While the drastic aid cuts announced by the largest donors are making the headlines around the world, a deeper issue may be at stake. In this episode of DevelopmentAid Dialogues, host Hisham Allam speaks to Dr. Göran Holmqvist, perhaps the most prominent voice in the international context of development, about the unprecedented shift in global aid paradigms. With decades of leadership experience, including at SIDA in Sweden, UNICEF‘s Office of Research in Florence, and the Nordic Africa Institute, Dr. Holmqvist is now a researcher at the Institute for Future Studies in Stockholm. His thinking is both urgent and sobering about the geopolitical undercurrents that are driving today’s aid cuts.
With foreign aid budgets slashed by up to 40% in the UK, France and Belgium, with Germany likely to follow, the question becomes that much more defining: is this a temporary response due to fiscal pressures or the beginning of a long-term retreat into a darker, more introspective place relative to global solidarity?
Download the transcript of this episode.
“In the short run, yes, it looks quite problematic,” Holmqvist said. But he warned against drawing simplistic conclusions. “When it comes to the U.S., I believe the aid cuts reflect a deeper ideological repositioning. For some European countries, the reductions appear more reluctant—done with regret and driven by budgetary constraints rather than a lack of political will.”
Yet the implications are profound. Holmqvist emphasized that the challenges necessitating global cooperation—climate change, migration, conflict—are intensifying, not fading.
“These problems will come back and haunt us. Eventually, we’ll have to return to the table of international cooperation.”
He argued that aid has become politically vulnerable, especially under the influence of right-wing populist movements. These movements often oppose the values underpinning development assistance—solidarity, equality, and shared responsibility.
“It’s not that public opinion has fundamentally shifted. Eurobarometer data shows strong continued support for aid among European citizens. What’s changed is the political discourse and the rise of parties that capitalize on skepticism.”
This disconnect between public sentiment and political action has made aid an easy target. Holmqvist warned against internalizing the rhetoric that global solidarity is unpopular.
“We shouldn’t buy into the idea that people don’t care anymore. That simply isn’t supported by the evidence.”
Throughout the conversation, Holmqvist returned to a powerful metaphor—the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Global problems, he explained, mirror the logic of that game: individual actors are tempted to defect for short-term gain, even though long-term cooperation benefits everyone.
“Game theory shows us that the most successful strategy over time is ‘tit-for-tat with forgiveness.’ That means we start by cooperating, punish defections, but always leave the door open to rebuild trust.”
Applying this logic, he stressed the need for “naming and shaming” countries that withdraw from cooperative frameworks while simultaneously encouraging a path back to alignment. He was particularly critical of the U.S. under former President Donald Trump, who he said pursued “a strategy for losers” by retreating from multilateralism and disregarding global responsibilities.
Holmqvist also warned of the immediate fallout.
“In refugee camps, people will go without food, medicine, and education. These aren’t abstract consequences. These are human lives.” The vacuum left by Western donors, he noted, may be filled by China and Gulf states, but often with geopolitical strings attached. “This isn’t just about money. It’s about values.”
He urged donors to defend multilateral institutions and not bow to ideological retrenchment.
“Retreating now jeopardizes everything we’ve built—from the climate financing commitments in the Paris Agreement to the credibility of our humanitarian response systems.”
Asked how to restore trust and build momentum, Holmqvist was clear:
“We must reassert the core values of development cooperation—human solidarity and collective responsibility. Aid isn’t just about charity; it’s about shaping a more stable, just, and sustainable world.”
He closed with a call to action inspired by historian Timothy Snyder’s work on tyranny.
“All authoritarian leaders rely on compliance. One of Snyder’s most important lessons is: do not obey in advance. Everyone has space to resist. We must use that space.”
For development organizations and NGOs, the message was one of urgency but also resilience: set priorities, cut where it hurts least, strengthen advocacy, and double down on local partnerships.
“We shouldn’t fool ourselves,” he cautioned. “Cutting aid will have consequences. People will be hurt. But the demand for global cooperation isn’t going away. It will return—because it has to.”
For the full conversation with Dr. Göran Holmqvist, listen to the latest episode of DevelopmentAid Dialogues. Stay tuned for more critical discussions on the future of aid and international cooperation.
