Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Americans may have voted to dismantle government, but they must not leave their children behind

Opinion

Americans may have voted to dismantle government, but they must not leave their children behind
Pallets of food, water and supplies staged to be delivered… | Flickr

A few weeks ago, in a windowless hotel ballroom in Washington, DC, I sat in a conference room full of school administrators from around the world as they received increasingly urgent messages about the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and began processing the devastating impact on the families they serve. Their stillness and silence made their shock, worry, and grief physically palpable: In the name of saving taxpayer dollars equal to less than the cost of a dozen bombers - and now in continued defiance of a court order - the Trump administration is intent on cuts that will strand thousands of American children in foreign countries, trigger international funding crises, and surrender diplomatic influence built through a program that has helped shape hearts and minds around the globe for decades.

A conference meant to be a gathering of colleagues planning for our students' future instead became a vigil of bewildered professionals trying to decode contradictory directives cascading from administration offices. The scene underlined how quickly "government efficiency" can shatter real lives.


The implications hit like aftershocks: roughly three thousand American children will suddenly be uprooted from their schools; their parents' legal status in foreign nations will evaporate; and many of these families who have no permanent homes in the U.S. or otherwise will be left adrift. A federal judge temporarily barred the agency from putting workers on leave as planned, agreeing that the move could create “irreparable harms” to USAID families, finances, and security overseas.

As a consultant who works with international schools serving American students abroad and the adult child of a family that served USAID for two decades, I understood their bewilderment. "There is no way that people in the U.S. can imagine what this means," one head of a school in western Europe told me, requesting anonymity. "For those of us who have lived abroad and educated the children of American diplomats, it's terrifying. This isn't just about USAID - it's about America's standing in the world and what happens when we abandon our posts."

It is also about the children.

USAID, a cornerstone of American diplomacy since 1961, currently has over 2,500 Americans on assignment in 60 countries. These public servants and their families carry America's promise across borders. In 2023 alone, they helped manage $40 billion in foreign assistance, pulling children from the depths of poverty, rushing aid to communities torn apart by disaster, and building the diplomatic bridges that make America safer and stronger. Since 2009, their maternal and child health programs have saved 4.6 million children and 200,000 women, protected 6 million lives through malaria prevention, and helped rebuild communities in crisis across the globe.

The children of USAID families belong to a unique tribe: those who choose to be citizens of the world rather than a single nation. Their lives abroad create a particular kind of vulnerability - frequent moves, distance from families, exposure to political violence - one that forges deep bonds across borders and cultures. I have seen how these school communities become more than classrooms - they are islands of stability in lives marked by constant change.

The educators’ panicked questions were existential: What happens to families whose right to stay in foreign countries depends on their USAID credentials? U.S. government employees assigned overseas are granted allowances intended to pay for an education equivalent to public schools in the United States. Many of these allowances are paid directly to schools, and many of those schools have not yet been paid their full tuition fees, leaving heads of schools wondering how they will pay their contracted teachers. What do they tell a teenager whose AP exams – and college dreams – might vanish overnight? How do they comfort a child watching their parents pack up their entire world with no opportunity to say goodbye to friends and cherished adults?

This administration believes it has a mandate for change. Forty-nine percent of Americans who cast a ballot in November 2024 – only 32 percent of Americans – voted for Donald Trump, whose explicit campaign promises to dismantle America’s administrative state are being implemented with efficient ferocity. But even if we accept this administration's insistence that USAID workers must be dismissed, indeed, we can protect these employees' children, mostly American citizens, who never voted for their displacement. Unlike natural disasters or global pandemics, this storm comes with an off switch if Congress or this administration chooses to use it.

Republicans and Democrats should act in the best interest of these students by ensuring that, regardless of what form the new American order ultimately takes, USAID families can complete the current academic year in their assigned countries and plan for where they will continue their schooling. This should include extending employees’ formal assignments to ensure they retain their visas.

While the shutdown of government offices and emails makes it hard to confirm the exact dollar amount, Congress must ensure that the current academic year’s funding for international schools serving approximately 2000 USAID families is disbursed as already authorized by Congress so schools do not bear the burden of funding shortfalls.

