Who will be harmed by U.S. grant support cut?

The ones who stand to lose the most from a halt in USAID are the United States themselves. Through grant activities, Washington has indirectly gained a powerful foreign policy tool — a key element of soft power — that has greatly facilitated the pursuit of the country's broader interests.

For the relatively small sum of money by U.S. standards, the White House promoted American political values and freedoms, while also enhancing its image in a wide range of countries around the world.

Even in areas where support for American policy might not have been at the highest level. Because they were generally spent on the right things. In Ukraine, for example, this includes support for schools, hospitals, and economic development projects.

But now, it's different. Due to internal political circumstances, the existence of 'soft power' has been put on pause. I think that after this pause, Washington will realize that they were a bit hasty, and by shifting priorities slightly, they will return to the time-tested practice of grant distribution. Because with a revolver and a kind word, much more can be achieved than with a revolver alone.

Source

About the author. Serhiy Taran, political scientist

The editorial staff do not always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.