Latest news with #foreignAid
Bloomberg
11 hours ago
- Health
- Bloomberg
UNAIDS Executive Director: ‘The HIV Response Is in Crisis'
Winnie Byanyima says her organization has lost almost 50% of its funding, a gap that is undermining global efforts to combat HIV/AIDS. By Are we unraveling years of progress on fighting HIV/AIDS? For the past two decades, the US has led the global response to a virus and disease that have together claimed more than 40 million lives. But there are still more than a million new infections every year; with no vaccine or cure, preventing further spread is critical. This is why there was so much alarm from campaigners and experts when the US Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, started slashing foreign aid. In an interview last month, Musk himself told me that HIV-prevention programs were ongoing. But Winnie Byanyima, executive director of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV and AIDS, tells a different story. Her organization is one of the key bodies fighting the virus globally — UNAIDS operates in nearly 100 countries — and Byanyima says the disruption she's seeing is both real and deadly. We spoke while Byanyima was on a visit to South Africa, where the rollout of one of the most promising HIV-prevention tools in a generation is now in doubt. 'Even if I get the next batch of medicines,' one aid worker in Soweto told her, 'they may expire because the two people I had who go out and reach people in their communities [are no longer there].' This interview has been edited for length and clarity. First of all, are you able to set the record straight? To what extent has your work at UNAIDS been affected by the DOGE-led cuts to USAID? First, globally, the HIV response is in crisis. Clinics have closed. Prevention services have halted. People are losing access to lifesaving medicines. People are scared. Our work as the UN leader of the global HIV response is also affected severely. We've lost close to 50% of our funding. It came from two pockets of the United States government. So we are also struggling to stay alive. But there is a crisis and a huge disruption, the biggest since the global response was created about 25 years ago. I know that Elon Musk has doubted that these disruptions are there,[and] has even said that if they are there, he would fix them. 1 I know he has left government, but I'll be happy to go with him anywhere in Africa or Asia to show him, or take any other American official to see what the real impacts are for people living with HIV and for people at risk of HIV, like gay men [or] women and girls in Africa. In our May conversation, Musk said he did not believe many HIV-prevention programs had stalled: 'If in fact this is true, which I doubt it is, then we'll fix it.' But he also questioned the assertion that cutting USAID would result in any fatalities, saying that recipient organizations 'don't even try to come up with a show orphan' to back up their claims of saving lives. When you say the HIV response globally is in crisis, how much of that is to do with US funding cuts? How great is America 's responsibility for that situation? Huge. The United States government and US taxpayers were contributing a lion's share of the support to developing countries to fight this disease, up to 73%. You might say, why the United States? Well, it's the wealthiest country in the world, and these are the poorest countries in the world. By pulling its funding away very quickly, the US didn't [give] these highly indebted countries — that are heavily impacted by [the] climate crisis, that have huge burdens of disease beyond HIV — enough time to be able to fill the gap. 2 UNAIDS created a portal to track the real-time effects of US funding cuts in the developing countries in which it operates, including observations from officials in the field. 'My greatest fear is that we will return to the dark days of the epidemic,' says the director of UNAIDS in Zambia. But what about other donors? What about rich countries in the Middle East or other G-7 countries or philanthropists with deep pockets? There have been two main sources of funding to support developing countries [on HIV/AIDS]. One is the American program, PEPFAR, the presidential initiative, and the other is called the Global Fund, where other donors — the Europeans, the Japanese, the Chinese — all put money together and help the developing countries. When the major contributor pulls out with little notice, things collapse. That is what has happened. In South Africa, which funds 80% of its own response and has been getting US support for only 17%, I visited a clinic in Soweto and saw the impact. A man who works [there] told me, 'Even if I get the next batch of medicines, they may expire because the two people I had who go out and reach people in their communities and bring them for service [are no longer there].' He's seeing a drop in the numbers of people coming forward to get what they need to prevent or to be treated. 3 This is backed up by recent Bloomberg reporting from South Africa, which has the world's largest HIV-treatment program with 80% of 7.8 million infected people on medication. So we are seeing that even in a country that's not so dependent, there are disruptions. Even in a country where the will is so strong, like South Africa, you're still seeing a gap that is definitely going to result in more new infections and more deaths. We know from our modeling that if the gap is not filled by other funding, in the next four years we are going to see up to 6.6 million additional new infections and additional deaths of 4.2 million. And that's in addition to what we were already estimating. PEPFAR, the program that you are referring to, 4 is the responsibility of the State Department. Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State, says 85% of PEPFAR is functional. PEPFAR stands for the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. It was a US policy choice that began during the George W. Bush administration in 2003, and has since then provided cumulative funding of $120 billion for HIV/AIDS treatment. That's roughly as much as the US government spends on its Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps) in a single year. It isn't exactly that because the PEPFAR program on the ground is implemented by two parts of the American government, the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] in Atlanta and USAID. Now USAID has been shut. So there's no work that was done by USAID that's going on right now, though some work by the CDC is still going on. 'I say to President Trump: You are a man who likes to do a deal. Here's a deal.' But over and above that, there has been confusion. First, the cut was a stop-work order for everything. Then, within a week — and we thank the American administration for realizing that this was going to cost lives — they said it can come back, but only some of it. We see testing and treatment coming back by the CDC. We don't see much progress on prevention. So in many places, prevention clinics where people get their condoms, their PrEP, vaginal ring, whatever — these are not open. So we do see many gaps, particularly for women and girls in Africa, gay men, sex workers and people who inject drugs. They have their special clinics; those too have closed. It seems then that you think the statement '85% of PEPFAR is functional' is inaccurate, or misleading. It is inaccurate to the extent that the impact for the very low-income countries is huge. Our own data shows us that the impact is much bigger than that. 5 We asked the State Department to respond to UNAIDS' assertion that many HIV-prevention programs supported by the US have stalled. They told us they continue to support testing, care, treatment and prevention of mother-to-child transmission, and that an estimated 85% of beneficiaries could be receiving lifesaving treatment and prevention of mother-to-child transmission. All other PEPFAR-funded services are under review. Did you have any contact with Elon Musk's team at DOGE? We appealed to him publicly. I am very loud on social media and said I'm happy to meet him and take him to see. Anyway, he's left government. We are addressing ourselves now to the American government to say, 'You started something strong.' A Republican government, President Bush, came out at a time of the worst pandemic of the century and [began] a program to save lives. Right now, there are tools that could end this pandemic, and I say to President Trump: You are a man who likes to do a deal. Here's a deal. There is an American innovation called lenacapavir that's 100% effective to stop infections. An American innovation that creates American jobs that could be rolled out and we could cut down new infections almost to zero. Why not do this? That would be another Republican president bringing a revolution on prevention. This could be a win-win. Get the Bloomberg Weekend newsletter. Big ideas and open questions in the fascinating places where finance, life and culture meet. Sign Up By continuing, I agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. It is a US pharmaceutical company, Gilead, that's behind lenacapavir, which has been through lots of trials. But there would still be an issue, wouldn't there? It is likely to be extremely expensive. Wouldn't access to the drug possibly be like antiretrovirals in their early years, when they were out of the reach of the world's poorest people? You are right. We are hearing rumors in the media of $25,000 per person per year, and [if] it comes out at that price, then it will not bring new infections down to zero. 6 When they first came out, antiretrovirals used to treat HIV infections could cost more than $10,000 a year, but they eventually became widely available thanks to the work of aid organizations. Now lencapavir promises to provide six-month protection from infection, eliminating the need to take daily pills. On June 18, Gilead said that lenacapavir, marketed as Yeztugo, has a list price of $28,218 per year. It sounds as if this has been an extraordinary rollercoaster. You had immense hope that 2025 could be a breakthrough year, and instead you spent the first half of it almost battling for the organization's survival? That's true. I'm letting people go. People who have, over 20 years, built the experience to support this response. It's sad and it's unnecessary considering the billions that are being spent on building up new weapons systems and fighting wars. My core budget was not even $150 million [a year], but now it's been slashed by almost half. It's a sad moment, but we won't give up. I'm inspired by the governments and the people in countries [that] aren't giving up. They are stretching themselves, volunteering, doing things differently. We've got to keep people alive. So we are pushing on. We will continue fighting. I read that you are