The UK, Germany and Canada have slashed foreign aid this year, deepening damage done by US cuts, analysis shows
Western countries have slashed foreign aid budgets this year and reductions will steepen in 2026, with the United States, United Kingdom, Germany and Canada cutting the most, according to a new analysis from the Center for Global Development (CGD).
The aid cuts will mean 'significant losses' for many developing nations, according to the analysis from the DC-based think tank, shared exclusively with CNN. Ethiopia is projected to lose the most aid in nominal terms, with Jordan, Afghanistan and the Democratic Republic of Congo also hit particularly hard.
Smaller nations will also be hammered by the reduction in foreign aid, with Lesotho, Micronesia and Eswatini each losing around 50% of their aid.
'It's setting fire to the bold ambitions to solve poverty and transform developing countries,' Lee Crawfurd, one of the authors of the report, told CNN. 'It's some of the poorest, most fragile places in the world that are going to be hardest hit.'
The analysis looked at projections of bilateral aid – money provided directly to another country rather than routed through multilateral organizations such as United Nations agencies or the World Bank – for 2025 and 2026.
The US is projected to cut the most, with a projected 56% reduction compared to levels two years ago.
The Trump administration's gutting of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) earlier this year has already left a hole in many international aid budgets, and several other Western nations are following suit rather than filling the void.
'A big, big chunk of overall cuts in the next couple of years are going to be from the US pulling out, rather than other countries. But these other countries are making things worse,' said Crawfurd, a senior research fellow at the CGD.
The UK aid cuts are estimated to represent a roughly 39% reduction compared to 2023 levels of spending. Meanwhile, Germany is cutting about 27%, Canada 25% and France 19% of their international aid budgets.
The true level of aid cuts remains unclear, as the Trump administration's proposed budget and other government proposals are still making their way through legislatures. But some funding cuts are almost guaranteed.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced in February that his government would increase the UK's defense spending by cutting its aid budget to 0.3% of gross national income in 2027, its lowest level since 1999.
Many organizations and aid workers have raised alarm about European governments pitting aid budgets against defense spending.
'Cutting the already lean aid budget is a false economy and will only increase division and amounts to a betrayal of the world's most vulnerable people,' said Halima Begum, head of Oxfam GB. 'It is a false dichotomy to pit international cooperation to tackle poverty against national security interests in order to avoid tax increases.'
Crawfurd said that bilateral aid is a 'really small part of government budgets' and the money for defense or security could be found elsewhere. 'It's a choice… it's a political choice,' he added.
The think tank wrote in its analysis that 'one striking takeaway is that some countries are projected to lose large amounts of ODA (official development assistance) simply because of who their main donors are – while others are projected to lose very little' – a game of chance, with losses not matching up to the recipient country's needs.
Yemen, for example, is projected to experience a 19% fall in its bilateral funding compared to 2023, while its 'comparable' neighbor country Somalia is projected to lose about 39%.
The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has also warned that multilateral aid cuts are threatening efforts to tackle 44 of the highest-priority, protracted humanitarian crises. As of April, only 11.9% of the funding for UN response plans had been covered.
'Every year, the UN has been helping more than 100 million people in the world as they go through the worst time of their lives in wars and disasters. But let's be clear: we won't reach the level of funding in 2025 that we've seen in previous years,' Anja Nitzsche, OCHA's chief of partnerships and resource mobilization told CNN in a statement. 'Vulnerable families are being left without food, clean water, healthcare, shelter or protection in places such as Sudan, Yemen, Ukraine, Myanmar and Afghanistan.'
The CGD is urging Western donors to reallocate aid to the poorest countries to try to 'ensure that resources are directed to populations in greatest need.'
Western countries also need to improve coordination to mitigate further damage, especially as they are withdrawing from countries receiving aid, the think tank said.
In some countries, the cuts will change who the largest donor is, which 'can lead to major shifts in what gets funded and how,' according to the CGD. For example, Portugal will likely overtake the US in aid to Angola, and Japan is projected to overtake France in Egypt. 'A new lead donor may not continue the same programs' or may take time to get up and running, according to the analysis.
Giving a larger share of aid to multilateral organizations can also help improve international cooperation and cut down on duplication of aid efforts.
'Coordination is an ongoing challenge,' Crawfurd told CNN. 'The easiest way to do that is just to fund big multilateral funds like the World Bank.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
37 minutes ago
- Axios
U.S. has "no interest" in putting troops on the ground in Iran, Vance says
Vice President Vance said Sunday that the United States doesn't plan to send ground troops into Iran and there is "no interest" in engaging in a "protracted conflict" with the nation. The big picture: Vance and other Trump administration officials appeared on Sunday shows to praise President Trump 's decision to carry out a series of airstrikes against three Iranian nuclear sites, while reassuring Americans that the mission — dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer — isn't the launching point for a wider conflict. Speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," Vance called the mission a "precise, a very surgical strike tailored to an American national interest" — preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon — and that he had "no fear" of a drawn-out conflict. Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed the sentiment on CBS' "Face the Nation," saying that there are no plans from the U.S. to engage in further attacks on Iran unless they "mess around" and attack Americans or U.S. military sites. What they're saying: Rubio said Sunday that the U.S. carried out the attack after efforts to negotiate with Iran stalled, but that Trump administration officials are "prepared to talk to them tomorrow." Both men also dismissed the notion that the U.S. is at war with Iran, with Vance stating that the war is with Iran's nuclear program. "We destroyed the Iranian nuclear program. I think we set that program back substantially," Vance told NBC News' Kristen Welker. Zoom out: Vance and Rubio were unable to confirm the extent of the damage done to the nuclear sites, but Iran Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei told CNN that the strike was a "betrayal of diplomacy." "No one knows what will happen next, but what is sure is that the responsibility of the consequences of this war must be borne by the United States and Israel," he said. Bagahei refused to say how Iran might respond to the U.S. strike, but said the nation is entitled to "exercise its right of self-defense."
CNN
39 minutes ago
- CNN
Dem. Senator Adam Schiff says 'we simply don't know' if US is safer after Iran strikes
Democratic Senator Adam Schiff speaks to Kasie Hunt about the congressional response to President Trump's order to strike Iran.
The Hill
39 minutes ago
- The Hill
Iran reportedly moves to close Strait of Hormuz after US attacks
The Iranian Parliament has approved a measure to close the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global oil chokepoint, after the United States bombed three nuclear sites in Iran, according to the Iranian state media on Sunday. While the Parliament has voted in favor of closing the strait, the final decision rests with the country's Supreme National Security Council, according to state media. Closing the strait, located between Iran and Oman, could have serious implications for both the global and U.S. economy. President Trump on Saturday night announced that the U.S. had bombed three nuclear sites in Iran, engaging U.S. forces in a war that Israel launched two weeks ago. In a brief address on Saturday night, the president warned of continued U.S. attacks on Iran if 'peace does not come quickly.' U.S. bombs targeted three nuclear sites in Natanz, Esfahan and Fordow, located inside a mountain. Six 'bunker buster' bombs were reportedly dropped on Fordow, while more than two dozen Tomahawk missiles were launched at the other two sites. The administration has argued the strikes were a monumental success, but it is currently unclear how much the sites were damaged or how long it has set back Iran's nuclear program. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi said the U.S. 'decided to blow up diplomacy' to end fighting with Israel by joining strikes against the country late Saturday night. Aragaci further warned of 'everlasting consequences.' Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday called on China to encourage Iran not to shut down the Strait of Hormuz. 'I encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them about that, because they heavily depend on the Straits of Hormuz for their oil,' Rubio said on Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo.'
