Trump Proposes Sweeping Cuts To US Foreign Aid And State Department Budget.
President Donald Trump has put forward a bold and controversial proposal to slash foreign aid by 75%, reduce the State Department’s budget by nearly half, and eliminate funding for major international organisations, including the United Nations, NATO, and more than 20 others. The plan, outlined by the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on 14 April 2025, signals a dramatic shift in America’s global engagement, prioritising domestic spending and a redefined approach to international relations.
The proposal, detailed in an internal State Department memo, calls for a $27 billion reduction in the State Department’s budget, bringing it to $28.4 billion for the 2026 fiscal year, down from $58.8 billion in 2025. Foreign assistance, which totalled $52 billion in 2024, would be halved, with significant cuts to humanitarian aid, global health programmes, and support for refugees. Funding for the United Nations, NATO, the National Endowment for Democracy, and other organisations would be entirely eliminated, except for targeted contributions to a few entities like the International Atomic Energy Agency. The plan also includes closing several overseas diplomatic missions, slashing diplomatic staff, freezing pay, and cutting travel benefits for Foreign Service officers.
OMB chief Russell Vought, who championed similar cuts during Trump’s first term, described the proposal as “aggressive” but reflective of the administration’s “America First” priorities. A new $2.1 billion America First Opportunities Fund would redirect resources to specific partners like India and Jordan or strategic initiatives such as the South Pacific Tuna Treaty. However, the proposal, still in its preliminary phase, faces significant hurdles, with State Department leadership and Congress expected to push back. Historically, similar efforts by Trump’s first administration met fierce resistance on Capitol Hill and largely failed.
The cuts have sparked alarm among humanitarian and diplomatic circles. The American Foreign Service Association branded the proposal “reckless and dangerous,” warning that it could empower adversaries like China and Russia by creating a vacuum in global leadership. Critics highlight the impact on programmes like the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which has saved over 25 million lives since 2003 but now faces an uncertain future. A study published in *The Lancet* on 2 July 2025 estimated that USAID’s programmes, now largely dismantled, saved 91 million lives over two decades, and continued cuts could lead to 14 million preventable deaths by 2030.
Supporters of the plan, however, argue it aligns with public sentiment. Polls from the Chicago Council on Global Affairs indicate long-standing American support for reducing foreign aid, which constitutes about 0.6% of the $6.75 trillion federal budget. The administration contends that other nations and organisations must shoulder more responsibility for global challenges, with one official stating, “The rest of the world needs to step up.”
The proposal comes amid broader efforts to shrink the federal government, including the dissolution of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the defunding of “soft power” institutions like Voice of America and Radio Free Europe. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, overseeing the integration of USAID’s remaining functions into the State Department, has insisted that spending must align with U.S. national interests. The appointment of Jeremy Lewin, a close associate of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, as acting head of foreign assistance underscores the administration’s focus on efficiency and cost-cutting.
As Congress prepares to review the budget, the debate will likely centre not only on fiscal priorities but also on America’s role in the world. With the proposal facing significant opposition, its fate remains uncertain, but it has already ignited a fierce discussion about the balance between national interests and global responsibilities.
