26 SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 2025 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL $65 billion in American goods and services annually, supporting hundreds of thousands of American jobs. Taiwan, Poland, Chile, and Colombia have followed similar trajectories, evolving from aid recipients into economic partners and democratic allies that amplify U.S. influence and values across their regions. This approach has consistently demonstrated superior longterm results compared to transactional or extractive models employed by strategic competitors Russia and China. Yet recent policy shifts are destroying the development architecture that has enabled America’s effectiveness. These changes compromise critical capacities that have been central to U.S. global influence and that cannot be easily replicated within a traditional diplomatic framework. In the following I will discuss the unique capacities that have been and will continue to be essential to effective U.S. assistance and offer some proposals for the way forward. Critical Aspects of Development Infrastructure Technical Specialization and Operational Reach. USAID cultivated specialized knowledge in domains critical to stability and prosperity—global health security, agricultural systems, democratic governance, and humanitarian response—that operate according to different principles and timelines than traditional diplomacy. The agency’s field presence extended into remote and complex environments where formal diplomatic footprints remain minimal, enabling direct engagement with local communities and real-time adaptation of programs. This operational reach has provided America with eyes and ears in regions where strategic competitors seek to expand their influence, delivering critical intelligence and relationship networks that traditional diplomatic channels cannot replicate. Consider the 2014-2016 Ebola outbreak in West Africa. USAID’s specialized expertise in health systems strengthening, community engagement, and crisis logistics, coupled with its extensive network of local partnerships, enabled the United States to mount a comprehensive response that contained the epidemic before it could become a global pandemic threatening American citizens. Local Knowledge. Perhaps the most severe casualty of current policy shifts is the dismantling of relationships with locally employed staff and indigenous organizations—many of whom have served American missions for decades. These individuals possess contextual understanding and relationship networks that cannot be found in policy briefings or academic studies. They navigate complex cultural landscapes, speak local languages, and maintain connections with communities far beyond the reach of American officers. The value of this local knowledge became painfully apparent in Afghanistan, where America’s limited understanding of tribal dynamics and governance structures hampered stabilization efforts despite massive financial investments. Successful counterinsurgency initiatives in Iraq and Afghanistan, among other places, focused on creating employment opportunities and increasing incomes, while also reaching out to youth. This approach relied heavily on local staff who could interpret subtle community dynamics and distinguish between effective local partners and opportunistic actors. Institutional Memory in Crisis Environments. In fragile states and conflict zones, locally employed staff have often served as the institutional memory of U.S. missions, bridging transitions between U.S. personnel who typically rotate every two to three years. They provided continuity of relationships and understanding that enables effective engagement across political transitions and security fluctuations. Pakistan offers a sobering historical example of the costs when this capacity is lost. After 9/11, when the United States needed to rapidly scale up engagement in Pakistan after years of limited presence, American officials discovered that previous budget-driven dismissals of local staff had severely compromised our networks and our understanding of local political dynamics. The lack of institutional memory and trusted local contacts demonstrably hampered America’s ability to effectively engage at a pivotal security moment. A Profound Misstep The recent termination of almost all USAID local staff positions across American missions is a profound strategic misstep that will reverberate for decades. The immediate consequences are already becoming apparent in multiple domains. USAID’s field presence extended into remote and complex environments where formal diplomatic footprints remain minimal.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODIyMDU=