On March 17, accompanied by armed FBI agents and police, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) used the threat of violence to dismantle an American symbol of peace. This hostile takeover of the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) defied the organization’s independent status and location in a private – not federal – office building. DOGE allegedly threatened to end $190,000,000 worth of federal contracts held by USIP’s former security firm, Inter-Con, unless they provided access to the building. Upon entry, DOGE employees opened the gun safe, evicted USIP staff, and destroyed USIP’s insignia, an emblem of peace and diplomacy. They have since transferred this privately-funded $500 million building to the federal government. The militarized dismantling of USIP, which reflects the unprecedented reach of the executive branch into an independent organization, has broader implications for the nonprofit sector. The targeted takedown of the institute and subsequent erasure of publicly available archives on peacebuilding and human rights threatens global peace and stability.  

USIP was established in 1984 as a nonpartisan and independent organization to bolster US soft power in the Cold War. According to George Moose, the now-former CEO, the Institute “was built as a symbol of the aspiration of the American people to be peacebuilders in the world.” Funded by Congress to prevent undue influence from partisan donors, the Institute serves as a center for research and training to advance conflict resolution and promote democratic governance. USIP has been led by former diplomats that served under Republican and Democratic administrations and provides financial audit reports to Congress every year. By law its board is bipartisan. By law, the appointment and removal of members of the board requires either Senate or board approval.

As peace studies scholars with on-the-ground expertise in human rights, democracy, and peacebuilding, we have often been critical of how the United States has exercised its soft power – informal influence exerted through culture and foreign policies intended to attract allies. In our classrooms, we pose questions about the ethics and efficacy of US-led peace processes and foreign aid programs that come with strings attached. American soft power can do damage – both at home and abroad – when it undermines the local agency of those most proximate to war. Our outward-looking institutions like USIP are not perfect, but they represent the very best of American idealism and humanitarianism. Most importantly, they advance our country’s strong financial, political, and ethical interests in pursuing international security without resorting to violence.  

The alternative to soft power is coercion, which evidence demonstrates will ultimately come at great financial and human cost. Rather than trying to win friends, the wielders of coercive hard power bully others with economic and military might, sometimes achieving their short-term goals but inevitably building resentment in the process. The Trump administration’s foreign policy agenda, exemplified by the takeover of institutes like USIP and the US Agency for International Development, signals a sharp turn in US foreign policy from soft to hard power.

What are the consequences of turning away from diplomacy and humanitarian assistance and toward coercion? Global wars are on the rise for the first time in decades. Congress must continue investing in long-term strategies to prevent violence, resolve ongoing conflicts, and build peace. With an annual budget of only $55 million, funding USIP is a cost-effective strategy to reduce US spending on foreign wars. Despite the small budget (only 0.125% of USAID’s $44 billion, and 0.000004% of theDepartment of Defense’s $1.38 trillion budget), USIP has improved diplomacy outcomes and supported democratic transitions to peace. 

In Colombia, USIP supported civil society networks as they provided nonviolent protection of civilians caught between warring factions, prevented the recruitment of young people into armed groups, and fostered regional reconciliation processes at the local level. These programs, which USIP facilitated in the midst of war, strengthened civil society organizations that, in turn, played a central role in establishing the victim-centered peace agreement signed between the government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) in 2016, bringing a political end to the Western hemisphere’s longest war. 

Peace agreements, while important, are insufficient on their own. Nearly half of all peace agreements revert to armed conflict within five years. USIP has supported research to deepen our understanding of when and why peace accords fail. Recent scholarship has shown that comprehensive accords, which include attention to the root causes of war, have high success rates. In Colombia, USIP therefore supported a comprehensive peace accord while continuing to invest in local capacities for peace, such as effective community-based dialogues between victim’s groups and the FARC.

Related Articles

Forever wars are financially unsustainable and inhumane. Rather than standing by while DOGE dismantles USIP, Congress should double down on our nation’s investment in this Institute and the work that it does in research, education, and action. Peace is an active process that requires ongoing support if we are to build social infrastructures for peace that prevent the recurrence of war. 

We urge our fellow citizens to reject the turn away from allyship and aid, towards coercion. We must hold DOGE accountable for illegal activity and stand up for peace. Peacebuilding is not an idealistic pursuit; it is a financially viable, socially effective way to move towards a better future while safeguarding human rights at home and abroad.  

Angela Lederach is Assistant Professor of Peace and Justice Studies at Chapman University and a graduate of the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame. She is the author of Feel the Grass Grow: Ecologies of Slow Peace in Colombia (Stanford University Press, 2023)

Karie Cross Riddle is Assistant Professor of Political Science at Pepperdine University and a graduate of the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame. She is the author of Critical Feminist Justpeace: Grounding Theory in Grassroots Praxis (Oxford University Press, 2024).