The USAID Freeze Created a Power Vacuum. Can the EU Find the Strength to Fill It?
An EU humanitarian worker inspects vital cargo in Jordan. The organization has a history of increasing their provision of foreign aid to meet the needs of the most vulnerable.
Photo Credit: European Union
On the first day of his second presidential term, Donald Trump issued an executive order pausing the nation’s foreign aid industry, composed primarily of the United States Agency of International Development (USAID), pending a 90-day program review. In mid-March, the U.S. Department of State formally notified Congress that it was dissolving USAID and moving the remaining 18% of programs and 900 employees under its umbrella. This suspension has sent shockwaves throughout the global aid community. In the European Union (EU), these cuts have manifested in billions of euros vanishing with little warning, limiting the EU’s capacity to provide humanitarian aid and forcing many European development organizations to shut down or roll back.
As the Trump administration appears to walk away from America’s historical position as an international protector of human rights, foreign assistance will be reassessed as a tool of global influence. The European Commission, the EU’s executive body, has acknowledged the organization can’t fully replace the $60 billion funding gap the U.S. left behind. Yet, with over 300 million estimated to need humanitarian assistance in 2025, the Commission announced plans to review the EU’s multi-billion-euro aid budget to ensure it aligns with the bloc’s “foreign policy priorities.”
The EU and Foreign Aid
Collectively, the EU is among the world’s biggest sources of development aid — providing about $52 billion a year. Since 1992, the bloc has worked to alleviate the suffering of millions in over 100 countries through its Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations department. Such reflects Team Europe’s firm commitment to ensuring everyone everywhere has access to aid by preventing crises and reacting swiftly when disasters strike. The EU has been a major player in supporting global conflicts, particularly in Eastern Europe and West Asia. Since the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, the EU has allocated over €100 billion in humanitarian aid to the nation, ranging from medical supplies to energy equipment. The bloc has also provided over €1 billion in humanitarian support for Palestinians since 2023.
As of 2021, the EU pivoted toward not only supplying humanitarian aid, but also pursuing development deals. This includes the Global Gateway program, which earmarked €300 billion for investments in infrastructure, digital literacy, and climate projects meant to foster sustainable growth and shared prosperity. Such a program not only promotes long-term development in EU partner countries, but also counters China’s Belt and Road initiative by ensuring the EU maintains relations with and relevance to potential allies.
On January 16, 2025 — 4 days before the U.S. freeze — the EU announced a humanitarian budget of €1.9 billion for 2025, most of which has been allocated to the Middle East, Africa, and Ukraine. The Commissioner for Equality, Preparedness, and Crisis Management, Hadja Lahbib, says “the EU is upholding its commitment to help those most in need as a leading humanitarian aid donor.” While the 27-member bloc has been non-committal regarding its decision to increase foreign aid in light of U.S. withdrawals, the EU must act decisively if it hopes to reinforce its global presence.
In Mayorsk, Ukraine, civilians utilize entry-exit checkpoints, like the one pictured above, to visit relatives and access basic goods and services. The EU works alongside UNHCR and Premiere Urgence Internationale (PUI) to provide Ukrainians with aid and support. Given the EU’s commitment to supporting Ukraine and increasing domestic prioritization, it is unclear whether the organization is capable or willing to fill the vacuum left behind by USAID’s collapse.
Photo Credit: “Ukraine: EU assistance to thousands of Ukrainians traveling across the line of contact every day” by EU Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid, CC BY-ND 2.0
To Expand or Not to Expand?
The U.S.’s changing approach to global engagement piles pressure on European governments to contain the fallout. Paired with the United Nations’ target for member states to spend 0.7% of gross national income on development assistance, international norms expect the EU to live up to its humanitarian principles. As nonprofits call on the bloc to provide greater financing and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky requests military assistance, the EU has displayed a desire to increase its supply of foreign aid. On March 6, leaders met at the EU’s defense summit in Brussels and backed plans to spend more on Ukrainian defense. Antonio Costa, European Council President, claimed the meeting has “shown that the European Union is rising to the challenge.” Further, in mid-April, the EU unveiled a financial aid package of €1.6 billion to fund projects and development in war-ravaged Gaza. The EU appears to have cast this moment in international politics as an opportunity to remind the world it is a reliable partner.
