The United States has nominated Luke Lindberg, the undersecretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs in the Department of Agriculture, to lead the Rome-based World Food Program, the largest humanitarian agency globally.
Lindberg, who lives in South Dakota, most recently oversaw the rebranding of Food for Peace, an international food aid program operated by the now-defunct US Agency for International Development, as America First international food assistance. [Update, April 14: Devex reported that UN Secretary-General António Guterres, who must agree to the US pick, will not appoint the new head of the World Food Program before his term ends on Dec. 31, 2026]
The Trump administration announced the nomination of Lindberg on April 8 as the US candidate for executive director of the World Food Program even as the White House continues to push for more funding cuts in international food aid.
Cindy McCain, an American who has led WFP, as it’s known, since 2023, is stepping down before her term ends, having suffered a stroke late last year.
The agency has been led by an American consistently since 1992. It was conceived in 1961, when George McGovern, a former US representative and Democrat from South Dakota, directed the US Food for Peace program. (WFP’s first executive director was Dutch, Addeke Boerma.)
“As Under Secretary, he oversees the McGovern-Dole Food for Education Program and Food for Progress program, and has worked to restructure the Food for Peace program through an innovative, accountable model,” the White House statement said, announcing the nomination of Lindberg, 37. He has held the undersecretary post since August 2025. His father-in-law is US Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-South Dakota).
The administration proposed a funding cut to the McGovern-Dole program, a US initiative that aims to reduce hunger in low-income nations, and Food for Peace in the proposed 2027 budget sent recently to the US Congress.
Under the second Trump administration, funding for the World Food Program was slashed after the dismantling of USAID. The loss of funding for 2025 dropped to $6.4 billion from $10 billion in 2024, or $3.6 billion, but the cuts were not from the US alone. The drop in financing triggered the layoff of a third of WFP’s staff, or around 6,000 jobs, and a surge in malnutrition in some of the most fragile countries. Despite the cuts, Washington remains at the top of the donors’ list for WFP. This reality makes it more likely that Trump’s nominee will be accepted.
WFP and other UN humanitarian agencies have increasingly shifted toward cash-based assistance and local or regional procurement, approaches that are considered more cost-effective and less disruptive to local markets.
But Lindberg in his current role at the Department of Agriculture has pushed for exporting US-grown commodities for international food aid. Sam Vigersky, an international affairs fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that recourse to the old practice of WFP procurement restricted only to US commodities is a strong possibility if an American leads the agency again.
In February 2026, Lindberg’s office announced an agreement with WFP valued at $452 million under the Food for Peace program, targeting countries that include the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Haiti and Kenya. While such contributions are welcomed in a humanitarian system facing chronic money shortages, they also revive longstanding debates about the efficiency of in-kind aid.
“The practice is inefficient in that it involves shipping grain at significant cost from America, which is rarely the most readily available or the cheapest source; nor is it always the locally preferred kind of grain,” said Nick Coghlan, a former Canadian diplomat who has worked in Sudan and South Sudan.
“Moreover, the practice seriously undermines regional food markets which would otherwise receive a useful boost; and it discourages more innovative WFP programmes that require cash injections,” Coghlan told PassBlue.
The executive director of the agency boss is formally appointed jointly by the UN secretary-general (currently, António Guterres) and the director-general of the Food and Agriculture Organization, but in practice, the process has long been shaped by an unwritten understanding that Washington selects the candidate as the largest donor.
Before his current post, Lindberg founded South Dakota Trade, an association that helps Midwestern businesses to gain access to global markets. Lindberg has also held roles at the Export-Import Bank of the United States, where he served as chief of staff and chief strategy officer; and at Sanford World Clinic, a Sioux Falls-based health system.
Lindberg is also a fellow at the America First Policy Institute, a conservative think tank founded by Trump administration officials in 2021, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
WFP has had 11 executive directors since its launching, in 1961. Here is the full list:
• Addeke Boerma (Netherlands, 1962-1967): The organization’s first executive director, overseeing WFP’s experimental phase as it established its basic operations.
• Francisco Aquino (El Salvador, 1968-1976): Led the organization through its first major expansion of emergency response capabilities before resigning in 1976.
• Thomas Robinson (US, 1976): Served as executive director ad-interim following Aquino’s resignation. After serving eight years as deputy executive director of WFP, Robinson was appointed executive director ad-interim in May 1976. Before joining WFP, he was assistant chief of the Commodities Division for the US Department of State.
• Garson Vogel (Canada, 1977-1981): He had a career in the grain trade in the private sector and in government, and became chief commissioner of the Canadian Wheat Board before joining WFP.
• James Ingram (Australia, 1982-1992): A diplomat who oversaw WFP’s dramatic expansion during the African famine of the 1980s, when the organization mounted 87 relief operations delivering 2 million tons of assistance.
• Catherine Bertini (US, 1992-2002): The first American to lead WFP and the third female agency head in UN history, appointed on the recommendation of President George H.W. Bush and reappointed with the support of President Clinton. During her tenure, Bertini raised over $15 billion, allowing 31 million tons of food to reach those in need.
• James Morris (US, 2002-2007): He guided WFP in carrying out the largest humanitarian operation in history, feeding 26 million Iraqis, and led the organization’s response to the Indian Ocean tsunami of 2004.
• Josette Sheeran (US, 2007-2012): A former government official and journalist who led WFP through a severe global food price crisis and the Haiti earthquake response.
• Ertharin Cousin (US, 2012-2017): Served from 2009 to 2012 as US ambassador to the UN Agencies for Food and Agriculture in Rome under President Obama before leading WFP.
• David Beasley (US, 2017-2023): A former governor of South Carolina who garnered record amounts of financial support for the agency to fight global hunger. The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to WFP in 2020.
• Cindy McCain (US, 2023-2026): Appointed in April 2023, after serving as US ambassador to the UN food agencies in Rome. She announced her departure in February 2026, citing health problems.
Correction: The US nominee for WFP executive director does not need Senate approval. The drop in funding for the agency in 2025 from the previous year has also been corrected, noting that the decrease was not from the US alone.
Damilola Banjo is an award-winning staff reporter for PassBlue who has covered a wide range of topics, from Africa-centered stories to gender equality to UN peacekeeping and US-UN relations. She also oversees all video production for PassBlue. She was a Dag Hammarskjold fellow in 2023 and a Pulitzer Center postgraduate fellow in 2021. She was part of the BBC Africa team that produced the Emmy-nominated documentary, “Sex for Grades.” In addition, she worked for WFAE, an NPR affiliate in Charlotte, N.C. Banjo has a master’s of science degree from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and an undergraduate degree from the University of Ibadan in Nigeria.
![[Re]Group - A Playbook for Turbulent Times -Subscribe Now](https://passblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/regroup-v2_unf2026_square_600.500@2x.webp)
Bilali, I don’t think that UN reform could solve these entrenched practices of country “ownership” of certain senior UN Secretariat / UN system positions. Such practices already go against the provisions on the independence of the Secretariat that are included in Chapter XV of the UN Charter. It is the relentless pressure by powerful countries and the inability of successive UN Secretaries-General to resist it that have led to this “private property” situation. Still, some appearances were still kept, I thought, so the reference to a US Senate hearing to approve the US nominee for WFP Executive Director caught me by surprise. Damilola may want to respond directly with more details on this. In any case, going back to your “deep and real reform of the UN” demand, allow me to say that I have been studying and advocating for UN reform since my PhD thesis on the subject in the late 1980s. One has to take into account many factors, though, and avoid having the UN reformed downwards, instead of upwards. In difficult times with little collective goodwill to go around, as is the case today, it is in my view better to try to make the best of the existing UN Charter provisions, with courage and equanimity, instead of opening up everything to the possibility of lower-level consensus and weakening. Hopefully, the new UN Secretary-General, to be selected in the coming months, will reassert the primacy of the Charter provisions through her actions, including senior appointments. Reform of the minds and attitudes is what is mostly needed, and when that happens formal reform will follow suit.
Georgios your points are important but I do think think that Damilola is right because de facto UNICEF and WFP are the private proprieties of the United States ans some say that UNESCO and the Peace Keeping and Conflicts prevention are the ownerships of France, etc.etc…, that is why I and many other people are demanding in insisting on a real and deep reform of the UN because these are some of the important inequity and inequality issues in the UN to be addressed as well!
I suppose that the reference to a US Senate confirmation process is a mistake, as the ED of WFP occupies a UN system position. Regarding the nominated US national, first of all there is no formal “ownership” of UN system positions by certain countries/nationalities. In practice, though, major donor countries have established “customary law” ownership of certain key positions. In this case, there should at least be more than one US candidates for the UN Secretary-General and the FAO Director-General to choose from, plus ideally non-US candidates too. Accepting the single candidate proposed by any country’s government makes the post a “hereditary” one for that nationality, brings in a de facto national hearing/selection process, and undermines further the international / objectively-working-for-the-collective-good status of UN system officials.
We have corrected the reference to a Senate hearing. Many thanks
The core problem of the World Food Programme is not budget cuts alone, but the political composition of its leadership. The organization is heavily dominated by approximately 157 D1 and D2 positions, many of which are neither competitively recruited nor rooted in operational accountability, but instead appointed through opaque, top‑down selections. Lacking a coherent strategic vision and facing financial contraction, senior management has chosen self‑preservation over reform. Rather than questioning the necessity of this inflated leadership layer, the instinctive response has been to eliminate lower‑level and local staff in the belief that doing so will protect senior executives and their privileges.
The reality is the opposite. At headquarters in Rome and across field offices, local staff are already under‑utilized, trapped in repetitive and circular workflows generated by managerial over‑layering and constant re‑reviews. Productivity is not collapsing because of staff at the base, but because decision‑making has been centralized, politicized, and disconnected from operational realities. Meanwhile, management remains preoccupied with defending institutional turf and personal “kingdoms,” while presenting austerity as a technical necessity rather than a political choice.
This could ultimately be positive for WFP. Appointing someone with no practical experience and a clear understanding of how to navigate the system may result in additional resources being mobilized to offset current inefficiencies.