Pages

▼

Tuesday, February 4, 2025

USAID Leadership Gutted

ComNavOps has often decried the use of the military in humanitarian and disaster relief (HA/DR) efforts, believing those should not be military missions as they detract from combat training and cause unproductive wear and tear on equipment and personnel.  Instead, ComNavOps has proposed funding and equipping an organization like the US Agency for International Development (USAID) to deal with HA/DR and to provide the forward ‘presence’ and ‘deterrence’ that so many want the military to do.
 
Here is a portion of the USAID mission statement from the organization’s web page,
 
… the U.S. Agency for International Development leads the U.S. Government's international development and disaster assistance through partnerships and investments that save lives, reduce poverty, strengthen democratic governance, and help people emerge from humanitarian crises and progress beyond assistance.

A seeming perfect fit for HA/DR, presence, and deterrence, right?  Without going into a lengthy documentation trail, suffice it to say that USAID had become a left-leaning, political tool that was ineffective at its job.
 
The Trump administration has just announced that it has placed 60 senior USAID bureaucrats on indefinite leave, presumably as a prelude to termination.
 
A memo from acting USAID administrator Jason Gray says, "We have identified several actions within USAID that appear to be designed to circumvent the president’s executive orders and the mandate from the American people.“[1]
 
The decision appears to affect nearly every career staffer who holds a top leadership role at the agency, at least in Washington — around 60 officials, the current and former officials said.[1]
 
This action effectively shuts down most of USAID's $22.6 billion in program support.[1]

This is an excellent first step towards refocusing USAID on its core mission.
 
How often do we justify programs and platforms as being good because they will ‘free up’ other units for more important work?  Well, USAID, taking on the HA/DR, presence, and deterrence missions can free up military units and resources to concentrate on their core mission of warfighting.  Perfect, right?  Exactly what everyone calls for, right?
 
There's your disaster relief, done efficiently



Buy USAID a couple of small to medium size cargo ships, load them with disaster relief supplies, and crew them with civilian mariners and there’s your disaster relief effort for free, relative to military costs. 
 
Get the military out of HA/DR and give it to USAID or some similar organization.
 
 
Note:  The FY2025 USAID budget is $42.8B.
 
 
 
__________________________________
 
[1]Redstate website, “Trump Suspends As Many As 60 Senior Bureaucrats for Trying to Evade His Executive Orders”, streiff, 28-Jan-2025,
https://redstate.com/streiff/2025/01/28/trump-suspends-as-many-as-60-senior-bureaucrats-for-trying-to-evade-his-executive-orders-n2184896

at

25 comments:

  1. AnonymousFebruary 4, 2025 at 10:15 AM

    I totally agree - and not just for the US, military forces should not be used for HA/DR maybe except for national emergencies.
    However, isn't "USAID had become a left-leaning, political tool that was ineffective at its job" a bit political for this blog :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ComNavOpsFebruary 4, 2025 at 11:11 AM

      "a bit political for this blog"

      If it were a matter of opinion, perhaps. However, it's a statement of fact. If you have any doubts, please review the list of projects they've funded.

      Besides, it's my blog and I can indulge myself on rare occasions!

      Delete
    2. Son of a SailorFebruary 4, 2025 at 11:40 AM

      I don't see that as a political comment. The most basic assessment of facts and critical thinking support it.

      The Navy needs to stop thinking of itself as "a global force for good" (actual slogan???) instead of "the most destructive seaborne force in history."

      There should be bipartisan support for this change.

      Delete
    3. ComNavOpsFebruary 4, 2025 at 12:11 PM

      Here's a sampling of USAID funded projects courtesy of Sen. Joni Ernst and PressSec Leavitt:

      1. $20 million to create a Sesame Street in Iraq.
      2. Million dollars to push DEI in Serbia
      3. Tens of thousands of dollars for a transgender opera in Colombia
      4. Despite the fact that Moroccans have been making pottery for thousands of years, USAID spent more than $2 million for Moroccan pottery classes and promotion. The idea clearly wasn't fully formed, because the translator they hired didn't even speak English.
      5. Trade assistance to Ukraine paid for models and designers to take trips to New York City, London Fashion Week, Paris Fashion Week, and South by Southwest in Austin.
      6. $2 million promoting tourism to Lebanon, a nation the State Department warns against traveling to “due to crime, terrorism, civil unrest, kidnapping, unexploded landmines, and the risk of armed conflict.”
      7. $1 million into batty research on coronaviruses at China’s infamous Wuhan Institute of Virology, which the CIA admits was the likely source of COVID-19.

      And the list goes on almost endlessly.

      Delete
    4. AnonymousFebruary 4, 2025 at 1:08 PM

      Well at least the fashion models create calendars for our shops and garages... isnt that "humanitarian"??
      Apologies, but couldn't resist!! ;)
      But seriously, just...YES!
      THIS is the kind of stupid abuse of taxpayer dollars that needs to be ripped out trunk and root just like DEI. International giveaways could fund a lot of the Navy we need...!!!

