Adapting to Reduced US Humanitarian Aid in Conflict Zones: What’s Next?

Humanitarian organizations operating in conflict zones are facing a perfect storm of challenges, with the most significant being the reduction of aid from major donor countries, particularly the United States. These shifts, ranging from direct funding cuts to restrictions on aid access, have dire consequences for civilians already struggling to survive the ravages of war and conflict. This article delves into the impact of these changes and explores the adaptive strategies being employed by humanitarian organizations on the ground.

Before the aid reductions, the United States alone provided around 40% of global humanitarian assistance, amounting to roughly 14billionin2024,asignificantmarginabovethe814billionin2024,asignificantmarginabovethe82.7 billion) provided by Germany. This shift in US policy is driven by multiple factors, including changing strategic priorities and, potentially, doubts about the effectiveness of certain aid programs.

This presents considerable hurdles for humanitarian organizations, forcing them to restructure operations and adopt alternative strategies to ensure the continuity of essential services. These challenges are particularly acute in regions experiencing humanitarian crises, such as Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, and Iraq, where millions heavily rely on external humanitarian support.

Ripple Effects: Consequences of Reduced Aid

As US policy under the Trump administration (and subsequent administrations) shifted toward reducing foreign aid, humanitarian organizations, especially those operating in conflict zones, have experienced significant repercussions. The most prominent of these include:

1. Funding Shortfalls and Reduced Scope of Operations: US funding has been a cornerstone for numerous humanitarian programs implemented by international and local organizations. When this funding is reduced or suspended, organizations face a significant funding gap, hindering their ability to provide food, clean water, shelter, healthcare, and other essential services to those in need. This will inevitably lead to organizations scaling back their humanitarian operations. This means reaching fewer beneficiaries, and only partially meeting the enormous needs. This can include the closure of some health or educational centers, reduced food aid, or delays in implementing vital projects.
2. Decline in Essential Services: Many international organizations, such as the World Food Programme and the World Health Organization, heavily depend on US funding to cover expenses in conflict zones. Reducing this funding will increase pressure on available resources from other funding sources, both governmental and private. This increased pressure can rapidly deplete these resources and make them insufficient to meet the growing needs. For example, reduced US aid in Yemen has disrupted nutrition programs for children suffering from acute malnutrition. Healthcare programs in Syria have also been affected, with some field hospitals forced to reduce operating hours or close entire sections due to funding shortages.
3. Disproportionate Impact on Vulnerable Groups: In regions enduring protracted conflicts, funding cuts exacerbate humanitarian crises. The number of beneficiaries from relief programs decreases, and the quality of services declines. Moreover, aid reductions often have a multiplied impact on the most vulnerable groups, such as refugees, internally displaced persons, children, women, the elderly, and people with disabilities, who depend heavily on humanitarian aid to survive. Additionally, reduced aid can increase rates of displacement and irregular migration, as people are forced to seek livelihoods outside their home regions.

Case Studies: The Impact in Arab Nations

Despite the fact that, as reported by Reuters on April 9th of last year, the Trump administration had moved to resume at least six foreign aid programs, including those of the World Food Programme in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and Somalia, in addition to Ecuador, the reduction of US aid has significantly affected a number of Arab countries, including the following:

1. Palestine: The ongoing Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip has exacerbated the humanitarian crisis, with the population suffering from severe shortages of food, water, and healthcare. The cessation of US support for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) has resulted in cuts to education and health services provided to over five million Palestinian refugees.
2. Lebanon: The suspension of US funding has led to the reduction of programs by UNICEF, which has increased the severity of the food crisis, especially among children. More than half of children under the age of two in eastern Lebanon suffer from severe food insecurity. The Ministries of Interior and Education were also directly affected, as they relied on funding from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to pay employee salaries and follow up on the implementation of educational projects.
3. Yemen: The population is experiencing the worst humanitarian crisis due to the repercussions of the Houthi coup. Reducing aid has exacerbated this humanitarian situation, with the collapse of the local currency, rising prices, the spread of epidemics, and the deterioration of health and education systems.
4. Somalia: The decline in humanitarian funding has led to a reduction in protection programs, increasing the risks of gender-based violence, child labor, and reduced access to education.
5. Syria: Food, health, and shelter programs have been reduced, affecting millions in need of assistance. The World Food Programme has reduced the number of beneficiaries, which has exacerbated the food security crisis in recent months.
6. Iraq: The reduction in humanitarian aid has led to the suspension of vital projects in food, clean water, and healthcare, a situation that could threaten the return of terrorist and extremist organizations, and thus, instability in the country.

