Written by Daniel Harper.
The second Trump administration kicked off with a clear mission: trim the fat from federal agencies doling out cash overseas. Now, the Inter-American Foundation—IAF for short—is in the crosshairs. It’s not a household name, but for decades it’s been funneling modest grants to grassroots projects in Latin America and the Caribbean. Think small-scale stuff—farmers, artisans, that sort of thing. The White House, though, sees it as another bloated relic ripe for the chopping block.
Big Changes Hit the IAF Overnight
Last Friday, February 28, 2025, Trump tapped Peter Marocco to take over the IAF. In one fell swoop, he sacked the president and CEO, Sara Aviel, and wiped out the board of directors. According to someone inside the agency who spoke to the Guardian, Marocco’s now the lone ranger—sole board member and chairman. It’s a power grab, plain and simple, and it happened fast. By Monday, he and the Department of Government Efficiency—DOGE, if you’re into acronyms—had their hands on the agency’s keys. The 37 employees? Sent home on paid leave, probably wondering what’s next.
I’ve seen restructurings before, but this was surgical. The IAF used to hum along with a $60 million budget, supporting local efforts across the region. Now it’s a shell. DOGE wasted no time bragging about it on X Tuesday, saying they’d whittled the staff down to one—the bare minimum the law allows. Efficiency, sure, but it’s hard not to wonder who’s left picking up the pieces.
Pushback That Didn’t Stick
Not everyone rolled over. Eddy Arriola, one of the board members Trump booted, fired off a letter to the White House. He wasn’t subtle—called Marocco’s appointment invalid, claiming it didn’t follow the IAF’s legal playbook. “The structure stays as is,” he insisted, telling Aviel to lock out outsiders, probably meaning DOGE. Bold move, but it didn’t work. Come Monday, Marocco and crew were in, and Arriola’s plea was just a footnote. Resistance is one thing; results are another.
It’s a classic standoff—old guard versus new blood. Arriola’s got a point about process, but Trump’s team isn’t big on debating fine print. They’re moving chess pieces while others are still reading the rulebook. By Tuesday, DOGE was crowing online about the cuts, and the IAF was down to a skeleton crew. Done Deal.
What Got Slashed and Why It Matters
Here’s where it gets specific. DOGE laid out the casualties on X: $903,811 for alpaca farmers in Peru—gone. $813,210 for veggie gardens in El Salvador? History. They axed $364,500 meant to help recyclers in Bolivia fight stigma, and $731,105 for boosting mushroom and pea sales in Guatemala. Even tiny stuff, like $39,250 for Brazilian beekeepers, didn’t survive. Honduras lost $677,342 for fruit and jam markets, Ecuador’s artisanal salt folks lost $483,345, and Brazilian Venezuelan migrants saw $323,633 for cultural projects vanish. That’s real money for real people.
This isn’t new for Trump. USAID’s already a ghost of itself, folded into the State Department, and the National Endowment for Democracy—NED—got its funding yanked, leaving partners high and dry. Both had reputations for meddling—think Ukraine in 2004 and 2014, where NED played a hand in regime shifts. Marocco, who helped gut USAID, now runs foreign aid at State, so he’s got skin in this game. The IAF’s different, though—it was about empowering locals, not toppling governments. Started in 1969, it’s handed out $957 million in 5,800 grants over the years, averaging $340,000 a pop. Small potatoes compared to the feds’ $6.75 trillion budget, but it added up for communities.
Take Bolivia’s recyclers. That $364,500 wasn’t just cash—it was dignity, a chance to shift how society saw them. Or Guatemala’s mushrooms—$731,105 could’ve turned a niche crop into steady income. Now those folks are scrambling. The U.S. still pumps out big aid globally—$55.3 billion in 2022, per OECD numbers—but Trump’s pulling back hard. China’s happy to step in, by the way, especially in places like Southeast Asia. Something to chew on.
Courts, Cash, and the Bigger Picture
Wednesday threw a wrench in things. The Supreme Court ruled Trump has to unfreeze $2 billion in USAID funds. That’s a win for the old system, but it’s murky how it affects the IAF, already on life support. Marocco’s in deep, and DOGE—think Elon Musk’s fingerprints—keeps swinging the axe. This is “America First” in action: slash the $60 billion foreign aid tab, redirect it home. DOGE says IAF salary cuts alone save $6.157 million yearly. Fine, but what’s the cost long-term?
I dug into this because it’s not just numbers—it’s people. Ecuador’s salt producers were banking on that $483,345; now they’re stuck. Honduras’ jam makers? Same boat. Critics say this tanks U.S. influence—decades of goodwill down the drain. Fans argue it’s overdue; why fund foreign bees when we’ve got bills here? Fair question, but pulling out leaves gaps. The IAF’s been a quiet player, not flashy like USAID, but its absence will ripple—migration, trade, you name it.
Our Take
Trump’s tearing through foreign aid like it’s personal, and the IAF’s the latest casualty. It’s a leaner government, no doubt—Marocco running a one-man show proves that. Savings are real, and “America First” folks are cheering. But here’s the rub: Latin America’s our backyard. Stability there keeps our borders quieter and markets humming. Ditching small grants might save millions now but cost billions later in fallout. The Supreme Court’s nudge on USAID funds shows this isn’t a clean sweep—legal pushback’s brewing.
Me, I see missed chances. Those alpacas in Peru or salt flats in Ecuador weren’t charity—they were investments. Tiny ones, sure, but they paid off in trust and growth. Trump’s betting domestic wins outweigh global losses. Maybe he’s right, but it’s a gamble. DOGE’s efficiency is impressive—ruthless, even—but efficiency isn’t always wisdom. Time will tell if this shrink-the-map strategy holds up.
