Impact of USAID Cuts on U.S. Humanitarian Response to Myanmar Earthquake

Recent cuts to U.S. foreign aid have severely limited the U.S. ability to respond effectively to the earthquake disaster in Myanmar, resulting in criticism from former USAID officials. They emphasized that the dismantling of aid structures has likely contributed to increased loss of life. The U.S. has pledged limited financial assistance but faced logistical challenges in deploying rescue operations. The broader implications of these reductions on U.S. humanitarian involvement and management have raised significant concerns.

According to three former senior U.S. officials, recent cuts to foreign aid have hindered the United States’ ability to respond effectively to the recent earthquake in Myanmar. A former USAID mission director for Myanmar stated, “America has been on the sidelines” during this critical period following the disaster, which resulted in at least 2,700 fatalities and thousands of injuries and missing persons. These officials expressed concern that the reduction in foreign assistance potentially led to additional loss of life in Myanmar.

A 7.7 magnitude earthquake struck on Friday, triggering substantial destruction. The former USAID officials noted that historically, the agency has deployed Disaster Assistance Response Teams (DARTs) consisting of highly trained rescue workers, specialized equipment, and even sniffer dogs in response to similar disasters. They asserted that the U.S. typically sends one of the largest teams among foreign assistance groups, as observed with the deployment following the Turkey-Syria earthquake in 2023.

As of Monday, a U.S. team of three advisers was reportedly en route to Myanmar, as stated by the U.S. Department of State. However, this team lacks the rescuers necessary for immediate disaster response. Additionally, the U.S. has pledged $2 million toward humanitarian aid, a stark contrast to previous disaster-related contributions.

Former officials allege that President Trump’s administration has deliberately undermined USAID, with ongoing dismantling efforts leading to substantial staffing reductions and logistical challenges in deploying response teams. They noted that key personnel who typically form the base of the disaster response unit were placed on administrative leave just as the earthquake occurred.

Andrew Natsios, a former USAID administrator, commented on this lack of readiness, attributing it to the termination of essential staff from the Bureau of Humanitarian Assistance. Chris Milligan, another former USAID director, observed significant disarray in management during the disaster, emphasizing the failure to maintain an operational workforce.

Further complicating matters, former officials indicated that logistical contracts crucial for transporting aid personnel and equipment were canceled, significantly impeding the U.S. response capability. As Jeremy Konyndyk expressed, this is unprecedented and demonstrates a significant gap in U.S. humanitarian response, noting, “The US basically was not there for the rescue window, period. And it’s too late.”

Despite the criticisms, the U.S. State Department dismissed suggestions that aid cuts impacted disaster relief efforts. Spokeswoman Tammy Bruce remarked that existing partnerships would facilitate necessary support without direct U.S. presence. Yet, former officials refuted this claim, arguing that effective rescue operations inherently require ground teams.

Milligan projected that the U.S. capacity to assist could have significantly exceeded what is present in Myanmar currently, highlighting a concerning shift in the U.S.’s international aid presence. The State Department asserted ongoing investment in various programs would continue, with intentions of coordinating support without a DART deployment. Their representation suggested adapting responses to align with current resources and partnerships, emphasizing a distinct operational approach in light of recent changes within USAID.

The situation following the Myanmar earthquake highlights significant challenges faced by the United States in providing humanitarian assistance due to recent foreign aid cuts. Key former U.S. officials have expressed concerns over the limitations in response capacity, underscoring the importance of maintaining a robust disaster response framework. As the U.S. navigates its role in international aid, the implications of such cuts signal a potential decline in its stature as a leading responder to global crises. The effectiveness of future assistance remains a subject for careful scrutiny and evaluation.

Original Source: www.bbc.com