Trump administration says it cut funding to some UN food programmes by mistake

The US State Department said it had reversed an undisclosed number of sweeping funding cuts to UN World Food Programme emergency projects in 14 impoverished countries, saying it had terminated some of the contracts for life-saving aid by mistake.
'There were a few programmes that were cut in other countries that were not meant to be cut, that have been rolled back and put into place,' State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce told reporters.
Ms Bruce said she had no immediate information on which countries had US funding for food aid restored after a days-long cut-off. She gave no explanation for how some contracts came to be cancelled in error.
The World Food Programme did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.
The Associated Press reported on Monday that the Trump administration cut funding to WFP emergency programmes helping keep millions alive in Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen and 11 other countries, many of them struggling with conflict, according to the agency and officials who spoke to the AP.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other administration officials had pledged to spare emergency food programmes and other life-and-death aid even as the Trump administration and Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) dismantled the US Agency for International Development.
All but several hundred of USAid's thousands of contracts for aid and development programmes abroad have been eliminated. The new cuts had hit some of the last remaining humanitarian programmes run by USAid.
Notices sent over the last week had said US funding for WFP emergency programmes in 14 countries were among about 60 being cancelled in the Middle East, Africa, Central and South America and the Pacific Islands 'for the convenience of the US Government'.
Those latest terminations were at the direction of Jeremy Lewin, a top Doge lieutenant who was appointed to oversee the elimination of USAid programmes, according to termination notices sent to partners and viewed by the AP.
The WFP, the world's largest provider of food aid, had publicly appealed to the US on Monday to reconsider cuts worth hundreds of millions of dollars for food programmes.
'This could amount to a death sentence for millions of people facing extreme hunger and starvation,' WFP posted on X.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

USA Today

31 minutes ago

• USA Today

Why did US bomb Iran? In Trump's vibes war, it's impossible to trust anyone.

At least the last time a Republican president got America involved in a military quagmire in the Middle East he had the decency to cook up a bunch of phony reasons beforehand. The day after President Donald Trump launched attacks on Iranian nuclear sites and swept an unprepared nation into another Middle-Eastern conflict, Vice President JD Vance said the most ludicrous thing imaginable. Asked if he and Trump trust the U.S. intelligence community and its assessments, which had been that Iran was not close to developing a nuclear weapon, Vance replied: 'Of course we trust our intelligence community, but we also trust our instincts.' Your instincts? Trump and Vance just marched America into a potential war because the vibes felt real nuclear-weapon-y? Trump didn't even take time to lie to Americans before bombing Iran At least the last time a Republican president got America involved in a military quagmire in the Middle East he had the decency to cook up a bunch of phony reasons beforehand. These guys just hauled off and dropped bombs and now want us to sit back and trust their hunch that it was the right move. In 2003, former Secretary of State Colin Powell went to the trouble of holding up a blue-capped vial of fake anthrax before the U.N. Security Council to back up the Bush administration's claims that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was producing weapons of mass destruction. (Spoiler alert: Nope!) All we got from the Trump team was a lie that the president was going to ponder the bombing option for a spell, and then a stupid Truth Social post saying the bombing had happened. No congressional approval. No case made to the American people. Just bombs away, then a bunch of people known for their dishonesty trotting out and saying, 'Trust us, this was a good thing.' Trump just bombed Iran. We deserve to know why, but don't count on the truth. | Opinion Marco Rubio, like much of the Trump administration, hates intelligence Pressed on CBS' 'Face the Nation' to explain what intelligence led the administration to think bombs needed to be dropped, a frustrated Secretary of State Marco Rubio uttered three words that perfectly encapsulate President Trump, his cabinet and the entire MAGA movement: 'Forget about intelligence.' They should put that on hats. Vance swears Americas is only a little bit at war with Iran Vance continued to stumble about during his June 22 interviews, telling NBC News: 'We do not want war with Iran. We actually want peace.' Because nothing says 'we want peace' quite like firing a couple dozen tomahawk missiles at a country before walloping it with more than a dozen 30,000-pound bombs known as 'Massive Ordnance Penetrators.' On ABC, the duplicitous Mr. Vance made this whiplash-inducing claim: 'We are not at war with Iran, we're at war with Iran's nuclear program.' So we don't want war, we want peace, but we're at war with Iran's nuclear program, but we're not at war with Iran. That's starting to sound a bit like, 'I want to love you but you keep making me drop bombs on you, so it's all your fault.' Opinion: From massive protests to a puny parade, America really let Donald Trump down Of course this Age of Stupidity brought us a war based on vibes And in the same NBC News interview, he barfed out this gem: 'I empathize with Americans who are exhausted after 25 years of foreign entanglements in the Middle East. I understand the concern, but the difference is that back then we had dumb presidents.' Buddy, right now we have a dumb president. We have a president who still hasn't accepted he lost the 2020 presidential election, one who misspelled his own name in a June 22 social-media post that read: 'The GREAT B-2 pilots have just landed, safely, in Missouri. Thank you for a job well done!!! DONAKD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!' Thank you, Donakd! We have a president who, just hours after his Defense secretary said the Iran mission 'was not, has not been about regime change,' posted this: 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' MIGA? Those are the words of a dumb president. And he's the same president who in his previous term took the word of Russian President Vladimir Putin over information from America's intelligence community. Choosing who to trust here is nearly impossible So what are the Russians who Trump trusts saying about America's bombing of Iran? Russian Security Council deputy chairman Dmitry Medvedev said it didn't accomplish much and the nation's nuclear sites suffered only minor damage. 'The enrichment of nuclear material – and, now we can say it outright, the future production of nuclear weapons – will continue,' Medvedev said on social media. 'A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads.' So who do we trust? The Russians, who Trump apparently trusts? Rubio, the guy telling us to forget intelligence? Vance, the guy who wants us to roll with the vibes? Trump, the guy who seems deathly allergic to honesty? If you elect liars, you're going to get lied to It's simple: We can't trust anyone in this administration. They're liars and sycophants from top to bottom, either too lazy or too full of themselves to even pretend they can present a clear case for this risky military action. If Trump's bombing of Iran proves successful – and I, of course, hope it does – it'll be dumb luck. But if it leads to disaster, it'll be exactly what anyone paying attention to these reckless hucksters predicted. Follow USA TODAY columnist Rex Huppke on Bluesky at @ and on Facebook at You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.