having to fight on another front at this moment, a personal front. You grew up in Uganda, you served your country as a political leader before you moved into international work, 7 and your husband is a longtime opposition leader in Uganda. Is it the case that he remains imprisoned, as we speak, on very serious charges? Byanyima has had quite a career. She was a flight engineer for Uganda Airlines, a combatant (alongside her husband) in the National Resistance Army and Uganda's ambassador to France from 1989 until 1994. She helped draft Uganda's 1995 constitution, and served two consecutive terms as a member of parliament before serving in leadership roles at the African Union and Oxfam International. She became executive director of UNAIDS in August 2019. That is true, Mishal. My country has struggled through crises since independence. We thought we had turned the corner through a revolution that brought back democracy, but we've seen reversals in the last 10 to 15 years. My husband has been an opposition leader for the last 25 years. But for most of those, he's been in and out of jail — always criminalized, but always being exonerated by the courts. Last November he was abducted from neighboring Kenya and taken across the border. It's now six months he's been in jail. He hasn't been tried. For a long time he was not even charged, he was just illegally being held. He's not the only political prisoner, but we have the international human rights organizations supporting his cause, supporting that he should be released on bail, so that he can fight whatever charge they may have against him. 8 In February, Byanyima's husband Kizza Besigye was charged with treason over an alleged plot to overthrow Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni. Besigye has unsuccessfully tried to unseat Museveni — who has been in power since 1986 — in four elections. How is he and are you able to be in contact with him? We are in contact with him and able to visit him. But he's not in a good condition. He's in a tiny cell where you can hardly even sit by his bedside, there's not enough room. So yes, I am angry at how he's being treated. I'm angry at the illegality that the president has shown. The Supreme Court decided that as a civilian, he should not be tried by the military. [President Yoweri Museveni] reversed it by bringing a law before Parliament to allow civilians to be tried by the military. 'No one anywhere — in any country in the world, rich or poor — should take freedom for granted, should assume that because they're enjoying human rights, because there's rule of law at a certain point in time, that it'll always be there.' Didn't he used to be a friend of yours, President Museveni? He is a family friend. I first met him when I was little. He was always in and out of the family home. He was a friend of my parents. This is just about politics and power. President Museveni has never quite accepted the idea of being a democratically elected leader who respects an opposition and competes with them fairly. I wonder what this leads you to conclude about the nature of power and authority. Your generation knows what dictatorship was like when you were growing up, the time of Idi Amin. You ended up having to leave Uganda, you came back, and you were part of building institutional governance. What are the lessons of how to build a nation to ensure structures that safeguard people's rights? You raise a very important point. No one anywhere — in any country in the world, rich or poor — should take freedom for granted, should assume that because they're enjoying human rights, because there's rule of law at a certain point in time, that it'll always be there. You can have reversals. Sudden reversals or slow reversals, but reversals do happen. You must always be working as a citizen, doing your duty to protect your constitution, to defend the rule of law, to defend the human rights of others, not just for yourself. May I close, Winnie, by asking you what gives you strength? To be battling on these two fronts — one professional, one personal — at the same time, it would take a lot out of anyone. It is tough, but the truth is that I have lived a life of struggle. I don't say my life was always rough. I've had, and I still have, very many happy moments. But at every point I have had to be a part of struggles, to make lives better — for myself and for others. What's happening to me on the personal front, what's happening on the professional side, I see them all as a struggle for justice. Justice for my husband, justice for people living with HIV, justice for those who are denied their rights because of their sexual orientation, because of who they are. So I live day by day and think everybody has their load to carry. And that's mine. Mishal Husain is Editor at Large for Bloomberg Weekend. More On Bloomberg
Washington Post
21 hours ago
- Politics
- Washington Post
Food rations are halved in one of Africa's largest refugee camps after US aid cuts
KAKUMA, Kenya — Martin Komol sighs as he inspects his cracked, mud-walled house that is one rain away from fully collapsing. Nothing seems to last for him and 300,000 other refugees in this remote Kakuma camp in Kenya — now, not even food rations. Funding for the U.N. World Food Program has dropped after the Trump administration paused support in March, part of the widespread dismantling of foreign aid by the United States, once the world's biggest donor.
