The UK’s bilateral aid to African countries will be reduced by almost £900m by 2028-29, a 56% cut, as part of more than £6bn in cuts aimed at boosting defense spending. The move has drawn sharp criticism from aid agencies and international observers, who warn of the long-term consequences for global stability and development.

Impact on Global Development

The cuts. Approved by MPs last year. Will mean aid spending is reduced for all G20 countries except Turkey; the majority of funding will now be focused on conflict zones, primarily Palestine, Sudan, and Ukraine. This shift in strategy has raised concerns about the impact on the most vulnerable populations in the developing world.

Aid agencies have said the cuts will be the steepest in the G7, leaving “the UK’s reputation in tatters, and a poorer, more unequal and unstable world for us all.” The reduction in aid is expected to hit countries such as Afghanistan, Somalia, and Yemen, which are already struggling with instability and poverty.

According to the Foreign. Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), bilateral overseas development aid will fall from £818m in 2026 to £677m by 2029. This shift is part of a pivot to multilateral contributions through the World Bank and African Development Bank, as well as funding for the Gavi vaccine program.

Humanitarian and Educational Consequences

Bond, the UK network for NGOs, warned that the cuts will leave children, people with disabilities, and older people more vulnerable across Ethiopia, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Zambia. In South Sudan. Fewer girls and children with disabilities will be able to go to school due to the reduction in aid.

Cuts to programs in Somalia, one of the world’s most unstable countries, are likely to heavily affect access to health services for women and children, though the most significant impact will be felt across Africa, where bilateral aid is being phased out in favor of multilateral contributions.

“Africa and the Middle East, both home to some of the world’s least-developed countries, will be forced to pay the highest price because of the reduced budget,” said Romilly Greenhill, CEO of Bond. The group’s analysis of the government’s impact assessment shows the cuts will have severe consequences for basic services in some of the world’s poorest countries.

Defense Spending and Aid Replacements

The UK government has defended the cuts, saying they are part of a broader strategy to address international threats and build global resilience. The development minister, Jenny Chapman, said that some of the poorest African nations had expressed a preference for expertise partnerships with the UK, building stable financial systems and clean energy, rather than traditional aid programs.

Chapman said the government has not turned its back on the world, but instead has engaged in a “very collaborative way with our global south partners.” She added that the decision was made after listening to the concerns of partner countries and being present at international discussions.

However, some Labour MPs have expressed skepticism, arguing that the cuts have not achieved the desired effect of bolstering military spending. Fleur Anderson, the MP for Putney, said that while defense spending has increased, the cuts to development programs risk delaying the prevention of future crises.

“A serious approach must place development spending at the heart of global resilience and security,” Anderson said. “Without this, we are not preventing crises; we are simply waiting for them.”

The UK has also ringfenced £240m a year until 2029, alongside billions in loan guarantees for Ukraine, and has protected allocations for Palestine and Lebanon at current levels. The latter is explicitly funded to “reduce the drivers of irregular migration.”

The cost of housing asylum seekers in UK hotels—running at roughly £2bn a year—is taken from the aid budget. This means that by 2027-28, aid spending on overseas programs is expected to reach its lowest since records began in 1970, at just 0.24% of gross national income.

However, the cuts will also end aid to some major funders, including polio eradication and the Pandemic Fund. The FCDO has said the changes will prioritize geopolitical security and conflict, as well as funding for the British Council and the BBC World Service.

Adrian Lovett, UK executive director of the ONE Campaign, said the cuts will have a devastating impact on the world’s poorest countries. “Slashing bilateral aid to Africa, where need is greatest, will have a devastating impact,” he said. “These choices will leave millions without access to basic healthcare, education and urgent humanitarian support, and risk a resurgence of deadly diseases we’ve spent decades trying to fight.”

The government has said it intends to gradually return to the 0.7% aid target when possible, despite the current cuts. However, the changes mark a significant shift in the UK’s approach to international development and aid, with long-term implications for global stability and the well-being of the world’s poorest countries.