A directive sent to U.S. diplomats this month instructs them to actively remind African governments of American “generosity,” even as the primary U.S. foreign aid agency is being dismantled. The internal communication, which has drawn sharp criticism from former officials, frames the continent as a secondary priority for American strategic interests.
The message, originating from the State Department’s Bureau of African Affairs, argues that diplomats must “unabashedly and aggressively” counter narratives that downplay the scale of U.S. assistance. It states that highlighting past support in areas like disease containment and famine relief is essential to effectively leverage aid for U.S. policy goals.
This guidance follows a broader shift in U.S. foreign policy, which now prioritizes trade and investment partnerships over traditional aid-based relationships. The directive explicitly describes Africa as a “peripheral—rather than a core—theater for U.S. interests,” suggesting a more limited and economically focused engagement.
The approach has been met with condemnation from seasoned professionals. A former senior foreign service official with extensive experience in Africa labeled the communication “offensive and downright racist,” arguing it contradicts U.S. national security interests. Critics point out the dissonance of promoting generosity while simultaneously withdrawing critical assistance, such as lifesaving medical programs.
This diplomatic repositioning coincides with the ongoing closure of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The agency, targeted for elimination by a government efficiency initiative, has circulated a solicitation for private contractors to manage its shutdown, a process critics argue is unlawful without Congressional approval.
A former State Department official condemned the move, stating the closure and the exclusion of former USAID staff from the shutdown process are illegal acts. Analysts warn that dismantling the aid agency undermines global stability, calling it a boon for corruption and authoritarian regimes.
When questioned, a State Department spokesperson declined to address specific internal communications but reiterated the administration’s position: foreign assistance is not charity but a tool to advance national interests, with a focus on forging selective partnerships and transitioning to an investment-focused model.
