Category World News

United States President Donald Trump’s administration has frozen funding for a wide range of federal programmes, in a move that experts say could potentially disrupt education, healthcare, poverty reduction and disaster relief schemes.

Officials said the decision, which is scheduled to take effect at 5pm EST (22: 00 GMT) on Tuesday, was necessary to ensure that all funding complies with Trump’s priorities, including his crackdown on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

The Office of Management and Budget, which oversees the federal budget, said in a memo that the freeze included any money intended “for foreign aid” and for “nongovernmental organizations”, among other categories.

The pause, according to the White House, would not have an impact on Medicare and Social Security payments, or “assistance provided directly to individuals.”

According to sources, this means that some poor food aid programs won’t suffer as a result.

But the funding freeze could affect trillions of dollars, at least temporarily, and cause potential interruptions in healthcare research, education programmes and other initiatives. It is supposed to be stopped even grants that have been given but not actually used.

State agencies and early education centers reportedly had trouble obtaining funding for Medicaid, a low-income healthcare program, and Head Start, a program that provides early childhood support.

On Tuesday, four organizations representing non-profits, public health professionals, and small businesses filed a lawsuit against Trump’s directive, contending that it will “will have a devastating impact on hundreds of thousands of grant recipients.”

“From pausing research on cures for childhood cancer to halting food assistance, safety from domestic violence, and closing suicide hotlines, the impact of even a short pause in funding could be devastating and cost lives”, Diane Yentel, the president and CEO of the National Council of Nonprofits, said in a statement.

Her group was among the four groups involved in Tuesday’s lawsuit.

Democratic state attorneys general pledged to fight the court order as well.

Letitia James, the attorney general of New York, claimed she intended to request a federal court in Manhattan to stop the Republican president’s actions.

“My office will be taking imminent legal action against this administration’s unconstitutional pause on federal funding”, James said on social media. “We won’t sit idly by while this administration harms our families”.

Democratic congressman from Florida Maxwell Alejandro Frost also claimed in a social media post on Tuesday afternoon that his team had spoken with numerous organizations and organizations that had been “completely cut off from federal funding.”

“We’re talking housing, homeless services, public safety”, he wrote, warning that the freeze “could have drastic local impacts”.

We’ve been on the phone with multiple agencies/orgs. They’ve been completely cut off from federal money. We’re talking housing, homeless services, public safety, etc.

I’m holding a press conference today to explain how this might have significant local effects on our electorates.

Chuck Schumer, the leader of the Senate Democrats, claimed that the Trump administration was unable to veto legislation that would block US Congress’ approval of spending.

“This decision is lawless, destructive, cruel”, Schumer said in a speech to the Senate. American families will suffer the most, according to the statement.

Trump claimed during his campaign that he believed the president had the authority to withhold money from programs he dislikes, but the US Constitution gives Congress complete control over spending.

Congressman Tom Emmer, one of the top Republicans in the House of Representatives, said Trump was simply following through on his campaign promises.

You must be aware that he was elected to upend the status quo. He intends to do that as well. At a Republican policy retreat in Miami, Emmer stated to reporters that things won’t go as they used to.

Karoline Leavitt, a spokeswoman for the White House, also defended the administration’s decision, telling reporters on Tuesday afternoon that Trump and his team were “good stewards of taxpayer dollars.”

The Trump administration’s grant and assistance programs are not halted completely. Individual assistance that includes … Social Security benefits, Medicare benefits, food stamps, welfare benefits, assistance that is going directly to individuals, will not be impacted”.

Leavitt claimed that the freeze “entails no longer funding for illegal DEI programs” or “the Green New Scam,” a term used by Trump and his allies to describe the actions former president Joe Biden took to address the climate crisis.

She said, “It means no longer funding for transgender sensitivity and apathy across our federal bureaucracies and agencies.”

The Office of Management and Budget memo is the latest directive in Trump’s push to dramatically reshape the federal government, the country’s largest employer, since he took office on January 20.

Since the start of his second term, Trump has slapped DEI programs and placed a freeze on federal hiring. He has also taken numerous executive actions.

The president also signed an executive order last week mandating a 90-day suspension of foreign aid and reviewing current programs.

With the exception of Israel and Egypt, the US State Department, which is one of the most important allies in the Middle East, announced in a memo a few days later that it was suspending nearly all new funding for foreign aid programs.

The administration has taken a step to stop the distribution of medications for treating HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis in nations that the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) supports, as well as medical supplies for newborn babies.

Saqr Maqdad and his family set off for northern Gaza late on Sunday night, just before Israel reopened the north for the first time since its 15-month war with the Palestinian enclave, following a fragile ceasefire agreement with Hamas.

