Greetings, Newswire readers! Devex is taking a summer break this week. Instead of our regular Newswire, we are bringing you deep dives into some of this year’s key development issues. In this edition we’re catching up on a flurry of global elections poised to transform the development landscape.
We are more than halfway through the biggest year in the history of elections — with countries home to a majority of the world’s population casting votes in 2024.
This is a preview of Newswire
Sign up to this newsletter for an inside look at the biggest stories in global development, in your inbox daily.
These elections have huge implications for domestic policies related to global health and development. They also carry major weight for international challenges such as climate change and conflict. And they could result in power shifts that lead to big swings for aid budgets and political leadership needed to keep HIV targets, the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals, and climate finance commitments from falling by the wayside.
Let’s be honest: One election looms large — and it’s been given a late-stage shake-up with U.S. President Joe Biden’s decision to bow out of the presidential race against Donald Trump and endorse his vice president, Kamala Harris, instead.
America’s political polarization — plus what we’ve heard Republicans might be planning for U.S. foreign aid — means the world’s largest bilateral aid donor is careening toward another critical crossroads in November.
But Trump vs. Harris is only one of many consequential global contests, several of which have already changed the landscape of development funding and international cooperation.
Many of these elections have been framed as referendums on the health of democracy itself — and the results are not always reassuring.
The inside take
On July 21, Biden announced he will not seek reelection and endorsed Harris in the race against Trump.
One day later, Devex Editor-in-Chief Raj Kumar sat down with longtime Democratic foreign policy insider Ben Rhodes for a wide-ranging conversation about what the U.S. election means for global development, U.S. foreign aid, and the future of international conflict and cooperation.
A few highlights, in Rhodes’ own words:
On Kamala Harris’ opportunity: “She can rethink and course correct in certain areas in ways that I think would have been much harder for a second term President Biden.”
On a Trump administration 2.0: “He’s going to come in with a much more assertive and ideological approach.”
On how U.S. aid leaders can speak out against their own government: “You don’t have to swing at every pitch.”
Watch the full conversation: Top Obama official reflects on Biden, Harris, Trump, and US aid (Pro)
+ A Devex Pro membership brings you essential analysis, data-driven funding insights, and access to the world’s largest global development job board. Get these perks and more by signing up to our 15-day free trial.
The blueprint — and its architect
For those wondering what a second Trump administration might seek to do, the Heritage Foundation — a conservative think tank — has more than 900 pages of suggestions. The organization’s “Project 2025” lays out a blueprint for Trump’s return, with sweeping changes that would transform the U.S. federal government, including U.S. foreign aid agencies.
While Trump took to his own social media platform to distance himself from the project, it remains the most detailed road map for U.S. foreign aid reform that his supporters have put out so far. Through interviews with those involved in the effort, I pieced together their overarching vision of what is currently wrong with U.S. development efforts, and what they would do to “fix” them.
The top lines: No “social reengineering,” smaller USAID, bigger Millennium Challenge Corporation and U.S. International Development Finance Corporation, and an attack on the “aid industrial complex.”
Read: The Republican plan to ‘rightsize’ US foreign aid in a Trump presidency (Pro)
Background reading: What MAGA has planned for USAID — and the world (Pro)
Related: Trump backs away from Project 2025. What does that mean for foreign aid?
The man behind the plan is Max Primorac, a former Trump administration official who led USAID’s efforts to get more funding to Christians and other religious minorities in the Middle East under former U.S. Vice President Mike Pence.
I spoke to Primorac to get a better sense of his worldview — and why he thinks conservatives get shut out of the U.S. aid industry.
Read the Q&A: A US conservative's plan to beat the 'aid industrial complex' (Pro)
+ Dig deeper into all the news and analysis on this pivotal U.S. presidential election.
Meet the new boss
Voters in the United Kingdom handed the country’s Labour Party a large majority last month — ousting the Conservative government in the process.
That means Labour will make good on previous commitments to restore British leadership on development and boost aid spending, right? Not quite, reports my colleague Rob Merrick. Within weeks of taking power, the Labour government is shifting even more funds from the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office to domestic refugee costs — a controversial practice inherited from the former government, but which will apparently be continued.
Rob writes: “It means Labour, elected on a manifesto that pledged to restore ‘leadership’ after development was ‘degraded’ by the Conservatives, faces the prospect of making its own aid cuts as almost its first act.”
It’s not entirely unexpected. Before the election, U.K. aid experts told Rob that while Labour was promising to “turn the page” for the international development sector, the more likely outcome would be continuity.
Read: UK Labour makes fresh aid budget cuts within weeks of taking power
Watch: On UK election, new development 'consensus' hides big challenges ahead (Pro)
+ Catch up on all our coverage of the U.K. aid sector.
Meanwhile in India
For the world’s largest democracy, India’s June election results delivered a message to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party, which lost its parliamentary majority.
That message had much to do with the country’s own development trajectory, which — as Devex contributor Catherine Davison writes — has left many people feeling left behind.
Catherine writes: “The shock election results, which will leave Modi reliant on alliance parties to form a new government, were a reminder that despite India’s rapid growth and increasing presence on the global stage, the majority of Indians still live in relative poverty.”
Historically high levels of inequality, major infrastructure investments that have failed to generate jobs, and caste-based discrimination have all contributed to a sense of frustration and demands for change. And they’ve left Modi in an unfamiliar position of political weakness at home.
Read: Why Modi's victory in India looks like a loss (Pro)
Dig deeper: Welfare schemes influence India elections, but do they aid development?
Indonesia and Bangladesh go to the polls
Two of this year’s big elections paint a complicated picture of the relationship between development and democracy.
In February, voters in Indonesia chose Prabowo Subianto to be their next president. Subianto, currently Indonesia’s defense minister, has portrayed his leadership largely as an extension of outgoing President Joko Widodo’s. Indonesia has seen remarkable progress in poverty reduction — but faces a slew of environmental, energy, and geopolitical challenges that demand a difficult balancing act on the way to the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.
But for some observers it is the president-elect’s personal history that raises concerns about Indonesia’s future. Subianto has admitted to abducting activists in the 1990s during the rule of former President Suharto, and more recently floated constitutional changes that have some observers worried.
Read: What Indonesia’s election means for development
And then there is Bangladesh, the “development darling” that has coupled rapid economic growth with declining democratic standards. Hundreds have died in anti-government protests in recent days.
In a January election widely regarded as a foregone conclusion — not to mention an opposition boycott and accusations of ballot rigging and voter manipulation — Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina secured a fourth consecutive term. But as of this morning, she’s reportedly resigned and fled the capital amid the current protests. While announcing Hasina’s resignation, the country’s army chief says an interim government will be formed.
Catherine writes that Bangladesh’s backslide presents a dilemma: “What role do — and should — international donors play in countries on a downward authoritarian slide?”
Read: Bangladesh — what happens when a development darling falls from grace? (Pro)
Devex is officially on Telegram and WhatsApp! Join our channels to receive updates on the latest globaldev news directly to your mobile device.
Sign up to Newswire for an inside look at the biggest stories in global development.
About the author
Michael Igoe@AlterIgoe
Michael Igoe is a Senior Reporter with Devex, based in Washington, D.C. He covers U.S. foreign aid, global health, climate change, and development finance. Prior to joining Devex, Michael researched water management and climate change adaptation in post-Soviet Central Asia, where he also wrote for EurasiaNet. Michael earned his bachelor's degree from Bowdoin College, where he majored in Russian, and his master’s degree from the University of Montana, where he studied international conservation and development.
