US considers cutting nearly all international pro-democracy aid programs

Nearly all US-funded pro-democracy programs operating under the State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL) are at risk of termination, according to internal briefings on a sweeping foreign assistance review led by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

The review, sources say, recommends slashing nearly USD 1.3 billion in grants, leaving just two programs untouched: one in China and one in Yemen, The Guardian reported.

“This would terminate about 80 percent of all US government foreign assistance at the State Department,” said a department official briefed on the matter.

The recommendations signal a dramatic shift in US foreign policy priorities under the Trump administration. Critics warn that cutting these programs would leave pro-democracy activists in authoritarian countries vulnerable, with many of these initiatives focused on digital freedom, election support, transnational repression, and emergency protection for at-risk civil society figures.

Most DRL-backed programs are kept confidential due to the sensitive nature of their work in hostile regimes like Venezuela, Cuba, and China. However, the sudden recommendation to terminate hundreds of grants stunned many inside the State Department. Officials said leadership in both DRL and the Office of Foreign Assistance were “in shock.”

Adding to the controversy, a newly appointed senior adviser to DRL, Samuel Samson, a recent college graduate and rising conservative figure, has reportedly proposed repurposing Congressionally allocated funds to support administration-linked priorities, including resettling Afrikaners to the US and backing the legal defense of French far-right leader Marine Le Pen.

Samson also led a US delegation in May that met with senior officials from Le Pen’s National Rally party. Though Le Pen did not meet with him personally, the group rejected a US offer of public support, according to Reuters. Samson’s recent writings have drawn criticism as well, particularly a State Department Substack post in which he questioned the designation of Germany’s far-right AfD as an extremist party, claiming it undermines democratic elections in Europe.

It remains unclear whether his recommendations were included in DRL's official budget planning.

The review’s release follows OMB Director Russell Vought’s Senate testimony, during which he claimed the State Department’s foreign assistance programs remained fully operational. Just days later, the results landed at DRL, coinciding with the department’s plan to lay off up to 3,400 staff and shutter around 300 offices as part of a massive restructuring championed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Under this reorganization, DRL is expected to be gutted, its aid programs stripped, and its staff laid off. Sources noted this would make it nearly impossible to challenge the funding cuts or defend terminated grants, as employees would lose access to the very resources and email systems required to do so.

“If you cut all the programs in DRL, then, why would you need to keep the staff if they’re not doing any work,” said one source familiar with the plan.

The proposed dismantling of DRL has sparked outrage from Democratic lawmakers. Ten senators recently wrote a letter to Rubio urging him to reconsider. “The proposed reorganization would result in a structural and substantive demotion of human rights promotion,” they wrote, arguing it runs counter to Rubio’s past as a vocal advocate for oppressed peoples.

Citing Rubio’s own prior testimony, they added, “Millions of people around the world who live in societies dominated by fear and oppression look to the United States of America to champion their cause… There are no greater champions more capable of advancing this noble cause than the dedicated staff in DRL.”

Despite mounting concerns, the State Department’s official line remains cautious. When asked for comment, a senior official said, “The provision of any foreign assistance, including for democracy programming, will be guided by whether it makes America safer, stronger, and more prosperous.”

Still, many inside and outside the department worry that once these programs are gone, and the personnel with them, America’s global human rights leadership will be diminished for years to come.