Former Presidents Bush and Obama Unite in Criticism of Trump Administration’s USAID Closure Decision
In an unprecedented display of bipartisan opposition, former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama joined together on Monday to express strong criticism of the Trump administration’s decision to shut down the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), marking a rare moment of unified dissent from two former commanders-in-chief against current executive policy.
The extraordinary joint appearance, which also featured U2 frontman and humanitarian activist Bono, was organized to address USAID employees as the agency faced its final day of independent operation before being absorbed into the State Department. The virtual gathering represented one of the most significant public rebukes of the Trump administration’s foreign policy decisions by former presidents, highlighting the controversial nature of the USAID closure and its implications for American international engagement.
The Context of USAID’s Closure
USAID, established during the Kennedy administration in 1961, has served as America’s primary foreign aid agency for over six decades, providing economic assistance, humanitarian relief, and development support to countries around the world. The agency’s mission encompassed poverty reduction, disaster response, health initiatives, and democratic governance support in developing nations.
However, the agency became a target of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), established by President Trump to identify and eliminate government waste and inefficiency. Under the leadership of then-DOGE head Elon Musk, the agency faced intense scrutiny over allegations of corruption, mismanagement, and ideological bias in its operations.
Musk characterized USAID as “a viper’s nest of radical-left Marxists who hate America,” reflecting the administration’s broader critique of the agency’s priorities and operational philosophy. This characterization became central to the justification for the agency’s closure and subsequent integration into the State Department’s operations.
The closure followed a federal investigation into corruption and abuse within the agency, though specific details of the probe and its findings have not been fully disclosed to the public. The decision to shutter USAID represented one of the most significant reorganizations of American foreign assistance infrastructure in decades.
Former Presidents’ Responses and Criticism
Former President Barack Obama delivered particularly pointed criticism of the closure decision, describing it as both “a travesty” and “a tragedy” during his video message to departing USAID staff. Obama emphasized the global importance of the agency’s work, stating that USAID conducted “some of the most important work happening anywhere in the world.”
Obama’s characterization of the closure as “a colossal mistake” reflected his administration’s strong support for foreign aid and international development initiatives. During his presidency, Obama significantly expanded USAID’s role in global health, food security, and climate change adaptation programs, making the agency’s closure particularly personal for the former president.
Obama expressed confidence that future political leaders would recognize the value of USAID’s mission, stating, “Sooner or later, leaders on both sides of the aisle will realize how much you are needed.” This comment suggested his belief that the closure represented a temporary setback rather than a permanent shift in American foreign policy priorities.
Former President George W. Bush’s participation in the criticism was particularly noteworthy given his general reluctance to publicly oppose Trump administration policies. Bush has maintained a largely reserved public stance regarding his successor’s decisions, making his vocal opposition to the USAID closure especially significant.
Bush focused his remarks on the personal legacy implications of the closure, particularly emphasizing how it would affect his signature global health initiative. The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), launched during Bush’s presidency and implemented through USAID, is credited with saving an estimated 25 million lives worldwide and represents one of the most successful American foreign aid programs in history.
“You’ve showed the great strength of America through your work—and that is your good heart,” Bush told USAID staff during the farewell event. His rhetorical question, “Is it in our national interests that 25 million people who would have died now live? I think it is, and so do you,” directly challenged the administration’s assessment of USAID’s value and effectiveness.
Celebrity Advocacy and Humanitarian Concerns
Bono’s participation in the farewell event brought additional attention to the humanitarian implications of USAID’s closure. The U2 frontman, who has been a longtime advocate for international development and global health initiatives, read an original poem commemorating the end of the agency and warning of potential consequences.
“They called you crooks. When you were the best of us,” Bono stated, directly addressing the corruption allegations that contributed to the agency’s closure while defending the integrity and dedication of USAID staff members.
Bono has previously predicted that cutting USAID would result in hundreds of thousands of deaths globally, particularly in regions dependent on American foreign assistance for healthcare, food security, and disaster response. His emotional remarks reflected broader humanitarian community concerns about the potential global impact of reduced American development assistance.
The inclusion of Bono in the farewell event highlighted the intersection between celebrity advocacy and foreign policy, demonstrating how high-profile figures outside government continue to influence public discourse on international development issues.
State Department Integration and Policy Justification
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who served as USAID’s acting administrator during its final weeks, announced that the State Department would assume all foreign assistance functions previously handled by the independent agency. This transition represents a fundamental shift in how American foreign aid will be administered and distributed globally.
Rubio’s justification for the closure focused on efficiency and effectiveness concerns, arguing that USAID had “little to show since the end of the Cold War” beyond creating “a globe-spanning NGO industrial complex at taxpayer expense.” This critique suggested that the agency had become more focused on supporting non-governmental organizations than achieving concrete development objectives.
The Secretary of State specifically criticized USAID’s track record, claiming that “development objectives have rarely been met, instability has often worsened, and anti-American sentiment has only grown” in regions where the agency operated. This assessment directly challenged the positive legacy claims made by former Presidents Bush and Obama.
Rubio emphasized that future foreign assistance programs would prioritize American national interests and be “delivered with more accountability, strategy, and efficiency” under State Department administration. This approach suggests a more politically directed and strategically focused approach to foreign aid distribution.
Congressional and Political Context
The USAID closure occurred within the broader context of the Trump administration’s government efficiency initiatives, which identified $22 billion in federal waste across various agencies and programs. During a March address to Congress, President Trump highlighted specific USAID expenditures that the administration characterized as wasteful or ideologically motivated.
Trump cited examples including $45 million for diversity, equity, and inclusion scholarships in Myanmar, $40 million for “social and economic inclusion of sedentary migrants,” and $8 million to promote LGBTQI+ rights in Lesotho. These specific expenditures became symbolic of the administration’s broader criticism of USAID’s priorities and spending patterns.
The administration’s critique also included more controversial claims, such as $8 million allegedly spent on “making mice transgender,” though the accuracy and context of such characterizations have been disputed by development policy experts and former agency officials.
Long-term Implications and International Impact
The closure of USAID represents a significant shift in American foreign policy infrastructure that could have lasting implications for global development initiatives and international relations. The agency’s independent status had allowed for more flexible and rapid responses to humanitarian crises and development challenges.
International development organizations and partner countries have expressed concern about the potential disruption to ongoing programs and long-term commitments. Many development initiatives require sustained engagement over multiple years, and the transition to State Department administration could affect program continuity and effectiveness.
The closure also signals a broader shift toward more politically directed foreign assistance, potentially affecting relationships with international partners and non-governmental organizations that have worked closely with USAID for decades.
Conclusion
The unprecedented joint criticism from former Presidents Bush and Obama of the USAID closure highlights the controversial nature of this policy decision and its implications for American international engagement. While the Trump administration justifies the closure as necessary for efficiency and accountability, critics argue it represents a retreat from America’s global leadership role in development and humanitarian assistance.
The emotional farewell event, featuring two former presidents and a prominent humanitarian advocate, underscored the personal and professional impact of the closure on those who have dedicated their careers to international development work. As the State Department assumes responsibility for foreign assistance programs, the long-term effectiveness and continuity of American development initiatives remain significant concerns for the international community.
The debate over USAID’s closure reflects broader questions about the role of foreign aid in American foreign policy and the balance between domestic priorities and international responsibilities in an increasingly interconnected world.
Lila Hart is a dedicated Digital Archivist and Research Specialist with a keen eye for preserving and curating meaningful content. At TheArchivists, she specializes in organizing and managing digital archives, ensuring that valuable stories and historical moments are accessible for generations to come.
Lila earned her degree in History and Archival Studies from the University of Edinburgh, where she cultivated her passion for documenting the past and preserving cultural heritage. Her expertise lies in combining traditional archival techniques with modern digital tools, allowing her to create comprehensive and engaging collections that resonate with audiences worldwide.
At TheArchivists, Lila is known for her meticulous attention to detail and her ability to uncover hidden gems within extensive archives. Her work is praised for its depth, authenticity, and contribution to the preservation of knowledge in the digital age.
Driven by a commitment to preserving stories that matter, Lila is passionate about exploring the intersection of history and technology. Her goal is to ensure that every piece of content she handles reflects the richness of human experiences and remains a source of inspiration for years to come.