Forbes
2 days ago
- Business
- Forbes
Heed General Mattis' Warning, D.C.: Less Diplomacy Means 'More Ammunition'
In his January Inaugural Address, Donald Trump said, 'We will measure our success not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars that we end, and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into.' If that's the president's most crucial foreign policy metric – and it's a good one – then it's hard to understand why Washington is pulling back on investments that have prevented war and promoted peace for decades. Especially when foreign aid accounts for only about one percent of the federal budget, much of it actually spent within the U.S. Every American should hope the White House reconsiders its strategy before it's too late. "If you don't fund the State Department fully, then I need to buy more ammunition" — Former Defense ... More Secretary James Mattis. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch - Pool/Getty Images) In 1947, America did something unique in world history when it launched the Marshall Plan, spending $187 billion in today's dollars to rehabilitate the economies of 17 European countries. Most extraordinary of all, we spent over 20% of those funds on the recovery of our World War II adversaries, Germany and Italy. The plan worked, establishing a stable and prosperous Europe, a network of reliable allies, and a massive market for U.S. companies. Last year, the U.S. exported almost $250 billion of goods alone to Germany, France, Italy, and the Netherlands. This exercise of 'soft power' – which describes the use of foreign aid, diplomacy, and the promotion of American values abroad – turned out to be every bit as consequential to strengthening America and winning the Cold War as our military's 'hard power.' But soft power is on the outs in Washington. Secretary of State Marco Rubio says the administration plans to reduce the Department's staff in the U.S. by 15 percent while closing and consolidating more than 100 bureaus worldwide. At the same time, China now has a larger diplomatic presence worldwide than the U.S. and a massive global infrastructure and investment strategy. Its Belt and Road Initiative is the largest infrastructure project in history, involving more than 140 countries and drawing an increasing number of nations into its orbit. China is rapidly filling the void because the U.S. has vacated its historic and influential presence. On his first day back in office in January 2025, President Trump signed an executive order freezing all foreign aid, including the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). Since its creation in George W. Bush's administration, PEPFAR has saved more than 25 million lives and prevented millions of HIV infections, including those in America, as the AIDS pandemic has been brought under more control. Although the Trump administration subsequently allowed a waiver for the continued distribution of HIV medicine, many other key aspects of the PEPFAR program are in jeopardy. President Trump has also ordered the closure of Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty, which reaches 50 million people each week in places where media freedom doesn't exist. Even Cookie Monster, Oscar, and Elmo are on the chopping block. Less soft power for Elmo: International adaptations of "Sesame Street" have been impacted by cuts in ... More federal funding. Since the early 1970s, Sesame Workshop, the producer of Sesame Street, has collaborated with local broadcasters to develop unique, culturally adapted versions of the show in over 150 countries. These international co-productions often include local languages, characters, and educational priorities, making "Sesame Street" a global neighborhood. Because the Department of Education has cancelled its key grants, Sesame Street has become a dead end in several nations. There's little question that some of the money Washington spent in recent years on foreign aid was wasted or devoted to pet ideological causes. This likely explains why 59% of the public supports reducing foreign aid, even as they vastly overestimate how much America spends on it. (Opinion polls often show Americans believe more than a quarter of the federal budget goes to foreign aid. As stated earlier, the real figure is around 1%.) However, I'd ask my fellow Americans – and our leaders in Washington – to recall something General James Mattis, then commander of the Central Command, said in 2013 about the perils of making reckless cuts to foreign aid and diplomacy. Testifying before Congress, he said, 'If you don't fund the State Department fully, then I need to buy more ammunition. The more that we put into the State Department's diplomacy, hopefully, the less we must put into a military budget as we deal with the outcome of an apparent American withdrawal from the international scene.' To meet President Trump's goal of ending and avoiding wars, Washington can't just slash budgets. It needs a new framework for soft power that prioritizes America's interests and delivers peace through strength. A great place to start would be the new 'Blueprint for How America Wins in the World' from the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition (full disclosure: I am a Vice Chairman at USGLC). I spoke recently to USGLC President Liz Schrayer, one of the sharpest thinkers I know on foreign policy and the exercise of U.S. power. Amid growing threats from China, Russia, and Iran, Liz walked me through several steps America can take to be stronger, safer, and more prosperous, including: Making these soft power investments should appeal to the most hardboiled realists in Washington – and compel the White House to reverse course on some of its proposed aid and diplomacy cuts – because they all make America safer. If we want to stay one step ahead of China, prevent the next pandemic from reaching our shores, keep our borders secure, and grow our economy, America must show up, lead with strength, and make smart investments abroad that deliver on American interests. Otherwise, our service members are going to need more ammunition.
