In a report today, the Joint Committee on the National Security
Strategy warns of the “false economy” of deep cuts to the
aid-funded portions of the Conflict, Stability and Security Fund
(CSSF), which have shifted the emphasis of the Fund away from
peacebuilding and conflict prevention. The cuts and change of
focus are likely to impair the ability of the UK Government to
anticipate conflict, prevent escalation, and respond effectively
to areas of known instability across the world.
The CSSF was established to deliver a cross-Government response
to challenges overseas that threaten UK national security, using
both Official Development Assistance (ODA) and non-ODA funding.
Reductions to the UK's aid budget have translated into deep cuts
to the ODA programmes in the Fund.
CSSF initiatives have been deeply cut in the Middle East and
North Africa (MENA) - counter to the aims and potential of the
Fund in a region with frequent and escalating conflict. At
the end of the 20/21, the CSSF programme in Sudan was closed "in
response to ODA constraints". Programmes in neighbouring South
Sudan and Ethiopia were also closed. North African countries such
as Morocco saw CSSF ODA funding cut from £8.1 million in 20/21 to
£2.5 million in 21/22, with its programmes subsequently closed in
2022/23.
The CSSF is now merging with other funds to form the new
Integrated Security Fund (ISF), intended to create greater
coherence between international and domestic work to tackle
national security challenges. But the Committee says that the
CSSF had developed a distinct identity as an agile and responsive
fund, delivering international objectives set by the Prime
Minister and National Security Council, and undertaking projects
that other funders would often deem too high-risk. There is a
risk that this will be diluted amongst other more disparate
policy aims in the new Fund, and that domestic political
pressures will take priority.
The Committee is concerned about the lack of clarity surrounding
the transition to the ISF, as well as the further impact of this
uncertainty on organisations currently implementing CSSF
programmes. The report calls on the Government to maintain
existing levels of transparency and evaluation, so that the
impact of the transition to the new fund can
monitored.
Dame , Chair of JCNSS,
said: “Cuts to UK ODA have impacted parts of the CSSF at
an extremely bad time. An agile, responsive fund is being
effectively repurposed towards a focus on ‘hard security’. Deep
cuts to programmes in the Middle East and North Africa and the
Horn of Africa look particularly short-sighted and damaging,
coming shortly before surging conflict, instability and
catastrophic disasters in those regions.
“Development and security used to sit evenly in the Fund, but
deep cuts to the aid portion mean the security element is now
dominant. Even in narrow economic terms, it is disproportionately
more costly to deal with the consequences of conflict and
instability than to address the challenges at
source.
“Today, our response to the incomprehensible disasters unfolding
in Libya and Morocco risks being hamstrung by the decision to
reduce programmes so severely in the region. There is a great
risk that the changes to the CSSF will see it being diverted
towards domestic political priorities. We seek an assurance from
Government that it will maintain at least current levels of
transparency, monitoring and evaluation in the move to the
Integrated Security Fund, and we will continue to scrutinise the
impact of the transition and the Fund.”
