It has been well documented recently that Russian President Vladimir Putin has threatened the UK recently and presents a clear thereat to UK interests. It may come as a surprise to learn that foreign aid cuts are holding back our ability to keep the influence of Putin at bay in the Balkans, as well as causing unnecessary suffering in many other places across the world.
It was reported in mid-December that there has been a 40% cut in funds for countering Russian aggression and misinformation in a region of Europe described by the prime minister as vital to the UK’s national security. And the reason for this cut? Keir Starmer’s very own raid on overseas aid.
British funding committed to bolstering the western Balkans has been cut from £40mn last year to £24mm for 2025-26, despite the fact that this an area where Russia has been accused of creating destabilisation and sowing division.
Integrated Security Fund (ISF), a fund working across government aimed at tackling the highest- priority threats to UK national security overseas and at home. It was said in the House of Lords in February 2024 that the ISF would use Official Development Assistance (ODA) and non-ODA funding to enable the delivery of National Security Council priorities.
Furthermore, it would “take an integrated, agile, catalytic, and high-risk approach to find solutions to the most complex national security challenges outlined in the IRR 2023”.
Starmer and the Balkans
It has been noted that Starmer recently described the western Balkans region, including Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania, Serbia. North Macedonia and Montenegro, as “Europe’s crucible – the place where the security of our continent is put to the test”.
It was further noted that in 2024, ISF funds were used in part to bolster democratic institutions and independent media and to respond to and counter malicious cyber-attacks in the region.
This cut appears to be a result of Starmer’s decision in February to cut Foreign Aid from 0.5% to 0.3 %, and the policy to reduce Official Development Assistance (ODA) for low and middle income countries.
Under the ISF, the amount of ODA committed to the western Balkans has gone down from £31.91mn in 2024-25 to £17mn for 2025-26. There has also been a cut of £1.15mn in “non-ODA” funding for the region, according to figures from the Cabinet Office.
The folly of cutting Foreign Aid
It is becoming ever more apparent just how foolish it was for Starmer to cut UK Foreign Aid in February. It has been argued that the cuts to Foreign Aid made in February will endanger the lives of children around the world. It was also noted that the cuts came at the worst possible time, just after President Trump had announced cuts to USAID, causing it to pause nearly all its funding to overseas aid projects. Meanwhile governments in other wealthy nations such as Belgium and Netherlands have also rolled back on previous commitments.
The folly of Starmer’s Foreign Aid cuts have also been emphasised by Global Citizen who point out that the cuts will put hundreds of thousands of lives at risk and deprive millions of aid. It could also undermine the very same national interests that Starmer claims to be protecting, a point he made a few years ago himself to oppose cutting Foreign Aid. As is pointed out, “slashing initiatives that support global health, education, conflict resolution, and economic development is likely to create the kind of crises that don’t stay contained – and may well end up back on Britain’s doorstep”.
And now we have cuts helping Putin to gain interest in the Balkans.
Most marginalised in the world hit by cuts
The Foreign Aid cuts will also impact particularly on some of the most marginalised and vulnerable communities in the world. It has been noted that Bond, a UK network for international development organisations, had claimed that it was notable that the government was “deprioritising” funding “for education, gender and countries experiencing humanitarian crises such as South Sudan, Ethiopia and Somalia, and surprisingly the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Sudan, which the government said would be protected”.
Bond policy director Gideon Rabinowitz commented: “It is concerning that bilateral funding for Africa, gender, education and health programmes will drop.
“The world’s most marginalised communities, particularly those experiencing conflict and women and girls, will pay the highest price for these political choices.
“At a time when the US has gutted all gender programming, the UK should be stepping up, not stepping back.”
Meanwhile the long-suffering people of Myanmar have also been badly hit by foreign aid cuts and there has been a call for the UK’s Foreign Aid commitment to Sudan to be radically overhauled, so that safe corridors can be established in the present conflict, local expertise can be utilised, and that there can be robust accountability mechanisms.
A threat to our security
It has been argued that in a number if ways not only are marginalised people’s lives put at risk by the Foreign Aid cuts, but our own security is threatened also. Much of our aid spending is channelled through the international organisations used, especially UN agencies are working on global challenges which also affect our security. This includes pandemic preparedness and monitoring, bio security and controlling infectious diseases.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) undertook an analysis through March–April 2025, of its 108 country offices’ work, discovered that 70% reported ”disruptions linked to aid cuts since the start of 2025, particularly for systems needed to monitor, prepare for and respond to outbreaks of preventable diseases”.
Similarly, Germany’s Kiel Institute has found evidence of “significant returns for aid donors who invest in health in poorer countries, particularly in controlling and managing infectious diseases which if left unmanaged would result in wider crises. Preventing pandemics is more cost-effective than responding to them”.
The folly of Foreign Aid cuts
When Starmer made his cuts to UK Foreign Aid in February this year, he claimed that he was making a hard choice that was just part of being a government. This was nonsense. It was an easy choice to make to cut aid to some of the poorest and most vulnerable people in the world, who have no voice and no way of resisting the cut.
The news about the effects of the cuts on the rise of influence for Putin in the western Balkans is just the latest in a string of events, which have exposed the folly of the cuts.
There can be no doubt that some of the world’s most vulnerable people in countries such as Myanmar and Sudan are going to suffer needlessly and, in some cases, die. as a result of the cuts.
Meanwhile our soft power as a nation continues to be diminished, on the back of cuts to organisations such as the British Council and the BBC World Service, meaning that we are simply ‘cutting off our nose to spite our face’.
We should have compassion for our fellow humans across the world in their time of need.
