Thomas Carothers
{
"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
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.
Source: House Committee on Foreign Affairs

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
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.
- The Effects of U.S. Democratic Backsliding on U.S. PowerPaper
- Post-U.S. International Democracy Support: Aspiration in Search of SubstancePaper
Richard Youngs, Thomas Carothers
Recent Work
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 Europe
- Taking the Pulse: Are the EU’s Watered-Down Russia Sanctions Better than None?Commentary
The EU had to compromise to adopt a twenty-first sanctions package against Russia, exposing growing cracks in the union’s resolve. Is this latest, weaker round worth it to keep pressure on Moscow?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Why Europe Must Take Charge of its Russia Diplomacy NowCommentary
Trump is distracted and Ukraine wants Europe to step up. The continent’s leaders must find their voice and assert it in talks with Russia.
Alissa de Carbonnel
- Why Russia Could Escalate Hybrid Warfare Against EuropeCommentary
Mounting economic strain and battlefield losses will not necessarily make the Kremlin less dangerous. They could instead push Moscow toward a more aggressive hybrid campaign designed to test NATO’s Eastern flank, exploit allied hesitation, and fracture European resolve.
Maksym Beznosiuk
- Taking the Pulse: Enough with the Annual NATO Summits, Already?Commentary
Over the past ten years, NATO has held almost as many summits as it did during the entirety of the Cold War. Are they still useful, or is it time to stop holding annual meetings?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Europe from Scratch: Visions for a New European OrderReport
As the EU confronts profound challenges, several leaders have called for fundamental reform to the union’s model—but only modest, superficial changes have resulted. What if Europe really could be reimagined from zero today: What should such a redesigned European order look like?
Richard Youngs, ed.