Cutting 25% of development cooperation is a dangerous choice
Feb 06 2025
3 minutes
As the world reels from conflict, climate crises and humanitarian disasters, the future government plans unprecedented cuts development cooperation. According to the most recent budget statement, the budget would be cut by no less than 25%. This is a short-sighted and dangerous decision, with concrete consequences on the ground and for Belgium's international position.
First the good news. The new government underlines the importance of international solidarity and partnerships for sustainable development. It wants to commit itself to democracy, good governance and respect for human rights. Topics such as reproductive health care, equal rights for women and girls and the protection of minorities are also given attention. The bad news: the resources to make all this happen are completely lacking.
In Congo, a devastating war is raging, in Gaza, people are searching for their family and friends under the rubble, and in Syria and Lebanon, there is a deep crisis. The needs have rarely been greater, and at this very moment, the Belgian government has chosen to deal a blow to international solidarity. This choice will create victims and lead to more instability, chaos and insecurity. International solidarity is not charity, but an investment in stability and fundamental human rights. These short-sighted cuts are putting human lives at risk and also endangering our own geopolitical and economic interests.
However, high-income countries, including Belgium, promised to invest 0,7% of their gross national income in international solidarity. However, that target was never achieved. Now, instead of making progress, our country is in danger of sliding even further away from this international agreement. This not only undermines our credibility, but also the impact that Belgium can have in global efforts for peace, stability and development.
Belgium is undermining its own position on the international stage
The coalition agreement proposes savings that seem to create budgetary space in the short term, but are destructive in the long term. Conflict prevention, food security and humanitarian aid are not luxuries. Every euro invested in conflict prevention yields sixteen euros later, as calculated by the OECD. A huge profit, in other words. Cutting these resources will therefore mean more forced migration, more conflicts and more instability in the long term, with all the consequences for Belgium and Europe.
Development cooperation, defence and diplomacy are three legs of the same stool. Saw off one and you undermine Belgium's strong position abroad. Yet the Arizona coalition explicitly acknowledges this three-legged position in its coalition agreement. But by putting the knife to the throat of development cooperation, it undermines its own strategy from the start.
Investments are needed right now!
These cuts follow Trump’s drastic cuts, which cut billions in life-saving aid on day one of his presidency. Just this week, USAID – the world’s largest food aid agency – was virtually financially and logistically drained by his administration. The consequences are disastrous: medicine shortages, food distributions halted and an avoidable increase in HIV patients. Belgium is now in danger of falling into the same trap. At a time when international solidarity is crucial, this government is opting for a downward spiral.
Earlier, 120 prominent voices – rectors, CEOs, defense specialists, academics and various civil society organizations – called on the government to continue investing in international cooperation and solidarity. Cutting now is like sending the fire brigade home while the fire is flaring up.
A dangerous shift: development cooperation in the interests of self-interest
The government emphasizes a so-called '3D approach', in which diplomacy, defense and development cooperation are more closely coordinated. In theory, this can promote efficiency, but in practice there is a risk that development aid will be used as an instrument for Belgian economic and geopolitical interests. According to the coalition agreement, development cooperation must contribute to Belgian trade policy and security policy.
An example of this is the link between development cooperation and migrant return policies. This is not only ineffective, but can also hurt local populations if budgets are cut. Development cooperation should remain focused on combating poverty and inequality, not short-term political gain.
