TL;DR
Get privacy and security gear delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
A recent study confirms that the sudden closure of USAID by DOGE in 2025 caused a rise in violence across African regions previously supported by the agency. The findings highlight the serious humanitarian and security consequences of the aid cut.
A new study confirms that the abrupt shutdown of USAID by DOGE in 2025 led to a significant increase in violence across nearly one thousand African regions, marking a major shift in the continent’s conflict landscape and highlighting the consequences of the aid withdrawal.
The study, published in Science, links the rapid dismantling of USAID—initiated by DOGE and spearheaded by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency—to a marked rise in violent conflicts in Africa. Researchers analyzed geolocated aid data and conflict records, finding that regions heavily dependent on US aid experienced a 6.5% increase in conflict probability, with notable rises in protests, riots, and fatalities.
Specifically, the study reports that conflict events increased by 10.6%, battle counts by 6.9%, and battle-related deaths by 9.3% in these areas. The analysis indicates no preexisting differences in conflict trends before the aid cuts, suggesting a direct correlation. The aid, which saved an estimated 91 million lives from 2021 to 2024, was dismantled rapidly, leaving communities vulnerable and fueling violence.
Why It Matters
The findings underscore the profound humanitarian and security impacts of the aid withdrawal, which has led to an escalation in violence and instability in regions previously stabilized by US support. This not only threatens local populations but also poses risks to US national security, as conflict zones can become breeding grounds for further instability and transnational threats.
The study emphasizes that aid reduction creates a ‘conflict trap,’ where violence perpetuates due to the sudden loss of resources, and vulnerabilities are exploited by armed groups. The long-term consequences could include increased refugee flows, regional destabilization, and a loss of US influence in Africa.
Products Worth Considering
Jackery HomePower 3600 Plus Portable Power Station, 3584Wh, 3600W
Anker SOLIX S2000 Portable Power Station, 2,010Wh, 1,500W
EcoFlow DELTA 3 Portable Power Station (1024Wh, 1800W)
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Background
USAID, established in 1961 by President Kennedy, had been a key component of US foreign policy, providing aid to promote development and stability. Its rapid shutdown in 2025, under DOGE’s directive, marked the most extreme and swift disbandment in its history, with less than 1% of federal spending involved. Prior to the shutdown, aid was associated with both conflict mitigation and, in some cases, conflict escalation due to resource disputes.
Analyses of aid and conflict data show that the aid cuts have had a lasting impact, with violence persisting months after the shutdown. The loss of aid also diminished US influence and trust among international partners, prompting some allies to reduce their own aid commitments, further complicating regional stability efforts.
“With the USAID shutdown, there was a rapid increase in the likelihood, severity, and lethality of violence across nearly a thousand African regions.”
— Austin L. Wright, study co-author
“When those funds rapidly go away, it’s a shock to the opportunity cost, making violence and crime more attractive, but the infrastructure and resources that groups fight over remain.”
— Wright
What Remains Unclear
It is still unclear how long the increase in violence will persist or whether aid reinstatement could reverse these trends. The long-term political and security consequences are also still being studied, and the full scope of aid’s impact on conflict dynamics remains complex and context-dependent.
What’s Next
Researchers and policymakers are expected to monitor ongoing conflict trends in affected regions and assess the potential for aid restoration or alternative interventions. Further studies will explore the long-term security implications and how to mitigate similar risks in future aid policies.
Key Questions
What specific regions in Africa are most affected by the aid cuts?
The study indicates that regions which previously received large amounts of US aid, especially those with weaker governance and less local control, experienced the most significant increases in violence.
Can the increase in violence be directly attributed to the aid shutdown?
According to the study, there is a strong correlation between the aid cuts and the rise in violence, with no preexisting differences in conflict trends observed before the shutdown, suggesting a causal relationship.
What are the broader implications for US foreign policy?
The findings suggest that abrupt aid withdrawals can destabilize regions and undermine US influence and security interests, emphasizing the need for more strategic and gradual approaches to aid policy.
Are there efforts to reverse or mitigate the effects of the aid cuts?
Currently, international agencies and some governments are attempting to address the fallout, but the long-term effects of the sudden aid withdrawal are likely to persist beyond immediate relief efforts.
