The fragility of trust: How the termination of US foreign aid undermines humanitarian efforts in Zimbabwe

 

 

In the heart of Buhera, a district in Zimbabwe’s Manicaland Province, lies the Johanne Marange community, a predominantly ‘White Garment’ African Independent Church in Zimbabwe, known for its healing ministry and blending local traditions with Christianity. For years, this community has resisted modern healthcare, relying instead on divine intervention and traditional birth attendants. The consequences have been devastating as they recorded high child mortality due to lack of immunisation, higher neonatal and maternal mortality rates, and a universal reluctance to seek modern medical care. Yet, over the past three decades, something remarkable has happened. Through the tireless efforts of community-based organisations (CBOs) and local and international non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and Government of Zimbabwe programmes funded by the United States Government (USG) and other bilateral agencies and foundations, the needle has begun to move. Women are now attending antenatal clinics, children are being immunised, and girls, once sidelined in favour of boys, are being sent to school, with some even advancing to universities and colleges. These gains, however, are now under threat. The abrupt freeze of USG foreign aid under the 90-day Stop Work Order left communities like Marange in limbo, undermining the hard-earned trust that took years to build.  

 

Having actively participated in implementing USAID-funded programmes over the years, I have directly observed the fragility of trust in humanitarian efforts. Trust is not established instantaneously; it is a nuanced and painstaking process that requires patience, consistency, transparency, and genuine dedication to the communities served. It involves engaging the local leadership, traditional leadership, and in the case of the Marange community, church leadership. The abrupt cessation of funding and the ‘departure’ of humanitarian organisations undermine essential services and diminish the trust of these key stakeholders who make these development initiatives successful. 

 

Trust constitutes the foundations of every successful development intervention. As Francis Fukuyama (1995) argues in Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity, trust is an essential form of social capital that promotes cooperation and collective action. In the context of inclusive development, trust enables communities to embrace new norms and practices, especially when they contradict entrenched ideas and belief systems. The transition from traditional birth attendants to facility-based deliveries in Marange for instance, represented not merely a logistical adjustment but a significant cultural metamorphosis. It required trust and confidence in the NGOs, government ministries, and departments promoting health-seeking behavioural and attitudinal shifts. 

 

It should be noted, however, that trust is not uniform as it operates at multiple levels. Each layer of trust is interconnected, and the breakdown of one can have cascading effects on the others. The abrupt freeze of USAID funding disrupted all these layers, creating a crisis of confidence that will have long-term repercussions. 

First, the freeze undermines trust between the USG and recipient governments. When funding is suddenly withdrawn without adequate consultation or transition plans, it sends a message that the partnership was transactional rather than relational. This undermines the credibility of future collaborations and makes recipient governments wary of relying on USG support. 

Second, the freeze erodes trust between the USG and humanitarian organisations. Many NGOs, including the one I worked with, were given no warning or explanation for the Stop Work Orders. This lack of transparency creates a sense of instability and unpredictability, making it difficult for organisations to plan and implement long-term programmes. As one colleague said, “How can we commit to communities when our funding is uncertain?”  

Third, the freeze strains the relationship between governments and NGOs. In many cases, NGOs act as intermediaries between donor agencies and governments, facilitating the implementation of programmes. When funding is abruptly cut, governments may view NGOs as unreliable partners, further complicating future collaborations. Finally, and most critically, the freeze damages the trust between NGOs and the communities they serve. In Marange, the sudden halt of programmes has left many wondering whether their gains, including immunising their children and sending their daughters to school, were merely temporary. As one community leader lamented, “We trusted these organisations because they said they were here for the long haul. Now they are gone, and we are back to square one.”  

 

Anthropological literature on inclusive development emphasises the centrality of trust in fostering sustainable change. As Maia Green (2010) notes, “Development is not just about delivering services; it is about building relationships”. Inclusive development requires a participatory approach that values local knowledge and empowers communities to take ownership of their development. This is impossible without trust.  However, the notion of trust is not without its challenges. Scholars like James Ferguson (1994) have critiqued the “anti-politics machine” of development, arguing that humanitarian interventions often depoliticise poverty and ignore the structural inequalities perpetuating it. In this context, trust can be seen as a double-edged sword. While it is essential for effective development, it can also be exploited to impose external agendas on communities. The abrupt freeze of USAID funding exemplifies this tension. On the one hand, the USG has every right to review its programmes and ensure accountability. On the other hand, how the freeze was implemented without warning or transition plans undermines the trust that makes development possible. Prominent development scholar Thandika Mkandawire (2005) observed that “development without trust is like building a house on sand; it may stand for a while, but it will inevitably collapse”.  

 

To mitigate the damage caused by the funding freeze, NGOs must prioritise trust in the closeout of USAID grants and awards. This includes transparent communication with communities, ensuring continuity of critical and life-saving services, and advocating for a phased exit rather than an abrupt withdrawal. Trust is not just a means to an end but an end in itself. In the case of Marange, this means working with local leaders and church elders to explain the reasons for the funding freeze and exploring alternative sources of support, while smoothly handing the affected programmes to the government for continued support. It also means documenting the gains made over the years and using this evidence to advocate for continued investment in the community.  

 

The abrupt termination of USAID funding is a stark reminder of the fragility of trust in humanitarian assistance. In communities like Marange, where trust has been painstakingly built over decades, the sudden withdrawal of support risks reversing hard-won gains and undermining future development efforts. As Fukuyama aptly puts it, “Trust is the lubricant that makes it possible for organisations to function”. Without trust, inclusive development is impossible. Moving forward, NGOs, governments, and donor agencies must prioritise trust in their operations. This means adopting a more participatory and transparent approach to development that values the voices and agency of the communities they serve. Only then can we ensure that the gains made in places like Marange are not lost to the whims of political and bureaucratic decisions.  

 

Ferguson, J. (1994). The anti-politics machine: “Development,” depoliticization, and bureaucratic power in Lesotho. University of Minnesota Press.  

Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. Free Press.  

Green, M. (2010). “Making development agents: Participation as boundary object in international development”. Journal of Development Studies, 46(7), 1240-1263.  

Mkandawire, T. (2005). “Targeting and universalism in poverty reduction”. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development.