When one steps back and observes the collapse of the Nairobi Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) deal, originally worth Sh7.76 billion and backed by the United States through the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), it becomes painfully clear: President Donald Trump has not only undermined Kenya’s development ambitions but also dealt a heavy blow to the trust between Nairobi and Washington.
The abrupt cancellation of this funding represents more than a policy shift; it is an affront to Kenya’s sovereignty and its people’s aspirations.
The agreement, signed under Trump’s predecessor, was hailed as a milestone in Kenya–US relations.
Through the MCC, the US had pledged to support the development of a modern BRT system for Nairobi, a project envisioned to unclog the city’s notorious traffic, reduce pollution, enhance safety, and provide a more equitable transport option for women, low-income commuters, and marginalized groups.
Kenya had already committed significant resources of its own, demonstrating genuine partnership and ownership of the initiative. Then came the reversal.
When the Trump administration cancelled the MCC Threshold Program as part of its foreign-aid review, the BRT project was abruptly thrown into uncertainty. Kenya’s Treasury confirmed receiving the termination notice, leaving a carefully negotiated, legally binding project in limbo.
Such a sudden withdrawal is not merely bureaucratic reshuffling; it is a profound injustice.
Why is it unjust? First, because Kenya loses most. Nairobi’s transport crisis is not a theoretical concern; it affects millions of people every day. Congestion drains productivity, worsens air quality, and makes commuting a daily struggle.
The BRT system was not just an infrastructure upgrade; it was a lifeline for a city desperate for modern transit. When the US backed out, it was ordinary Kenyans who paid the price in lost opportunity and prolonged hardship.
Second, the move reflects a troubling lack of commitment. International partnerships depend on predictability. When a change of government in Washington can instantly nullify agreements signed in good faith, developing countries are left exposed.
This unpredictability weakens Kenya’s long-term planning capacity and discourages the kind of transformative projects needed to push the country forward.
Third, it damages US credibility on the world stage. For decades, America positioned itself as a development partner that honors its commitments and supports governance reforms through reliable assistance.
By abandoning the BRT deal, the Trump administration signaled that US development partnerships are conditional not on mutual goals but on domestic political whims. That makes it difficult for Kenya or any country to trust the U.S. with ambitious, multi-year projects.
This is precisely why Kenya and many other nations have increasingly turned to China for infrastructure. It is not because China offers the cheapest or simplest deals, but because it offers certainty.
When China commits to build a road, a railway, a port, or an energy installation, it rarely reverses course due to leadership changes or shifting domestic priorities. Western governments often criticize Beijing’s approach, citing concerns over debt or geopolitical influence, but from the perspective of developing nations, reliability is priceless.
Kenya cannot afford to wait endlessly for partners whose policies shift every four years. It needs roads, energy grids, railways, ports, and modern public transit — and it needs them delivered without sudden cancellations. When the US tears up agreements, China naturally steps in to fill the vacuum. The BRT saga is simply another example of a broader trend: countries gravitate toward consistent partners.
Trump’s decision to halt other USAid contracts in Kenya — affecting sectors such as education, energy, and civic engagement — only strengthens this perception.
Cuts totaling tens of billions of shillings in development commitments weaken vital sectors and leave long-term projects stranded. These abrupt contractions send a clear message: American support is not guaranteed.
Some may argue that every administration has the right to review foreign aid and reallocate funds. That is true. But renegotiation is different from abandonment.
When deals are terminated without meaningful consultation, without transition plans, and without regard for the people affected, it shows disrespect. It suggests that Kenya’s development priorities can be dismissed at the stroke of a pen.
Kenya is not simply a recipient of aid; it is a strategic partner with clear development ambitions. By signing the MCC compact, Nairobi demonstrated faith in long-term cooperation with the US The cancellation of the deal undermines that faith.
The MCC was designed to support countries committed to reform and good governance. Kenya met those conditions. America did not meet its own.
In the broader geopolitical picture, Trump’s actions reveal a failure of US soft power. Development diplomacy is not about rhetoric; it is about delivering real infrastructure and helping partner nations achieve tangible progress. When America falters, others rise to the occasion.
Ultimately, the scrapping of the Sh7.76 billion BRT deal is not only a broken promise — it is an injustice to Kenya’s development agenda and a betrayal of Nairobi’s commuters who deserve better.
It weakens trust, undermines collaboration, and accelerates Kenya’s pivot toward partners who offer more consistent engagement. If the United States wants to remain relevant in Africa, it must learn that reliability, not rhetoric, is the foundation of meaningful partnership.
The writer is a Journalist and Communication consultant