      Delete
    5. AnonymousFebruary 5, 2025 at 8:07 AM

      Agree somewhat with initial commenter. I come here to try to find (relatively) apolitical discussions on naval issues and find that refreshing.

      I obviously respect your right to do what you want with your blog, just putting that out there.

      Delete
    6. ComNavOpsFebruary 5, 2025 at 8:10 AM

      "I obviously respect your right to do what you want with your blog, just putting that out there."

      Then you'll quite enjoy the other 99.99% of posts that have no political content, whatsoever, and you can sleep easy at night. Just putting that out there.

      Delete
  2. G2milFebruary 4, 2025 at 2:52 PM

    I knew USAID was a sister organzation to our CIA and only worked to support its goals. I didn't know how bad this was until I saw this short video:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtgT_u2rWs0

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousFebruary 4, 2025 at 7:31 PM

      I had never heard of this organization, but as I've been watching the news, all I've been thinking is "this is clearly a front organization for the CIA".

      Lutefisk

      Delete
    2. ComNavOpsFebruary 5, 2025 at 11:22 AM

      "I'm a retired veteran who worked for this organization"

      Comment deleted. We're done with this nonsense of debating USAID other than as it directly relates to military matters.

      Delete
  3. AnonymousFebruary 4, 2025 at 8:10 PM

    The sheer amount of screaming about this from the Democrats and liberals says that there is are some really deep and dirty things in there that dare not be made public. Like how much of the 'aid' goes to NGOs that operated within the US.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousFebruary 5, 2025 at 7:15 AM

    I understand frustration with individual USAID funding decisions. The federal government spends over a trillion dollars a year. No one is going to agree on every dollar spent (I sure don't), and as such it's always an easy exercise to generate a list of examples to make a point.

    USAID's budget is around $23 billion, most of which is grants and contracts (I read the agency functionally controls about $40B). The list cited above adds up to, what, maybe $30M, rounded up? The transgender conversation thing was literally in the thousands of dollars - not even a rounding error. So tis whole list adds up to about one tenth of one percent of the entire USAID budget. Double, triple, quadruple that figure, whatever you want - still, it remains a very, very small percentage.

    The obvious implication, of course, is that those activities are representative of the other 99.9% of USAID's budget. Noted. But another, more likely possibility is: most of the budget is being ignored because the vast majority of it funds things completely unrelated to the activities on that list. (I'm not going to include a bunch of citations about the full range of USAID's work - for anyone interested, there's plenty of information online you can find for yourself.)

    In any case, what the administration has done here is thrown the baby out with the bathwater. You don't want to fund certain things? Everyone knows to use a scalpel, not an axe. Killing an entire agency isn't strategic. It's just lazy.

    To use an analogy, I happen to believe there are millions of $ in projects in the DoD budget that are misspent, misdirected, are pure pork barrel nonsense, or otherwise utter wastes of my taxpaying dollars. What would you think if I suggested eliminating the entire DoD as the solution?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ComNavOpsFebruary 5, 2025 at 7:41 AM

      You have offered zero proof of useful funded projects to back up your assertion. As such, you've actually said nothing of value.

      You also seem to be laboring under multiple misunderstandings:

      1. No one has said that USAID does not fund anything of value. They do.

      2. No one has called for the elimination of the USAID function. The current administration wants to continue the core functions (minus the left wing political projects) under the control of the State Dept and SecState where it can better align with and support the government's political objectives.

      3. The incredibly brief list of examples cited (as opposed to your list of zero examples) is not all inclusive and the total spent on left wing political projects is unknown but certainly much greater that the few examples cited. You made an intentionally misleading and sophomoric argument suggesting that the list was all inclusive and, therefore, insignificant.

      4. You seem to think that the funded projects are the only reason for restructuring USAID. The President has stated that one of the main reasons (perhaps the main reason) for restructuring is that USAID was operating as an independent agency, outside the control or authority of the government and that it needs to be brought under the direct control of the State Dept to redirect it back to its purpose of supporting government geopolitical objectives.

      Finally, this is a naval/military matters blog. Debating USAID does not fall within that domain. That should pretty well end this discussion unless you have comments directly related to military matters. Thank you.

      Delete
    2. ComNavOpsFebruary 5, 2025 at 4:33 PM

      From the Daily Caller website,

      "USAID ... planned to spend $1.5 billion in Latin America and the Caribbean on LGBTQ causes and sent 65.5 million condoms, 9.8 million injectable birth control products and 334,000 IUDs to foreign countries in the fiscal year 2022."

      Delete
  5. ComNavOpsFebruary 5, 2025 at 7:20 AM

    "Your "60 leaders" headline was either out of date or intentionally misleading."

    Your comment was deleted for being disrespectful and willfully ignorant. If you wish to try again, do so with a polite, respectful tone and use some common sense to see that circumstances have changed at a hypervelocity pace in just the few days since the post was written.