Globe and Mail
3 days ago
- Politics
- Globe and Mail
‘It's time for some co-operative federalism.' Letters to the editor for June 18
Re 'Carney accelerates talks with Trump to reach economic-security deal within 30 days' (June 17): U.S. President Donald Trump used his short-lived presence at the G7 summit to once more spout untruths: that Justin Trudeau excluded Russia from the group, and to imply that were it not for the actions of Barack Obama and Mr. Trudeau, there would not have been a war in Ukraine. He doesn't seem to care about facts. And his advisers, where are they? They must have the same attitude towards reality. The scariest thing is, of course, that Canada is attempting to make a 'deal' with that same person. Sinclair Robinson Ottawa Re 'Africa largely sidelined at G7 summit, despite multiple wars and massive aid cuts' (June 17): Sadly, the U.S. policy led by the Trump administration of dismantling USAID, coupled with calls for substantial increases to defence spending, seems to be spreading to the other G7 countries. Canada and the rest of the Group of Seven are facing numerous problems. But if we can't solve them without sacrificing foreign aid, the consequences to Africa will be severe. One of Donald Trump's predecessors, John F. Kennedy, once said: 'If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.' T.S. Ramsay Guelph, Ont. Re 'Alberta, Saskatchewan premiers push for port-to-port corridor as Carney touts energy security at G7' (Report on Business, June 17): Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe wants to see words turn into action regarding a proposal on building a port-to-port energy corridor from Prince Rupert, B.C., to Hudson Bay at Churchill, Man. He speaks of investors and infrastructure. But he does not speak of risks such as environmental damage, nor does he offer benefits to British Columbia and Manitoba. The woeful record of Alberta and Saskatchewan at letting thousands of orphan wells pollute unattended should make us wary of the off-loaded costs of this project. Perhaps he should engage the Premiers of Manitoba and B.C. in discussions guaranteeing environmental protections and even some upside profit-sharing of resource revenues. Instead, he relies on the powers of the federal government to impose a solution. It's time for some co-operative federalism. Michael Levin Toronto Re 'Ottawa to put latest Canada Post offer up to a union vote' (June 13) and 'Cutting corners' (Letters, June 17): Some of the comments in the article and a subsequent letter to the editor appear to misunderstand the underlying purpose of the vote sought by Canada Post on its most recent offer to the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW). In particular, the letter writer suggests that the request made by Canada Post is shameful and ignores the right of CUPW to represent its members. Canada Post is doing nothing unlawful by asking for a vote. In fact, the Canada Labour Code expressly provides for a vote on an employer's offer in the current circumstances. Canada Post appears to be of the view that the positions taken by CUPW do not reflect the desire of its members, and it is simply exercising its statutory right to ask for a vote. Whether the view held by Canada Post is correct remains to be seen. Lee Shouldice Former Vice-Chair Ontario Labour Relations Board, Toronto Re 'Late start' (Letters, June 13): A letter writer believes NATO's existing forces are sufficient to defend against a Russian invasion. They are not. NATO knows it can no longer rely on help from the United States and is rapidly improving its defence capabilities. The letter writer disparages that as 'NATO's increasingly aggressive posture.' Russia, not NATO, is the aggressor. Some analysts believe Russia's continuing war against Ukraine is temporarily delaying Vladimir Putin from occupying again some of Russia's other former Soviet territories like the Baltic states. If a future larger war in Europe were to be started by Russia, it's probable that China and North Korea (and others) may be involved. The increasing cost of our defence preparedness is unfortunate but necessary as avoiding it could end up costing us even more. Reiner Jaakson Oakville, Ont. Re 'No Benefit' (Letters, June 17) and 'Germany embraces militarism for the first time since the Second World War' (June 13): In the real world, military spending is a necessary investment for safety and security. The ancient adage, si vis pacem, para bellum (meaning if you want peace, prepare for war), still applies. In addition, military research has provided many beneficial products that have raised our living standards including penicillin, canned and freeze-dried foods, the internet, GPS, microwave ovens and Jeep vehicles. Jiti Khanna Vancouver Re 'Housing remedy' (Letters, June 17): The letter writer is right to point out that there are many advantages to increasing the density of existing residential areas. But upzoning needs to include design requirements to ensure that infills or replacements fit with the neighbourhood (particularly if it has a historic nature). There are examples in Edmonton's Garneau neighbourhood of very sensitively designed new multiunit buildings, but also numerous 'grain elevators' which are sore thumbs and overbearing on their neighbours. There is also no guarantee that infill or replacement housing will in fact be affordable – that has certainly not been the case in Garneau. And there needs to be a requirement for reasonably sized two, three and four bedroom rental units to be able to accommodate the families that make the area such a vibrant village. More thought is