Staff Reports
The dismantling of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) by countries around the world showcases a growing backlash against American liberalism that has been brewing for years. Ordinary folks in various nations have become acutely aware of the meddling tendencies of US bureaucrats, funded by the likes of USAID, who attempt to impose their progressive agendas under the guise of humanitarian aid. This phenomenon has often been characterized as social engineering, and many are ready to kick these meddling agents out of their backyards—just as Russia did over a decade ago.
In 2012, the Russian government unceremoniously booted USAID from its territory, accusing the agency of interfering with its political processes. The agency, which had been operating in Russia for two decades and spent nearly $3 billion in various schemes, was told to pack its bags and leave by October 1st of that year. The Russian Foreign Ministry made it clear that the agency’s operations often strayed far from their supposed goals and veered into the realm of political manipulation. This ejection was a clear message that other nations have taken to heart: meddling with a nation’s internal affairs has consequences, particularly in the context of US political projects disguised as altruistic ventures.\
USA TODAY: USAID cuts fallout felt across the world —
• Conditions in Syria's Al-Hol ISIS prison camp have deteriorated
• Serious disruption of PEPFAR HIV prevention services in Africa
• As of Monday, 475,000 tons of US food aid risked being wasted pic.twitter.com/b2X9uGR2kM— Kareem Rifai 🌐 (@KareemRifai) February 13, 2025
Countries that may not have the robust power of Russia have bided their time, observing the cautionary tales of those who dared to challenge the whims of Washington. With leaders like Muammar Gaddafi and others felled by US intervention, smaller nations have quietly watched, understanding the risks involved in opposing the all-knowing technocrats of the State Department. As the tide shifts toward a more nationalistic approach among these countries, they now see an opportunity to stand up to USAID’s inappropriate influence.
This resurgence of local leadership is evident across the globe. In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who is often lambasted by corporate media as a “dictator” despite holding the legitimate office with overwhelming public support, has celebrated a movement away from what he calls “globalist Soros” organizations. His pivot towards nationalism and away from the progressive agenda promoted by USAID highlights a strong push against any external forces attempting to dictate local governance or social norms.
Moreover, leaders from El Salvador to Nicaragua are echoing similar sentiments, with criticisms directed toward USAID for allegedly funding political opposition and divisive movements. These assertions reveal a widespread acknowledgment that the agency is more about exporting a specific political ideology rather than genuine humanitarian efforts. Various countries are realizing that they don’t need the American hand to thrive, and they are prepared to sever ties with organizations that do not respect their sovereignty.
As the liberal world order begins to crumble—much to the chagrin of diehard progressives—this collective action signals a profound shift in international relations. With Rachel Maddow and her like protesting the dismantling of this order, it’s clear that they are merely observing the inevitable death throes of a model built on overreach and paternalism. Nations worldwide are increasingly asserting their independence, saying farewell to USAID and its faux-empathetic but ultimately disruptive influence.
