Kirsten Weeks is a seasoned global health leader with over 25 years of experience in public health and international development.
As a former employee of DAI, a major USAID contractor, she has witnessed firsthand the impact of American foreign assistance on public health worldwide.
In this article, Weeks shares her concerns about the consequences of foreign aid cuts under the Trump administration, the potential loss of American influence, and the strategic importance of soft power in maintaining national security.
The Role of Public Health in Global Development
Kirsten Weeks was introduced to the concept of public health in the early ’90s through a personal connection with a childhood friend living with AIDS.
This experience sparked her interest in how public health can transform communities and countries.
For over two decades, she has dedicated her career to supporting U.S. foreign assistance in global public health.
Through her work with USAID and DAI, she has seen firsthand how American investments in global health have saved lives and fostered long-term partnerships.
USAID’s Impact on Global Security
USAID, created in 1961 under President John F. Kennedy, has long been a tool of American soft power.
The agency’s mission is to provide foreign assistance, not just as charity, but as a means of building trust and alliances around the world.
Weeks highlights how American foreign assistance programs have had a direct impact on health systems, including efforts to control HIV in Botswana, empower Afghan women with healthcare training, and support youth programs in Nigeria.
These efforts not only improve lives abroad but also enhance U.S. security by fostering international trust.
For example, when local governments in volatile regions like northern Nigeria cooperate with the U.S. on development programs, it undermines the influence of extremist groups and strengthens American ties to key strategic regions.
The Domestic Impact of Foreign Assistance Cuts
The Trump administration’s freeze on foreign assistance has had significant consequences for both the global health sector and domestic job markets.
North Carolina, for instance, receives a substantial portion of USAID funding, which supports vital research in agriculture and other sectors.
The disruption of these programs has left many scientists and local communities concerned about the long-term impact on their industries.
Moreover, the federal government’s abrupt cuts to foreign aid programs have led to furloughs for thousands of employees, including Kirsten Weeks and her colleagues.
This has not only affected their livelihoods but has also resulted in the suspension of life-saving health programs like disease surveillance and pandemic response efforts.
The Strategic Risk of Abandoning Soft Power
Weeks stresses that the cuts to foreign assistance risk ceding influence to rival nations such as China and Russia, who are eager to step in where the U.S. is withdrawing.
By reducing its foreign assistance footprint, America may be giving up strategic influence in key regions, allowing competitors to expand their presence.
For instance, China’s growing influence in Africa and parts of Asia could undermine U.S. interests in those regions.
The Need for Reform in Foreign Assistance
While Weeks is concerned about the current state of U.S. foreign aid, she also believes there is room for improvement in how foreign assistance is administered.
She advocates for a more collaborative approach, including stronger partnerships with local organizations and better coordination between different sectors.
By streamlining the bureaucracy and focusing on sustainable, self-sufficient solutions, the U.S. can help countries become less reliant on aid over time.
Conclusion: Protecting America’s Soft Power
Kirsten Weeks has spent over 25 years witnessing how American foreign assistance programs have created lasting change around the world.
From saving lives to building stronger international relationships, these programs have made both America and the world safer.
Weeks urges the U.S. to rethink its approach to foreign assistance—protecting American jobs, national security, and its position as a global leader in health and development.
Her call to action is clear: the U.S. must restore and strengthen its foreign assistance programs, ensuring that investments in global health continue to have a positive ripple effect that benefits everyone.
By doing so, America can maintain its influence and leadership on the world stage.