����vlog����

Former diplomats see unnecessary deaths, lost opportunities for American corporations, workers, and diminished geopolitical influence.

Many more people around the world will unnecessarily die of AIDS and starvation; American farmers will take an economic hit; Russia and China will strengthen ties with less-developed nations formerly friendly with the U.S., forging new political loyalties — and potentially reaping future economic gains.

This is some of the possible fallout from the Trump administration’s recent decision to make deep cuts in programs for foreign aid, such as USAID and the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, known as PEPFAR, according to a panel of former diplomats.

“We are going to have to think about different ways of doing things,” said Reuben E. Brigety II, former U.S. Ambassador to South Africa in the Biden administration on Feb. 27 during the first of a planned series of online discussions organized by the Harvard Center for International Development (CID) with government leaders, policymakers, and NGO experts that will examine the future of American foreign aid.

Brigety noted that the pullback will loosen ties between the U.S. and large parts of the global community, with multiple consequences, both expected and unexpected.

“None of this changes the fact that pandemic diseases know no borders,” he said. “None of this changes the fact that there are going to be emergencies” that will require international coordination.

A forecast by Richard A. Boucher, former U.S. ambassador to Cyprus, was more pointed. “People are going to die,” he said, listing AIDS and starvation as threats, as well as death “at the hands of murderous regimes over whom we don’t have influence” because of our withdrawal of aid and diplomacy.

Boucher, who was also former deputy secretary general of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and U.S. assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asia, said that other nations, less aligned with our interests, may rush in behind us.

“If we don’t have that seat at the table, China is going to step in,” he said. “We’re going to lose influence globally; we’re going to lose influence individually; and the United States is going to be poorer for it.”

Brigety agreed. “There is no scenario in which American international or domestic interests are better served absent the robust presence of American leadership abroad. None.”

That kind of stepping up, he said, “helps access to foreign markets for American goods.” In addition, partnerships with foreign governments grant us “access [to information on] very specific threats to American interests, including American lives.”

Former U.S. Ambassador to Greece and Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt offered an example: In sub-Saharan Africa, he said, “USAID’s Power Africa program spent about a billion since 2013 facilitating and de-risking power generation.”

This was done with U.S. corporate partners, including Chevron and ExxonMobil, “American companies who were leveraging Power Africa activity to expand their markets,” said Pyatt, who is also former assistant secretary of state for energy resources. The results thus far? The program has “leveraged $29 billion” for the United States’ corporate partners.”

Boucher pointed out that American farmers benefit from the billions of dollars’ worth of grain that USAID buys to distribute abroad, as do American workers who travel to help build and manage new infrastructure created through foreign aid.

“America has always wielded influence because we had the money and the power. Take away the money, it means we’re walking on one leg,” he said.

As we withdraw, Brigety continued, all the Chinese have to say is: “‘See, you can’t trust the Americans.’”

Discussion moderator Fatema Z. Sumar, executive director of the CID, shifted the conversation to other future forecasts.

PEPFAR, Brigety explained, not only strengthened African healthcare as it distributed drugs and services to combat AIDS, but also strengthened that of the continent with lasting results. “Some of the earliest and best research on the planet about how to address COVID in the midst of the pandemic happened in South Africa.”

In the field of energy, the panelists outlined logistical and other challenges.

The U.S. has spearheaded the deployment of $5 billion in energy assistance to Ukraine, the majority of which came from the 29 other countries and multilateral organizations involved, Pyatt said. “But it is only USAID that has the grant-making authority, the power to push that money out the door,” he said.

“It worries me greatly that we have dismantled this capacity — because the next time, imagine there’s a Chinese attack on Taiwan — we’re not going to have the toolkit to accomplish this.”

We are losing “the institutional memory of those who were able to do this work,” he said.

Boucher added, “You don’t have the influence if you don’t show up.” Historically “we were the ones who able to go in and talk to people and make things happen.”

Instead, Brigety reiterated, that means China, Russia, and private organizations will step in, with Pyatt listing U.S. government institutions such as the Development Finance Corporation. Among those are former private USAID contractors, he said.

“If I were a USAID contractor whose 80 percent of funding just got yanked, I would immediately set up office in Jeddah [Saudi Arabia], in Dubai [UAE], and in Doha [Qatar], and probably Kuwait,” he said. “Many of those Middle Eastern countries see the economic opportunities on the continent and are interested not only in benefiting from it, but also realize that in order to benefit you actually have to help develop those economies.”

Sumar asked the panelists what they would say to students who have been preparing for careers in public service.

“The career has certainly become more challenging,” said Pyatt. Still, for those who may still be able to land jobs in the shrinking sector, “it’s a fabulous career,” he said.

“I can’t imagine anything in the private sector that delivers the level of psychic rewards that come from representing a country that is perceived to be the good guy in a contested international environment.”

This article was originally published by the . The CID virtual series, "The Future of US Foreign Aid," has brought together influential decision-makers with firsthand experience in shaping policies, directing aid initiatives, and overcoming development challenges for conversations with CID faculty affiliates about the Trump administration's cuts to foreign aid and where we collectively go from here.