The 47th U.S. President, Donald Trump, began signing executive orders in bulk immediately after his inauguration on January 20. His decisions often impact not only domestic policy but also the interests of other countries.
For example, the news about the deportation of illegal migrants—who are being sent out of the U.S. on military planes—quickly gained traction. Trump then froze financial aid to foreign states for at least 90 days.
Trump signed the order to suspend foreign aid on his very first day in office. The president explained that the “industry” of foreign assistance does not align with the country’s interests and, in many cases, contradicts American values.
However, the new U.S. Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, is unlikely to meet the given deadlines and may request an extension of the moratorium, Fergana news agency reports, noting that according to UN data, in 2024, the U.S. accounted for 42% of all humanitarian aid worldwide—a massive sum and investment.
Yet, as is often the case, every rule has exceptions. A few days after Trump reaffirmed his decision to suspend foreign aid, the State Department outlined specific areas and projects that would be exempt from the freeze. Specifically, programs aimed at saving lives will continue. Washington will not cut funding for the supply of essential medicines, medical services, and food to partner countries. Additionally, military aid to Israel and Egypt remains unaffected.
NGOs in Central Asian countries are sounding the alarm. Many of them operate solely on donor funding and could cease to exist. They are pressuring Trump by highlighting the potential consequences: if social programs are frozen, elderly people without pensions may be left without food, and children from low-income families may lose access to education.
It is already clear that the suspension of aid will also impact Americans. Some organizations, including those running overseas projects with federal funding, are laying off employees or putting them on extended unpaid leave. This could significantly increase unemployment in the U.S.
U.S. aid to Central Asia
The U.S. is a major global donor. In the 2023 fiscal year, the country allocated $72 billion for foreign aid, with 90% of that amount distributed through the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
Although USAID operates as an independent agency, it is fully controlled by the government, and its director is appointed directly by the president.
For now, Secretary of State Marco Rubio will temporarily serve as the acting director of USAID. He has stated that while the agency will not be shut down, it will undergo a major reorganization. The process of reviewing foreign aid has already begun.
Experts believe that while the overall impact on Central Asia may not be catastrophic, the region risks losing tens of millions of dollars in annual funding from the U.S.
Looking at USAID's financial reports, here’s how much money was allocated to Central Asian countries last year: Tajikistan – US$58.5 million; Kyrgyzstan – US$45.8 million; Uzbekistan – US$39.5 million; Kazakhstan – around US$15.3 million; and Turkmenistan – US$2.8 million.
In the regional ranking of 13 South and Central Asian countries receiving U.S. aid, these former Soviet republics rank between seventh and eleventh place.
An analysis of the data shows that compared to the 2023 fiscal year, funding has decreased for all countries. Kazakhstan was hit the hardest, with aid cut by more than half. Tajikistan, the top recipient in this mini-ranking, saw a reduction of $30 million.
USAID-funded programs in Central Asia generally share common themes across all five countries. Key areas of support include healthcare, governance and civil society, agriculture, education, and HIV/AIDS prevention.
Expert opinions on the impact
Temur Umarov, an expert on Central Asia, believes that there won’t be major structural changes in the region’s relationship with the U.S.: "American foreign policy has significantly shifted since the U.S. ended its military campaign in Afghanistan. After that, Washington no longer had the same incentives to maintain a strong presence in Central Asia as it did in the 2000s and 2010s," Umarov told Fergana.
"Now, relations are primarily managed through the State Department, various organizations, or individual senators interested in the region, rather than at the White House level. Trump and his administration are focused on other priorities: relations with China, Ukraine, the situation involving Israel and Palestine, Yemen, Canada-Mexico relations, maritime trade routes, and more.”
The analyst argues that, on a global scale, the financial aid flowing into Central Asia through USAID has never been significant. Therefore, even if the agency ceases operations, it won’t have a dramatic impact on the region’s economies.
Umarov predicted that Trump’s decision to freeze foreign aid would have the greatest impact on Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. In terms of NGOs, Kazakhstan would be the most affected, as it has a well-developed civil society sector.
“Regarding Uzbekistan, the country has received more U.S. funding since 2018, and a USAID office was established there. However, the projects implemented through this partnership are not crucial to Uzbekistan’s economy,” he concluded.
Umarov also noted that the reduction of U.S. financial flows into Central Asia began well before Trump’s second term. By 2025, donor diversification had already taken place—European organizations and Chinese projects increased their presence. Russia is also active in the region, though its focus is narrower, primarily revolving around Russian-language education and cultural programs.
"When it comes to investments, Central Asia relies more on international financial institutions such as the World Bank, China’s Exim Bank, and the Asian Development Bank. However, Kazakhstan might face some challenges due to its reliance on major U.S. investors. In the rest of the region, economic disruptions are unlikely. U.S.-Central Asia cooperation had already been declining in recent years," he added.
Finally, Umarov believes that the C5+1 format (five Central Asian countries plus the U.S.) will remain unchanged:
