SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
oxfam america
Trump-Musk Shutdown of USAID 'Would Have Deadly Consequences for Millions'
"Dismantling USAID would be a callous, destructive political power play," warned the president of Oxfam America.
Feb 03, 2025
The unelected billionaire given free rein to tear through the federal government said early Monday that U.S. President Donald Trump agrees with the ongoing push to shutter the United States Agency for International Development, the single-largest contributor of humanitarian assistance worldwide.
Elon Musk, the head of an outside advisory commission that has trampled the law as its agents work to access and take over critical government operations, said during an event broadcast on the social media platform he owns that he has checked with Trump "a few times" about whether he wants USAID shut down. According to Musk, Trump replied, "Yes."
"So we're shutting it down," said Musk, who claimed the agency is run by "radical lunatics."
Over the weekend, as Common Dreamsreported, two USAID security officials were forced out after they refused to give Musk agents access to internal systems and classified material. USAID's website has also gone dark, an ominous development for an agency that has become one of the Trump administration's top targets.
In addition to the grave political implications of Musk's maneuvers—which one observer described as a "textbook coup"—humanitarian Abby Maxman, president and CEO of Oxfam America warned in a statement that "dismantling USAID would be a callous, destructive political power play that would have deadly consequences for millions of people living in dire humanitarian emergencies and extreme poverty."
"Any attempt by President Trump to dissolve or merge USAID with the State Department would be legally dubious and must be swiftly challenged in court," Maxman added.
"If this were Pakistan, Chad, or Venezuela, the headlines wouldn't hedge: A billionaire oligarch seizes control, dismantling democracy in real-time."
The Trump administration has already instituted a sweeping pause on foreign aid distributions, sparking chaos and panic around the world as charitable organizations scramble to understand the consequences for their lifesaving work.
"One had to decide whether to abide by a stop-work order or deliver lunches to schoolchildren in impoverished communities, as it has for years," TIMEreported. "It decided to obey the order, wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of perishable food. Another is figuring out whether to close health clinics for pregnant mothers in Haiti, leaving them with scant alternatives for a place to give birth."
Reports indicate the Trump administration has discussed plans to "strip a slimmed-down U.S. Agency for International Development of its independence and put it under State Department control." By Saturday, according toThe New York Times, "lawmakers had received word that at least some of the USAID signs at the agency's headquarters in downtown Washington had come down, and rumors were circling that mission directors around the world were being called back to the United States."
"Two USAID employees, who work in the Washington headquarters and spoke on condition of anonymity because of an order barring employees from discussing any changes to the agency, said that they were working under an atmosphere of fear and chaos, and that half of the agency's workforce had been eliminated in the last week," the Times added.
Paul O'Brien, executive director of Amnesty International USA, said in a statement that "governments around the world are significantly better equipped to meet their human rights obligations because of the technical and financial resources USAID provides."
"An abrupt collapse of the agency," O'Brien warned, "would put the rights of millions of people around the world at greater risk as a result."
Progressive strategist and organizer Waleed Shahid wrote over the weekend that "if this were Pakistan, Chad, or Venezuela, the headlines wouldn't hedge: A billionaire oligarch seizes control, dismantling democracy in real time."
"Musk's loyalists, armed with executive orders instead of rifles, are gutting the civil service, locking officials out of government systems, and dictating policy from a boardroom-turned-war room," Shahid continued. "Trump, a fading strongman, is the figurehead; Musk, the junta's real leader. Treasury, national security, and federal agencies—one by one, falling under private rule. In any other country, experts would call it state capture, a textbook coup. Here, the press still asks if democracy is in danger, as if waiting for the moment history makes it undeniable."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Biden Administration Takes 'Morally Bankrupt' Climate Position at ICJ
"This opposition to strong international law on climate justice categorically undermines the Biden administration's climate legacy," said Ashfaq Khalfan of Oxfam America.
Dec 05, 2024
The Biden administration faced backlash from scientists, advocacy groups, and vulnerable Pacific islands on Wednesday for arguing before the United Nations' highest court that the Paris agreement is sufficient and countries should not face additional legal obligations to fight the climate emergency.
The U.S. position, outlined at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) by State Department legal adviser Margaret Taylor, was deemed "morally bankrupt" by Oxfam America, which
decried the administration's insistence that "countries do not have clear legal obligations to reduce carbon pollution, especially as it prepares to turn over the executive office to a proven climate denier like President-elect [Donald] Trump."
"This opposition to strong international law on climate justice categorically undermines the Biden administration's climate legacy," Ashfaq Khalfan, Oxfam America's climate justice director, said Wednesday. "The U.S. has today denied any firm obligation to reduce carbon pollution to safer levels, phase out fossil fuel production, or provide funding to lower-income countries to help with renewable energy and protection from climate harms. Governments have failed to do what is necessary to protect humanity from the climate crisis, and it is essential that the ICJ holds them to account by pushing them towards concrete action to ensure climate justice."
Taylor argued during her presentation in The Hague on Wednesday that "the U.N. climate change regime, with the Paris agreement at its core, is the only international legal regime specifically designed by states to address climate change" and that "cooperative efforts through that regime provide the best hope for protecting the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations."
