A public service announcement on Dutch public radio (NPO Radio 1, 19 February 2025) prior to the news of 8 am) asked people to sign a petition of protest against President Donald Trump’s decision to reduce development funding through the USAID agency. The reason given was the threat that reduced funding would harm people living in developing countries, that many programs could no longer be delivered. The programs themselves were never identified, although listeners were assured that people’s lives in those countries were under threat because of cutbacks in USAID funding.
Of interest was the news that followed the request for people to sign the anti-Trump petition. The first news item related that the Netherlands would cut back on aid to developing countries and focus only on aid that would benefit the Netherlands. Later, a letter by the Dutch Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, Ms. Reinette Klever, clarified that development aid would be reduced by €2.4 billion. Future aid would concentrate on things that matter to Dutch citizens; it would focus on health, food security, and water quality improvement. Should these not be the priorities of development aid?
The monies that the Dutch government saved would go instead to domestic programs that urgently needed funding, including public housing and defense. Just like the Trump cuts to USAID, development funds would no longer support social engineering projects, initiatives to mitigate climate change, and ill-defined programs susceptible to corruption. Social engineering projects include efforts to initiate or support transgender programs and alternative lifestyles, and promote a country’s international image on human rights. Ill-defined programs would include efforts to promote women’s rights, production of television programs that promote certain, often left-leaning, viewpoints, and activities that could be seen as supporting or undermining (whatever the case) local cultural values. Many such projects are promoted by the very contractors that the international development agency, whether USAID or its Dutch equivalent, might hire to implement the program. It is often the same contractors that lobby to prevent loss of funding.
Development aid and loans are often directed at activities and programs that support efforts to mitigate climate change. International agencies such as the World Bank will provide loans for a developing country to build wind turbines and solar PV facilities, but will not entertain projects such as gas plants or coal plants that provide reliable power to citizens. Renewable wind and solar energy cannot be relied upon for sustained economic development. Generation of wind and solar electricity requires gas or coal power as backup. Indeed, a helpful rule of thumb is that for ever megawatt (MW) of wind and solar capacity that is built, about 0.9 MW of gas plant capacity is required to support the renewable capacity. Without reliable energy, there is no economic development.
Will the cutbacks to USAID and its Dutch equivalent harm the poorest in global society? I doubt it. Those harmed the most are precisely those who are lobbying to prevent reductions in such international aid, namely, the bureaucrats and contractors who earn much more than the average person living in a rich country.