Leaving behind the Khan Younis displacement camp in the south, the 31-year-old, along with his wife, and two daughters, Reema, 5, and two-year-old Rawaa, walked northward along the coastal al-Rashid road hoping to reach Beit Hanoon, the family’s hometown, at the far northern tip of the besieged territory.

An estimated 200, 000 Palestinians retreated to the most devasted areas of the Gaza Strip on Monday, making a dramatic comeback from areas many feared Israel would never permit them to re-enter in the wake of the war.

They had already walked about 20 kilometers (12. 4 miles) and were only carrying a few small bags of clothing when Al Jazeera saw them as they passed through central Gaza.

But the family were determined nonetheless, adamant that they would return home.

“We’re going back to the place where we grew up, the land that holds our memories”, Saqr said. “Even if it’s destroyed, it’s still ours”.

The tens of thousands of people traveling north express a conflict with Donald Trump’s comments on Saturday that suggested sending Palestinians to neighboring Jordan and Egypt.

“You’re talking about probably a million and a half people, and we just clean out that whole thing and say: ‘ You know, it’s over'”, Trump said.

Trump’s statements, in spite of the far-right movement’s claims that the move might be temporary, sparked immediate criticism.

“Trump’s talk of relocating us is pure fantasy”, Saqr scoffed. “Does he think, after everything we’ve endured, we’ll just leave? This is our home, and we’re staying”.

He emphasized that Beit Hanoon was about more than just returning home for his family.

“It’s a message to the occupation and its backers: we will not abandon our land. We’ll stay here, no matter the cost”.

Across Gaza, Palestinians have rejected Trump’s proposal, viewing it as an extension of efforts to “uproot them from their land”, Saqr added.

“No political scheme, no matter how powerful, can change that”, he explained.

“Every step we took back to the north was a step against displacement”, he said. “This is our land. We were born here, and we will die here”.

No relocation

In southern Gaza’s Khan Younis, 76-year-old Abu Suleiman Zawaraa has been quietly waging his own form of resistance. His farm, once teeming with olive and citrus trees, was razed during a months-long Israeli military operation. Abu Suleiman has been restoring the land for the past few months.

“I’ve cleared seven dunams]7, 000 square metres] of rubble by hand”, he said, gesturing towards the freshly tilled soil. “Why? Because I’m the only one who can take it from me, this is my land.

For Abu Suleiman, the act of farming is also a declaration of defiance.

“Living among the rubble is a challenge, but it’s one we’ve accepted”, he said. “Leaving Gaza is out of the question. We’ve survived bombardments, destruction, and loss. We are going to keep working.”

Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, launched on October 7, 2023, has left an unparalleled toll on the enclave. With more than 46, 700 Palestinians dead, including 18, 000 children, and nearly 1.9 million people displaced, there is little left untouched. More than half of Gaza’s buildings have been damaged or destroyed, including critical infrastructure: 92 percent of primary roads and 84 percent of health facilities have been compromised.

Abu Suleiman dismissed Trump’s relocation comments, saying he “doesn’t understand history or reality”.

According to Abu Suleiman, “people who have endured 15 months of relentless bombardment and refused to leave will never consent to forced relocation.”

For many Palestinians, the prospect of leaving their homeland is not just unthinkable, it is a betrayal of their history and identity.

“Yes, we have endured unimaginable suffering, the destruction of everything we own, and the trauma of genocide”, said Abu Suleiman. “But none of this can push anyone to accept displacement. Our memories of the Nakba in 1948 remain vivid. Those who left then never returned, and we will not let history repeat itself”.

The Nakba, or “catastrophe”, the event that Abu Suleiman referred to, was the forced displacement of at least 750, 000 Palestinians from their homes in 1948 upon the formation of Israel on 78 percent of historical Palestine.

That memory has stayed for many Palestinians, and often shapes their actions today.

People have overwhelmingly chosen to stay in Gaza, even as death seemed closer than life, according to Abu Suleiman, who noted that opportunities existed for leaving both before and after the war.

“We see ourselves as part of the resistance, as defenders of Palestine. Giving in or leaving would require paying a price, he claimed. Even if it means surviving in the ruins, “this heavy burden only strengthens our resolve to hold on to our land.”

Israa Mansour, a 35-year-old mother of four living in a makeshift tent after her home was destroyed in Khan Younis, backed Abu Suleiman’s argument.

“We refuse to leave, not because we lack options, but because this is our home”, she said. Even my children understand the value of surviving the suffering in our land.

Israa argued, however, that Palestinian leaders must step up to provide minimum support, including education, healthcare, and emergency aid, to help people withstand the unbearable conditions.

If we don’t have the basic necessities for life, how can we fight displacement? Is it reasonable to expect Gaza to endure this heinous abomination indefinitely while enlisting its citizens in its resilience? Israa said. “Without food, shelter, and basic needs, even the strongest families might be forced to consider alternatives, not out of a lack of patriotism, but out of sheer desperation”.

