🔗 Share this article

A notable change is underway in European foreign assistance approach, experts note. The longstanding emphasis on fighting global destitution and hunger is now being replaced by geopolitical calculations, while countries channel money to Ukrainian support and domestic military budgets.

New Decisions Highlight a Broader Trend

During December, Sweden revealed a substantial cut of development assistance amounting to 10 billion kronor (£800m). The money once assigned to Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Liberia, Tanzania, and Bolivian projects will now be reallocated.

Simultaneously, German authorities have outlined a humanitarian spending plan for 2026 planned at €1.05 billion (£920m). This amount constitutes under 50% of the previous year's budget, with expenditure shifted on regions deemed a direct priority for European interests.

"It is my belief we are eroding a common agreement of shared responsibility and responsibility which has been in place for a while now," said an expert based in the German capital.

A Growing List of Nations Following Suit

This trend is far from unique. Additional European donors have implemented parallel decisions:

• Britain has announced plans to reduce its overall aid budget to finance higher military investment.
• Norway recently increased its non-military support to Ukraine by 2.5bn kroner (£185m), a sum that now constitutes a fourth of its total assistance budget. This rise has been partly funded by a reduction to support for Africans nations.
• The French government has also scheduled a major €700m reduction to its aid spending, including a severe sixty percent decrease in nutritional assistance. Concurrently, defence spending is scheduled to increase by €6.7bn.

Humanitarian Turning into More "Conditional"

Analysts argue that humanitarian assistance is now seen through a quid-pro-quo lens. Support is increasingly channeled to where donor nations perceive a tangible strategic advantage for Europe.

"It’s a broader global strategic shift and there’s a misleading idea by European actors that they have to engage in this game now in the same way as Moscow, China, Washington," added the analyst.

Severe Impacts for Vulnerable Regions

The funding shifts have direct and severe impacts.

For countries like Mozambique, which faces cyclones, drought, and a persistent insurgency in its Cabo Delgado region, humanitarian cuts are currently biting. The nation has secured only a small portion of the funding required for 2025, causing insufficient food distribution and medical shortfalls.

The Swedish aid cut will specifically hit projects that provide medical care, schooling, and rehabilitation support for people displaced by the conflict.

Moreover, slashes to international public health programmes risk decades of advances in combating HIV/Aids. Countries like Mozambique, Zimbabwean, and Tanzania are among those projected to bear the brunt of these cuts.

"Each reduction increases the threat of lasting developmental decline," said a country director for a major humanitarian agency in Mozambique. "If current patterns persist, 2026 will be incredibly hard ... there is a genuine risk that gains achieved over the last decade could be undone."

The broader consensus is suggests populations directly affected by these decisions have limited say in making them. While funding capitals may meet short-term political concerns, the long-term consequence is the weakening of on-the-ground systems that keep humanitarian conditions from deteriorating even more.