By Gloria Drealomalicha
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has sparked fresh controversy after claiming that deaths across Africa declined following significant cuts to United States foreign aid, arguing that the reductions helped curb instability rather than worsen humanitarian conditions.
Musk made the remarks on Tuesday while defending the spending cuts introduced under the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which supported sweeping reductions in funding for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
According to Refugees International, US humanitarian assistance fell sharply from $14 billion in 2024 to $3.7 billion in 2025. The Center for Global Development also estimated that USAID spending declined by about 58 per cent during the same period.
Despite repeated warnings from humanitarian organisations that the funding cuts could have devastating consequences, Musk insisted that available mortality data did not support predictions of rising deaths.
In a post on X, the billionaire wrote: “Deaths in Africa decreased after USAID funding was cut, because they’re no longer able to push for violent revolution to install leftist regimes!”
Musk made the claim while sharing an analysis based on mortality data from South Africa.
The analysis cited weekly death figures from January 2023 to May 2026, arguing that excess deaths remained close to zero and below projected levels following the reduction in aid. It also referred to a 2019 study that questioned whether increased foreign aid spending significantly improves life expectancy or reduces mortality in developing countries.
However, public health experts have continued to express concern over the impact of the funding cuts.
A study published in The Lancet in July 2025 estimated that the reduction in international aid could contribute to more than 14 million deaths worldwide by 2030, including more than 4.5 million children.
Musk has consistently defended the cuts, maintaining that they were necessary to eliminate waste, corruption and the misuse of taxpayers’ money. He has also alleged that some previous USAID programmes in Africa contributed to political instability and violent unrest rather than supporting genuine humanitarian development.
His latest comments have reignited debate over the effectiveness of foreign aid and the potential humanitarian consequences of sharp reductions in international assistance, with supporters and critics continuing to disagree over the long-term impact of the policy changes.
Leave a Reply