Brian Sandberg: Historical Perspectives

Professors of National Security and Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin have published a letter defending USAID and warning that dismantling the agency would damage U.S. national security.

The following letter was sent to the Texas Congressional Delegation on Monday and was shared with the American-Statesman Editorial Board for publication.

We are scholars and practitioners of national security at the University of Texas at Austin. We come from diverse ideological and professional backgrounds but share a deep commitment to the national security of the United States. We are alarmed that the Trump administration appears prepared to abruptly dismantle the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). We fear the administration’s hasty and ill-conceived efforts have done grave damage to signature programs like the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), President George W. Bush’s AIDS initiative which has saved more than 25 million lives.

USAID and foreign assistance play a vital role in protecting America, reducing the risk of instability, migration and disease coming to our borders. We know from experience that investments in foreign assistance can be a much less expensive way to protect the country than sending our soldiers into harm’s way overseas.

USAID works with other agencies across the federal government, including the State Department and the Department of Defense, to further U.S. national interests as critical instruments of national power that combine development, diplomacy and defense. Eliminating development from the toolkit will make the country less safe.

Dismantling USAID would be a catastrophic national security mistake by the administration, leaving the global playing field of influence to adversaries of the United States. It will make the United States less safe and less respected around the world and contribute to both instability in already fragile states as well as make the United States vulnerable to infectious diseases like bird flu and Ebola.

Proposals to shrink the USAID workforce from 10,000 to 300 are contrary to what the United States needs. At a moment when China is increasing its global footprint around the world, the United States should be doing more with its foreign assistance, not less. Eliminating USAID would be a gift to China and Russia.

For example, the proposal to shrink USAID staff to 300 would reduce the number of USAID officials covering Asia from around 1400 in field offices and 140 in Washington to 8 individuals in Washington. You can’t counter China with 8 people.

Our national security is at risk if we close USAID. The United States is the leading provider of foreign assistance to fragile states like Colombia which could fall back into conflict again without support. We have spent $1.7 billion since 2017 in development and security assistance to help Colombia emerge from a civil war against narco gangs and paramilitary groups. Colombia has also accepted millions of Venezuelan migrants. If Colombia goes the way of Venezuela, more migrants will come to America.

USAID funding supports monitoring of the emergent bird flu outbreak in 49 countries. The freeze in funding has halted those efforts. That cannot be in the national interests of the United States to lose visibility on an important emergent disease that could threaten us all. Already, a bird flu outbreak has decimated poultry populations and increased the price of eggs. What happens if more people get infected with bird flu from a dangerous new strain?

There is always room for efficiency and improvements in the delivery of foreign assistance, but claims that USAID is contrary to the national interest are misinformed and are likely influence operations from hostile powers.

Foreign assistance is less than 1% of the U.S. federal budget. More than half of USAID’s budget of $40 billion goes to support health programs like efforts to eradicate polio and stop people dying from AIDS.

Finally, the way this is being carried out is deeply damaging to America’s credibility with friends and allies around the world. The haphazard and rushed move to withdraw thousands of foreign service officers is putting their lives and their family’s lives at risk. It is also not clear the executive branch has the unilateral power to dissolve an agency for which there is Congressional statute. Congress also has the power of the purse under Article I of the Constitution, and unilateral efforts by the executive branch to repurpose appropriations also likely fall foul of the Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Efforts to dismantle USAID and unilaterally cancel programs already appropriated by Congress risks a constitutional crisis in the first weeks of the second Trump administration.

Should you wish to discuss this further, we are happy to meet with you or members of your staff.

Sincerely,

Ambassador (ret) Larry Andre, Professor of Practice, LBJ School of Public Affairs

Josh Busby, professor, LBJ School of Public Affairs, former Senior Advisor for Climate, U.S. Department of Defense (2021-2023)

Aaron O’Connell, associate professor of History and Director of Research, Clements Center for National Security, UT Austin

Jeremi Suri, Mack Brown Distinguished Chair for Leadership in Global Affairs, Professor of History and Public Affairs

The Austin American Stateman has published this letter online.