THE impending phase-out of Sweden’s bilateral development cooperation with Zimbabwe by August 2026 has cast a deep shadow over vital health, democratic governance and climate programmes, with experts warning of far-reaching consequences for vulnerable communities.
The withdrawal worsens an already dire situation following the sudden shutdown of the United States Agency for International Development (USAid)’s country mission in Zimbabwe earlier this year, a move that sent shockwaves through the development sector and left many organisations scrambling to survive.
USAid had been one of the largest funders of health, humanitarian and governance programmes, and its abrupt exit triggered immediate programme suspensions, lay-offs and funding gaps that are yet to be bridged.
Against this backdrop, Sweden’s decision adds yet another layer of uncertainty.
Swedish Ambassador to Zimbabwe Per Lindgärde has described the decision as part of a global strategic realignment. But it also marks the end of a four-decade partnership that has been a financial backbone for Zimbabwe’s civil society.
“Despite the phase-out of bilateral cooperation and closure of the embassy, Zimbabwe remains an important partner for Sweden,” Lindgärde told the Zimbabwe Independent.
Keep Reading
- Zim hit by grain shortage
- Ncube rules out income tax relief
- WFP to spend US$40 million on vulnerable communities
- Power shortages, poor roads stall grain deliveries: Govt
He dismissed suggestions that the move was linked to Zimbabwe’s political climate.
“It is necessary to underline that the decision is not related to any specific political developments in Zimbabwe,” Lindgärde said.
“Rather, it reflects Sweden’s wider foreign, security and development policy priorities and the government’s reform agenda for development cooperation.”
The financial stakes are high.
Lindgärde revealed that Sweden’s support to Zimbabwe in 2024 alone amounted to SEK336,5 million (US$36,3 million), channelled toward human rights protections, climate resilience and inclusive economic development.
Across the full 2022–2026 strategy period, Sweden’s indicative budget for development cooperation totals SEK1,65 billion (US$178 million), subject to annual parliamentary approvals.
For partners on the ground, however, the looming withdrawal signals a crisis.
Community Working Group on Health executive director Itai Rusike said the announcement “comes as a shock”, especially as other major donors have also been scaling back.
“They were covering quite a significant proportion of SRHR (sexual and reproductive health and rights) funding among other health, environmental and social programmes,” Rusike said.
“The withdrawal means some [agencies] have to close and discontinue the health and development programmes with negative consequences on the beneficiaries.”
He warned of job losses, disruptions to service delivery and the collapse of critical community-based interventions, noting that Sweden’s funding largely flowed through local non-government organisations (NGOs) and implementing partners.
And while he acknowledged the phased approach, unlike other abrupt donor exits, Rusike stressed that the timing is “disastrous” for a country still battling “limited domestic resources and post-Covid-19 fragility”.
Sweden’s departure from direct bilateral cooperation is part of a wider retrenchment across Africa, affecting countries such as Mozambique and Tanzania.
Lindgärde emphasised that Sweden will maintain political dialogue and humanitarian assistance. But the core development funding that has sustained civic programmes for decades is set to disappear, leaving a void that experts say will be extremely difficult to fill.
Also shutting down its Harare office is the German organisation, Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom, which has worked in Zimbabwe since 1980 promoting liberal democracy, rule of law and media freedom.
The foundation has supported civil society, youth initiatives and innovation programmes, including the acclaimed Womentorship Journalism Programme, which has trained more than 450 female journalists in digital, investigative, financial and political reporting.
Its closure marks another major setback for pro-democracy actors. The foundation has been central in fostering youth debates, backing innovators through platforms such as the Falling Walls Lab, and advocating for constitutional freedoms in an increasingly restrictive environment.
Its exit leaves yet another gap in the already diminishing support landscape for independent media, rights defenders and democratic institutions.