The lies against USAID

By Rekpene Bassey

The recent allegations levelled against the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) by US Congressman, Scott Perry, ignited a firestorm of controversy and incredulity within diplomatic and development circles and across nations bound together in mutual cooperation.

Perry’s claims that USAID has provided funds to terrorist groups, including the Islamic State (ISIS), Al-Qaeda, and their Nigerian affiliate, Boko Haram, are not only extraordinary but deeply troubling in their potential to undermine longstanding strategic alliances and humanitarian trust.

In Nigeria, the allegations reverberated swiftly. The Nigerian Senate, exercising its oversight responsibilities seriously, summoned National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, and the heads of key intelligence agencies, including the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) and the Department of State Services (DSS), to a closed-door session.

This high-level engagement reflects the gravity with which Nigerian authorities regard the country’s safety and the integrity of its foreign partnerships.

Senator Ali Ndume, a vocal and seasoned legislator representing Borno South, sponsored the motion that triggered this parliamentary response. This region has borne the brunt of Boko Haram’s insurgency for over a decade.

Ndume’s stance underscores a vital point: Nigerians, especially in the most affected regions, deserve clarity, transparency, and, above all, truth regarding matters concerning national security and foreign engagement.

However, beyond the Nigerian legislature, Perry’s claims’ tremors have unsettled many within the US establishment itself. Even President Donald Trump has reportedly taken note of the matter, which amplifies its political visibility. But visibility does not equate to veracity.

Allegations of this nature demand more than partisan interest or populist soundbites; they require meticulous evidence, forensic scrutiny, and respect for institutional reputations.

One is compelled to ask the fundamental question: what would be the strategic rationale for the United States government, through USAID, to fund terrorist organisations, especially in Nigeria, a nation whose security and economic stability remain key to West Africa’s equilibrium?

This question alone exposes the implausibility of the accusations. Such a hypothesis defies logic and clashes head-on with the United States’ decades-long investment in counterterrorism operations and development initiatives across Africa.

Since its inception, USAID has been at the forefront of humanitarian work in Nigeria, from providing life-saving healthcare, food aid, and education to supporting democratic governance and conflict mitigation.

Over the years, USAID’s footprint has extended to rural communities ravaged by conflict, where its interventions have often been the only lifeline for displaced populations. To assert that the same agency is knowingly bankrolling terrorism is not only inconsistent, it is intellectually dishonest.

Let us be clear: development aid and humanitarian assistance are never without risk. In complex conflict zones, armed groups often control territory; assistance can be manipulated or diverted. Yet, equating unintentional diversion with deliberate sponsorship is a dangerous leap that discredits the careful work of aid workers and the rigorous auditing systems in place to prevent misuse of funds.

Moreover, the global implications of these allegations cannot be overstated. If such claims were to be accepted without scrutiny, it could erode international trust, destabilize vital partnerships, and embolden actual perpetrators of violence by weakening the institutions that hold them in check.

For Nigeria, which depends on robust international collaboration to fight insurgency and rebuild war-torn communities, such unfounded accusations risk inflaming public opinion and sowing distrust where solidarity is needed most.

One must also consider the broader consequences. Should Nigeria’s development partners be forced to operate under suspicion or harassment due to conspiracy theories, the Nigerian people, particularly the vulnerable and underserved, will bear the heaviest burden.

Essential health programmes, agricultural support, and emergency relief could be delayed or curtailed, resulting in setbacks the nation cannot afford.

When examined under the lens of diplomatic logic and operational realities, Scott Perry’s assertions appear less as revelations and more as reckless conjecture, white lies wrapped in populist rhetoric.

Legitimate concerns about misappropriation or weak oversight must be addressed through formal investigations guided by evidence and transparency, not political theatre.

Therefore, the US government must treat this controversy not with indifference but with purposeful inquiry. To restore confidence, independent audits, congressional reviews, and declassified briefings, where appropriate, should be pursued. At the same time, Nigeria must defend its strategic interests without falling prey to sensationalism or speculative narratives.

Furthermore, the public in Nigeria and the United States must be equipped with accurate information. Misinformation thrives in the absence of facts, and in a hyper-connected world, a single falsehood can undermine years of trust-building.

USAID and allied institutions must intensify efforts to communicate their activities transparently, using data and testimonials to demonstrate the tangible impact of their work.

Diplomacy demands vigilance, but it also requires fairness. Accusations against longstanding partners must meet a threshold of proof commensurate with their seriousness. Anything less undermines the global architecture of cooperation, particularly in regions where development and peace are still fragile.

It bears remembering that terrorism flourishes where institutions are weak and public trust erodes. Undermining those who work to build resilience, empower communities, and heal divisions only empowers the forces we claim to oppose.

Ultimately, this episode should serve as a cautionary tale about the perils of politicizing foreign aid. It reminds us that truth is a public good that must be defended with diligence and dignity in the age of disinformation.

Let us hope that Nigeria and the United States can rise above these white lies, reaffirm their shared values, and continue the partnership journey rooted in mutual respect, not mistrust.

*Rekpene Bassey is the president of the African Council on Narcotics (ACON) and a security and drug prevention expert.