‘A Smaller Budget Means You Have Less Time to Work in the Field, Less Time for Everything’: US Foreign Aid Funding Cuts One Year Later
"In January last year, US President Donald Trump abruptly froze almost all foreign aid provided by the US Agency for International Development and the State Department, including that earmarked for independent media around the world. He then proceeded to slash more than 80% of USAID programs and to cut some $60 billion in overall development assistance. The move came as a huge shock — and a devastating blow — for many investigative news outlets, particularly in the Global South, which suddenly found themselves grappling with huge holes in their budgets. GIJN sat down with Rawan Damen, director general of Arab Reporters for Investigative Journalism(ARIJ), a nonprofit organization based in Jordan that focuses on cross-border collaboration and on empowering journalists in the Middle East, to find out how they are coping one year later. [...]
"One year ago, we lost 25% of our annual budget overnight. We worked with the US State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Projects focused, for example, on the environment, fact-checking, diversity, and gender equality. It was the first time ever in our “ecosystem” that contracts that had been signed, with the work already started, were terminated without being honored. For us, it was a big shock, but other organizations, like some Russian and Iranian exile media, lost 100% of their annual budget that day. Nobody was able to help us — or others — because it was a global funding crisis affecting civil society, human rights defenders, and independent media around the whole world. During 2025, there was a “snowball effect” with less funding coming from Europe, too, as more resources were allocated to defense amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine and souring relations between Europe and the US.
GIJN: How did these cuts aff ect your day-to-day operations?
RD: We managed not to lay people off , but many of our partners and friends had to do that immediately, they had no choice. In our case, because we are a small organization of 30 full-timers and our funding is diversified, we managed to move people from one project to another, although that meant a learning process and adapting to new jobs. But we had, of course, to cut activities and do things in a much cheaper way. This affected our production from a quantitative standpoint, we can’t deny it. Our work typically involves journalists, but also a fact checker, a lawyer, a designer, and a developer, and we had to cut on all levels. The number of investigations we can work on is reduced, but we try our best to preserve quality and do good stories. But when you have a smaller budget, it means that you have less time to work in the field, less time for everything."
"One year ago, we lost 25% of our annual budget overnight. We worked with the US State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Projects focused, for example, on the environment, fact-checking, diversity, and gender equality. It was the first time ever in our “ecosystem” that contracts that had been signed, with the work already started, were terminated without being honored. For us, it was a big shock, but other organizations, like some Russian and Iranian exile media, lost 100% of their annual budget that day. Nobody was able to help us — or others — because it was a global funding crisis affecting civil society, human rights defenders, and independent media around the whole world. During 2025, there was a “snowball effect” with less funding coming from Europe, too, as more resources were allocated to defense amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine and souring relations between Europe and the US.
GIJN: How did these cuts aff ect your day-to-day operations?
RD: We managed not to lay people off , but many of our partners and friends had to do that immediately, they had no choice. In our case, because we are a small organization of 30 full-timers and our funding is diversified, we managed to move people from one project to another, although that meant a learning process and adapting to new jobs. But we had, of course, to cut activities and do things in a much cheaper way. This affected our production from a quantitative standpoint, we can’t deny it. Our work typically involves journalists, but also a fact checker, a lawyer, a designer, and a developer, and we had to cut on all levels. The number of investigations we can work on is reduced, but we try our best to preserve quality and do good stories. But when you have a smaller budget, it means that you have less time to work in the field, less time for everything."
