This is the beginning of the end of international aid. What will the new world look like?

In recent months, international aid has been subject to the"shock and awe" of dramatic cuts by the largest donor in the world, the United States, as well as many European countries.
But this reduction – recent projections suggest a $40 billion cut is expected in 2025 – is more than just a drop in funds. It increasingly looks like an assault on the norms and values – like solidarity and multilateral cooperation – that have been at the core of the Western liberal internationalist system since the Second World War.
This attack has not happened overnight. In fact, it's been a long-time coming.
Criticisms of aid stretch back several decades and are not unique to the US. Free marketeers have long taken issue with a model of economic development reliant on benevolent state intervention, while those leaning to the left have expressed frustrations with the neocolonial aspirations of development that seeks influence over formerly dependent colonies.
The sector has trumpeted the effectiveness of aid to respond to criticisms that it doesn't deliver results, but has not robustly moved forward the true devolution of power needed to achieve real impact. The aid sector has talked about global institutional reform but not addressed real imbalances of decision-making and representation between countries. This glacial pace of change has frustrated both aid providers and recipients alike.
Before Donald Trump 's executive order suspending aid and dismantling the US Agency for International Development (USAID), aid cuts had already been announced in several countries including Germany, France and the Netherlands.
The UK has also recently cut its aid budget in order to grow its military spending. While global aid budgets grew to reach a notional peak of $223 billion (£166bn) in 2023, the amount of Official Development Assistance (ODA) spent beyond national borders has actually been falling in recent years, with more and more aid spent by major donors helping refugees inside their own countries, incentivising exports and external investment and reducing climate emissions.
The reality is that foreign aid hit both peak legitimacy and peak volume prior to this Trump-induced upheaval. And now the clock is ticking to define what this new 'post-aid' paradigm should look like.
In a series of meetings hosted by the think tank ODI Global, several government donors underwriting aid have been reflecting on how to manage short term political and fiscal pressures, while identifying a possible long-term vision for the next iteration of development cooperation and their role in it.
But beyond these immediate challenges, officials recognise an opportunity to exploit this moment of disruption to redesign a global development cooperation system fit for the realities of a multipolar world, as well as new development challenges – from increased humanitarian crises to climate change. Several voices from the Global South have also expressed considerable enthusiasm for a fundamental rethink, perhaps even more so than officials from donor countries horrified by the collateral damage of the sudden, sharp withdrawal of funding.
So what should come next?
Our discussions highlighted the need for a sound rationale for the modern-day purpose of public spending for development. Our research finds that narratives are most likely to succeed if they link to core national interests, cross-border challenges and international solidarity. New, compelling narratives for public spending on development can help taxpayers understand why such expenditure is important, which in turn can grow broader based political leadership that can champion such investment.
Our first meeting detailed three plausible policy rationales: narrowing the focus of aid on the most vulnerable in fragile and humanitarian contexts; inviting all countries, rich or poor, to collectively tackle shared global challenges; and transforming the structural drivers of inequality by changing policies on trade and debt that disadvantage the Global South.
To put these ideas into action we will need to change the way aid institutions function.
For example, Western NGOs working internationally will need to transition away from delivering bags of rice and tents and being contracted to provide services, towards building progressive movements and actively trying to influence the policies of their own governments.
Donor governments may spend less on big aid budgets, but focus more on other ways to create change, such as sharing intellectual property and changing their policies on migration or fossil fuel production.
It may be time to retire the traditional concept of rich countries giving money directly to poor countries altogether, in favour of pooling funding through institutions, like the United Nations, designed to address collective challenges – though such international institutions will need to be revitalised and streamlined.
In 1969, the Pearson Commission, named after Canadian Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson, was formed to recommend "a new basis for international cooperation" and ultimately led to an acceptance among donor countries to spend 0.7 per cent of their GDP on aid, creating the international aid architecture we know today.
We have reached a similar turning point and require similarly robust thinking about a new paradigm for international cooperation in the 21st century. A modern-day independent commission of high-level experts could help to think through the strategic and operational choices that need to urgently be made.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Daily Mail​

39 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

EXCLUSIVE Trump launches intriguing new call to arms video to pass massive tax cuts in his 'big beautiful bill'

The White House drafted several members of Congress to help sell the president's 'Big Beautiful Bill' in a new video, as the deadline to pass it grows closer. The video, provided exclusively to the Daily Mail offers a window into the White House effort to move the bill through Congress by July 4th for the president to sign. Members of Congress were drafted by the president's team at the White House Congressional picnic to speak in support of the bill, highlighting why they were supporting the president's efforts. Sens. Roger Marshall of Kansas, Dave McCormick of Pennsylvania were featured in the video, as well as Reps. Chuck Fleischmann, Diana Harshbarger, Erin Houchin, and Anna Paulina Luna. The Republicans touted the bill's efforts to prevent the 'largest tax increase in history,' by extending expiring rate hikes, securing funding for border security, energy development, and tax relief, 'This is a bill for working families, working Americans,' Houchin said. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, touted the expansion of the child tax credit and savings accounts for every new child in the United States and ending tax on tips. 'This is a net positive for America,' she said. President Trump urged the Senate to keep working on the bill during his speech at the picnic. 'We're shooting for the 4th of July,' he told members of Congress. 'I think it's going to be the most important piece of legislation that our country has passed in many, many years.' The bill passed the House with a slim Republican majority vote of 215-214 and now is working its way through the Senate. Despite pressure from the president, some Republican senators are opposed to the measure, warning that it spends too much money and adds to the deficit. Sen. Rand Paul signaled his opposition to the bill telling Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo in a recent he would need more negotiations before he was willing to vote for it. 'Right now they are not negotiating with me, because they don't think they need me, so I will not be the deciding vote. The bill will not fail because of me,' he said. Senate Majority Leader John Thune can lose four Republican votes to pass the bill, provided that Vice President JD Vance can help it pass by breaking a tie. After Paul vocally criticized the bill he said he was 'uninvited' from the White House picnic, telling reporters he felt the move was 'incredibly petty.' Trump re-extended the invitation to the Senator and his family on social media. 'Of course Senator Rand Paul and his beautiful wife and family are invited to the BIG White House Party tonight,' Trump wrote, describing Paul as 'the toughest vote in the history of the U.S. Senate.' The president's signature bill struggled out of the gate to win support, especially after billionaire Elon Musk criticized the bill as a 'massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill' that was 'a disgusting abomination.' Republicans defended the measure, arguing that the tax cuts in the bill would help boost revenues for the treasury through economic growth. Congressional Democrats remain universally opposed to the legislation.

Daily Mirror

40 minutes ago

• Daily Mirror

Donald Trump slams spy chief and says Iran has two weeks 'to come to senses'

The US President said he had given Iran a 'period of time' to see if its leaders would 'come to their senses' after saying his two week deadline would be the 'maximum' Donald Trump has slammed his former Democrat spy chief in a blistering attack while being questioned about his plans for potential US intervention in Iran. The President has been subject to intense questioning in recent days as he weighs whether or not to involve the US in the ongoing Israeli assault of Iranian nuclear facilities. On Thursday, he decided he would wait two weeks before giving an order on how to precede, before going on today to claim the nation is "within a matter of weeks or months" of acquiring a nuclear weapon. He has now said the country has two weeks "to come to its senses" before slamming his own intelligence chief. ‌ ‌ Speaking to the press this afternoon, Trump was asked by gathered journalists about the intelligence behind his claim that Iran is close to acquiring a weapon of mass destruction. He was asked to respond to claims that members of the US intelligence community has said they had "no idea" when Iran could develop a bomb. In response, he said: "Well then my intelligence community is wrong." He then asked: "Who in the intelligence community said that?" When the journalist informed him that his director of national intelligence, former Democrat turned key Trump ally Tulsi Gabbard, had said so, he curtly responded: "She's wrong." Ms Gabbard told Capitol Hill lawmakers in March that the intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003". She added at the time that the US was closelt monitoring Iran's nuclear programme, before noting it was actively enriching uranium. She noted, however, that Iran's enriched uranium stockpile "is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons". ‌ The Commander-In-Chief also previously suggested his handpicked national security head was wrong earlier this week, adding fuel to rumours that his fragile MAGA coalition is reportedly fracturing at present. Key factions in the alliance are splitting over the 79-year-old's approach to Israel's recent all-out attack, with a key Trump-Vance campaign plank being no involvement in foreign conflicts. Mr Trump said during his press address earlier today that he has given Iran "a period of time", before adding the two week deadline he had originally given was "the maximum". During those two weeks, he added, the parties involved in the conflict would receive "time to see whether or not people come to their senses". He also said it would be "very hard" to ask Israel to cease attacks on Iran after Iran's foreign minister said Israel must stop its "crimes and aggression", adding that Iran will not negotiate with any parts as long as Israeli attacks continue. "I think it's very hard to make that request right now," Trump said as he was asked whether or not he would speak to Israel about stopping their strikes. "If someone is winning, it's harder to do than if someone is losing. But we are ready and willing and able, and have been speaking to Iran and we will see what happens."

Reuters

41 minutes ago

• Reuters

FCC orders review of 'Cyber Trust Mark' program over China ties

June 20 (Reuters) - Federal Communications Commission chair Brendan Carr said on Friday he had ordered a review of the U.S. Cyber Trust Mark program over "potentially concerning ties to the government of China." Carr said the review was being carried out by the FCC's Council on National Security. He did not provide details. The review was earlier reported by Fox News, opens new tab.