The United States government, under the leadership of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and spearheaded by billionaire Elon Musk, recently scrapped a $21 million grant meant to support voter turnout initiatives in India. The relocation has triggered a political discussion, in which US President Donald Trump has defended the move, expressing doubts about the money allocated by US taxpayers in foreign land for its funding.
Trump Questions US Funding for India’s Voter Turnout
From his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida, President Trump voiced doubt about the US distribution of Indian electoral funds. He told us that this is a highly economically advanced country with considerable tax revenues and asked why the American assets should be redirected to boost the voters turnout in India.
“Why are we giving 21 million for voter turnout? In India? What about voter turnout here?” Trump stated.
US Government Cuts Multiple Foreign Aid Programs
On February 16, DOGE published a comprehensive list of taxpayer-funded programs that had been canceled. The list, shared via a post on X (formerly Twitter), included several foreign assistance programs deemed excessive or unjustifiable by the US government.
The scrapped funding included: The scrapped funding included:
- $21 million for voter turnout initiatives in India
- $29 million for strengthening the political landscape in Bangladesh
- $39 million for fiscal federalism and biodiversity conservation in Nepal
DOGE justified the cuts by stating, “US taxpayer dollars were going to be spent on the following items, all of which have been cancelled.”. The decision to discontinue these programs has drawn mixed reactions from various stakeholders, both in the US and in the recipient countries.
BJP Condemns US Funding as an External Interference.
The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in India reacted strongly to the revelation that US funds were earmarked for India’s voter turnout efforts. BJP national spokesperson Amit Malviya referred to the lining as “extraneous interference” in the electoral process of India.
“$21M for voter turnout? This definitely is external interference in India’s electoral process. Who gains from this? Not the ruling party for sure!” Malviya went on to say, highlighting anxieties as to foreign presence in Indian democracy.
Malviya further suggested that this funding could be linked to what he called a “systematic infiltration” of Indian institutions by foreign entities. Hedrubas also specifically pointed the finger at the billionaire investor George Soros, whose Open Society Foundations have been made the target of domestic political attacks by conservative ideologues across the globe.
Once again, it is George Soros, a friend to the Congress party and the Gandhis, whose spectre casts its long shadow on our electoral system,” Malviya alleged.
A Historical Concern
The BJP has, for a long time, raised questions about the activity of foreign-supported NGOs (NGOs) and civil society organisations on India’s political systems and electoral system. Malviya has pointed out to a controversial 2012 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between Indian Election Commission and The International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) which is affiliated with Soros’s Open Society Foundation.
According to Malviya, the MoU (entered into under the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government) has allowed excessive foreign intervention in India’s electoral process.
“Ironically, those questioning the transparent and inclusive process of appointing India’s Election Commissioner—a first in our democracy, where previously the Prime Minister alone made the decision—had no hesitation in handing over the entire Election Commission of India to foreign operators,” Malviya said.
He further accused the Congress party of systematically allowing foreign interference in Indian governance, claiming that the previous UPA government actively facilitated external influence in India’s institutional frameworks.
“The Congress-led UPA government systematically enabled the infiltration of India’s institutions by forces opposed to the nation’s interests—those who seek to weaken India at every opportunity,” Malviya alleged.
Global Reactions and the Way Forward
Although the US has claimed its decision to be a responsible expenditure from public money, in India, the party in power interprets it as an effort to impose external control on the country’s democratic process. The shift away from the cancellation foreign assistance projects, such as those focused on their governance and political reforms, is in line with Trump’s long-held position on cutting US financial obligations abroad in favor of them within the country.
On the other hand, voter turnout activities are seen by opposition politicians and civil society activists in India as significantly important to fostering the democratic process and as avenues for greater voter participation in election processes. They have demanded more openness in foreign assistance, and how it will be used, in India’s democratic framework.
As India gears up for its upcoming elections, the controversy over foreign funding and external influence in its electoral system is likely to remain a contentious issue. BJP’s rejection of external posture is consistent with its overall focus on limiting external involvement in Indian political process, whereas the opposition maintains its tradition of promoting international engagement in democratic progress.
The US decision to cancel the 21 million dollars grant poses deeper issues related to international funding in domestic elections and to what degree foreign assistance is appropriate to intervene in democratic processes across the globe.
“Stay updated with the latest news and insights – follow us at YPBB News on X for real-time updates and exclusive stories!”