This is our home, according to the statement.

Palestinian political analyst Hani al-Aqqad points to the refusal of Palestinians to renounce their land as a significant factor in why he thinks Trump’s proposed relocation plan will fail.

Because they view this conflict as their own, he said, “every previous attempt to relocate Palestinians failed.” The ultimate expression of staying power is when families camp out in the open for days only to return to the ruins of their northern towns.

Al-Aqqad sent a message to both Israel and international proponents of relocation by pointing to the widespread return of displaced Palestinians to northern Gaza despite the region’s complete destruction and lack of services.

“Trump and others fail to understand the Palestinians”, he said. It’s about having a strong, unwavering bond with their homeland, which is deeply rooted in history and identity, not just about living on land.

“The return to the north, knowing what awaits, is a clear rejection of forced relocation”, al-Aqqad said. “Those who support these schemes must accept that Palestinians will never leave their land,” reiterates the statement. Instead, they should focus on recognising their rights and supporting a pathway to statehood”.

He also dismissed the idea of “voluntary displacement” through deliberate deprivation.

“Israel has succeeded in making Gaza nearly unlivable”, he said. They haven’t, however, managed to eject Palestinians from their land. Palestinians in Gaza have repeatedly demonstrated their ability to bring back even the most ravaged areas, knowing that the struggle is not just about survival but also about a national mission.

The United States has a lot of influence over how global health programs and policies are headed, and for decades so. According to health policy experts, President Donald Trump issued three executive orders on his first day in office, which might signal the end of the era.

The US will likely not be present when the WHO executive board convenes next in February due to Trump’s order to withdraw from the organization. The WHO is shaped by its members: 194 countries that set health priorities and make agreements about how to share critical data, treatments, and vaccines during international emergencies. With the US missing, it would cede power to others.

Kenneth Bernard, a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and top biodefence official under the George W. Bush administration, said, “Withdrawing from the WHO leaves a gap in global health leadership that will be filled by China.” “]This] is clearly not in America’s best interests”.

The executive orders to end their cooperation with the WHO and to review how US policy toward international aid is interpreted refer to the WHO’s “mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic” and claim that US aid is intended to “destabilize world peace”. In action, they echo priorities established in Project 2025’s “Mandate for Leadership”, a conservative policy blueprint from the Heritage Foundation.

The 922-page report says the US “must be prepared” to withdraw from the WHO, citing its “manifest failure”, and advises an overhaul to international aid at the Department of State.

According to the Biden Administration, “the Biden Administration has deformed the organization by using it as a global platform to pursue a divisive political and cultural agenda that promotes interventions against perceived systemic racism,” it states.

The US may step back as one of the world’s largest healthcare funders, especially in low-income nations, because it funds both international and domestic initiatives like the WHO and the US Agency for International Development (USAID).

The Council on Foreign Relations’ director of global health, Tom Bollyky, said, “This not only makes Americans less safe, but it also makes the citizens of other countries less safe.”

He continued, citing policies that restrict travel to nations with outbreaks of disease as “the US cannot wall itself off from transnational health threats.” The majority of the evidence in favor of travel bans suggests that they detract from domestic safety efforts and create a false sense of security.

Less than 0.1 percent of US GDP

Technically, countries cannot withdraw from the WHO until a year after official notice. However, Trump’s executive order mentions his 2020 termination notice. If Congress or the public&nbsp, pushes back, the administration can argue that more than a year has elapsed.

Trump’s plan to suspend funding for the WHO in 2020 is unconstitutional. US contributions to the agency hit a low of $163m during that first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, falling behind Germany and the Gates Foundation. Former US President Joe Biden reinstated payments and membership. In 2023, the country gave the WHO $481m.

As for 2024, Suerie Moon, a co-director of the global health centre at the Geneva Graduate Institute, said the Biden administration paid biennium dues for 2024-25 early, which will cover some of this year’s payments.

The executive order specifically mentions “unfairly onerous payments” as justification for the WHO withdrawal. As the richest nation in the world, the US has typically received more money than other nations because its dues are a percentage of their gross domestic product (GDP).

About 4% of US federal expenditures are made up of the WHO’s funds annually, or about 4% of the country’s overall budget for global health. The WHO’s budget, which is about a third of the $3.4 billion that the CDC, which received $ 9.3 billion in core funding in 2023, accounts for.

The WHO funds support programmes to prevent and treat polio, tuberculosis, HIV, malaria, measles and other diseases, especially in countries that struggle to provide healthcare domestically. Additionally, it responds to health emergencies in conflict-stricken areas, including those in areas like Gaza, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, among others.

