Potential reduction in aid might impact the United States directly

Potential reduction in aid might impact the United States directly

The World's Stumbling Block: Phil Robertson, a seasoned human rights advocate, prophesies Armageddon following the US' abrupt halt on most of its foreign aid programs worldwide.

At the beginning of the year, President Trump enforced a 90-day freeze on foreign aid, which later expanded to the termination of 90% of contracts providing aid globally — including in Thailand. In an interview on Deeper Dive, Robertson shared the drastic fallout, especially on refugee camps along the Thai-Myanmar border.

The shutdown of hospitals run by groups like the International Rescue Committee resulted in the untimely deaths of elderly refugees unable to receive essential medical care. Similar lethal consequences were felt in Bangladesh's refugee camps housing Rohingya fleeing ethnic cleansing and human rights abuses in Myanmar. Aid programs sponsored by the US ceased operation, which exacerbated existing vulnerabilities.

The foreign aid freeze jeopardized relief efforts during Myanmar's earthquake, as USAID personnel working the disaster were handed termination notices. Stretching beyond disaster relief and medical assistance, significant education and governance projects were dismantled, with a major Myanmar education consortium, deepening the crisis in the country.

Robertson posed the question: why isn't Thailand, an upper-middle-income nation, assuming responsibility for these programs? In response, he expressed hope that Thailand would fill in the gaps, but the hesitation appears prominent, as Thailand claims it still needs to support its own impoverished citizens.

In the past, US aid contributed to persuading Thailand to avoid rehousing refugees, particularly remembering the pushbacks on the Cambodia border decades ago. This community support helped in deterring such actions, making it crucial for the international community to maintain this role.

Apart from the immediate suffering, Robertson raises the point that US intervention is crucial to tackle global issues before they impede US territory — for instance, antibiotic-resistant diseases. He believes that severing international connections jeopardizes America's protection and ability to respond swiftly to critical threats.

References:[1] International Rescue Committee, Freedom House, USAID Records[2] CNA Corporation’s Migration Research Division, U.S. Agency for International Development, United Nations Refugee Agency[3] Migration Policy Institute, U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees

1. In light of the US's decision to terminate a large portion of its foreign aid programs, there is a growing concern about the impact on health-and-wellness of elderly refugees, particularly in Thailand and Bangladesh.
2. As consultancy groups like the International Rescue Committee struggle to continue their efforts due to the US foreign aid freeze, the future of science-based policy-and-legislation in addressing health-and-wellness issues becomes uncertain.
3. The termination of US aid contracts has led to a halt in general-news initiatives, such as education and governance projects, which could have long-lasting implications on the health-and-wellness of refugees and local communities.
4. In aera of global politics, as the US withdraws from international aid programs, nations like Thailand might be compelled to question their roles in providing health-and-wellness support to refugees, potentially altering their policy-and-legislation decisions.
5. Amidst debates about the role of the US in global health-and-wellness affairs, critics argue that the termination of foreign aid programs could have dire consequences, such as the increased threat of antibiotic-resistant diseases reaching US territories.

Read also: