MEPs Emmanuel Fragκos and Geadis Geadi requesting information about the funds wasted by USAID and the United States in Cyprus.
Greeks Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Emmanuel Fragκos from Greece (ELLINIKI LISI: Greek Solution) and Geadis Geadi from Cyprus (ELAM: National People’s Front) have expressed concerns regarding the allocation of United States Agency for International Development (USAID) funds in Cyprus, particularly during the early 2000s.
The two MEPs alleges that these funds were misused to sway public opinion in favor of the controversial Annan Plan, a United Nations proposal aimed at resolving the Cyprus dispute by restructuring the island into a federation of two constituent states. The plan was put to a referendum in 2004, where it was accepted by 65% of Turkish Cypriots but rejected by 76% of Greek Cypriots, leading to its failure.
In light of these allegations, Frangos has called for an investigation into the purported misuse of U.S. taxpayer dollars in Cyprus. He has reached out to Elon Musk, who, as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under the Trump administration, has been instrumental in scrutinizing and restructuring federal agencies, including USAID. Musk’s team has previously highlighted instances of misallocated funds, such as a $25,000 award intended for supporting LGBTQIA+ refugees in Greece, which was subsequently canceled.
The broader context includes significant changes to USAID’s operations. In early 2025, Musk played a pivotal role in dismantling USAID, following the Trump administration’s agenda to reduce government spending. This led to the termination of over a thousand employees and the suspension of numerous aid programs worldwide.
In their letter to Elon Musk, the two MEPs state:
“Dear Mr. Musk Musk,
We have taken notice of your firm stance on government transparency and efficiency, particularly regarding the misuse of federal funds through agencies such as USAID. Given your past statements and concerns about its operations, we would like to formally bring to your attention a historical case of potential financial misallocation in Cyprus.
During the early 2000s, USAID was a key financial backer of efforts to promote the controversial Annan Plan, a proposed settlement to the Cyprus issue, which was ultimately rejected by the Greek Cypriot majority in a 2004 referendum. Reports suggest that USAID directed tens of millions of dollars-through the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and other intermediaries-toward initiatives aimed at shaping public opinion in favour of the plan. This included the funding of NGOs, media campaigns, and academic initiatives designed to influence local perspectives, potentially crossing ethical lines regarding foreign interference in democratic processes.
Given your ongoing efforts to expose inefficiencies and corrupt practices within federal agencies, we see it as a mutual interest if your department reviews past USAID allocations to Cyprus and discloses any findings regarding potential financial improprieties or wasteful spending.
We would greatly appreciate any insights, reports, or investigative steps your office could take on this matter.
Sincerely, Geadis Geadi and Emmanouil Fragkos”
It is recalled that Nathan Associates in the Final Report “CYPRUS BI-COMMUNAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM EVALUATION” on behalf of USAID, which was made public almost 1 year after the rejection of the Annan plan, stated:
“The US effort, along with the UN and others, has accomplished much since the inception of the program and, as we report here, since the establishment of the US-UNDP BDP. We also identify where we believe improvements could be made in the program, mainly in the context of our hope that the UN Plan would be accepted. With the Greek Cypriot rejection of the plan, it is not clear whether there will be, or should be a continuation of the BDP (Bi-Communal Development Program), or any other foreign grant program dedicated to convincing Greek Cypriots to “vote for peace”. The factors which caused these citizens to reject a settlement may well be too powerful for any such program to succeed.”