The EU should avoid falling into the same trap Britain fell into: funding defence spending by cutting aid, says former British Army Major General Charlie Herbert.
“There’s no lasting security at home when large parts of the world are consumed by conflict and uncertainty. To achieve real stability, hard power alone is not enough. Military might is essential to protect a country once conflict reaches its borders. But diplomacy and well-applied development aid are the very tools that prevent wars from happening in the first place.
“I have learned this on the ground, while serving as a senior military official for the United Kingdom in Afghanistan, Somalia, and Iraq. There, devastating wars have pushed countries toward collapse and triggered severe humanitarian crises. In Europe, the same wars have sparked fear and contributed to real and perceived danger, terrorism threats and growing pressure for military spending.
“Scrapping aid for unstable and fragile countries means leaving them to their own fate. It means accepting that instability will likely turn into a full-blown crisis. If humanity and shared responsibility are not enough to prevent leaders from doing that, common sense should provide the motivation. Security and health threats do not stop at borders. They have spillover effects that are inevitably going to reach us at home.
“My experience in Sierra Leone during the Ebola outbreak started in 2014 made this crystal clear. Without international cooperation systems in place, the government’s response alone would never have been enough to stop the disease from spreading. Only thanks to a combination of international aid, military tools and diplomacy were we able to avert a potential global health crisis – one that would have threatened the safety and security of our families back home.
“Many leaders fail to see that the choice between investment in security and in development aid is a false dichotomy. They are busy increasing their military capacity – but they are preparing for crises while dismantling the tools that could prevent them.
Global aid cuts are the starkest evidence of this trend. Only a few weeks ago, the OECD found that development aid from the world’s richest club of countries fell by over 23% in real terms in 2025 compared to 2024, marking the largest drop in the history of official development assistance. My country, the UK, has hit a near 20-year low in its development aid spending.
“As European leaders discuss the bloc’s budget for the next seven years, they can learn from the UK’s mistakes, and to do better than my country did. Poorly targeted aid can fail, but abandoning fragile states entirely creates larger security costs later. This is why development aid investment should be seen as part of a broader security strategy, where military and defence tools go hand in hand with diplomacy and international cooperation. Cutting aid spending would not only be shortsighted, it would prove more costly – and dangerous – in the long run.
“Reducing soft power risks making military intervention more likely and more expensive. Decreasing support for better healthcare systems and governance means spending more in crisis response. Pulling back from partner countries leaves space for hostile powers to fill the void – as we have witnessed in the Sahel region of Africa in recent years.
“Amid rising global instability, it is not the time to save on our security. If EU leaders really want Europe to be a safer place for its own citizens, they must see aid for what it is – our first line of defence.
