According to The Washington Post, the Trump administration’s America First strategy has trickled down to what’s left of the government’s humanitarian apparatus, potentially leading to millions of deaths by 2030. At a time when more delicate approaches to the world’s ‘middle powers’ are required, opinion polls have shown tanking public approval of the United States in many countries around the world.

Instead of being directed at where they can save the most lives, U.S. humanitarian efforts now seem to be aimed primarily at where they can advance the Trump administration’s other priorities, according to The Atlantic. This radical shift in the approach to foreign aid seems to be less grounded in past bipartisan narratives of humanitarianism or charity, and more focused on strategic engagement to advance the current administration’s goals.

A new Lancet study examines how the dismantling of international aid by the U.S. and other countries could undo decades of health gains, projecting up to 9.4 million extra deaths by 2030 if current conditions persist. This projection provides an early picture of how funding reductions could undo decades of health gains, leading to upsurges in HIV/AIDS, malaria and hunger across the developing world, according to The Washington Post.

The Guardian reports that a year after the Trump administration’s cuts to U.S. aid, Australian charities and development programs in the Pacific have struggled to fill the resulting gaps in funding for education, health, and food security, with some groups describing impacts that have led to preventable hardship and deaths.

Recent U.S. foreign policy shifts toward isolationism labeled “America Alone” conflict with broad public opinion showing Americans generally support multilateral engagement, alliances, and advocating for human rights and democracy abroad, according to Just Security.

The Trump administration announced a significant expansion of the Mexico City Policy, barring U.S. foreign aid to those it says support “gender ideology” and diversity, equity and inclusion. Supporters praise the move as protecting U.S. taxpayer dollars from funding abortion internationally, while critics warn the restrictions undermine care for women and marginalized populations, according to NPR.

The Independent reports that changes to U.S. foreign assistance under the Trump administration have coincided with interruptions in health, contraception, and disease control services in several African countries. With the scale of support significantly reduced, the shape of American foreign assistance and its effect on the world going forward looks very different one year on.

In the wake of the USAID closure, philanthropies are trying to fill some of the gap. NPR follows how one organization is trying to do the most good in the face of major cuts to U.S. foreign assistance.

Sharp cuts to U.S. foreign aid for the World Food Programme have left refugees at the Kakuma camp in Kenya severely malnourished, with pregnant women facing life-threatening complications, reports ProPublica. Many families must choose between returning to starvation outside the hospital or staying indefinitely to access basic meals.

With USAID programs gutted, conservative groups are advancing new aid frameworks that sideline sexual and reproductive health. Advocates warn this shift could deepen contraceptive shortages and raise the risk of unsafe abortions, The Guardian reports.

ProPublica investigates impacts after the Trump administration cut off food from the third-largest refugee camp in the world. Thousands of families faced impossible choices as their children starved. Here, the authors follow the story of Rose Natabo, who works tirelessly to keep her children alive even amid deep food insecurity caused by the cuts.

Reductions to humanitarian aid in Rohingya refugee camps have stripped away protection services, leaving children more vulnerable to trafficking, forced labor, and early marriage, reports the AP.

Bill Gates tells Politico that projected increases in child mortality are closely tied to recent foreign aid cuts by the U.S. and other wealthy countries, following decades of steady progress. While the Trump administration disputes the link, Gates argues the scale and speed of the cuts have had deadly consequences.

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace reports that the abrupt reduction in U.S. humanitarian aid has left major gaps in global emergency response systems and strained the ability of the United Nations and partner organizations to meet rising humanitarian needs. The funding shock presents both a crisis and a potential inflection point for reforming the international humanitarian system.

The analysis concludes that the shutdown weakened coordination structures, reduced partner capacity, and led to significant staff losses. Researchers argue that humanitarian systems cannot be paused without lasting damage—and that rebuilding them requires more resources than maintaining them.