While technically a legally binding international treaty, the Paris accord has failed to arrest the rise of planet-warming carbon emissions, which have surged to an all-time high this year. The agreement—from which the U.S. is expected to withdraw for a second time under Trump—has no enforcement mechanism, and its language leaves ample room for countries to continue burning fossil fuels at levels that scientists say are incompatible with a livable future.
"The U.S. is content with its business-as-usual approach and has taken every possible measure to shirk its historical responsibility, disregard human rights, and reject climate justice."
Delta Merner, lead scientist for the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists, criticized the U.S.—the largest historical polluter—for resisting "calls for climate accountability" at Wednesday's ICJ hearing.
"Instead of taking responsibility for its contributions to the climate crisis, the United States used its 30-minute slot to downplay the role of the courts for global climate action, emphasize nonbinding national commitments under the Paris agreement, and reject the notion of historical responsibility," said Merner. "By framing climate change as a collective action challenge without clear legal obligations for individual states, the United States dismissed the potential for redress or binding accountability measures that advance justice for climate-vulnerable nations."
"In the face of stonewalling from major polluters, we applaud the leadership of Vanuatu and others for advancing this process," Merner added. "These proceedings must continue to center the voices of frontline communities."
The Pacific island of Vanuatu first launched the push for an ICJ advisory opinion on climate in 2021. Less than two years later, the U.N. General Assembly approved a resolution calling on the ICJ to issue an opinion on countries' legal obligations regarding the global fight against climate change.
Ralph Regenvanu, Vanuatu's special envoy for climate change and environment,
criticized the U.S. presentation at Wednesday's landmark hearing and said treaties such as the Paris agreement can't be "a veil for inaction or a substitute for legal accountability."
"These nations—some of the world's largest greenhouse gas emitters—have pointed to existing treaties and commitments that have regrettably failed to motivate substantial reductions in emissions," said Regenvanu. "There needs to be an accounting for the failure to curb emissions and the climate change impacts and human rights violations that failure has generated."
Vishal Prasad, director of Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, expressed outrage at what he described as "a disheartening attempt by the U.S. to evade its responsibilities as one of the world's largest polluters."
"The U.S. is content with its business-as-usual approach and has taken every possible measure to shirk its historical responsibility, disregard human rights, and reject climate justice," Prasad added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
House GOP Revives Bill to Let Authoritarian Trump Crush Nonprofits
"We urge the House of Representatives to reject this dangerous bill and to protect our freedom of speech and our right to dissent," said the president of Oxfam America.
Nov 18, 2024
House Republicans have revived and are looking to push through legislation this week that would hand President-elect Donald Trump's incoming administration sweeping power to investigate and shut down nonprofit organizations, including news outlets and humanitarian groups.
The bill, H.R. 9495, failed to pass the House last week despite bipartisan support because the Republican leadership attempted to pass the measure using a fast-track procedure that requires a two-thirds majority vote. More than 50 Democrats, including Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and other prominent members, backed the legislation in last week's vote, along with 204 Republicans.
This time, the GOP is attempting to advance the bill through regular order, meaning it can pass with a simple majority. The Republican-controlled House Rules Committee is scheduled to hold a markup hearing for H.R. 9495 on Monday.
After learning of the hearing, advocacy organizations that mobilized against the bill redoubled their warnings about its dire implications for free expression and the right to dissent—particularly in the hands of a would-be authoritarian who has vowed to prosecute his political enemies.
"The bill we defeated days ago is back," the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights wrote on social media over the weekend. "Representatives are trying to ram through H.R. 9495, a repressive bill that could shut down nonprofits & student groups supporting Palestinian rights."
The legislation, if passed, would give the Treasury Department the authority to unilaterally strip nonprofits of their tax-exempt status by designating them supporters of terrorism. As of this writing, Trump has not announced his pick to lead the Treasury Department.
While the bill provides a brief period for an accused nonprofit to defend itself, the ACLU said the provision "is a mere illusion of due process," noting that the federal government would be able to "deny organizations its reasons and evidence against them, leaving the nonprofit unable to rebut allegations."
Abby Maxman, president and CEO of Oxfam America, warned in a statement after Republicans revived the bill that H.R. 9495 "would grant the Trump administration, and any future administration, the ability to silence and censor its critics, curb free speech, target political opponents, and punish crucial organizations that speak truth to power and help people in the United States and around the world."
"This bill would increase the powers of the president at the expense of all of our freedoms, and could impact not only organizations like Oxfam, but other nonprofits, news outlets, or even universities who dare to dissent," said Maxman. "It could put our ability to respond to some of the worst humanitarian crises at risk and prevent us from delivering lifesaving aid to some of the world's most marginalized people."
"This bill follows the same playbook Oxfam has seen other governments around the world use to crush dissent. Now we are seeing it here at home," Maxman added. "We urge the House of Representatives to reject this dangerous bill and to protect our freedom of speech and our right to dissent."
It's not clear whether the U.S. Senate, narrowly controlled by Democrats, would bring H.R. 9495 to the floor for a vote if it passes the House this week, or whether President Joe Biden would sign it into law. But Republicans will gain full control of Congress and the White House starting in January, giving them the ability to push the legislation through at a later date.
"Their rush to reconsider this bill is solely to offer Trump more and more power, while Trump's nominees for key national security posts this week indicate how he will be using it," Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), a leading opponent of the measure, toldThe Intercept on Friday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular