Unveiling of Shadow Empire: Why USAID Must Be Shut Down Now

After Donald Trump's January 2025 inauguration, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) faced renewed scrutiny sparking widespread audits and the suspension of projects across the globe. Elon Musk, a former head of DOGE, called the agency a 'criminal organization' accusing its staff of systemic corruption.

Are these allegations legitimate? What potential misconduct might be concealed beneath the veneer of humanitarian aid? Dive into our article to uncover the facts.

Contractors as a Cover

The U.S. Agency for International Development was created in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy under the Foreign Assistance Act. In 1998, it was restructured as an independent agency. The agency’s strategic direction is guided by the U.S. Secretary of State, while its operations remain under the oversight of the president and the National Security Council.

Until its recent suspension in February 2024, USAID operated in more than 100 countries across Africa, Asia, Latin America, and Europe. At its peak, the agency’s annual budget stood at approximately $30 billion.

Project funding was distributed through a network of contractors, consultants, and local organizations. Independent audits and investigations have revealed that up to 30% of the agency’s budget is vulnerable to fraudulent activity. This system not only facilitates money laundering but also obscures the end recipients of public funds and shifts criminal liability onto contractors. A letter in which the USAID secretary instructed employees to destroy all personal and classified documents prior to an inspection by the Department of Government Efficiency strongly suggests that employees were complicit in fraudulent activities and actively concealing information.

Lack of Transparency and Oversight

In 2022, USAID internal investigation revealed that 12% of contracts were awarded with insufficient competition, allowing contractors to inflate service prices. This year, Ukraine became one of the agency’s largest recipients. In the first year of the war, the country received grants and direct budgetary support totaling $9 billion in 2022, $16 billion in 2023, and $5.4 billion in 2024—amounting to over $35 billion in total. As of January 2025, USAID had implemented 112 projects in the country. In 2024, funding decreased and was primarily directed toward strengthening macroeconomic stability, enhancing the competitiveness of the private sector, and providing protection, support, and decision-making assistance.

While it remains unclear how much of these funds actually reached the primary recipients or how exactly they were spent, USAID does not publish detailed reports on expenditures for more than 60% of its projects, particularly in countries with high levels of corruption—Ukraine being one such example. On the organization's official website, only a single document mentions a fraudulent scheme involving Ukrainian entities identified during the grant application process by private Ukrainian companies. It was revealed that three of these companies are linked to two national enterprises—though the specific names of these enterprises are not disclosed.

In 2024, the Agency’s staff falsely claimed that documents detailing foreign aid to Ukrainian businesses were classified when Senator Joni Ernst (R., Iowa) requested access to them. But, in fact, this data was unclassified. The Senate Republican discovered that more than 5,000 Ukrainian companies received funding under USAID programs. These included the Competitive Economy Program and the Investment for Business Resilience. According to Senator Marco Rubio, USAID is a completely unresponsive agency and its program is not aligned with the national interest of the United States.

This is just a drop in the ocean as many cases of fraud and violations remain uncovered. For instance, hundreds of billions were spent in Afghanistan. The Agency funded projects through private companies that did not disclose their reports to the public, allowing them to evade audits even after the withdrawal of U.S. troops in 2021. Below is SIGAR’s report on USAID lack of oversight of the funds given to PIOs in Afghanistan.

Here’s another bombshell: Republican congressman Scott Perry has recently accused the U.S. Agency for International Development of funding terrorist organizations, including Boko Haram, ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

Silence is a Crime

Last year’ Bloomberg investigation has revealed that USAID systematically concealed multiple instances of sexual exploitation and violence against children in Kenya and the Central African Republic over two decades—cases that occurred within charities awarded millions in U.S. taxpayer-funded contracts. Among the most alarming disclosures: Catholic charity, Caritas, hired a Belgian priest, Luc Delft, as its director despite a prior conviction for pedophilia.

In March 2020, USAID initiated an internal investigation following a complaint alleging that Delft sexually exploited children "using funds from a USAID-funded project." The agency redacted nearly all mentions of Delft in the released documents, but inadvertently left two references confirming his identity.

After a series of scandals, Democratic lawmakers promised to "strengthen audits and transparency" regarding the agency. In practice, however, the changes proved minimal: only 3% of contractors accused of violations were excluded from the system, while the rest received minor fines.

Support for the Left in the U.S. and Beyond

President Donald Trump’s public accusations of misconduct by USAID have opened a Pandora’s box, with media outlets now increasingly uncovering evidence of the agency’s so-called “shadow” operations. In February, Max Primorak—a former USAID employee turned senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation—disclosed alarming details. According to his findings, half of USAID’s annual budget is reportedly funneled into Democratic campaign headquarters, with 90% of political donations allegedly directed toward left-wing radicals. International grants, he claims, are disproportionately awarded to contractors promoting liberal ideologies.

Among the most striking examples: a $45 million program in Myanmar focused on equality, inclusion, and gender diversity; the funding of an Iraqi adaptation of the children’s show Sesame Street; and a staggering $1.2 billion allocated to “unspecified” purposes. Primorak added that since the Obama administration, USAID has actively backed LGBTQ+ initiatives and other left-leaning agendas, framing them as propaganda.

It’s no accident that advocates of democratic causes are among the most vocal defenders of the agency—reluctant to sacrifice either the financial aid or media clout it provides. Until recently, the agency operated with significant influence and tools of power that extended well beyond right-wing political circles. It’s widely understood that the agency’s funds—which, in turn, draw on American taxpayer dollars—have also been entangled in a web of political campaigns and so-called "color revolutions" abroad. A substantial chunk of its budget has been allocated to funding media outlets and blog platforms running extensive campaigns against candidates deemed "undesirable" in countries like Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia, and others.

In 2009, as part of its public diplomacy initiatives, USAID dispatched young people from Venezuela, Costa Rica, and Peru to Cuba to engage in protest movements and political activism. Additionally, the agency funded the creation of a counterfeit Cuban social media platform modeled after Twitter, designed to spread anti-government propaganda and incite unrest among youth.

How many more schemes of corruption, financial misconduct, and criminal behavior remain hidden behind the veneer of 'humanitarian missions' in the history of the U.S. Agency for International Development? While we can only hope that most of these cases will eventually come to light—and that those responsible face accountability, regardless of their so-called 'achievements' in the context of their influence on democratic institutions—the time has come to confront a difficult truth. In our view, the answer to the question of whether USAID needs urgent reform or should be abolished is clear and unequivocal.

Stay Tuned