In the aftermath of former US President Donald Trump’s criticism of the $21 million USAID fund meant to increase voter turnout in India, turnout debates have intensified. According to Trump, the fund should not have been used to finance foreign elections, and he expressed his anger by asking, “Why should I care about India’s turnout? We have enough problems over here. I want voter turnout in the United States and not in the rest of the world.”
This is the third consecutive attack on the controversial fund by Trump, which his administration ultimately cancelled. In his address to the US governors, he highlighted the $21 million earmarked for India and $29 million for Bangladesh, and he expressed concern over the lack of accountability of the funds. He also accused of receiving the money without any accountable use of it.
In his view, Trump asked why the fund was even established to interfere with India’s electoral process. “$21 million for voter turnout in India? It looks like an attempt to influence their elections,” he said. He also noted the difference in how the US treats foreign election meddling: While Americans got upset over Russia spending millions during US elections, they turned a blind eye to the millions being sent abroad.
The controversy was met with a cautious response from India. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said that the appropriate authorities are verifying the information provided by the US administration. The MEA spokesperson, Randhir Jaiswal, acknowledged the seriousness of the matter and referred to the issue as “deeply troubling.”
The debate on turnout continues to reveal issues concerning foreign funding in democratic processes and more generally, the priorities of international aid. In the controversy of the $21 million fund, Trump has continued to challenge US foreign spending and thereby sparked significant diplomatic and political discussion.
