Security or solidarity?

The government is working on an aid reform and intends to prioritize more strictly. Our calculations show that only slightly more than half of the aid budget goes to what most people consider aid: poverty reduction and emergency relief. Support for Ukraine is a major reason for this.

That support for Ukraine should not come at the expense of the world's poor was a point of consensus when the Nansen Support Programme for Ukraine was adopted in 2023.

Now, support for Ukraine and refugees in Norway is consuming every third krone of the aid budget. 15 billion from the aid budget is allocated to Ukraine. That is more than what Norway spends on healthcare, pandemic security, and emergency relief in the rest of the world combined. Support for Ukraine is drowning out all other priorities.

Some argue that all support for Ukraine is about helping people in need, and therefore has an indisputable place in the aid budget. But this masks the fact that security is the actual justification. If emergency relief were the primary goal, the money would have to go where the needs are greatest, in accordance with humanitarian principles. It does not.

Sudan has three times as many people in need as Ukraine, yet it only received 608 million kroner in aid in 2025. Ukraine received 20 times that amount.

The portion of the support for Ukraine that is not emergency relief must be moved to the defense budget to reflect the fact that security is the real argument for this exceptional support.

If we are to get the aid debate on the right track, we must also be honest about its purpose. Is it security, or is it solidarity?

‍