The Trump administration is advancing a proposal that would reduce the United States’ diplomatic and international development spending by nearly half, including the near-total cessation of contributions to NATO, the United Nations, and other multilateral organisations.
An internal memo, circulated within the State Department and obtained by The Washington Post, outlines the proposed reductions as part of the White House’s preparations for its 2026 federal budget submission.
According to the document, the total budget for the State Department and the now-absorbed U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) would be set at $28.4 billion. This figure represents a 48 percent reduction compared with the budget authorised by Congress for the 2025 fiscal year. The proposal is subject to further internal review and ultimately requires congressional approval.
The largest cuts would affect funding for international organisations, with a proposed reduction of approximately 90 percent. The memo states that U.S. funding for the United Nations, NATO, and 20 other international bodies would be terminated. Only selective contributions would remain, notably to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO).
Humanitarian assistance and global health programmes would also face significant reductions of 54 percent and 55 percent respectively. The proposed budget would entirely withdraw U.S. financial support for international peacekeeping operations, citing “recent mission failures” as justification, though it offers no further detail.
The memo also sets out a package of internal restructuring measures for the State Department. These include a hiring and pay freeze, consolidation of roles, reduced travel budgets, and the termination of various staff benefits. In addition, the proposal calls for the closure of the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations, along with the cancellation of all educational and cultural programmes run by the department, including the Fulbright Programme. Established in 1946, the Fulbright Programme has played a prominent role in international academic exchanges and counts more than 40 current and former heads of state among its alumni.
The memo is dated 10 April and signed by Douglas Pitkin, Director of Budget and Planning at the State Department, and Peter Marocco, who has since left his post as Director of Foreign Assistance. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has until Tuesday to submit his formal response and recommendations. The White House intends to present the final budget proposal to Congress by the end of April.
This initiative follows earlier moves by the Trump administration to restructure the federal government and reduce international commitments. USAID, previously an independent agency, is now considered by the administration to be fully integrated into the State Department. President Trump’s broader agenda includes the downsizing of U.S. foreign operations and a re-evaluation of multilateral alliances, as part of his “America First” foreign policy doctrine.
A new $2.1 billion programme, titled the “America First Opportunities Fund” (A1OF), is proposed in the draft budget to support selected foreign policy initiatives aligned with administration priorities. These funds could be allocated flexibly, including to international organisations, depending on strategic considerations.
Despite Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress, the proposal is likely to face significant opposition. Senator Chris Van Hollen, the ranking Democrat on the Senate subcommittee responsible for State Department and USAID oversight, criticised the plan as “unserious” and predicted bipartisan resistance.
The American Foreign Service Association has also expressed strong concern, warning that the cuts would undermine U.S. diplomatic capability and cede influence to strategic competitors such as China and Russia. Meanwhile, former senior officials and foreign policy analysts have cautioned that withdrawal from international peacekeeping and multilateral engagement could diminish U.S. global standing.
Richard Gowan, UN Director at the International Crisis Group, noted that zeroing out funding for UN peacekeeping operations would likely provoke strong reactions from countries such as India, which have traditionally played a major role in peacekeeping missions. Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Julianne Smith warned that withdrawing financial support from NATO could have a destabilising effect on alliance cohesion, potentially prompting other member states to reduce their own contributions.
Though the administration has preserved funding for certain high-profile programmes—such as $5.1 billion in military aid for Israel and Egypt, and $2.9 billion for the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR)—the broader strategy indicates a substantial retrenchment from the post-war U.S. role in global governance and development.
Read also:
Trump’s “Falsehoods” on Ukraine and NATO: A Critical Examination
