Opinion: Foreign aid won’t save us. Neither will philanthropy

In recent years, many have declared that the international development system is in crisis. The Trump administration’s dismantling of USAID, alongside donor governments steadily walking back their commitments to official development assistance, has led some to claim the system is breaking down. But what if the system isn’t broken at all? What if it’s working exactly as it was designed to — to uphold colonial power dynamics, advance donor governments’ national interests, and ensure that funding, decision-making, and accountability flow back to the global north, rather than to the people aid is meant to serve? But now, the cracks are showing. And instead of reckoning with the root causes, or reimagining a more just system, we’re seeing a rush to “fill the gaps” with short-term solutions — that keep power exactly where it’s always been. While these short-term solutions may be motivated by genuine concern for vulnerable people who will suffer from disruptions in health, education, sexual and reproductive health and rights, humanitarian, and nutrition services — including lifesaving HIV/AIDS programs, vaccine initiatives, and food distribution — it risks creating an even more dependent and unjust patchwork of cobbled-together aid architecture. Such a system would be even further removed from the democratic will of the people most affected by it. For instance, citizens in my home country, Pakistan, have long depended on USAID's bureaucracy to access essential family planning services. If private philanthropy rushes in to fill the gap and nothing else changes, they would instead find themselves reliant on the benevolence of a single living donor. “Foreign aid is framed as generosity, but in reality, it’s a fraction of what wealthy countries owe for centuries of colonization, resource extraction, and economic exploitation.” --— If we are serious about rethinking international aid, we need to move beyond talk of merely “shifting power.” The current wave of aid cuts is already shifting power — just not in ways that advance equity or justice. Instead of retreating from responsibility, donor governments and large INGOs must acknowledge the duty of local and national governments to provide basic services to their citizens, and the critical role of civil society in amplifying citizen voices and holding governments accountable. A reimagined aid architecture must be built around these principles — not as charity, but as justice. Patching a broken aid system instead of changing it won’t work ODA is not charity — it’s a debt that’s still unpaid. Foreign aid is framed as generosity, but in reality, it’s a fraction of what wealthy countries owe for centuries of colonization, resource extraction, and economic exploitation. Yet, governments such as the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden are cutting their aid budgets, often justifying these reductions by shifting priorities toward domestic concerns, security, and economic constraints. Meanwhile, much of the aid that remains comes with harmful conditions — forcing countries to adopt austerity, privatize services, or follow donor priorities rather than their own. When donor governments cut aid, the response is typically the same: Restore funding, lean on philanthropy, or tweak policies — without addressing the deeper perversions within the system. But these approaches don’t lead to fundamental transformation. And that’s exactly what we need now. True power shifts require dismantling the structures that reinforce dependence and ensuring that local and national governments — not donors or INGOs — are in charge. If we’re serious about economic justice, we need to go beyond aid and push for real solutions: • Debt cancellation or at least a debt servicing moratorium, so countries can invest in their own futures. • Domestic resource mobilization through reformed and effective taxation — particularly of multinational corporations — to enable direct investment in public services such as health care and education. • Trade policies that allow countries to build their own economies instead of keeping them dependent on outside funding. Philanthropy can help — but it’s not the answer Private donors and foundations play a role in development, but they are not a solution to shrinking government aid. Philanthropy is voluntary, unaccountable, and often shaped by the priorities of billionaires rather than the needs and voices of the people — and it simply cannot fill the gap. There are not enough institutional philanthropic funds to replace public financing, nor should they be expected to. While major foundations have supported health, education, and SRHR programs, their funding comes with limitations — it can disappear overnight, and it’s rarely designed to strengthen national institutions in the long run. Instead of relying on philanthropy, governments must invest in their own people. Long-term, sustainable development cannot be built on short-term generosity. It requires public systems, national leadership, and accountability to those most affected — not to donors. Aid should build independence The biggest global challenges — the climate crisis, growing inequality, and attacks on women’s and girls’ rights — weren’t created by the “global south.” They are the result of global systems that have concentrated power and wealth in the hands of few. ODA shouldn’t be about keeping countries dependent on aid — it should be about restoring the resources and control that colonizing powers stripped from them over centuries, enabling true self-sufficiency. We need to stop managing dependence and start enabling real independence. That means investing in strong national institutions that can function without donor intervention. Tinkering with the current system won’t work. Real change means letting go of institutional self-preservation and business as usual — and building a system where every citizen can hold their government accountable for delivering basic services. Not through another donor pledge. Not through another policy report. But through real action that centers people’s rights, demands accountability, and recognizes that those most affected must be the ones shaping their own futures. If we truly want a just and sustainable world, we must stop managing dependence and start dismantling the systems that uphold it.