Strategies for Survival: Adaptation and Innovation

Faced with mounting challenges from reduced US aid, humanitarian organizations are adopting a range of strategies to adapt and ensure the continuation of their work as much as possible. The most important of these include:

1. Diversifying Funding Sources: Relying on a single funding source is no longer a sustainable option. Humanitarian organizations are increasingly seeking to diversify their funding sources and expand their donor base to reduce their dependence on one source, such as the United States. This includes seeking funding from other governments, international organizations, the private sector, and individuals. Some organizations have turned to the European Union, the Gulf countries, and the Scandinavian countries, which maintain high levels of humanitarian assistance. Other organizations have partnered with the private sector through partnerships with commercial institutions interested in social responsibility, as well as taking advantage of joint funding mechanisms managed by the United Nations and other international organizations.
2. Expanding Partnerships and Fostering Innovation: Humanitarian organizations are working to diversify their partnerships with local and regional organizations, which often have a deeper understanding of the local context and greater ability to reach the affected groups. Instead of relying solely on external funding, some organizations have begun to strengthen their partnerships with local entities, such as charitable societies and local governments in the affected countries. In addition, as organizations attempt to adapt to aid reductions, they strive to increase the efficiency of their operations by adopting new technologies and innovative methods to deliver aid more effectively and at a lower cost. This includes using cash transfers instead of in-kind assistance, and utilizing digital technology, interactive maps, early warning systems, and artificial intelligence to track needs and distribute aid.
3. Prioritizing Needs and Assessing Requirements: In the face of scarce resources, organizations have been forced to review their priorities, adopt austerity policies, and identify the most urgent needs that must be met first to ensure the continuity of essential services. This has included helping the most affected groups, such as children, women, the elderly, and people with disabilities, while reducing administrative expenses, integrating similar programs, and training local cadres to reduce dependence on foreign experts, whose hosting requires significant financial costs.

Looming Challenges: A Difficult Road Ahead

The continued policy of reducing US aid in conflict zones presents a number of future challenges that could hinder the work of humanitarian organizations and their ability to effectively respond to crises. These challenges include the following: The potential for a growing funding gap, as the lack of funding is likely to remain a structural challenge facing the humanitarian sector. If Washington continues to reduce its contributions, and alternative funding sources cannot fully compensate for this deficit, organizations will face increasing difficulties in financing their basic programs. This may force more organizations to reduce the number of beneficiaries and close vital programs entirely, not to mention the difficulty of providing a rapid and effective response to sudden humanitarian crises such as new waves of displacement or natural disasters that increase needs.

Furthermore, if alternative funding sources fail to compensate for the shortage of US aid, it could intensify competition among humanitarian organizations for available funding from other donors, potentially depleting the capabilities of these bodies and preventing them from continuing to provide the same level of support in the long term.

In conclusion, humanitarian organizations face immense challenges in navigating the crisis of reduced US aid, particularly in conflict zones. The negative consequences resulting from these cuts are likely to continue impacting the organizations’ ability to effectively respond to the growing needs in numerous countries in the region suffering from war and internal instability. This can trigger a wave of complex crises that extend from the lives of individuals to the institutional and social structures in these countries. The international community must recognize the critical role of humanitarian aid and explore innovative funding models, fostering collaborative partnerships to support these organizations and ensure the delivery of life-saving assistance to those most in need. Ultimately, the resilience and adaptability of these organizations will be crucial in mitigating the impact of aid reductions and upholding the principles of humanitarian assistance in an increasingly complex and challenging global landscape.