required. David Phillip Jones Edmonton Re 'Canadian gynecologists group issues new compassionate care guidelines for miscarriage patients' (June 16): My story is similar to Ms. Payton's. My first pregnancy ended in the washroom of an emergency waiting room. The hospital was ill-equipped to respond to the complex needs of a parent who just lost a child before birth. Over years of trying, I 'got good' at responding to my needs. With each miscarriage, I had my doctor, naturopath, therapist and best friend on speed dial. My story has a happy ending. In the midst of seven miscarriages, we have two children. I still remember hearing the ultrasound tech saying to me for the first time: 'Yes, there's a live baby in there.' What a gift. But the journey was one of unnecessary secrets and trauma that was hard for the medical system to comprehend. Alison Pidskalny Calgary Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@
The Guardian
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Toll of Trump's USAID cuts on Australian aid revealed, with projects to help children among hardest hit
The Trump administration's gutting of foreign aid has seen a $400m hit to Australian projects, with 120 projects affected, at least 20 offices closed and people left without crucial support for health, education, humanitarian and climate change issues, the Australian Council for International Development (Acfid) has found. Acfid has surveyed its members and their partners, who deliver projects on the ground, on the impact of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) cuts, which took effect when the president, Donald Trump, froze funding for 90 days from 20 January. By the time the 90 days expired, despite a waiver for humanitarian assistance, 5,200 of the agency's 6,200 programs had been stopped. Those that were left were absorbed into the state department. Workers in Australian programs described 'chaos' and 'total panic' at the time, and warned programs could shut, causing 'unnecessary deaths and suffering'. Some Australian aid projects had direct USAID funding, while others were jointly funded or subsidised through US funding. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email 'Australian NGOs and their partners have had to reduce operations and staff with dire consequences to local communities that are now no longer receiving essential healthcare, education, food or other assistance,' Acfid's report, released on Monday, says. 'At least 20 partner organisations and/or country offices of Australian NGOs have closed. Some local organisations have also had to close their doors permanently.' The report points out that it collected information during that 90-day period, that it was a time of 'upheaval' and many organisations did not have a clear picture of the impacts. Less than half provided financial data, so the figures 'should be read as a low estimate of impact on the Australian aid agencies and the local partners they work with around the world', the report states. More than 120 projects were hit, with a financial value of more than $400m. The projects were mostly in the Pacific and south-east Asia. Projects to help children, combat climate change and provide humanitarian support were the hardest hit. In Nepal, 307 girls are no longer able to go to school after an education project closed. Without education, girls are at higher risk of child marriage and being trafficked, Acfid says. In Kiribati, almost 2,000 people lost access to improved water, sanitation and hygiene practices, leading to reduced access to clean water and increased risk of disease. The Acfid policy and advocacy chief, Jessica Mackenzie, said the development sector was only now fully grasping the scale of the fallout. 'We've heard first-hand accounts from people on the ground ranging from communities in the Pacific losing access to clean water, to girls in Nepal deprived of education and fearful they may be forced into marriage,' she said. 'At least $400m in humanitarian and development projects have been directly impacted by the USAID freeze for Australian NGOs. That's millions of people losing access to food, healthcare and education.' Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion The cuts could not have come at a worse time, she said. 'Communities already on the frontline of climate change are losing access to programs that were helping them adapt, prepare and survive.' Acfid says Australia's own foreign aid spending is the lowest it has ever been, at a time when the world needs it most. Other countries including the UK, the Netherlands and Germany have cut their foreign aid, despite the context of growing global conflict and uncertainty. Acfid is calling for the government to increase spending on foreign aid from 0.65% to 1% of the federal budget. Save the Children Australia has made a similar call. Its proposals include spending on climate action, development, and work on gender, disability and social inclusion. In March, Australia moved to plug the funding gaps in the region by directing about $120m in foreign aid to support economic, health, humanitarian and climate responses in the Indo-Pacific. That money came from funding for other programs, which the foreign affairs minister, Penny Wong, called 'hard strategic decisions'. DFAT has also committed to 2.5% annual increases in aid funding. Wong announced on Friday that another $10m would go to help distribute urgent medical and food supplies in Gaza, taking the total assistance there to $110m since 7 October 2023. On Thursday, the Trump administration announced it would eliminate all USAID overseas positions by 30 September.
