The cost of America’s retreat, what a USAID shutdown would mean for Ghana

USAID’s contributions to Ghana can be seen in several key areas. One of its most visible successes is in agriculture and food security.
Through its Feed the Future initiative, USAID has supported smallholder farmers, especially in northern Ghana, where poverty and malnutrition are prevalent.
The programme has increased food production, improved market access, and built resilience among farmers.
Without this support, many will struggle to sustain their livelihoods.
Beyond agriculture, USAID has been instrumental in strengthening Ghana’s democracy, human rights, and governance.

It has played a critical role in ensuring free and fair elections, improving local governance, and enhancing accountability in public institutions.
Through the Accountable Democratic Institutions and Systems Strengthening (ADISS) programme, it has helped fight corruption and increase government transparency.
A USAID withdrawal would disrupt these efforts, threatening democratic integrity and public trust.
The agency has also supported Ghana’s economic growth by reducing dependence on raw exports like cocoa and oil.
It’s West Africa Trade and Investment Hub has helped Ghanaian businesses access global markets, boosting trade and job creation.
USAID-funded projects have provided employment for thousands of Ghanaians—both directly and indirectly—through local NGOs, contractors, and businesses.
If these initiatives are discontinued, the ripple effect on employment and economic stability will be significant.
Education has also been a major beneficiary of USAID funding. The Ghana Partnership for Education Project has aimed to improve reading skills among primary school students, reaching millions of children.
Through programs like Learning!, USAID has supplied educational materials, trained teachers, and improved curricula.
If these programmes end, rural schools, which are already struggling with limited resources, will suffer the most, deepening the gap between urban and rural education standards.

The domino effect—A looming socioeconomic crisis
If USAID’s funding is cut, Ghana will feel the consequences immediately.
One of the biggest risks is a public health crisis. USAID has been a lifeline in fighting malaria, improving maternal health, and funding life-saving vaccines.
The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which operates largely through USAID, provides antiretroviral treatment to thousands of Ghanaians living with HIV/AIDS.
If these funds disappear, countless people could lose access to essential healthcare, reversing years of progress in disease control.
Beyond health, Ghana’s economy could take a serious hit. Thousands of jobs, especially in agriculture and trade, are sustained by USAID projects.
Without this financial and technical support, farmers and businesses may struggle to compete globally, potentially leading to food shortages and economic instability.
Education will also be affected. With teacher training programmes and literacy projects at risk, declining literacy rates could impact long-term economic mobility and national development.

Who fills the void? The geopolitical shift
If the U.S. reduces its development assistance, other global powers will inevitably step in, reshaping Ghana’s diplomatic and economic landscape.
China, already a dominant force in Africa, may expand its influence through its Belt and Road Initiative.
However, China’s focus on infrastructure rather than governance, health, or education raises concerns about debt dependency and long-term sustainability.
Russia, meanwhile, has been strengthening its presence in Africa, particularly in the Sahel, through military and resource deals.
A weakened U.S. footprint could give Moscow greater influence, a shift that critics warn might weaken democratic values in the region.
The European Union, another major donor, may attempt to bridge the gap.
However, while the EU has funded development projects, it lacks the scale and strategic influence of U.S. aid.
Without USAID’s involvement, European support alone may not be enough to sustain key initiatives. For Ghana, these changes could reduce diplomatic leverage.
The U.S. has been a strong advocate for democratic governance and human rights, areas where China and Russia take a more hands-off approach.
If U.S. engagement declines, Ghana’s foreign policy dynamics could shift in unpredictable ways, altering its longstanding alliances.

A costly mistake for the U.S.
The push to dismantle USAID is framed as an “America First” strategy, but in reality, it is an act of self-sabotage.
Foreign aid represents less than 1% of the U.S. federal budget, yet it yields enormous strategic benefits.
Weakening USAID does not just harm recipient countries like Ghana; it also undermines America’s global influence.
Former U.S. officials have warned that shutting down USAID would be a colossal mistake.
Senator Chris Murphy (D – Connecticut) recently pointed out that a president cannot unilaterally eliminate a federal agency without congressional approval.
However, even the uncertainty surrounding USAID’s future is already causing damage.

Ghana’s path forward—Lessons for the Future
While Ghana has benefited significantly from donor assistance, this moment should serve as a wake-up call.
As I often emphasize in my lectures, no country can build a sustainable future by relying solely on foreign aid.
Ghana must take proactive steps to secure its progress and reduce its dependence on external support.
One critical step is increasing domestic resource mobilisation.
The government must strengthen tax collection, close loopholes, and reduce revenue losses to ensure that essential programmes such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure are funded from within.
Additionally, public-private partnerships (PPPs) must be expanded.
Encouraging businesses to invest in key sectors like healthcare and education will ease the burden on government spending. When the private sector is engaged, development becomes more sustainable.
Beyond this, Ghana must diversify its development partnerships. While the U.S. has been a key ally, it is essential to engage strategically with other players like the European Union, the African Development Bank, and emerging global economies.
This will ensure continued support while reducing dependency on any single donor.

Conclusion—The cost of abandonment

Ghana, and Africa as a whole, is at a crossroads.
The continent is undergoing rapid transformation, yet challenges remain.
USAID has been a key partner in addressing these challenges, but its potential withdrawal could derail progress.
For the United States, dismantling USAID would be a tragic miscalculation.
It would signal to the world that America is retreating from its global leadership role, ceding ground to rising powers.
The price of that decision would not only be measured in lost influence but in lost lives.
Development aid is not an act of charity; it is a strategic investment in stability, economic growth, and a brighter future for Ghana and other beneficiary nations.
If USAID is truly at risk of being shut down, Ghana must take urgent steps to become more self-reliant, while the United States must carefully consider the long-term consequences of withdrawing its support.

The writer is an award-winning senior media executive, educator, and leadership consultant. He holds master’s degrees in Business Administration, Communication Studies, Education, and African Studies and specialises in media innovation, organisational strategy, and fostering leadership excellence across diverse sectors.