Several European countries have announced discounts of their foreign aid budgets, with global health programs in the reticle.
ADVERTISEMENTSome of the largest world health donors in Europe reduce their aid budgets, which fear that health groups can spell the disaster for countries dependent on foreign money to combat malaria, HIV, tuberculosis, andEmerging threats.
Global health groups still do not know exactly which programs are on the cutting block. But they say that the recent European cuts are painful since the United States has brought an ax to its own foreign aid during the six weeks since President Donald Trump took office.
In the United Kingdom, for example, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said last week that he would shave the foreign aid budget of 0.5% of gross national income (GNI) to 0.3% in 2027 in order to support defense spending, which prompted the international development minister to leave in protest.
Meanwhile the Dutch government Plans presented To reduce the aid by 2029 because it prioritizes the “interests of the Netherlands”.
Belgium has also reduced the financing of development cooperation by 25%.
France has reduced its assistance budget 35% and will launch an examination of its existing programs. And Swiss will stop Development initiatives in Albania, Bangladesh and Zambia at the end of 2028.
Cups mean that global health programs – which received around 10% of all foreign aid in 2023 – are in competition for a money reduction pot while Europeans turn to defense and other interior priorities.
“The door closes on the help wherever we look at,” Dr. Michael Adekunle Charles, Director General of RBM Partnership told Euronews Health to put an end to malaria, a large anti-malaria initiative.
The United States provided approximately half of the group’s budget before these subsidies were terminated, said Charles.
A recent subsidy in the United Kingdom for 5 million pounds sterling (6 million euros) to combat mosquito disease in Cameroon, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda does not seem to be in danger, he said, but it does not expect that the additional funding of the United Kingdom-and other European countries do not go to fill the void.
This already obliges difficult decisions about spending money on bed nets treated by insecticides, which help prevent mosquito bites and infections, or cases management for patients with malaria, which can die if they even lack a day of treatment.
“Many lives are at stake,” said Charles, describing the situation as “quite disastrous” in African countries where malaria is endemic.
“ Snowball effect ” of American and European cuts
In 2022, the United States was the world’s largest donor of health (15.1 billion euros), followed by Germany (4.2 billion euros), Japan (3.1 billion euros), the United Kingdom (2 billion euros) and France (1.9 billion euros), according to a tracker managed by Look for development.
The recent European cuts are not exactly the same as those of the United States, which have been rapid and brutal, eliminating tens of billions of dollars for the treatment of HIV, efforts to vaccination against polio, the employment of health workers, and even more in low-income countries.
European governments give more time to complete their projects, and many have said that they will not make the existing contracts. Meanwhile, country cuts like Germany and Sweden were already in motion.
ADVERTISEMENTNevertheless, the new cuts arouse a concern among world health experts in Belgium, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, which had hoped for Europeans Would remain in the middle of the American retirement – and would have been disappointed.
“Something we have never seen, I think that in the history of international cooperation, is such a massive cup, not a donor, but several,” said Jean Van Wetter, head of the Belgian development agency Enabel, Euronews Health.
“You have a kind of snowball effect, which is very negative”.
The Netherlands, for example, generally have a large part of his development aid for sexual health and reproduction problems, and when Trump reduced these programs during his first mandate, the Country led a fundraising effort To fill part of this gap.
ADVERTISEMENTBut while sexual and reproductive health remains a priority in the new development policy plan, health groups should not expect a repeated performance, according to Paul van den Berg, political advisor in Dutch cordaid for non -profit.
“It’s a little lower on the list of priorities, but he is still there,” Van Den Berg told Euronews Health, although another fundraising campaign “will certainly not happen”.
What European health cuts could mean
The United Kingdom reduces its help budget by the same margin as in 2021, offering indices on the place where recent cuts could fall.
According to an analysis Through the action of the UK’s UK-CONNEMENT-CONNEMENT-CONNEMENT-CONNECTIVE in the United Kingdom, money-based health group in countries like Nepal and Myanmar, ambulances transporting patients in Sierra Leone hospitals have lacked fuel, and bilateral projects for clean water and sanitation lost 80% of their funding.
ADVERTISEMENT“It was incredibly difficult for these essential health programs and health services to continue when, essentially, the catch was fired on them,” Katie Husselby, group director, Euronews Health told.
She described the last series of cups as “completely devastating” and a “double blow” since American funding freezes.
The United Kingdom has already undertaken funding in multilateral groups such as the Global Fund to combat AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, as well as initiatives related to climate change.
These promises leave little or even nothing, for direct health partnerships between the United Kingdom and other countries, according to an analysis of the Global development center.
ADVERTISEMENTIn the end, the Cups of the United States and Europe could reshape the global aid system, according to Jesper Sundewall, an associate professor of global health systems at Lund University in Sweden.
He said that even if the sudden exit from the United States has been “irresponsible” and “immoral”, developing countries should play a more important role in funding directly from their health services, and that global health collaborations could be discussed differently to call on the change of political priorities.
“Opinion on the aid is obsolete,” Sundewall told Euronews Health.
As development budgets decrease, he said, global health programs could be distributed through the government.
ADVERTISEMENTVan Wetter of Belgium, however, warned that the extent of the recent cuts could paralyze global health initiatives in a way that will be difficult to recover.
“When you work on a long -term health system strengthening, it takes time to build, to get results … So if you stop and then decide to reinvest later, it’s difficult,” said Van Wetter.
In the meantime, he has added: “We fear that the system could collapse”.