The Hill

32 minutes ago

• The Hill

Pakistan nominates Trump for Nobel Peace Prize, then condemns strikes on Iran

Pakistan on Sunday condemned U.S. strikes against Iran, one day after Islamabad announced it had nominated President Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize for his mediation of a ceasefire between Pakistan and India last month. Pakistan said the U.S. attacks violated norms of international law and voiced support for Iran's right to retaliate in self-defense. 'Pakistan condemns the US attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities which follow the series of attacks by Israel. We are gravely concerned at the possible further escalation of tensions in the region,' the Pakistani Foreign Ministry said in a statement. 'The unprecedented escalation of tension and violence, owing to ongoing aggression against Iran is deeply disturbing. Any further escalation of tensions will have severely damaging implications for the region and beyond.' Pakistan on Saturday announced it was nominating Trump for a Nobel prize for the president's 'decisive diplomatic intervention and pivotal leadership during the recent India-Pakistan crisis.' The government praised Trump for 'pragmatic diplomacy and effective peace-building' and added that Islamabad was hopeful the president would also resolve ongoing crises in the Middle East, including humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip and 'the deteriorating escalation involving Iran.' Trump has lamented not getting a Nobel prize during his first term. On June 20, he posted a long missive on Truth Social listing different diplomatic actions from his first term and some from his second term that he 'won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for doing.' 'No, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do, including Russia/Ukraine, and Israel/Iran, whatever those outcomes may be, but the people know, and that's all that matters to me!' he wrote.

Bloomberg

33 minutes ago

• Bloomberg

What to Know About the Nuclear Treaty That Iran's Threatening to Quit

Iran could be poised to withdraw from an international accord that seeks to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. This follows tensions with the United Nations' atomic watchdog, compounded by the attacks on the Islamic Republic's nuclear program by Israeland the US. Should Iran pull out of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, it would reduce the chances of a diplomatic solution to Tehran's atomic ambitions and be a serious blow to global arms-control efforts.