Global Europe: the future of EU development aid and external action

Translated by Mariateresa Tauro

In an era of growing global instability and political fragmentation, the European Commission is being put to the test with the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for the 2028-2034 cycle.

The budget proposal, presented on 16 July 2025, has a total size of around 2 trillion euros, equivalent to 1.26% of the annual gross national income of the Member States, and aims to provide the European Union with the resources it needs to deal with complex internal and external challenges.

Global Europe in the New Multiannual Financial Framework

The proposal – currently under negotiation between the Commission, Parliament and Council – clearly highlights the importance attributed to the Global Europe instrument.

Already operational in the period 2021-2027, this instrument is formally known as the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe (NDICI-Global Europe) and is currently the EU's main mechanism for development cooperation and partnerships with third countries.

For the period after 2027, however, the Commission proposes a significant strengthening of Global Europe, with total resources of around 200 billion euros. This choice reflects the growing importance attached to external action in an increasingly unstable and competitive international environment, characterised by a phase in which both the United States and several EU Member States have reduced their development aid.

In the draft presented in July, Global Europe consolidates and expands existing mechanisms into a single, more flexible architecture, with a greater focus on the EU's geopolitical and economic interests, such as competitiveness, energy security, migration and climate. The instrument thus has a ‘dual objective’, namely to promote mutually beneficial global partnerships that contribute, on the one hand, to the sustainable development of partner countries and, on the other, to the strategic interests of the Union.

The Commission also reaffirms its commitment to promoting multilateralism, the rules-based international order, and compliance with the Union's international commitments, in particular the Sustainable Development Goals, the 2030 Agenda, the Paris Agreement and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

Global Europe’s geographical and financial structure

Structure-wise, the instrument is divided into six geographical pillars, each with an indicative financial allocation:

1. Europe (43.17 billion euros);
2. Middle East, North Africa and Persian Gulf (42.93 billion euros);
3. Sub-Saharan Africa (60.53 billion euros);
4. Asia and the Pacific (17.05 billion euros);
5. Americas and the Caribbean (9.14 billion euros);
6. Global pillar (12.68 billion euros), designated to global challenges, such as the protection of human rights.

In addition, financial support for Ukraine is planned in the form of loans for a maximum amount of 100 billion euros, as well as a reserve for emerging challenges and priorities of 14.8 billion euros.

Alongside these programmable actions, the Commission also identifies some non-programmable actions, including humanitarian aid, resilience and competitiveness, to enable the EU to increase cooperation where necessary. Since flexibility is at the heart of the next MFF, allocations are indicative and non-binding, allowing for the reallocation of resources if necessary.

Key criticisms and concerns

Despite the significant increase in resources, several think tanks and civil society actors have raised serious doubts about the proposed changes to Global Europe.

Firstly, the growing emphasis on flexibility and the absence of binding allocations raise questions about the predictability and transparency of aid. While the possibility of reallocating resources strengthens the EU's capacity to respond to crises, it also risks weakening medium- to long-term planning, which is central to the effectiveness of development aid. Partner countries could therefore find themselves facing less stable funding that is more exposed to fluctuations in European political priorities.

Particular attention is also paid to thematic priorities. While NDICI-Global Europe specified binding spending targets for areas such as climate, human development and gender equality, the current proposal no longer clearly mentions them. Therefore, how the EU intends to ensure continuity of investment in these areas is one of the key issues to be addressed in the negotiations.

Finally, the proposal includes a suspension clause giving the Commission the power to suspend development support if a third country fails to cooperate in the readmission of its nationals. Compared to the past, this marks a significant tightening of conditionality, with the risk of increasing politicisation of aid.

Final considerations

In conclusion, the new Global Europe is the most ambitious investment proposal ever made by the EU for external action, in a historical context characterised by significant instability and geopolitical rivalries.

However, as highlighted by various civil society actors, the proposed changes create a strategic dilemma, namely how to reconcile the pursuit of short-term geopolitical and economic interests with the EU's long-term commitment to development cooperation.

The risk, indeed, is that strategic interests will end up prevailing over structural development objectives. Negotiations between European institutions will therefore be crucial in understanding how the EU intends to protect and promote global development.

Mondo Internazionale APS - Riproduzione Riservata ® 2026