• Commentary
  • Research
  • Experts
  • Events
Carnegie China logoCarnegie lettermark logo
{
  "authors": [
    "Thomas Carothers"
  ],
  "type": "testimony",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "democracy",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "DCG",
  "programs": [
    "Democracy, Conflict, and Governance"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Foreign Policy",
    "Democracy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Testimony

Effective U.S. Democracy Assistance Requires Reform at USAID

While U.S. democracy aid has grown in amount and sophistication over the last two decades under Republican and Democratic administrations alike, American democracy promotion efforts can achieve their full potential only by reforming USAID.

Link Copied
By Thomas Carothers
Published on Jun 10, 2010

Source: House Committee on Foreign Affairs

For the past 25 years, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has devoted more resources, energy, and attention to aiding democracy than any other organization in the world. In testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Thomas Carothers says that despite making important contributions to democracy in dozens of countries around the world, USAID’s democracy work falls short in several damaging ways.

U.S. Policy Recommendations:

  • Reduce bureaucratization: USAID’s basic operating procedures are a study in dysfunctional bureaucratization. USAID needs to undertake a thorough process of de-bureaucratization to increase flexibility, speed, adaptability, and innovation. For such reforms to succeed, it is critical that the State Department, White House, and Congress resist the tendency to think that stricter controls, more regulations, and tighter procedures necessarily lead to better performance.
     
  • Increase local ownership of projects: USAID’s insistence on using U.S. organizations at every step in the process reduces local attachment to democracy assistance projects and undermines long-term sustainability. USAID must therefore improve the way it partners with local actors, giving them substantial influence in determining goals and the methods employed to achieve them.
     
  • Integrate democracy assistance more tightly into USAID’s core mission: Democracy programs receive far less attention and support than socioeconomic work. Strengthening USAID’s capacity to provide democracy assistance will require clear leadership from the organization’s senior-most officials, along with specific measures, including an expanded democracy assistance budget and a greater number of democracy and governance positions in USAID’s country missions.

While U.S. democracy aid has grown in amount and sophistication over the last two decades under Republican and Democratic administrations alike, Carothers concludes that American democracy promotion efforts can achieve their full potential only by reforming USAID. Doing so, he writes, would “be a viable signal that the Obama administration is moving beyond its apparent caution on democracy promotion to forge foundational changes.”
 

About the Author

Thomas Carothers

Harvey V. Fineberg Chair for Democracy Studies; Director, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program

Thomas Carothers, director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program, is a leading expert on comparative democratization and international support for democracy.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    When Do Mass Protests Topple Autocrats?
      • McKenzie Carrier

      Thomas Carothers, McKenzie Carrier

  • Article
    The Trump Administration’s Tangled Talk About Democracy Abroad
      • McKenzie Carrier

      Thomas Carothers, McKenzie Carrier

Thomas Carothers
Harvey V. Fineberg Chair for Democracy Studies; Director, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program
Thomas Carothers
Political ReformForeign PolicyDemocracyNorth AmericaUnited States

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie China

  • Commentary
    Malaysia’s Year as ASEAN Chair: Managing Disorder

    Malaysia’s chairmanship sought to fend off short-term challenges while laying the groundwork for minimizing ASEAN’s longer-term exposure to external stresses.

      Elina Noor

  • Commentary
    When It Comes to Superpower Geopolitics, Malaysia Is Staunchly Nonpartisan

    For Malaysia, the conjunction that works is “and” not “or” when it comes to the United States and China.

      Elina Noor

  • Commentary
    Neither Comrade nor Ally: Decoding Vietnam’s First Army Drill with China

    In July 2025, Vietnam and China held their first joint army drill, a modest but symbolic move reflecting Hanoi’s strategic hedging amid U.S.–China rivalry.

      • Nguyen-khac-giang

      Nguyễn Khắc Giang

  • Commentary
    Today’s Rare Earths Conflict Echoes the 1973 Oil Crisis — But It’s Not the Same

    Regulation, not embargo, allows Beijing to shape how other countries and firms adapt to its terms.

      Alvin Camba

  • Commentary
    China’s Mediation Offer in the Thailand-Cambodia Border Dispute Sheds Light on Beijing’s Security Role in Southeast Asia

    The Thai-Cambodian conflict highlights the limits to China's peacemaker ambition and the significance of this role on Southeast Asia’s balance of power.

      Pongphisoot (Paul) Busbarat

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
Carnegie China logo, white
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.