Norad Director Explores Gulf State Partnerships Amid Global Aid Cuts

The framework for Norad Director Bård Vegar Solhjell’s recent trip to the Gulf was shaped by enormous global aid cuts and what Norwegian Development Minister Åsmund Aukrust (Labour) describes as a new aid landscape. But did the Norad director actually travel to the three Gulf countries to seek new partners for Norwegian development assistance?

“Yes,” Solhjell replies. He explains that Norad has, over time, sought cooperation with so-called emerging donors, for example through “Rethinking Development Cooperation”, an academic collaboration that Sweden’s Sida and Norad have maintained with Colombia, South Africa, Indonesia, South Korea and Mexico.

“Through this, we have learned how large countries, which are often small donors, think differently and perhaps more freely about aid than we do. The Gulf visit was an extension of this,” he says.

However, the trip was also driven by the international situation, announced cuts to US aid and quite substantial cuts from donors such as the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, Solhjell notes.

“In the world we are now entering, more wealthy countries must contribute,” he says.

The UAE gave USD 1.68 billion in aid in 2024, whilst Qatar gave approximately USD 660 million, according to recent figures from the OECD Development Assistance Committee. By comparison, Norwegian authorities spent USD 5.18 billion — or NOK 55.7 billion — on aid last year. As a percentage of GNI (both gave 0.32 per cent), these are countries that give less than Norway but more than the US and a number of European countries — and Solhjell believes they can contribute more.

“We know less about Saudi Arabia. I do not have good figures for how much they give,” he says.

The actors Solhjell met during his Gulf trip expressed a desire to cooperate with knowledge-based aid actors.

Following meetings in the kingdom, Solhjell wrote on LinkedIn about Saudi Arabia’s desire to open up more, and that development cooperation is an important part of that: “Saudi Arabia is a substantial donor, disbursing big funds to both development and humanitarian aid in the region and beyond. King Salman Humanitarian Aid and Relief Center and Norad agreed to screen our work to look for potential cooperation.”

Asked which initiatives Norad sees potential for in cooperation with Saudi Arabia, Solhjell responds: “Difficult to say. I think what we do in long-term development is quite different. Whilst some of what we do in the humanitarian sphere probably has quite a few similarities.”

Saudi Arabia has been a “participant”, not a member, in the OECD Development Assistance Committee since 2018, and last year a memorandum of understanding was signed to expand cooperation with the OECD. A note from King Salman Humanitarian Aid and Relief Centre (KSRelief) “seeking to shed light on Saudi Arabian aid” suggests why it is challenging to determine how much the country gives: “For many years, Saudi Arabia did not publish data or reports on foreign aid. The kingdom kept a low profile, in line with Saudi culture and the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him: ‘Let not your right hand know what your left hand does.’”

This may be about to change.

“We are interesting to them, they to us,” Solhjell says. In the KSRelief note, reference is made to the Saudi Aid Platform, where one can read that Yemen, Iraq and Palestine are among the largest recipients — and the UN Development Programme (UNDP) recently signed an agreement with the kingdom on the reconstruction of Gaza.

Solhjell says one example can provide insight into how much the Gulf country actually gives. “UNDP told us that Saudi Arabia, in Yemen alone, spent around four billion dollars over the course of one year, which is an enormous sum.”

Solhjell’s impression is that the Saudis were curious about how Norwegian bureaucrats work. “We are interesting to them because we are so professional, whilst they are interesting to us because they obviously spend quite substantial resources on humanitarian work. And I think perhaps we can play a positive role in helping them spend their money in ways that deliver greater impact and become more integrated into the international donor system.”

In addition to meetings in Saudi Arabia, Solhjell visited the Abu Dhabi Fund for Development, the newly established UAE Aid Agency and the Qatar Fund for Development. Asked whether these actors and countries can help offset the massive US cuts, he responds: “No one can offset the US cuts.” After a pause, he adds: “I don’t think one should think that way either. Just as it is not reasonable to ask Norway to offset US cuts, it is not reasonable to ask Qatar to do so either.”

Solhjell believes there are significant differences between the three countries, noting that the UAE and Qatar would be easier to begin cooperating with because they have greater transparency, participate in work Norwegian bureaucrats are familiar with, and already contribute money to the multilateral system.

“They support, for example, the Global Partnership for Education, as we do,” he says.

Solhjell points out that there is a long history of aid in the region. “Abu Dhabi Fund is 50 years old, hardly a newcomer. But I think it is important that large, professional donors like Norway cooperate with ‘new donors’, also to break out of the pattern of the West versus the rest.”

Asked about challenges relating to values — Norway’s focus on women’s rights, LGBTQ rights and workers’ rights — and whether these countries are natural partners, Solhjell responds: “If a partner must resemble us, try Sweden,” he says with a smile.

“But yes, these are countries that in terms of values are quite far from us, with entirely different views on human rights and democracy as a form of governance. This means there are parts of our aid work that would not be natural to do together with them. But my first impression is that our views on providing humanitarian aid are not so very different — that neutrality applies, that it is about alleviating suffering regardless of politics and religion.”

Differing values also exist with countries Norway knows better, such as the US, Solhjell notes. “The Gulf countries know we have different values from them, and I don’t think they are particularly concerned about our democracy. But I think they are curious about our knowledge of what works and what doesn’t, and that is a good starting point.”

Solhjell says humanitarian cooperation is relevant for all three countries, but the UAE and Qatar were also curious about Norway’s investments in education and health.

“We have not entered into any concrete agreements — that is also a political question — but I believe there are good reasons to explore the possibilities for cooperation,” he says, noting that any partnership would need to begin with a screening process where the countries tell each other how they work. “Implicit in that is that I am not certain it is a good idea to cooperate.”

Asked about Gulf countries’ motives for their aid — in the context of China’s long-debated role in Africa — Solhjell responds: “Like most countries outside Europe, aid is often linked to foreign policy interests. In Saudi Arabia, this is probably most evident. But what all three have in common is that they provide significant humanitarian support, and a good deal of emergency relief goes through well-known channels, such as the Norwegian Refugee Council — which has received money from several of these without having to compromise on its own values.”

He believes more Western countries will now turn their attention to the Gulf region. “These are countries there are good reasons to be critical of, particularly on human rights, but if through cooperation with three wealthy countries we can help unlock more funding, that is very important for international aid.”

Last year saw a seven per cent decline in global aid, and with the world’s largest donor now having announced further cuts, the poorest will be hit hard. The OECD Development Assistance Committee fears that 30 per cent of aid could disappear before 2030, and the Norad director says what we are witnessing represents the largest changes in international aid anyone has ever seen.

“And in many ways there are good reasons for that,” Solhjell says. “When aid began, there was a world with some rich countries and many poor ones. That world no longer exists. But there are large, new global challenges that do not fit into the established aid architecture. So in many ways, I think it is good that the system is being shaken up, but it is unfortunate that this is happening through such massive cuts.”

The Norad director says it is serious that cuts are being made whilst needs are growing. “But aid needs reform, and a discussion is long overdue. The UN must look at itself, and we must all think differently about who gives and how we spend money. But if the result of the crisis is that we create more effective channels and mobilise new donors, this could also prove to be important.”