Just like the environmental and cultural sectors, Belgian NGOs need a new strategy by mid-2026 for the five-year programme. Unlike in, for example, the Netherlands, in our country we have a great deal of freedom to shape that strategy. With our northern neighbours, the government defines a programme (we are going to do this and that in this and that country) and then issues a tender. Dutch NGOs therefore swing along from left to right (or far right) with the policy. In Belgium, NGOs are allowed to make their own choices, so there is more autonomy. You can define a strategy yourself, draw up a programme and then submit it to the government. A unique system, and so it is quite exciting to see what will happen at the negotiating table.
So much for the good news
I am not at the table during the government negotiations. A pity, but that is how it is. Still, I would dare to bet that if the Belgian defence budget goes up, NGOs will most likely have to make cuts. It is not simply moving money from one pocket to another, but rather the result of a policy shift to the right. Vooruit is at the table, and traditionally solidarity is an important issue for progressives. It is difficult for such a party to allow cuts to international solidarity. But even on that side of the spectrum, the narrative that we must prepare for more war is gaining ground.
The motivation for this is simple: Europe is involved in more and more international conflicts, and there is a belief that even more conflicts will follow. Until today, we have mainly relied on American money to wage those wars. The US is still pumping a lot of money into NATO, but unless the other countries increase their defence spending, a certain Mr Trump will absolutely no longer do so. International solidarity is not exactly his pet cause. So there is heightened alertness in Europe when it comes to defence, and every extra euro that goes to a missile, helmet, soldier, whatever, is one euro less for something else.
Completely naive
It may be stating the obvious, but for the record I do need to say how I think about military displays of power as a solution to conflicts, or the illusion that violence can lead to security. I find that completely naive. Name one place where military means have led to a happy end in the past twenty years. Name one country that has improved since military intervention, on either side of the conflict. We let fortunes go up in smoke, literally, mortgage the future of the population, roll back quality of life by several decades, only to clean up the mess with diplomatic means when push comes to shove. Neatly, at the table.
That being said. The defence budget will go up; the budget for international solidarity will go down. By how much? No idea. Hopefully it will not be too bad. But the cuts will hurt—that is the consensus at management level among Belgian NGOs. So there is no easy period ahead, with the combination of cuts and the need for a new strategy for the DGD applications (the government’s subsidy mechanism). At S&L we are fully in prep mode so that we can thoroughly support NGOs through all these developments. We have the experience in-house and are very eager to guide NGOs. But I do want to share a few pieces of advice here already, because we cannot work with everyone.
My two cents
- A strategy is not a straight line
And yet they are so often drawn up that way. This is important, so we are going to do that, in this way, for the next five years. The environment is too uncertain to draw such rigid lines. It is smarter to think in scenarios. Then you start thinking in “What if?” terms. What if the trend towards lower subsidies increases over the next ten years? What do we need to do then? What if there really are more military conflicts? Where should we direct our energy then? Choose the biggest uncertainties in your environment and translate them into four major “What if” questions, turn them into scenarios and write them out. Your strategy is closely linked to those scenarios, because “What if your budget is cut in half?” Where do the priorities lie then?
- Together we are stronger
It is a risk, but if you approach it well, more collaboration can increase your impact and deliver efficiency gains. This is not a call for everyone to merge, but there is more than just collaboration in the field; there is also an enormous amount of overlap in the “overhead” category. Does every NGO need to arrange its monitoring, evaluation and HR separately? Managing financial flows requires a lot of specialist work, from profiles that are hard to find. For some calls or tenders, Belgian NGOs on their own are simply too small to qualify. More collaboration contains, if done right, time savings and greater impact.
- A chair does not stand on two legs
You need to diversify income. That is true for every organisation, large or small, non-profit or for-profit. As I indicated above, collaboration opens up more possibilities in fundraising, certainly at the institutional level. It is smart to join forces, also in the budgetary question. Focusing on fundraising is also important, but you should not try to do everything. Too often, organisations try everything, while fundraising is about making choices. About doing what you do well. But there too, it is sometimes difficult to attract experts—something that can be addressed through collaboration.
- Take the next step in decolonisation
Decolonising is complex because it touches on the essence of organisations that are active in the former colonies of the West. They are still needed, but they must think carefully about their new role as networker, translator and connector for civil society in the Global South. How can those partners become fully-fledged, independent organisations, rather than local implementers? That is possible if we truly share power and pass on responsibilities, with attention to a good transition. That starts with building decolonisation into every step of the organisation and its strategy. And involving the people it is about, of course.
It is not a cheerful prospect
My advice is not simple or without risk, I know. In terms of fundraising, NGOs are also simply each other’s competitors, even more so with the upcoming cuts. But good leaders who want to get to know and trust one another can rise above that. Because collaboration is more than making a plan or holding endless meetings. In practice, it means daring to lean on and count on one another. And at S&L we have enough people in-house to guide NGOs in this: in leadership with trust, a resilient strategy, selective fundraising, future thinking with imagination, and helping take up the pen when writing the policy plan.
