Presented by Tetra Pak
Europe ramps up defense spending after calls to “step up.” Aid budgets are falling sharply across major donors. At Munich, the debate is whether development still counts as security.
Also in today’s edition: How to make the most of Venezuela’s turning point, and the EAT Foundation is set to wind down.
The world’s top defense officials are gathering at the Hotel Bayerischer Hof for the Munich Security Conference in Germany, a forum founded in 1963 in the hope that dialogue might prevent another world war. This year, the mood is grim.
At last year’s meeting, U.S. Vice President JD Vance told Europe to “step up in a big way to provide for its own defence.” Europe has responded. Germany’s defense budget is set to reach €82.7 billion ($98.23 billion) in 2026, with up to 10,000 more soldiers. Italy and the United Kingdom are boosting spending, too. Every NATO country is increasing defense outlays.
But as defense budgets rise, development budgets fall. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development projects a 13%–25% drop in bilateral aid to least developed countries in 2025. Germany halved humanitarian aid and cut its development ministry. France and the U.K. are also slashing their official development assistance.
“A security architecture monopolized by defense undermines long-term stability, even as governments spend record sums on military preparedness,” a report released Wednesday from the ONE Campaign warns.
For years, leaders argued that stability underpins security. In 2024, then-MSC chair, Christoph Heusgen, said “development policy is security policy.” But that balance is under strain. “The needs for humanitarian response are increasing,” says Alexandre Munafó of Geneva Call. “There are more needs on the ground, but the ambulance is being shot at.”
Still, some warn against folding development into defense. “It's a very delicate situation,” Habib Ur Rehman Mayar of the g7+ Secretariat tells my colleague Jesse Chase-Lubitz. “If they link defense to development, we risk the securitization or militarization of development, which has never been effective, never been impactful, and we never prefer that. The first step is always peace.”
Read: At Munich Security Conference, development tries to stay relevant
See also: Why we need closer links between development and defense (Pro)
🇩🇪 Jesse is on the ground in Munich, so if you are in attendance, you can get in touch with her at jesse.chaselubitz@devex.com. Plus, keep an eye out next week for a special newsletter edition from the conference.
Just weeks after Venezuela’s political upheaval, the question is simple: Will the world move — and fast?
“We are at a watershed moment in which there’s a big opportunity for things to change in Venezuela,” said Roberto Patiño, founder of the Venezuelan NGOs Mi Convive and Alimenta La Solidaridad. “And that includes the role of these [international] organizations.”
He was joined for a Devex Pro Briefing by former World Food Programme Executive Director David Beasley, who helped broker WFP’s entry into Venezuela amid isolation and collapse. Their partnership began years ago on a crowded Colombia-Venezuela bridge. “It was a divine connection orchestrated from above,” Beasley recalled.
Now, with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro arrested, both say the United States must lead. The White House must “own the responsibility to make certain that things go forward,” Beasley said. “They need to move quickly and … assess the humanitarian situation.”
The needs are urgent, writes Jesse. “We’re talking about a country where the education system basically collapsed,” Patiño said. School kitchens are “all but dilapidated,” Beasley warned. And engagement — however controversial — is essential. “Do you want to look good, or do you want to do good?” he said. “I have no choice, and I’m not going to let innocent children die.”
But even if the politics shift, the institutional hurdles are enormous. Venezuela has no active portfolio with the World Bank or Inter-American Development Bank, is deep in arrears, and hasn’t had an International Monetary Fund economic assessment in two decades. Reengagement would mean debt restructuring, governance reform, and U.S. political backing — all at once.
Still, Patiño argued the country’s oil and gold reserves offer a credible path back — and that tools such as cash transfers could jump-start the economy if done right. “When it’s done right strategically … it has a multiplier effect on the economy,” Beasley said. The bigger point, Patiño stressed, is that recovery can’t be top-down: “This needs to be an effort of the whole society.”
Read: Venezuela's watershed moment puts spotlight on institutions (Pro)
🗝️ Not yet a Pro member? Start your 15-day free trial today to access all our expert analyses, insider insights, funding data, past and upcoming exclusive briefings, and the Pro Insider — special weekend newsletter editions covering the behind-the-scenes of our industry’s big moves as well as the remaking of the U.S. foreign aid system.
U.S. Senate Democrats savaged President Donald Trump’s nominee to oversee U.N. policy at the State Department, accusing Jeremy Carl of promoting white supremacy, racism, and antisemitism in past writings and podcasts. But the bigger signal? Republican silence.
