The United States of America is an enigmatic political embodiment reflecting human creation’s true nature. The more you observe, the less you comprehend; a more profound analysis leads to further confusion. Otherwise, why would Americans, who triumphantly denied Trump a second term in 2020, consider bringing him back to the White House in 2024? President Donald Trump was denied a second term as President of the United States in the 2020 election due to political, social, and economic factors. Among these key factors were Trump’s conduct and behavior. Many voters were deterred by his controversial statements, Twitter usage, and the numerous scandals that marked his presidency, including his impeachment by the House of Representatives in 2019. Has Trump changed, earning him a second term?
Today, President Donald Trump is in his second month occupying the White House during his second and final term after defeating incumbent President Joe Biden in the 2024 presidential election. During his first tenure from 2016 to 2020, Trump showed little patience or regard for Africa and its leadership, as he reportedly made some uncomplimentary remarks about the continent. His return is marked by more derogatory comments attributed to President Trump, such as, “If after 50 years of independence, you have not built the necessary infrastructure for your people, are you human?” and “If you become a thief in your own country, stealing all the resources meant for your country, while most of your brothers are miserable, starving, and living in poverty, is that being human?” These remarks, painful as they are, reflect the bad governance being practiced in the African continent and other developing countries across the globe.
A few hours after his inauguration for his second coming as 47th American president, Donald Trump hurriedly issued an unprecedented forty-four executive orders and memos across various areas—from bureaucratic reorganization to trade, energy, and migration. The action communicated his intention to implement his policy agenda and campaign promises swiftly. The executive orders (EOs) target low—and middle-income countries in Africa and the Global South: foreign aid, reframing energy diplomacy, the Global Tax Deal and US FDI, global trade relations, WHO and global health, and spillovers of adversarial relations with China. Six of the EOs are of significant concern to Africa.
The first is the Reevaluating And Realigning United States Foreign Aid, which directs “all department and agency heads with responsibility for United States foreign development assistance programs to immediately pause new obligations and disbursements of development assistance funds to foreign countries and implementing non-governmental organizations, international organizations, and contractors pending reviews of such programs for programmatic efficiency and consistency with United States foreign policy, to be conducted within 90 days.” A “stop-work” order on all U.S.-funded development projects around the world, except for emergency food and humanitarian aid, and assistance to Egypt and Israel was issued and accordingly being complied.
Another executive order (EO) withdrew the United States from funding the World Health Organization (WHO) following Joe Biden’s rescission of Trump’s initial attempt in January 2021. This latest withdrawal notice pauses the future transfer of US government funds, support, and resources to the WHO, which offers crucial development assistance for health programs in numerous countries around the globe and directly affects the WHO’s budget and authority. The United States is the largest donor to the WHO’s budget, contributing approximately 15 percent. This withdrawal will impact the organization’s financial stability. African nations depend significantly on WHO support for their healthcare systems, and a withdrawal of US funding could create considerable gaps in financing for essential health programs. For example, the WHO’s polio eradication initiative, which has shown significant progress in recent years, could be adversely affected, putting millions of children at risk of contracting the disease. Cutting down over 70% of USAID funding, an agency for funding aid contracts in African and Asian countries. In 2024 alone, Nigeria reportedly received over a trillion naira in grants from USAID.
Furthermore, the withdrawal could also limit access to critical medicines and vaccines, exacerbating health challenges in Africa. The WHO plays a vital role in coordinating global responses to health crises, and without US participation, African countries may be left vulnerable to emerging health threats. The impacts are already being felt, particularly in health intervention, agriculture, and food programs, and with some NGOs and contractors facing the prospects of job cuts in the coming weeks.
Another thorny policy is the Trump immigration policy; President Donald Trump declared his decision to deport all undocumented immigrants who cannot prove they have resided in the USA for more than two years; African nationals view themselves to be among the main targets.
While the top 10 African countries from which immigrants have departed have changed, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Egypt, South Africa, Ghana, and Morocco have consistently topped the list over the past decades. Concurrently, other countries facing war or political and economic instability have also emerged as significant sources of immigrants.
The new policies are unpalatable to African countries, but we must rise. Americans have spoken; Trump’s campaign mantra of “America First” has led them to offer a second term to their chosen president. African leaders must embrace the culture of good governance. Why should African countries rely on handouts with harmful strings attached? Just recently, US Congressman Scott Perry accused the USAID agency of funding ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and Boko Haram terrorists. However, Perry provided no evidence to support his claim, yet it is sufficient to inspire a thorough investigation. Is any African leader investigating this allegation? Or are we behaving as if nothing serious has been said? What enormous funds did USAID spend in Nigeria in the name of assistance?
With African countries among the hardest hit by Trump’s policies, health education and other programs requiring emergency funding are likely to suffer. But how will they cope with the shock of Trump’s sudden August gift? African nations can soften the impact of Donald Trump’s aid cuts by diversifying their funding sources and exploring new collaborations. For instance, they might reduce their reliance on US aid by seeking support from other countries, international organizations, and private investors. Furthermore, promoting regional cooperation is essential. Regional economic communities such as the African Union, ECOWAS, and SADC can help African nations share resources, knowledge, and risks.
Trump’s policies have created an opportunity for African leaders to rethink their approach before seeking aid for their countries, as such assistance has never developed the continent and cannot do so, making it subservient to the giver. As Trump aims to achieve his “America First” goal by boosting domestic production, the US will import numerous raw materials worldwide, most likely from Africa, including minerals and agricultural products. Therefore, African leaders should seize this chance and transform Trump’s policies into blessings in disguise. They should take the lead and define the terms of the partnership. What a fantastic dream.
