Two major global development summits in Paris and London have recently concluded, with the stated aim of reshaping the strategic direction of international cooperation. Both took place against a backdrop of historic hypocrisy as aid is increasingly replaced by investment.

We are witnessing the deepest aid cuts on record, precisely as billionaire wealth reaches record highs that defy moral comprehension. Over the past 12 months alone, billionaires have gained $4 trillion, bringing their wealth to $1.5 trillion more than that of the poorest half of humanity. Meanwhile, global military spending surged toward $3 trillion, and fossil fuel giants are projected to pocket profits at an astronomical rate of $3,000 every single second.

I raised these stark realities on a panel of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s conference on the Future of Development Co-operation. While attendees politely agreed that the system needs to be “rethought,” the underlying narrative felt less like a summit on human solidarity and more like a commercial investment fair.

New donor commitments to social justice, reducing inequality, or local community empowerment were few and far between. This omission is not an oversight; it highlights a cynical, yearslong drift in global policy.

“The debates over the last weeks have exposed profound fractures in our global social contract. A system built on the values of solidarity and cooperation is being rapidly replaced by a ruthless, winner-takes-all competition.”

Aid cuts are coming at the worst possible moment. Overlapping global shocks ― the COVID-19 pandemic, Russia’s war against Ukraine, the trade war, and the unlawful U.S. and Israeli war against Iran ― have reversed progress in reducing extreme poverty and inequality worldwide. Instead of protecting people in vulnerable situations against these compounding crises, rich countries are abandoning them. The poorest countries face a lost decade of development.

The Changing Face of Aid as It Is Replaced by Investment

This debate should be as much about the quality of aid as its volume. While some development agencies are trying to adapt to a volatile geopolitical landscape, others have rebranded surrender as innovation. They are doubling down on a commercial paradigm disguised as development, using buzzwords such as “trade over aid,” “from donor to investor,” or “global gateways.”

The strategy relies on two flawed pillars: forcing aid to serve the interests of both the donor and recipient country, and relying on private finance to fill the gaps.

Read the full article about development aid being replaced by investment by Amitabh Behar at Devex.