Our newsletter Inside Denmark looks at some of the stories we’ve been talking about during the last seven days. This week, could Denmark cut international development aid, and would such a move achieve its stated purpose?
The Liberal (Venstre) party will make a promise to cut to foreign aid spending part of its platform for the parliamentary election later this year, leader Troels Lund Poulsen said in an interview with newspaper Berlingske at the start of the week, kicking off a discussion about whether the move will benefit Denmark domestically and help regulate the number of asylum seekers.
Poulsen said the Liberals want to reduce the amount of money Denmark spends on foreign development aid from 0.7 percent of GDP to 0.5 percent of GDP, which it says will free up 6.5 billion kroner.
Poulsen cited the need to divert more state spending to defence as well as welfare in Denmark.
“We are in a situation where we can’t just do what we normally do. It’s necessary to reprioritise development aid because we want to invest more in welfare, and more than demographic trends demand we should,” he said.
The Liberals later elaborated on the policy by saying they plan to cut aid to countries which don’t have an agreement with Denmark for return of rejected asylum seekers.
“You have to take tougher action against the countries that receive development aid but refuse to take back their own nationals,” party leader Troels Lund Poulsen told reporters at parliament.
The plan has been criticised by rival parties and human rights groups, who have pointed out that cutting aid could have the long-term effect of increasing migration from developing countries by worsening conditions in those countries.
For instance, Johanne Schmidt-Nielsen, secretary general of Save the Children Denmark, released a social media post praising Denmark for being a leader in development aid up to now.
Advertisement
Schmidt-Nielsen also pointed to the potential impact of cutting aid on health in developing countries.
“We are one of very few countries in the world that lives up to the UN goal of 0.7 percent and we can be proud of that,” Schmidt-Nielsen wrote in the post.
“In Denmark we have done the opposite of the Trump administration in the United States and several other countries which have cut foreign aid,” she wrote, adding that a “broad political majority” had “stood behind” the need to continue the current level of aid, “not least in current times.”
“It’s also crucial that we help the many people forced to flee because of extreme poverty,” the secretary general of Save the Children Denmark also said.
That would prevent them from taking dangerous journeys to Europe by giving them the “chance to stay in their own countries and provide for themselves and their families there,” she said.
Lars Engberg-Pedersen, senior researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS), meanwhile told DR that Denmark’s contribution to international rules and institutions is important because a “small country like Denmark does not benefit from the the big countries deciding everything.”
“At the same time, development aid is a symbol that we want to engage with some of the poorer countries. It is a symbol that is becoming increasingly important because we need cooperation and alliances with countries in the Global South,” the senior researcher said.
Advertisement
The Liberals have argued that their proposals outline where funding for welfare and security will come from in the future, meaning they are costing their policy platform in a way other parties aren’t.
Saving money on development aid would mean “better focus on our security,” Poulsen told media at parliament during the week.
“That means investments in our own region, which could be Ukraine, it could be a greater effort in relation to [EU border patrol] Frontex” he said, adding that the Liberals “also want to prioritise welfare.”
The two other parties in the coalition government, the Social Democrats and Moderates, want to retain the current level of 0.7 percent of GDP on foreign development aid spending, a level that is in line with UN targets.
The leader of the latter party, Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen, went as far as to call Poulsen’s proposal “short-sighted, uninspired and, to be honest, a bit stupid” in comments reported by DR.
Løkke is known to be a believer in development aid as an investment in national security, rather than seeing it as charity.
But given there will be an election this year, with the potential result of the Liberals eventually governing with other parties than the Moderates or Social Democrats, the policy announcement is significant.