In a move reflecting the Trump administration’s emphasis on accountability and alignment with national interests, the U.S. State Department under Secretary Marco Rubio has suspended all assistance programs benefiting Somalia’s federal government. The decision, announced in early January 2026, follows reports that Somali officials demolished a World Food Programme (WFP) warehouse containing U.S.-funded food aid—approximately 76 metric tons intended for vulnerable populations.
The State Department cited a “zero-tolerance policy for waste, theft, and diversion of life-saving assistance.” According to diplomatic sources and public statements, the warehouse—built with international support—was allegedly destroyed without prior notification to donor nations, including the United States, and its contents were seized. Somalia’s government has denied the allegations, stating that port expansion work in Mogadishu did not affect stored aid and that recovered commodities remain under WFP control. The WFP confirmed retrieval of the nutritional supplies but highlighted the incident’s impact on emergency operations amid Somalia’s severe hunger crisis, affecting millions.
This suspension is part of a broader “America First” overhaul of U.S. foreign assistance, which Secretary Rubio has described as a deliberate tool of foreign policy rather than unrestricted charity. In public remarks, including a December 2025 press briefing, Rubio emphasized:
“Foreign aid is not a separate activity of the United States government. It is an element and a tool of our foreign policy, and it should be used for the purpose of furthering national interest.
That doesn’t mean we don’t care about human rights. That doesn’t mean we don’t care about starvation. That doesn’t mean we don’t care about hunger. That does not mean we do not care about humanitarian need. What it does, however, is believe that even foreign aid—which is not charity—it is an investment of the US taxpayer. American charities are free to give their money to whoever they want, as long as it’s not a sanctioned entity. But the United States and the taxpayer money should be spent in furtherance of our foreign policy, should be spent in places and on things that further our foreign policy. Even that is not unlimited. We have a limited amount of money that we can dedicate to foreign aid, humanitarian assistance, and it has to be applied in the way that furthers national interest, which is what we’ve sought to do.
Well, and in that endeavor as well, we’ve empowered the regional bureaus or embassies to play a dramatic role. They are the implementers of this in many cases, suggesting leading responses. So bringing tools for foreign aid underneath the umbrella of our broader foreign policy has been an important and dramatic reform. Even in the midst of all that, we remain engaged around the world, including conflicts that perhaps are not central to everyday life in America, but the President has made it a priority to be a peacemaker.”
The administration has integrated foreign aid more closely under the State Department, reviewing programs to ensure they advance U.S. security, prosperity, and strategic goals. While humanitarian waivers exist for life-saving needs, the Somalia case exemplifies enforcement of conditions—aid must not be misused or diverted.
Public discourse, particularly on platforms like X, has shown strong support for this stance among many Americans, who argue for prioritizing domestic challenges like veterans’ care, family support, and border security before funding abroad without strict oversight. The incident underscores concerns that unconditional aid can sometimes enable inefficiency, corruption, or ingratitude rather than foster stability.
As global crises continue, the U.S. maintains it remains the world’s largest provider of humanitarian assistance—but now with clearer expectations: every dollar must deliver value aligned with American interests. This pragmatic shift aims to balance compassion with realism in an era of limited resources and competing priorities.
