People will starve' because of US aid cut to Sudan

Not a valid attachment ID.
In early 2025, the United States government, under President Donald Trump, initiated a 90-day freeze on foreign aid, effectively suspending over $40 billion in assistance managed by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). This abrupt policy shift has precipitated a severe humanitarian crisis in Sudan, a nation already grappling with internal conflict and widespread food insecurity.

**Immediate Impact on Humanitarian Operations**

The suspension of USAID funding has led to the closure of numerous food programs that were vital lifelines for millions of Sudanese. Hundreds of community-run kitchens, especially in conflict zones where international organizations face operational challenges, have ceased operations. In the capital city, Khartoum, reports indicate that two-thirds of emergency kitchens have shut down within a single week, exacerbating the hunger crisis. The disruption of these services has left countless individuals without reliable access to food, intensifying the risk of famine in several regions.

Moreover, approximately 500,000 metric tons of food aid, valued at $340 million, remain in limbo—either in transit or stored—awaiting authorization for distribution. This bureaucratic paralysis has stalled critical relief efforts, leaving vulnerable populations without essential sustenance. The halt in aid has also disrupted medical programs, leading to shortages of essential medicines and the suspension of health services, further endangering lives.

**Broader Humanitarian Consequences**

The cessation of U.S. aid has had a ripple effect, undermining the operations of various humanitarian organizations that relied on USAID funding to sustain their programs. The dismantling of USAID's infrastructure has not only halted current projects but has also compromised the agency's ability to oversee and manage unspent aid funds, raising concerns about the potential misuse of resources and the long-term viability of aid-dependent programs.

In Sudan, the freeze has critically impacted the Emergency Response Rooms (ERRs), civilian-led groups that provide food and other humanitarian assistance amidst the ongoing civil war. With famine already confirmed or anticipated in multiple regions, the suspension of support to these grassroots organizations has left hundreds of thousands without aid, exacerbating the humanitarian emergency.

**Policy Justifications and Criticisms**

The Trump administration has defended the aid freeze as a necessary measure to reassess and realign U.S. foreign assistance with national interests, emphasizing an "America First" approach. However, critics argue that the indiscriminate suspension of aid, particularly in crisis-stricken areas like Sudan, neglects the moral and strategic imperatives of humanitarian assistance. The reduction in aid not only threatens lives but also risks destabilizing regions, potentially leading to broader security concerns that could ultimately affect global stability.

**International and Domestic Responses**

The international community and domestic stakeholders have expressed profound concern over the aid suspension. Humanitarian organizations warn of catastrophic outcomes if aid is not promptly restored, highlighting that the most vulnerable populations bear the brunt of such policy decisions. Legal challenges have emerged, with opponents seeking to overturn the freeze on the grounds that it contravenes established humanitarian commitments and endangers lives.

In response to mounting pressure, the administration has granted limited exemptions, releasing $5.3 billion primarily for security and counternarcotics programs. However, these exemptions offer minimal relief for humanitarian initiatives, as the majority of the funds are allocated to military aid, leaving critical food and health programs severely underfunded.



The U.S. aid freeze has precipitated a dire humanitarian crisis in Sudan, with the abrupt withdrawal of support leading to widespread hunger and the collapse of essential services. As the situation deteriorates, there is an urgent need for a reassessment of aid policies to balance national interests with humanitarian obligations. The restoration of aid is imperative to prevent further loss of life and to uphold the United States' longstanding commitment to global humanitarian leadership.

[attachment deleted by admin]