Could DOGE and Musk cutting U.S. foreign aid be a deliberate strategy to trigger migration to Europe and boost nationalist politicians?

When thinking about second-order effects, DOGE cutting aid to poor nations causes illegal migration. This immigration is a benefit and becomes a rallying cry for nationalist candidates in European nations (AfD in Germany, Rassemblement National in France, VOX in Spain, etc.)

There's a well-documented history of this. It seems like there's a clear strategy of cutting aid destabilizes poor nations -> people flee those nations-> they migrate heavily into European countries (like Germany, Spain, etc.) -> the sudden influx of migrants fuels anti-immigrant sentiment -> right-wing nationalist candidates win elections.

Illegal immigration impacts (or can be sold as impacting) everything else in politics. It impacts budget priorities, national security, tax policies, affordability, housing costs, healthcare costs, and on and on and on. Sell the idea of a flood of immigrants, and you mobilize a huge chunk of the voters.

In the end, DOGE didn't save the US any real money. At best, it's a rounding error in a $7T budget. Cutting USAID funding amounted to maybe $8B. We also cut funding to PEPFAR, WFP, and FEWS NET. We pulled the rug out from under these programs, triggering a massive humanitarian crisis. No phase-down, no transition, no handoff to other NGOs. This was abrupt and left a massive vacuum.

Is there any reason to believe that this is NOT a deliberate strategy?