Somalia is struggling with hunger, security and the impact of the climate crisis, despite decades of aid money worth billions of dollars, writes Nick Ferris. As aid money gets cut, is this the time for countries to wean themselves off aid dependency – and can they do it?
Of all the countries in the world that will be affected by cuts to overseas aid announced this year, the impacts felt in Somalia will be among the most profound.
The war-torn country has long been highly reliant on aid to function. Over 67 per cent funded by foreign donors, while the country’s health system continues to be predominantly run by a mixture of international donors, agencies and NGOs.
Cuts are already taking their toll: a World Food Programme (WFP) country spokesperson told The Independent that they have reduced food aid provision from 1.2m people per month to 820,000 per month despite the country’s critical food needs, while USAID files analysed by The Independent show projects worth more than $400m have been terminated in Somalia by that agency alone.
But while Somalia’s example shows us why aid remains vitally important for some countries, it also helps illustrate why some politicians have become disillusioned by the way aid has been operating.
Tens of billions of dollars have poured into the country since the country’s civil war broke out in 1991, but the country’s life expectancy remains below 50, GDP per capita remains below $500, and corruption levels were judged the second worst in Africa by Transparency International in 2024.
“There is a lot of donor fatigue when it comes to Somalia,” says Ahmed Soliman, Horn of Africa Programme researcher at Chatham House.
Continue reading with Eandel
Subscribe to unlock the complete story and receive your subscriber benefits.
