USAID Could Adopt Cryptocurrency For Greater Traceability!

What if blockchain became the new safeguard for humanitarian aid? A persistent rumor stirs Washington: USAID, the pillar of international assistance, could metamorphose under the influence of Trump advisors. Their idea? Inject a dose of crypto into the bureaucratic veins of the agency. The stated goal: track every dollar, eradicate leaks, and redefine transparency. A bold shift that combines technological innovation and political calculation.

A structural reform under the sign of crypto

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) may soon sport a new name – United States Agency for International Humanitarian Assistance – and a new roadmap.

Placed under the direct supervision of the Secretary of State, this institutional transformation would be accompanied by an unprecedented tool: blockchain. Indeed, far from Trump’s speech at the DAS, an internal document leaked reveals that the technology would be used to “secure and trace the distributions” of aid, making every transaction indelible.

Imagine a digital ledger, tamper-proof, where each fund transfer would be recorded in real-time. No more gray areas, no more opaque intermediaries.

Blockchain would act as a virtual notary, validating each step from Washington to the final beneficiaries.

A revolution for programs often undermined by corruption or inefficiency. However, this ambition faces a complex reality: in January, USAID suspended its payments, leading to legal chaos and lawsuits.

In this context, crypto appears as much as a solution as it does a symbol. In parallel, the Government Efficiency Department (DOGE), an entity run by Elon Musk, is attempting to restructure the agency.

Ironically, the DOGE, an unexpected partner, embodies this alliance between techno-utopianism and political pragmatism. It remains to be seen whether the marriage between bureaucracy and crypto will withstand the realities on the ground.

Transparency or technological mirage?

Behind the promises of traceability lie far thornier issues. Can crypto really clean up humanitarian aid? Its advocates argue that the immutability of records would deter misappropriation.

But its detractors highlight a paradox: how to reconcile the anonymity of beneficiaries with absolute transparency? Not to mention that crypto, often associated with volatility, will have to prove its stability in a sector where every penny counts.

The Trump administration bets on a disruptive effect. By integrating crypto, it seeks to restore the image of an agency criticized for its cumbersome nature.

However, this modernization hides a desire for increased control. By placing USAID under the aegis of the Department of State, Washington would centralize aid management, blending diplomacy and assistance. A risk of politicization, warn some NGOs, who fear an instrumentalization of funds.

Finally, the technical question remains. The most vulnerable regions, often lacking digital infrastructure, could be excluded from this system. Training local actors, securing crypto wallets, or even access to the internet would become essential prerequisites. A colossal challenge, demanding additional investments. Without support, blockchain risks widening the inequalities it claims to solve, while Michael Saylor warns: without Bitcoin, the euro is doomed! Without support, blockchain risks widening the inequalities it claims to solve, while Michael Saylor warns: without bitcoin, the euro is doomed!