In recent months, there has been plentiful reports written on the rapid and abrupt changes in Swedish aid policy and the feared consequences. Many small but also large political decisions show a clear new political direction, and the overall picture is frightening for those of us who see civil society as an important component of a vibrant democracy.
We who follow this are horrified and angry. Anger that breeds engagement and activity, there are debates and discussions with other concerned and with relevant politicians. The brutal reforms are on everyone’s lips. Or so you might think if you, like me, work in civil society, socialise with others engaged in the society and are daily showered with news coverage and articles on the subject.
But unfortunately, the majority of these outcries have been published in sector related press, and the realisation of the future we fear as a result of these decisions has not yet reached the masses. A broad mass that has clearly signalled that aid is important to them. SIDA’s annual attitudinal survey on aid shows that 74% think it is important for Sweden to contribute to development in poor countries.
Despite this, it is understandable that not everyone is on the barricades – yet. When only a few pieces of the puzzle are visible, it’s hard to see the whole picture. And political discussions can be quite boring and towering. So let’s concretise what the decisions taken in the name of efficiency and transparency lead to:
The decision to remove the information and communication grant meant that a lot of staff lost their jobs and that the possibility to share information and knowledge about civil society’s activities in Sweden and the world became much more difficult – this is not transparent.
The decision to reduce aid budgets means that considerable time and energy is spent on adjusting activities and thoughtfully informing partners about cancelled collaborations and staff about redundancies – this is not efficient.
The decision to break ongoing contracts to start over from scratch means that a lot of time and energy is spent trying to understand consequences and inform partners with the limited information we have – this is neither efficient nor transparent.
It leads to a breakdown of long-term relationships built over many years and risks the cancellation of long-term projects aimed at peace, freedom and democracy – as if freedom is established overnight – that is not effective aid.
It also leads to civil society, instead of focusing on its core activities, needs to replan and reduce activities and resources as information is released – that is certainly not effective aid.
The decision to first freeze aid and then to reduce the focus and budget for Palestine means that considerable time is spent informing partners and trying to re-plan ongoing projects – during a current conflict. It means that fewer young women have the opportunity to learn about their rights, it means that fewer women question gender inequality and hold political leaders to account. It means fewer women pursuing political careers and being included in peace processes, and it means that the important democracy and peace work that is being done, and which is now more important than ever, is being spoiled – this is not effective aid.
And an even more frightening consequence is that young people who have grown up in an occupied state, whose parents have grown up in an occupied state, risk losing hope of engaging in a bright future and instead turn to the darkness. And that is a far worse consequence for the population and society that will echo for a long time to come – this is not effective aid
In a global world where democracy and gender equality are in decline, world leaders are inspired by each other. And if those who have been at the top of the class, such as Sweden in terms of democracy and gender equality, withdraw and leave walk over, others may follow. When oppressive states use violence against their own people without consequence, it leaves the way open for others to do the same.
It’s time to speak out – support civil society!
Anette Uddqvist, kanslichef
