An unusual alliance of political and cultural heavyweights came together recently in a moment that has sparked both national attention and international concern. What brought them together wasn’t a celebration or commemoration—but rather a solemn goodbye to an institution that had stood as a pillar of American foreign aid and diplomacy for decades. Though emotions ran high, the full implications of the event—and the fury it triggered—are only beginning to surface.
The Closure That Shocked Washington—and the World
On Monday, former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, alongside global activist and U2 frontman Bono, delivered emotional tributes to the staff of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), marking the official end of the agency after it was disbanded by the Trump administration earlier this year.
Their joint appearance—delivered via videoconference to USAID employees—was notable not only for its somber tone but for its bipartisan nature. Bush, often cautious about criticizing his Republican successors, spoke candidly about the value of USAID’s mission. Obama, meanwhile, was more direct, calling the move “a colossal mistake.”
The video, not made public but reviewed by journalists from the Associated Press, captured a rare moment of cross-party unity. While the tone was reflective, the underlying message was a loud condemnation of the decision that ended a 63-year-old agency known for its extensive global outreach.
How USAID Became a Target
USAID was originally established in 1961 under President John F. Kennedy. For decades, it played a key role in America’s soft power strategy—delivering foreign aid, stabilizing conflict zones, responding to global health crises, and spearheading development initiatives.
But in early 2025, the agency found itself in the crosshairs of a new initiative by President Donald Trump: the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. The department was formed to root out what Trump referred to as “massive bureaucratic waste and ideological corruption.” It was led by none other than Elon Musk, whose high-profile appointment raised both eyebrows and expectations.
Musk quickly zeroed in on USAID, accusing the agency of being “a viper’s nest of radical-left Marxists who hate America.” DOGE’s audit highlighted a variety of spending programs—many of which Trump would later ridicule publicly as wasteful or ideologically biased. The agency, according to DOGE’s findings, had become bloated, ineffective, and out of step with what Trump defined as America’s “real” interests.
A Painful Goodbye—and a Poetic Tribute
As the closure was made official on July 1, Secretary of State Marco Rubio—serving as USAID’s acting administrator during its final weeks—announced that all foreign aid responsibilities would be absorbed by the State Department.
This, he argued, would lead to more “accountability, strategy, and efficiency.” Rubio was unapologetic: “This era of government-sanctioned inefficiency has officially come to an end.”
Yet not everyone agreed.
In an emotional address, Bono read a poem he had written specifically for the occasion. “They called you crooks,” he read. “When you were the best of us.” His words brought tears to some of the staff watching the broadcast.
The Associated Press noted that Obama and Bono showed clear emotion during their remarks, while Bush remained focused on his legacy—particularly the PEPFAR program, the AIDS relief initiative launched during his presidency, which had long been administered in part by USAID.
“You showed the great strength of America through your work—and that is your good heart,” Bush told the departing staffers. “Is it in our national interest that 25 million people who would have died now live? I think it is, and so do you.”
A Broader Political Statement
Critics of Trump’s decision saw the move not merely as administrative streamlining but as a broader attack on globalism, diplomacy, and humanitarian values.
“Gutting USAID is a travesty, and it’s a tragedy,” Obama said. “Because it’s some of the most important work happening anywhere in the world.”
He added that, eventually, both Democrats and Republicans would come to regret this decision, and recognize the long-term damage done.
Bono, known for his decades-long advocacy on global poverty, health, and human rights, echoed this sentiment. He had previously warned that dismantling USAID could lead to hundreds of thousands of deaths, especially in vulnerable regions that relied on American aid.
The Fallout
The decision has already had real-world consequences. Aid shipments have been delayed. Projects in Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and Southeast Asia have been halted or handed off to private contractors with little transition support.
Foreign leaders, international NGOs, and even some U.S. allies have voiced dismay over the abrupt closure of the agency. Longstanding relationships, built over decades of cooperation and goodwill, have been thrown into disarray.
While the State Department has promised to continue many programs “that align with administration policies,” many former USAID workers fear that this will leave out critical health, education, and refugee support initiatives.
The agency’s defenders argue that such programs are not about ideology, but about stability—and that cutting them off will invite chaos, unrest, and deepen anti-American sentiment abroad.
Trump’s Justification—and the Backlash
Trump, however, remained unapologetic. During a March address to Congress, he highlighted DOGE’s $22 billion in identified “waste,” ridiculing specific USAID initiatives.
He scoffed at spending examples like:
-
$45 million for DEI scholarships in Burma,
-
$40 million for “sedentary migrant” inclusion,
-
$8 million to promote LGBTQ+ rights in Lesotho,
-
$60 million for Afro-Colombian empowerment,
-
and most controversially, $8 million for what he described as “making mice transgender.”
These remarks drew laughter from some supporters but sparked outrage among policy experts, scientists, and human rights advocates who argued that Trump was misrepresenting the goals of these programs.
What Comes Next?
With USAID now dissolved and foreign aid centralized under the State Department, questions remain about the future of American humanitarian policy. Will the U.S. maintain its leadership in global health and development? Will efficiency come at the cost of compassion?
Former presidents Bush and Obama clearly believe so.
And Bono—speaking as an outsider but long-time partner to USAID—warned that history would not judge this moment kindly.
“They may shut the doors,” he said. “But the world won’t forget the lives you saved.”
Conclusion
The shuttering of USAID marks a significant pivot in American foreign policy—a shift from decades of bipartisan investment in global development toward a more insular, cost-cutting agenda. While some hail this as overdue reform, others see it as a dismantling of America’s moral leadership on the world stage.
As the dust settles, one thing is certain: USAID’s closure may be complete, but the debate it sparked is far from over.