Carl tried to pivot to sovereignty and U.N. reform, writes Senior Global Reporter Colum Lynch. Instead, senators read back his own remarks, including claims that “jews love to see themselves as oppressed” and references to the so-called great replacement theory. In a heated exchange, Sen. Cory Booker told him, “You have discriminated against Jews in your writings, you have discriminated against others, and then you claim yourself as a victim.”
Carl denied being antisemitic or a “racial nationalist,” admitting, “I made some comments in an interview about minimizing the fact of the holocaust that were absolutely wrong.” But support from Republicans was thin. Republican Sen. John Curtis said afterward he would oppose the nomination, calling Carl’s record “unbecoming of the position,” while Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley dismissed his credentials: “Your résumé is pretty thin for this position.”
Read: Trump's UN pick faces bipartisan backlash at hearing
The foundation behind one of the most influential food system blueprints of the past decade is winding down.
The Oslo-based EAT Foundation says its model is “not sufficiently resilient for sustainable and ambitious operations in the years ahead,” pointing to “profound change in the international donor landscape, where funding priorities and conditions have shifted significantly.” Leaders are exploring what might continue, but “no concrete arrangements have been agreed at this stage,” and “discussions are ongoing.”
Since 2013, EAT has branded itself a “science-based platform for food system transformation,” launching the landmark EAT-Lancet report, which found food systems drive roughly 30% of global emissions and called for a “planetary health diet” to feed 9.6 billion people sustainably by 2050.
Cofounder and executive chair Gunhild Stordalen insists the mission isn’t over: “There are encouraging indications of interest in sustaining projects that have delivered significant impact over the past decade. The challenge hasn’t gone away,” she says. “If anything, it’s more pressing and the next chapter must be built to scale solutions in a way that is sustainable and fit for the world we are in.”
The wind-down also follows online criticism from anonymous former staff alleging mismanagement and a toxic culture. “We do not comment on anonymous claims made in the past,” an EAT spokesperson tells Devex, adding that the organization has “always taken concerns about our work environment seriously.”
Read: EAT Foundation to wind down after a decade of food systems work
🌱 For more insider reporting on the transformation of the global food systems, sign up for Devex Dish, our free, weekly newsletter on the topic.
We’re at the halfway mark of the African Union Summit — ministers out, heads of state incoming.
Opening statements this week circled a few familiar pressure points: Africa’s bid for permanent representation on the U.N. Security Council, the need for debt reform, ongoing AU institutional reforms, and appeals for unity amid a scramble for Africa’s critical minerals.
But much of the texture, as always, happens at the side events, my colleague Ayenat Mersie tells me.
At one side event hosted by Morocco yesterday, water — the official theme of this year’s summit — was the focus. The continent needs roughly $64 billion a year in water investment and receives only about $10.5 billion. Morocco was cited as something of a model, particularly for its expansion of desalination, as peers debated how to narrow that gap.
Trade, meanwhile, is being framed as an underutilized salve. At a standing-room-only discussion on the African Continental Free Trade Area, or AfCFTA, Equity Group Holdings CEO James Mwangi said that in this moment of global trade recalibration, deeper intra-African trade was more urgent than ever.
AfCFTA Secretary-General Wamkele Mene said that in the coming days, heads of state would adopt the remaining parts of the agreement’s legal instruments — annexes on intellectual property rights. Expect a story from Ayenat taking a close look at where we are in terms of AfCFTA in the coming days.
And it’s not just side events — there are side conferences too. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni arrives today to cohost the second Africa-Italy summit as Rome advances its €5.5 billion Mattei Plan, and the Africa Business Forum will extend the diplomatic churn into next week.
🎧 Listen: For the latest episode of our podcast series, Ayenat joins Devex’s Rumbi Chakamba and Sara Jerving to discuss the key issues to watch at the AU Summit and other top global development stories from the week.
A projected 1.2 billion people in low-income countries will enter the workforce over the next decade but with only 400 million jobs expected, acting early to bridge this gap will be central to global stability and growth, according to World Bank President Ajay Banga. [Bloomberg]
The U.N. General Assembly yesterday approved a 40-member multidisciplinary panel to independently review the impacts of artificial intelligence, drawing objections from the U.S. and Paraguay over what Washington calls an overreach of the global body’s mandate. [Independent]
From a COP31 draft that omits fossil fuels from the agenda to the U.S. revoking the endangerment finding that underpins its greenhouse-gas limits, the U.N. climate chief warns climate risks are being pushed down the global policy agenda despite escalating impacts. [Aljazeera and The Guardian]
Sign up to Newswire for an inside look at the biggest stories in global development.