THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 2025 27 First, the United States is systematically blinding itself to on-the-ground realities. The loss of development programming and engagement severely diminishes our ability to identify emerging threats, engage emerging leaders, and counter competitor narratives. Second, the abrupt disruption of partnerships represents the abandonment of decades of American investment in local capacity. By severing these relationships without transition plans, America not only wastes this investment but signals that its commitments shift with political winds. Third, many locally employed staff have taken considerable personal risks to work with the U.S. Their sudden termination demonstrates callous disregard for their contributions and sacrifices, undermining America’s moral authority and reputation as a reliable partner. Fourth, while America dismantles its development infrastructure, China’s Belt and Road Initiative continues to forge new partnerships with fewer transparency requirements and less regard for environmental standards, labor rights, or longterm debt sustainability. This retreat from wielding our most critical soft-power tool is occurring precisely when global challenges—pandemic threats, climate disruption, technological competition, and democratic backsliding—demand sustained, sophisticated engagement. These challenges directly affect American security and prosperity; yet they cannot be effectively addressed through traditional diplomatic or military tools alone. Looking Ahead: Damage Control and Renewal Amid these challenges, we must articulate a forward- looking vision for American development diplomacy that preserves proven strengths while adapting to emerging global realities. This vision must recognize development not as an isolated charitable endeavor but as an integral component of a comprehensive national security strategy. A modernized American development capability must maintain independent implementation capacity and specialized expertise while establishing more effective coordination mechanisms with diplomatic, defense, and economic agencies. The development perspective—with its deep understanding of local contexts and longer time horizons—must be systematically integrated into national security deliberations through formalized institutional mechanisms. This will become much more difficult once USAID is “merged” into the State Department, as is now underway, and development diplomacy Given the severe consequences of current policies, immediate action is required to both mitigate damage and create a sustainable path forward. becomes “managed” from Washington, far removed from where the relationships, the impact, and the work matter most. However, given the severe consequences of current policies, immediate action is required to both mitigate damage and create a sustainable path forward. This approach must recognize political realities while preserving core strategic capabilities. Congress should establish an emergency “Local Staff Retention Fund” focused on maintaining critical positions at priority missions. Preserving even 30 to 40 percent of critical local positions would maintain essential institutional knowledge and relationship networks that would otherwise be irretrievably lost. This approach should prioritize positions based on strategic importance, specialized knowledge, and relationship networks, with special attention to staff with extensive experience or rare language skills. Rather than terminating indigenous partnerships abruptly, the State Department should implement a structured “Partnership Transition Program” that provides graduated funding reductions, technical assistance for organizational sustainability, and support for consolidating capabilities through strategic mergers. A certification program could recognize high-performing local organizations, enhancing their credibility with other donors and supporting their longterm viability. American corporations, foundations, and nongovernmental organizations represent potential partners in maintaining critical programs and relationships. A coordinated “Partnership Preservation Initiative” could engage private sector entities in supporting high-impact development programs in regions where they have business interests, creating shared value while maintaining vital relationships. A matching fund approach, where government provides partial funding if private entities contribute, could leverage limited public resources while engaging broader American society in global development.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODIyMDU=