Trump's axe on humanitarian aid causes deaths and affects global health, and is part of a trend in many Western countries in recent years.
For weeks now we have been closely following the impact of the cuts to international cooperation that US President Donald Trump has implemented with pride and much fanfare. A recent article by journalist Julia Navarro and the reading of a report by the Elcano Royal Institute signed by one of its main researchers, Iliana Olivié, made me realise, however, that Trump's cuts are neither an isolated event nor one of those moments that mark a before and after in the geopolitics of the world: they are a trend.
It turns out, then, that in these turbulent times of polarisation and rising extremism, many Western countries have undertaken extensive cuts in aid to the least developed countries. This year alone, we are talking about cooperation and humanitarian aid being slashed by as much as 74 billion dollars (it is much more than a cut). Before the United States, countries such as the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands had cut their Official Development Assistance (ODA). And beware, these are not only governments inspired by Trump, but also by social democrats. It is, as I say, a trend.
Without a doubt, the US decision has had the most direct and immediate effects. In 2023, the United States was allocating around 65 billion dollars to it. The estimate for 2025 is that the scissors' blow is down to about $55 billion. For the purposes of the US humanitarian arm, called USAID, it is virtually a total shutdown of its activities.
Overnight, at scores of humanitarian and aid projects that depended on US funding, the doors were padlocked and their workers had their contracts abruptly terminated while they were urged to fly home the next day. In all, it is estimated that the US terminated more than 10,000 different grant lines and foreign aid contracts, leaving millions of people without access to life-saving services.
Some, like telecoms magnate Elon Musk, celebrated and hailed the decisions as a huge saving for the US coffers. Disinformation, one of the main evils of this century, is rampant: it turns out that several polls have confirmed that one in four Americans is convinced that 25% of the total US budget was spent on foreign aid.
And with these figures, and with biased assertions, Trump and Musk play to the applause of their acolytes by talking about huge amounts of money wasted: the reality of the numbers shows that the country spent about 1% on foreign aid, and within that, only a quarter of it was humanitarian aid (0.25% of the federal budget). Still, because I don't want to make it sound like that was small, the US contribution was not only huge, but key.
Weeks later, we have started to read about the effects of these cuts. Chief among them is that people are dying. That makes sense, because for those suffering the consequences of war, displacement, famine or disease, humanitarian aid is vital. It provides food, clean water, medical care, shelter and even some mental health. These programmes are not mere numbers in a budget; they represent tangible lives and futures. If cutting aid puts lives at risk, eliminating it with the stroke of a pen kills.
Moreover, all these humanitarian cuts come in the years when the world is experiencing the most armed conflicts since the Second World War (59 conflicts in 2023, 28 of them in Africa). The barbarities occurring in Ukraine and Gaza are on our minds, but people are not aware of the gigantic dimensions of the war in Sudan, the resurgence of the almost eternal conflict in South Sudan, the jihadist violence in the Sahel or the impact on the civilian population of the war in eastern Congo, where geopolitics is playing dice with strategic minerals.
In Sudan alone, for example, humanitarian organisations now consider it to be the biggest humanitarian crisis on the planet. Thirty million people need humanitarian aid to survive, including twelve million refugees displaced by the virulence of the fighting. And in such a context, the cuts are devastating: they have crippled essential programmes and reduced the response capacity of organisations on the ground. One heartbreaking example is that of community kitchens: at least 900 out of 1,400 have closed, leaving nearly two million people without daily sustenance.
Another direct and fundamental impact of the cuts is on global health: thanks to humanitarian aid, under-five mortality rates have been halved over the past 30 years. Some experts and academics have already estimated that the halting of US projects in the fight against HIV could undo decades of progress against the disease, and that the cancellation of these programmes could cause more than six million additional (unplanned) deaths over the next four years.
Against this backdrop, it is a source of pride that our country, with its clear and evident economic difficulties (Official Development Assistance is not yet at the level it should be, below the average for European countries in our neighbourhood), is working not only to avoid appearing on the list of countries that have cut their development aid, but quite the opposite: to be an example to the international community for its determination to increase it and to be a key player in promoting a global movement that calls for a culture that is much more empathetic towards countries in need.
Just yesterday we read in the media that Spain and four other EU countries have called on the European Commission to make an extra effort in foreign cooperation, which would provide some relief from the disastrous cuts not only by Trump, but also by all the countries that have reduced their cooperation.
And this movement of countries and organisations has an appointment in a month and a half in Spain, in Seville, to work towards a fairer and more united world: the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4).
This conference represents a unique opportunity to reform financing for development at all levels, including a push to reform the international financial architecture and to address the challenges that are holding back the urgent investment needed to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (the 2030 Agenda). The conference will bring together leaders from all governments, along with international and regional organisations, financial and trade institutions, business, civil society and the United Nations system, to strengthen international cooperation. And here our country has a unique opportunity to lead, foster and facilitate consensus.
In conclusion, regardless of whether the cuts to humanitarian aid come from the US or from Europe, the impact on those who depend on this assistance is the same: a direct threat to their survival and well-being, a threat to their lives.
It is essential to point out the hypocrisy of selective criticism (it seems that all the focus is on Trump's cuts) and to recognise that the responsibility is shared. Assuming this, the importance of events such as the Seville Conference will serve as an opportunity to reassess and strengthen the global commitment to financing for development, even in a difficult context such as the one we are living in. Spain has the opportunity to take the lead in promoting fairer and more inclusive approaches, and this can and should also lead us to improve our own Official Development Assistance effort.