The WHO sounded its most alarming alarm, a public health emergency of global concern, in January 2020. It regularly updated the public and gave countries advice on how to protect citizens over the course of two years as well as screening diagnostic tests and potential COVID drugs.

Experts have cited agency errors, but numerous analyses have revealed that internal issues contribute to the US having one of the highest COVID deaths worldwide.

On January 30, Bollyky stated, “Every country received the WHO’s notification of a public health emergency of international concern.” “South Korea, Taiwan, and others responded aggressively to that – the US did not”.

‘ It’s a red herring ‘

Nonetheless, Trump’s executive order accuses the WHO of “mishandling” the pandemic and failing “to adopt urgently needed reforms”. Some changes have been made by the WHO through bureaucratic procedures involving contributions from the participating nations. Last year, for example, the organisation passed several amendments to its regulations on health emergencies. These include guidelines for coordinated funding and transparent reporting.

“If the Trump administration tried to push for particular reforms for a year and then they were frustrated, I might find the reform line credible”, Moon, from the Geneva Graduate Institute, said. “But to me, it’s a red herring”.

“I don’t buy the explanations”, Stanford University’s Bernard said. “This is not an issue of money”, he added. There is no reason to leave the WHO, not even considering our issues with China.

Trump has alleged that the WHO is “inappropriate political influence” by referring to China’s failure to openly investigate COVID’s origin in the executive order.

In a video posted to social media in 2023, Trump claimed that “the World Health Organization shamelessly covered the Chinese Communist Party’s tracks every step of the way.”

On multiple occasions, the WHO has called for transparency from China. The agency does not have the legal authority to force China, or any other country, to do what it says. Trump’s assertions that a WHO-pending pandemic treaty would violate US sovereignty are also discredited by this fact. Instead, the agreement aims to outline how nations can cooperate more effectively during the upcoming pandemic.

Trump’s executive order calls for the US to “cease negotiations” on the pandemic agreement. As discussions progress, the pharmaceutical industry may lose one of its steadfast supporters.

The US and the European Union have sided with lobbying from the pharmaceutical sector to uphold strict patent laws for medications and vaccines in the negotiations so far. They have objected to efforts by middle-class nations in Latin America, Asia, and Africa to enact licensing agreements that would enable more businesses to produce medicines and vaccines when supplies are constrained. If COVID vaccines had been available in every country in the world by 2021, according to a study in the Nature Medicine journal, more than one million lives might have been saved.

“Once the US is absent – for better and for worse – there will be less pressure on certain positions”, Moon said. “In the pandemic agreement negotiations, we may see weakening opposition towards more public-health-oriented approaches to intellectual property”.

“This is a moment of geopolitical shift because the US is making itself less relevant”, said Ayoade Alakija, chair of the Africa Union’s Vaccine Delivery Alliance.

Alakija suggested that emerging Asian and African nations with emerging economies could now invest more money in the WHO, alter their policies, and set goals that the US and European countries that are battling the Ukraine war had previously opposed. “Power is shifting hands”, Alakija said. In the long run, that might lead to a more just and equitable world.

Echoes of Project 2025

In the near term, however, the WHO is unlikely to recoup its losses entirely, Moon said. About 15% of the US government’s budget is typically made up of funds. A lack of funds may prevent many people from receiving life-saving treatments for HIV, malaria, and other diseases, in addition to Trump’s executive order that temporarily suspends international aid for 90 days.

The WHO’s scientific collaboration, which takes place at about 70 locations across US institutions like Columbia University and Johns Hopkins University, is another loss. Through these networks, scientists share findings despite political feuds between countries.

The secretary of state is required to “assure the department’s programs are in line with an America First foreign policy” by a third executive order. It follows the executive order to suspend international aid while checking whether it complies with American foreign policy. According to that order, US aid has been used to “destabilize world peace by promoting ideas in foreign countries that are directly opposed to harmonious and stable relations.”

These and the climate policies’ executive orders are in line with Project 2025’s policy goals. Although Trump and his new administration have distanced themselves from the Heritage Foundation playbook, CBS News discovered that at least 28 of Project 2025’s principal authors had jobs under Trump’s first administration.

Russell Vought, who previously served as the Office of Management and Budget director during Trump’s first term and has received a number of nominations for the project, was one of Project 2025’s principal architects. The America First Legal Foundation, a group led by Trump adviser Stephen Miller, has contributed to Project 2025 in part because it has received complaints from “woke corporations.”

Project 2025 recommends reducing international aid for programs and organizations that are focused on addressing issues like climate change and reproductive healthcare, as well as deregulating businesses and lowering taxes as a means of achieving economic stability.

According to some experts, the executive orders appear to focus more on ideological issues than strategic positioning.