For weeks, headlines have been dominated by the Trump administration’s DOGE-led overhaul of USAID spending, exposing not just gaps in oversight but also financial blind spots and programs whose humanitarian impact and strategic value to the U.S. remain uncertain. Each new claim of billions saved is swiftly met with counterarguments that the cuts are an illusion.

Yet, while Washington debates USAID, a far bigger clash is coming — one that will test America’s role in global leadership, its commitment to fiscal responsibility, and the future of humanitarian aid itself.

At the heart of this brewing storm is a single question: What is to be done about the United Nations?

This will not be a quiet policy debate. It will be global, partisan, and high-stakes, with U.N. advocates and international allies pushing to preserve billions in funding, while others demand greater transparency and fiscal accountability. The outcome will reshape not just U.S. foreign aid, but America’s influence on the world stage.

One U.N. program certain to come under intense scrutiny is the Regional Refugee and Migrant Response Plan — a sprawling $1.4 billion initiative involving 15 U.N. affiliates and 230 NGOs, aimed at assisting displaced populations across 17 Latin American and Caribbean countries. For more than a decade, its funding has surged in direct response to U.S. immigration policies, rising as migration incentives expanded.

This debate will unfold against the backdrop of the largest diaspora in the history of the Western Hemisphere — more than

© The Hill