[refurb]

If you're arguing other countries will suffer with the end of USAID programs, that will be a hard argument to win.

Providing HIV assistance while undermining political stability is a high price for other countries to pay and I'm sure is a net negative for them.

[corimaith]

>Providing HIV assistance while undermining political stability

You're taking that as a prior when in reality US FoPo prefers political stability after the Cold War. You need to get a grip here if you're seeing everything through the lens of dubious paranoia, if not just leftist resentment.

[refurb]

> You're taking that as a prior when in reality US FoPo prefers political stability after the Cold War. You need to get a grip here if you're seeing everything through the lens of dubious paranoia, if not just leftist resentment.

I should rephrase that to "political instability with regards to the perspective of locals".

I agree the US is seeking "political stability" with these activities. But it's on US terms which is often in direct opposition to the locals.

And I'd argue my view is not "dubious paranoia". The purpose of USAID is to use development activities as a cover for interference in other country's politics.