Two days after a catastrophic earthquake shook Nepal in April 2015, the United States Agency for International Development deployed a 128-member disaster response team to assess how it could help and pledged $10 million in humanitarian aid. The agency later provided miles of tarp for shelters, helped build temporary schools out of bamboo and used mapping technology to help people find clean water.
But two weeks after the country’s worst natural disaster since then — the flash floods triggered by a glacial fall that left more than 5,000 dead or missing — the United States has dialed back, sending $3.6 million to provide food for 10,000 households.
U.S.A.I.D. is conspicuous by its absence.
Nonprofit groups in Nepal that were funded by the American aid agency said they have had to shut down some of their programs since the Trump administration gutted it early last year, making it harder for them to support relief and rescue efforts.
The difference in the U.S. response to the earthquake and the floods was “night and day,” said Corey O’Hara, an international development expert based in Nepal who oversaw the closeout of a U.S.A.I.D. program last year. “The U.S. had an incredibly important role from the start of that particular disaster,” he said. “At this point, the U.S. response is invisible.”
Development experts and government officials highlighted a bigger issue. The pullback by the United States from providing humanitarian and development assistance has had the effect of not just cutting off disaster aid but also shrinking the total pool of money available, a significant issue for an impoverished country that must rebuild towns, bridges, roads and schools, and care for thousands of displaced people.
Swarnim Wagle, Nepal’s finance minister who was involved in the post-earthquake recovery, said that while U.S.A.I.D.’s role in immediate relief would have been limited, the American retreat from international assistance has had a cascading effect on how other major economies view foreign aid commitments.
By dismantling U.S.A.I.D. and pulling out of other international agencies and treaties, he said in an interview, the United States “seemed to have emboldened other rich countries to also follow a similar path.” He expected official development assistance — in the form of grants — to drop, but emphasized that the bulk of such recovery is traditionally financed by long-term loans.
The Nepali government has argued that the country is disproportionately affected by climate change linked to major polluters and therefore should be eligible for compensation rather than charity from Western and other developed nations.
Former U.S.A.I.D. employees, government officials and development experts said they expect to be working with less foreign aid than in 2015 to help with relief and rebuilding efforts.
Nepal is one of dozens of countries suffering the fallout of President Trump’s decision to end U.S.A.I.D. The agency’s grants helped international and local humanitarian groups do everything from administering vaccines to getting more children in school and mitigating the impact of climate change.
The State Department said in a statement that the U.S. response to the floods in Nepal had been “fast, flexible and driven by conditions on the ground.” The dismantling of U.S.A.I.D. allowed the department to “use humanitarian partners to move resources far more quickly and more efficiently to communities in need,” the statement said.