We must all call on America’s leaders to mitigate the human fallout of this administration's determination to dismantle our nation's administrative agencies and programs. Perhaps there are ways for America to be organized that do not rely on existing systems, which many of us recognize have shortcomings. However, within a complex infrastructure, it is hard to anticipate exactly what might happen when we change one piece.

While Americans struggle to find common ground, we can agree that our children should not pay the price of hasty change. We face a moment when doing right by our youngest citizens aligns perfectly with political wisdom, ideological integrity, and moral necessity. America must care for the families and the educators who choose to serve us, whether at home or abroad.

Ulcca Joshi Hansen, PhD, JD is a futurist, the author of the award-winning book The Future of Smart, and a Paul & Daisy Soros Public Voices Fellow of The OpEd Project. Her research and writing focus on the social impact on communities during periods of rapid social change.


Read More

Pacific heights , San Francisco, CA

High view over Pacific heights and San Francisco Bay at sunset

Getty Images

Class A for Residents, Class B for Investors

Neighborhood residents should be able to build ownership without surrendering control to whoever brings the largest check. I propose a neighborhood corporation with Class A shares for residents and Class B shares for outside investors. Pacific Heights and Cow Hollow could examine the first model, then make its documents and lessons available to other neighborhoods.

The distinction must mean something. Class A would protect resident governance. Class B would let outside capital participate on disclosed economic terms. The corporation would own assets it voluntarily acquires and operate agreed services. It would govern those assets and contracts; government authority over zoning, taxes and public streets would remain subject to public law.

Keep ReadingShow less
​A demonstrator holds a sign

A demonstrator holds a sign in front of the Federal Courthouse in Detroit, Michigan.

(Photo by Bill Pugliano/Getty Images)

Beyond Airstrikes: Why America Must Rethink Its Counterterrorism Strategy in Nigeria

When American forces carried out airstrikes against suspected Islamic State militants in northwest Nigeria on Christmas Day 2025, the operation offered a glimpse of renewed security cooperation between Washington and Abuja. But for Nigerians living in communities threatened by terrorism, kidnapping and armed attacks, a more pressing question remained: Would the strikes make their lives any safer?

That question deserves attention in Washington. The United States has spent decades helping Nigeria combat terrorism through military equipment, intelligence sharing and training. Yet armed violence continues to disrupt everyday life across northern Nigeria, raising doubts about how the success of American counterterrorism assistance should be measured.

Keep ReadingShow less
Victorian style houses at Alamo Square in San Francisco, CA

Colourful vibrant Victorian style houses at Alamo Square in San Francisco, California, USA

Getty Images

Fund the Community DataBank

San Francisco residents need an organization that can follow public money and decisions before the damage is done. I propose a Community DataBank, beginning with Pacific Heights and Cow Hollow, supported by a modest, publicly approved allocation of our taxes. Residents should be able to find out what government is doing without requiring everyone to research City Hall.

My earlier proposal placed two desks outside the Mayor’s Office, staffed by neighborhood association members who would watch who goes in and out and follow the public business behind those visits. The DataBank would give those desks useful work and reliable records. A visitor’s presence would prompt a question; official documents would establish what actually happened.

Keep ReadingShow less
US America and China flags on chess king on a chessboard.

USA and China trade relations, cooperation strategy. US America and China flags on chess king on a chessboard.

Getty Images

America’s Gridlock Is Beijing’s Best Argument

Americans tend to treat democracy’s superiority as settled, and the long-run evidence backs them up. A major study by MIT economist Daron Acemoglu and colleagues found that countries that democratize end up about 20 percent richer per person within a generation. But most of the world does not grade governments on long-run studies. For billions of people outside the wealthy West, the test is simpler: does the power stay on, are food prices steady, is there work, and do the roads get built? When the stomach is empty, a ballot can feel like a luxury.

China understands this and sells its model on exactly those terms. Its GDP per capita has climbed from about $300 in 1980 to nearly $15,000 today, by IMF figures, and the World Bank credits it with lifting some 800 million people out of extreme poverty. India, the world’s largest democracy, started from a similar place and sits near $2,800. Beijing’s centralized system, paired with Deng Xiaoping’s market reforms, built power plants, factories and rail lines at a pace India’s more deliberative politics has not matched. Anyone who values liberty will find little to admire in that model. It does explain why the model sells.

Keep ReadingShow less