    ReplyDelete
  6. G2milFebruary 5, 2025 at 9:23 AM

    USAid provided millions of grant dollars to pro-Dem news outlets.
    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/politico-ny-times-propped-millions-dollars-us-government

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ComNavOpsFebruary 5, 2025 at 9:31 AM

      Redstate reports $8.1M to Politico and $34M in total to various outlets. This quite clearly indicates that USAID needs to be completely cleaned out and restructured with new leadership. After that, perhaps it can be used as the support for our State Department that it was intended to be and maybe take some of the burden off the military HA/DR as suggested in this post.

      Delete
    2. ComNavOpsFebruary 5, 2025 at 11:21 AM

      "They are subscriptions to news services"

      It doesn't matter whether they are subscriptions. They are indisputably not what USAID is supposed to be doing. I've deleted the rest of your comment. We're done with this nonsense of debating USAID other than as it directly relates to military matters.

      Delete
    3. AnonymousFebruary 5, 2025 at 1:51 PM

      This sounds like State rather than US AID but also we’ve sent $50 million to Gaza for condoms???

      https://www.foxnews.com/politics/state-dept-pulls-millions-funding-condoms-gaza-trump-admin-looks-trim-spending

      Delete
  7. AnonymousFebruary 5, 2025 at 4:35 PM

    None of this surprises me. Anyone paying attention could tell you this place was a “viper pit” of bad spending as I think Musk called it. Long time coming.

    What in the world were we spending $40 billion on?

    ReplyDelete
  8. AnonymousFebruary 6, 2025 at 5:00 PM

    USAID are the people who told the military to coach Afghans to give up opium which makes $2000 per acre needing very little water. USAID wanted Afghans to grow pomegranates which require 10 to 12 years to grow, need lots of water, and only produce $300-$400 per acre after the long wait.
    USAID produces nothing more than good idea PowerPoints while burning up taxpayer dollars.

    ReplyDelete
  9. ComNavOpsFebruary 6, 2025 at 5:08 PM

    I think we've done enough USAID bashing for the time being. Let's stick to Navy/military matters. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ComNavOpsFebruary 7, 2025 at 8:05 AM

      Well, I'm going to contradict myself one time for the sake of documentation for anyone foolish enough to believe that USAID was only giving insignificant bits of money to slightly questionable causes. Here's a partial list of USAID projects that Sen. Kennedy read off.

      "He discovered that the American taxpayers are giving money to Afghanistan.

      He found that we are giving money to Yemen.

      He found that we are giving money to Syria. [....]

      He found that the USAID has 10,000 people, 10,000 people/employees and every year they give away $40 billion. [....]

      He found that the USAID gave money to support electric vehicles in Vietnam. Our money, taxpayer money.

      He found that the USAID gave money to a transgender clinic in India. I didn't know that. I bet you the American people didn't know that.

      He found that USAID gave $1.5 million to a Serbian LGBTQ group...they got $1.5 million to “advance diversity, equity, inclusion in Serbia's workplaces and business community.” [....]

      Well, he reviewed a study and then went and checked it. The study was done by the Middle East Forum. They found that USAID spent $164 million to support radical organizations around the world. We're not talking about Cub Scout troops here. We're talking about radical organizations around the world. They gave $122 million of that to groups aligned with foreign terrorist organizations Our taxpayer money.

      According to this report...the USAID has given millions of dollars to "organizations in Gaza controlled by Hamas." Why, why aren't my colleagues talking about that? Recipients of the money they found have, "called for their lands to be cleansed from the impurity of Jews." That's who we're giving foreign aid to? [....]

      He found that we gave $2 million, USAID did, for sex changes in Guatemala.

      He found that we gave $20 million to produce a new Sesame Street show in Iraq.

      He found that we gave $4.5 million of taxpayer money to combat misinformation in Kazakhstan.

      He found that we gave $10 million, USAID did, of meals to an al-Qaeda-linked terrorist group called the Nusra Front.

      Mr. Musk found that we gave $7.9 million of taxpayer money to a project that would teach Sri Lankan journalists to avoid binary gendered language. The USAID took 8 million bucks and gave it to a bunch of journalists in Sri Lanka to teach them how to avoid binary gendered language...Do you think most taxpayers would support that?

      USAID gave $1.5 million to promote LGBT advocacy in Jamaica.

      They gave $1.5 million to rebuild the Cuban media ecosystem.

      They gave $1.5 million for "art for inclusion of people with disabilities in Belarus."

      Another $3.9 million for LGBT causes in Macedonia.

      $8.3 million for equity and inclusion education in Nepal."

      Delete
    2. ComNavOpsFebruary 18, 2025 at 9:22 AM

      As of 18-Feb, DOGE reports saving $55B in inappropriate funding.

      Delete
  10. AnonymousFebruary 11, 2025 at 5:50 AM

    Though it will be difficult to ever find conclusive evidence, DOGE investigations suggested USAID money was used domestically through the Soros Foundation to influence elections and bring undocumented migrants. The money is supposed to be used externally and this is a good enough reason to defund USAID until they can fix the issue.

    ReplyDelete

Comments will be moderated for posts older than 7 days in order to reduce spam.