The claim made by former US President Donald Trump that $21 million was allocated by USAID to India for the purpose of "voter turnout" is false and has sparked unnecessary controversy. Upon investigation, it has been revealed that the actual amount provided to India for election-related programs between 2013 and 2018 was significantly less—under half a million dollars. Additionally, the $21 million figure cited by Trump was not directed towards India, but instead was part of a larger global fund aimed at election-related programs, including for countries like Bangladesh.
This misunderstanding emerged after the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a federal initiative led by Elon Musk, disclosed a list of USAID grants which included India, leading to speculation about potential foreign interference in India's elections. In this list, a sum of $21 million was allegedly earmarked for boosting voter turnout, but the narrative surrounding this claim quickly became distorted when Trump furthered the idea of a "kickback scheme" involving India’s election process. His inflammatory statements, questioning why the US was funding India's elections, only added fuel to the fire.
A deeper look into the data from USAID’s disbursements to India reveals that between 2001 and 2024, India received a substantial total of $2.9 billion in aid across various sectors. The largest share of this funding, about 56%, was directed towards health and population, amounting to $1.6 billion. In contrast, the "Governance" sector received only a fraction of this amount, with just 4.2% or $121 million. Of this, only a small portion, approximately $484,000, was earmarked for election-related activities under the program's purpose of supporting democratic participation.
Most of the funding for elections in India came through the Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening (CEPPS), which works to promote democratic processes around the world. The funds were designated to promote the legitimacy of democratic systems by improving legal frameworks for political parties and entities, ensuring fair political contestation, and supporting civil society.
The real figures behind USAID’s grants for democratic participation and civil society in India paint a much smaller picture of U.S. involvement in the country’s elections. For example, between 2020 and 2024, several American non-profit organizations, such as the National Democratic Institute (NDI), received portions of the funding to support democracy-building initiatives. NDI received the largest share of $7.6 million, which was used to support the Central Tibetan Administration, an organization representing Tibetans.
Moreover, the USAID records show that the $21 million figure originally referenced was, in fact, allocated to Bangladesh for its election-related activities, not India. The funds were distributed through a series of grants aimed at strengthening Bangladesh's democratic institutions, with a significant portion going to CEPPS.
In conclusion, while it’s true that the U.S. provided funding for election-related programs through USAID, the narrative presented by Trump about a $21 million allocation for voter turnout in India is false. The amount allocated for such purposes in India has been far smaller, and the main recipient of election-related funding in the region was Bangladesh, not India. This misunderstanding highlights how political statements, especially those made without proper verification, can quickly spiral into misleading narratives that create confusion and exacerbate diplomatic tensions. It is important for the public to verify claims with facts and ensure that foreign aid is properly understood in its true context.
