Aid politics and national interest
A row over the US cancelling $21 million for voter turnout in India raises concerns about foreign interference and transparency in aid funding.
A row has broken out over the US Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) tweet that it has cancelled funding of “$21 million for (improving) voter turnout in India”. Senior government functionaries and BJP leaders have waded into the controversy by demanding to know who got these funds, disbursed under the aegis of USAID, the American donor agency now in the crosswires of the Trump administration, and what was it deployed for. The BJP IT cell head described it as “external interference in India’s electoral process”.
The India project, reportedly, was among several such initiatives supported by the Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening (CEPPS), an NGO funded by USAID. DOGE said it cancelled CEPPS’s funding worth $486 million for projects across the world — among them, $29 million for “strengthening the political landscape in Bangladesh”, $20 million for “fiscal federalism” in Nepal, $47 million for “improving learning outcomes in Asia”, $2.3 million for “strengthening independent voices in Cambodia”, $32 million for the Prague Civil Society Centre, $40 million for a “gender equality and women empowerment hub” in Serbia. USAID, which has an annual budget of $42.45 billion, was created by an executive order under the US Foreign Assistance Act by the John F Kennedy government to support economic and social development. In plain terms, the aim was to further American soft power and prevent the spread of Soviet Communism, mostly in the Third World, during the Cold War. In recent times, such agencies have been accused of supporting colour revolutions, including in Ukraine, against regimes deemed hostile to US interests. The Communist Left has held that US aid agencies promoted US interests — a view that has found resonance among hyper-nationalists, who suspect a foreign hand, a term popularised by Indira Gandhi in the Emergency years, working to undermine the nation-building project. For sure, the Soviet bloc had its version of aid diplomacy that encompassed fraternal parties and friendly publications.
Leaving aside the political rhetoric in this debate, issues of opacity and accountability in the access and deployment of external funds need to be addressed. Foreign aid has been a useful ally to further the development agenda. But many in the NGO sector have been found wanting when it comes to transparency standards and disclosures in their constitution and functioning, notwithstanding the stringent Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act. Meanwhile, some clarity over the aid for “improving voter turnout” will help to stop conspiracy theorists from claiming that India’s electoral democracy is compromised.