Foreign Engagement That Puts America First

kepticism is growing about foreign aid across the political spectrum. That’s fair. For too long, foreign assistance has been bloated, unfocused, and misaligned with U.S. priorities. But if the federal government wants to bolster national security and long-term prosperity, it needs smart engagement abroad, not wholesale retrenchment.

The first Trump administration understood this. It prioritized accountability, performance, and results in foreign aid. It pushed for foreign assistance policies that served the American people, not international institutions. That effort should continue in the President’s second administration. But we need to move past the idea that all foreign assistance is bad and instead ask: Which programs make America safer, stronger, and more competitive?

Done correctly, foreign engagement isn’t charity, it’s a cost-effective way to strengthen U.S. national security.

Let’s take a few examples. PEPFAR, the U.S. government’s flagship global HIV/AIDS program, has saved more than 25 million lives. It has also helped stabilize governments, reduce refugee flows, and prevent the kind of health crises that too often leap across borders. The same goes for U.S. investments in anti-malaria programs, global disease surveillance, and emergency food aid to feed starving children in Africa and in war-torn regions around the world. These are forward-looking national security tools.