New research published in the journal Science directly ties the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to a sharp uptick in armed clashes, protests, and riots across Africa. The study, co-authored by University of Chicago Associate Professor Austin Wright, analyzed conflict data from 870 subnational regions in the 11 months before and after the agency’s shutdown.
“Areas that relied heavily on US aid saw an increase in the number of conflict events (of all types) of approximately 12.3 percent, an increase in the number of battles of around 7.3 percent, and an increase in protests and riots of around 6.8 percent,” the paper states. In regions at the 75th percentile of aid exposure, the probability of any conflict event rose by 6.5 percent compared to areas with no U.S. aid. Protests and riots were 10 percent more likely, battle counts increased by 10.6 percent, and battle-related fatalities jumped 9.3 percent.
Sub-Saharan Africa, which received the bulk of USAID’s civilian health, food security, and basic service funding, bore the brunt. The study notes that after the cuts, Boko Haram expanded its footprint in Nigeria, an ISIS affiliate threatened religious freedom in Mozambique, and South Sudan saw intensified armed conflict. The findings underscore how humanitarian assistance also served as a tool for local conflict mitigation.
The economic fallout is already being felt. An op-ed in the Michigan Journal of Economics projects Sub-Saharan Africa’s economy will be $4.5 billion smaller over five years than pre-cut forecasts. Somalia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria, Kenya, South Sudan, Uganda, and Mozambique each lost over $400 million annually in USAID support. The Institute for Security Studies warns that 5.7 million more Africans could fall into extreme poverty by 2030, with Ethiopia, Somalia, and the Congo hit hardest—fueling further instability.
The paper’s release comes amid ongoing debate over the Trump administration’s aid policies. Cindy McCain has urged the administration to restore food aid, citing the humanitarian and security consequences. Meanwhile, the U.S. has tightened airport screenings for travelers from Ebola-affected African nations, reflecting broader concerns about the region’s stability.
“The withdrawal of USAID wasn’t just a humanitarian decision—it had direct security implications,” Wright said. “Our data shows that aid cuts can trigger a cascade of violence.” The study adds to a growing body of evidence linking foreign assistance to conflict prevention, challenging the narrative that such spending is merely charity.
As the region grapples with these shocks, the research serves as a stark warning: dismantling aid programs without a transition plan can unravel years of progress in conflict reduction. For policymakers, the choice is increasingly between investing in stability or managing the consequences of its absence.
