OPINION — A recent survey of African youth challenges conventional wisdom on foreign aid. Policymakers should take heed of their views as they design the future of U.S. foreign assistance to increase effectiveness and American soft power on the continent.
We ask a lot of our aid to Africa. Over the years, it has saved countless lives from HIV/AIDS and malaria, fed the hungry, stopped pandemics, and increased farmers’ yields. We take it for granted that our good intentions are appreciated by Africans, augmenting American soft power and influence.
Yet, what if those assumptions don’t hold? What if our aid simply did not have the positive reception we thought it did? Today, in the wake of USAID’s shutdown, the entire architecture of foreign aid is under review, with many studies, commissions, and proposals underway. Now would be the time to dig deeper to understand what Africans want from aid. Doing so would help us be more effective and relevant, with the added benefit of increasing American soft power.
In August, the Ichikowitz Family Foundation of South Africa conducted its fourth iteration of the African Youth Survey, the most extensive continent-wide survey of African youth. This year’s survey included questions specifically about USAID cuts, and its findings blow up any illusions we might have had about young Africans feeling hopeless over USAID’s departure.
After 21 years with USAID in places like Uganda and South Sudan, where my focus was out-of-school youth, and a tour as mission director to Somalia that was canceled by USAID’s shutdown, I thought I understood how African youth viewed us. I was wrong. Three findings in particular challenged my preconceptions and provide important lessons as we design the future of U.S. foreign assistance.
Less Than Half Will Miss USAID
The survey was conducted in places that had enormous USAID programs, like Nigeria, Kenya, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and many others. Yet, only 46% of respondents thought USAID cuts would have a negative impact. Fully 26% saw a positive impact, 16% saw no impact, and 11% did not know.
However, the researchers also commented, “Just over a quarter (26%) take a more optimistic view, believing the closure will force leaders to confront domestic challenges directly.”
This idea was certainly borne out during my Africa tours with USAID. Often, the U.S. budget for health far exceeded the country’s national budget for the sector, allowing the country to direct spending elsewhere, such as Russian-made fighter jets, as happened in Uganda in 2011.
The lesson: Our foreign assistance should be part of a larger bilateral partnership with mutual accountability, where the country must increase its own domestic spending on the sector in tandem with our assistance.
China Is Viewed More Positively Than the U.S., Despite Flaws
When asked about the influence of China and the U.S. on their countries, again, the results are surprising. China is fully ten percentage points ahead of the U.S. regarding whether the influence is positive (95% for China, 85% for the U.S.).
Is this a reaction to the Trump administration? In 2024, results for the same question were similar, with China slightly ahead. However, positive responses for the U.S. actually went up during Trump’s tenure (from 79% in 2024 to 85% in 2026).
Key to this finding is a related one in the 2026 report: 58% of respondents thought that the U.S. would disregard international law to gain access to natural resources. Recent actions like the capture of Nicolás Maduro and asserting ownership over Venezuela’s oil showed a disregard for international law. Respondents may be surmising that the same could apply to African natural resources.
What is astounding about China’s strength on this question is the abundance of evidence that China is highly transactional with its aid recipients, often leaving them indebted and in weaker positions. That was certainly the case with South Sudan’s “Oil for Roads” deal, widely disparaged by locals and diplomats when I served there.
Why aren’t widely known stories like this one reflected in the responses? Emmanuel Kwezi Tabaro, an analyst of the 2026 survey, explained:
“Young Africans are not uninterested in geopolitics, but they appear far more concerned with the practical realities that shape daily life: jobs, infrastructure, economic opportunity and the cost of living. When they think about international partnerships, many are asking less about ideology and more about whether those partnerships will improve their prospects.”
China is seen as meeting youth where they are, which leads to the third finding.
The lesson: With huge youth populations in Africa, increase programs specifically for youth that prepare them for jobs, like training and leadership programs, and adulthood, such as family planning.
It’s the Economy, Stupid
Actually, it’s about jobs. When asked about the biggest threats to African communities, 54% of respondents said unemployment and poverty, not violent crime (20%), gangs (17%), or terrorism (16%). When asked what government priorities should be to improve security, 56% of respondents said job creation for young people, far ahead of military investment (35%) or improvements to policing (29%).
Why are questions about threats and security coming back to jobs? Jihane Cherif, another analyst of the 2026 survey, answered:
“A young person who cannot find work, cannot afford to eat, and cannot see a way forward within the system does not feel protected by a well-equipped police force. They feel abandoned by it.”
The lesson: As in the World Bank’s new strategy, keep a laser focus on the bottom line of job creation for the millions of youth entering the workforce each year.
The Bottom Line
In the great power competition being played out in Africa, we cannot take for granted that our generous assistance will lead to increased positive views of the U.S. This survey shows a rising generation of savvy youth that sees the whole picture of U.S. policy, questions rhetoric, and asks fair questions about the impacts on their lives of billions of dollars of assistance. Hearing their concerns will result not only in more effective aid programs, but also in increased American influence across the continent.
The Cipher Brief is committed to publishing a range of perspectives on national security issues submitted by deeply experienced national security professionals. Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent the views or opinions of The Cipher Brief.
Have a perspective to share based on your experience in the national security field? Send it to Editor@thecipherbrief.com for publication consideration.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
