Die Schließung von USAID führte zu einem Anstieg der weltweiten Gewalt. Die Zahl der Proteste und Unruhen nahm um 10 % zu, die Zahl der bewaffneten Kämpfe stieg um 6,9 % und die Zahl der kampfbedingten Todesopfer stieg um 9,3 %. Der Anstieg der Gewalt begann fast unmittelbar nach dem Ende der Hilfe und blieb über Monate hinweg erhöht.
https://time.com/article/2026/05/15/usaid-shutdown-rise-global-violence/
23 Kommentare
Link to the actual paper. Not the editorialized version.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aeh7122
the article actually claims that the opposite is also true ‚ Aid can create rents to fight over, distort local incentives, and raise the value of controlling territory or office. ‚
I mean, I do think it’s an interesting topic to discuss about America’s role in global security. I think a lot of the people here who would be for this program are against America’s interventions in other aspects. I don’t think it’s really feasible for America to be trying to fund the entire world while in an incredible deficit at home.
[removed]
So many people here jumping to bash USAID as if it didn’t help stabilize countries around the globe, prevent humanitarian disasters (and by extension, refugees flooding into our country), and increase our soft power and influence.
Instead we’ve got much more than what we spent on USAID being added to the bottomless hole of defense spending, so instead of helping foreign countries, we’re bombing them, making the globe less stable, increasing refugees, increasing our gas prices, etc.
Trump supporters really want the world to burn.
[removed]
Trump is gonna leave a massive amount of collateral damage in his wake, the guy literally bankrupted several casinos.
What is counted as violence for this? War? Terrorists? Local disputes? All of the above? What aid segments or countries are they directly relating, considering much of what USAID did was not eliminated but moved and re-assigned. The US didn’t just stop all aid everywhere. They still handle about 18% of what USAID had active and a lot more was consolidated, offered to other countries, or privatized.
This is nothing but a blurb. It’s like saying cars now have more backup cameras than before and car crashes are up therefore backup cameras are causing more car crashes. Where’s the correlation?
This is going to be a very unpopular opinion, especially on reddit, but if we have to prop up peace and harmony with USAID bribes then maybe we just need to let it reach its own natural conclusions instead of trying to interfere. Which is better? A temporary harmony that exists only so long as we keep interjecting, or one that flows naturally from reality „getting it out“ of its system.
Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime. Drop him a satchel of food and a warlord grabs it and sells it back to the poor while our government back home steals a little off the top.
And, to the people that say oh it creates soft power, that’s a really cynical and selfish reason to want to help anyone. You’re doing them a disservice to satisfy your own aims, not because you care.
Scarcity of resources will always result in violence.
And I should care? We have our own issues to deal with why should we deal with other countries issues while their leaders are heavily corrupt.
I’ve not seen a third alternate referenced. The sudden cut in aid resulted in a sudden cut in corrupt regimes getting their share. Without being able to enrich themselves, buy off subordinates, and use those funds to keep their opponents under their thumb -violence erupted
USAID was corrupt. The aid should always have gone to making countries self sufficient , not an endless grift at taxpayer expense.
That’s only the criminals involved being upset.
Who cares. USAID is a pure scam.
To play the devils advocate that liberals like to push, maybe those guys overseas should stop having so many children if they can’t feed them.
8 piece wings cost $20 now other countries can pay for themselves
The rest of the world is not our responsibility and they show how self-destructive their cultures are.
So without the USA’s help, other countries across the globe devolved into chaos and violence?
Looks like we really are the best and most altruistic country in the world.
“Give us your money or we’ll kill people” is maybe the strongest argument for ending these programs anyone could have made
It’s not the American taxpayers job to subsidize the third world
Why is it the American tax payers job to prevent these things from happening?
Propaganda. USAID gets used as a tool of imperial violence to destabilize countries. Look up ZunZuneo in Cuba, training proxies in Venezuela and Haiti for coups, etc.
“Give us your hard earned money or we will fight eachother”
-Go ahead
Statistics are manipulated to fit an agenda. Just take violence here in the US. There’s been dozens of whistle blowers and people suing municipals for removing violent crimes from the database. Simple search of the internet will give many examples of this.