The implications of US funding cuts for humanitarian assistance and development support are severe and far-reaching, including in large displacement crises and for major refugee-hosting countries. It is projected that USAID programmes in Ethiopia, the DRC, Colombia, South Africa, Palestine, Bangladesh, Kenya, Afghanistan, and Tanzania have each been cut by over 200 million USD. The largest absolute cut is in Ukraine with 1.4 billion USD removed. In the cases of Afghanistan, Palestine and Somalia it is estimated US funding cuts represent a loss of over 1 percent of their gross national income (GNI). Compounding the impact, less dramatic but still significant reductions in aid budgets have taken place at major European donors, including the UK, France, the Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland, and will likely also occur in Germany.

The repercussions will be felt around the world: life-saving assistance will not be provided to millions of people in need and very difficult decisions about resource allocation need to be taken. People who are forcibly displaced within their home country or across borders will feel the impact imminently. While the majority will be stuck in protracted displacement internally or in neighbouring countries, others will be forced to embark on dangerous journeys to access humanitarian assistance, including towards Europe.

The impact of the funding cuts will be significant, also on asylum systems in Europe. First, cuts to support for displaced people in countries such as Ukraine or Türkiye will likely lead to more people arriving in EU Member States in search of protection. Second, the European asylum sector, which in many countries is heavily dependent on funding from institutional or private donors, is directly affected. Many civil society organisations supporting asylum seekers and refugees through services, legal aid, and support to inclusion have been hit by the end of US funding either through direct cuts or because intermediary donors or partners, such as UNHCR, have ended or reduced their support. The significant reduction in UNHCR’s budget will mean that the majority of civil society organisations working on asylum in Europe will be affected. This aggravates the already adverse funding environment for organisations work on refugee rights, many of which face national governments that refuse or severely limit funding to this sector.

At the time of writing, significant funding cuts have been reported in Belgium, Croatia, Czech Republic, Cyprus, Estonia, Georgia, Greece, Kosovo, Malta, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, Sweden and Türkiye.

As a result, at a time of increased need due to rising displacement, civil society working on asylum and migration is under huge financial strain, facing significant reductions in staffing and activities. This will leave many people seeking protection in Europe unsupported, undermine the functioning of asylum systems, and jeopardise the implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum in which civil society has an important role to play.

Given this new reality, it is imperative that all relevant actors – the European Commission, Member States and private funders – reassess their priorities and address the shortfalls to prevent a crisis of asylum, reception and inclusion in Europe.

For this purpose, the undersigned organisations are calling on:

The European Commission to:

• use its mid-term review of Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) and the European Social Fund+ (ESF+) to ensure that funding channelled via Member States adequately supports civil society organisations working on asylum and migration.
• consider how to fund civil society directly, e.g. through resources from the AMIF thematic facility, in order to respond to the emerging needs for legal aid, counselling
  and other activities all of which have a high added value for the EU as they support the implementation of the Pact.
• review whether, given the changed context, Member States should be obliged to spend a certain percentage of their national programmes in support of civil society, a good
  practice established for EU funding for displacement from Ukraine.
• adapt national programmes under the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) to respond to the emerging needs in relation to asylum and migration.

Member States to:

• ensure that national programmes under the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) and the Border Management and Visa Instrument (BMVI) provide adequate
  resources for civil society organisations, that civil society are considered eligible under all relevant call for proposals and that activities include legal counselling and representation; calls should be issued promptly.
• convene consultations with affected NGOs to understand what the needs are and how
  they can be addressed in the short-, medium- and long-term.

Private funders to:

• re-assess funding needs for asylum in Europe, increase resources for this purpose
  and prioritise countries where neither national allocation of EU funds nor institutional
  funding reaches civil society.

Immediate action is needed now. In the medium term, the new funding reality should be reflected in the proposals and negotiations of the next Multi-annual Financial Framework which will start this year.