As the EU stands to lose out to countries like Russia and China, preserving international humanitarian norms is not the only reason for a surge in EU foreign aid rhetoric; conveying influence may become crucial to maintaining European defenses. Since 1961, the formation of foreign aid has been widely viewed as a cornerstone of soft power. As such, providing foreign assistance becomes a political choice, often misrepresented as a budgetary decision.
USAID humanitarian assistance arrives at the Burmese airport in 2008, providing the Burmese with food, water and medical supplies. The aid came in response to a cyclone that devastated the region. For decades, the United States has used USAID as a soft power tool to increase its global prestige. Its recent dissolution by President Donald Trump has created a vacuum in the developmental aid sector.
Photo Credit: U.S. Navy.
The Trump administration’s moves to dismantle USAID have stoked fears that Western nations will lose their standing on the world stage. In light of the existing global conflicts and humanitarian crises, the EU can’t afford to stop a security approach that increases positive perceptions of the bloc. For instance, U.S. support for civil society in countries like Georgia, Moldova, and Armenia had been a bulwark against Russia’s destabilizing influence and the rise of illiberal domestic political forces. Now, their budgetary cuts may throw off energy and independence efforts, effectively playing into Moscow’s hands. Essentially, the EU has an interest in stepping up strategic investments in global stability to ensure its foreign policy priorities are not threatened by an increasingly protectionist international order, even if such an effort is incomplete.
That said, the Trump administration’s near-total freeze has unleashed chaos in the foreign aid community, perpetuating reductions set in motion before his re-election. In recent years, many European nations have prioritized domestic spending to manage refugee flows and economic headwinds of global crises. Countries like France, Germany, and the Netherlands have significantly scaled back international financial commitments over the past two years; France’s 2025 budget reflects a 37 percent decrease in French humanitarian aid and the Dutch foreign minister announced the country would take a Netherlands-first approach to development.
As established, the EU can't replace the sheer scale of U.S. foreign aid, and may not be inclined to, as the bloc contends with struggling economies and demands to redirect funds to domestic defense. Even if it tried, international aid funding has suffered significant losses that leave many EU relief services in jeopardy. While cuts are nowhere near as dramatic or sweeping as those for U.S. agencies, growing patterns of protectionism and diminished access to funding ensure many view expanding EU foreign aid responsibilities as unlikely and ill-advised.
International Implications
The Trump administration seems unconcerned with the danger marking this shift in longstanding US foreign policy; a danger the EU must comprehend to prevent threats to regional security and influence. Whether or not Washington eventually unblocks funding channels, Kaja Kallas, Vice President of the European Commission, believes it is time to “put the European flag up more.” While not completely closing the funding gap, the EU could further its interests and define a new era of international assistance by filling the symbolic and financial void the U.S. left behind. Development assistance is critical for long-term change and the EU’s unique selling point is the value they place on human rights; a value that may result in greater returns on investment than a large budget. Maria Groenwalk, director of a network of European humanitarian NGOs, believes there is a “moral duty for Europe to stand up and have some responsibility in the world.”
The EU is not the only entity that may seek to reshape the environment this vacuum left behind; Norway has increased overseas aid funding, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Arab states have channeled financial assistance to political partners in the region, and China remains unmatched in speed and scale of development initiatives. At this point, the challenge of an EU response is to act quickly. However, the bloc is notorious for its bureaucracy and “glacial pace.” While many EU representatives point out that the entire international community should shoulder this responsibility, if the EU aspires to remain a relevant actor committed to civil society, it must step up or risk losing its credibility and geopolitical influence.