a year in payments from federal agencies pass.

"The DOGE team discovered, among other things, that Treasury employees in charge of approving payments had been ordered to always approve payments, even to known fraudulent or terrorist groups. They literally never once in their entire careers denied a payment. Not once," Musk wrote on social media.