Elon Musk Faces Criticism Over USAID Ebola Program Cuts
Experts assert that reductions in funding have impaired the response to the Democratic Republic of Congo’s (DRC) Ebola outbreak, leading to
‘significant numbers’ of deaths.
Elon Musk is confronting challenges related to Ebola. While SpaceX stock has fallen sharply following its initial public offering and Tesla is facing multiple lawsuits, Musk has frequently posted on X about the US Agency for International Development (USAID), an agency he played a role in dismantling last year through the short-lived US “department of government efficiency” (Doge).
Jeremy Konyndyk, a former senior USAID official who managed the agency’s Ebola response in 2014-2015 and currently president of Refugees International, commented on Musk’s recent activity:
“Elon’s crash-out over the past week has been a thing to behold. In a way, it’s helpful that Elon is doing this, because it’s putting attention back on the issue of what he did last year.”
Musk has challenged his critics by stating they
“cannot cite a single name of someone who died”due to the cuts, adding
“If there were, it would be worldwide headline news!”When presented with the names of individuals, including those who died as a result of the funding reductions, Musk responded by calling a journalist
“an utter piece of shit and a liar”and used derogatory language. Additionally, Musk has made unsubstantiated claims that US tax dollars were diverted to arm militants and other unsupported allegations.
Impact of Musk’s Cuts on Ebola Response and Global Health
Musk admitted last year to
“accidentally” cutting Ebola detection and response programs. These cuts have come under renewed scrutiny amid the ongoing Ebola outbreak in the DRC.
Davide Rasella, a research professor at the Catalan Institution for Research and Advanced Studies and head of the Global Health Impact Assessment and Evaluation Group at the Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal) in Spain, explained:
“This is one of the reasons why there was not enough surveillance and preparedness for the outbreak of Ebola.”
Jeremy Konyndyk expressed confidence that if global health programs had not been slashed in the DRC and elsewhere, the Ebola outbreak would have been detected much earlier:
“I’m very confident about that.”
The cuts have also affected global health, nutrition, and education programs worldwide.
A study published in The Lancet estimated that the complete abolition of USAID could result in 14 million deaths, including 4.5 million child deaths. When Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna cited this study, Musk threatened legal action and reiterated his defense of Doge’s actions.
Rasella, one of the study’s authors, was unaware of the Khanna-Musk dispute but reaffirmed the study’s findings:
“Musk uses science for launching rockets. When we speak about public health and global health, we use the same statistical mathematical tools that we use to launch rockets into space.”
While it is challenging to determine the exact number of deaths attributable to these cuts, Rasella emphasized the scale of the impact:
“There will probably be millions of deaths over the next several years. This is really unquestionable.”
Some of these fatalities are already occurring. Konyndyk stated:
“People are absolutely dying. They’re dying in significant numbers in some places.”
Legacy and Consequences of USAID Dismantling
Konyndyk suggested that Musk’s dismantling of USAID, along with the consequent suffering and loss of life,
“is going to be a defining part of his legacy, and I do wonder if that’s why he’s scrambling so hard to rewrite that history now.”
He described Musk’s approach as applying a corporate model of
“cut until people scream, and then when people scream, you’ve cut too far, and then you restore.”Konyndyk emphasized that
“that’s not how public funding works. Here the cost is literal human lives.”
According to Konyndyk, without Musk’s involvement, USAID would likely still exist, albeit weakened. He stated:
“If not for Musk, USAID would probably still exist. Without him, and administrators like Pete Marocco, USAID would have taken some huge hits, but would have survived in some form, like other health and science agencies – much diminished, much weaker, but still existing.”
He added that Musk’s personal investment in the project elevated it to the highest levels of government:
“His personal investment in that project gave it the reach all the way up to the White House.”
Konyndyk noted that Congress could have prevented the dismantling of USAID and still has the opportunity to intervene. He explained that USAID is mandated by law and that existing aid programs have been hampered by delayed funding releases from the State Department.
Rasella highlighted the absurdity of cutting pandemic preparedness programs after the COVID-19 pandemic caused approximately 20 million deaths worldwide:
“When you disrupt a single piece of that [aid], you can really create more and larger damage to the entire system. This is just the beginning.”
Despite the damage, Konyndyk believes there is still time to mitigate the worst effects of foreign aid reductions:
“We have a window here to try and bring some of this back before the worst of the harms set in.”
