US Humanitarian Aid Pledge Faces Criticism Over Conditionality and Reduced Funding
The United States has pledged $2 billion for humanitarian aid through the United Nations, but experts warn this could undermine the UN’s flexible funding system by prioritizing Washington’s political goals.
The funds must be channeled through a pooled fund managed by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) rather than going directly to individual agencies. Moreover, the aid must be spent in 17 US-priority countries, excluding ongoing crisis areas such as Afghanistan and Yemen. The list of priority countries includes Sudan, Haiti, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and several Latin American states, reflecting a focus on US strategic interests.
Analysts say this move centralizes control within Washington and may limit the UN’s ability to respond effectively to emerging crises outside the prioritized list. The $2 billion pledge is also smaller than the previous year’s US contribution of $3.38 billion in 2025 and comes amid broader US aid cuts and debates over ending peacekeeping funding.
Critics argue that praising the US pledge as generous ignores the restrictive conditions attached and the potential negative impact on the UN’s independence. There is also skepticism about whether the funds will actually materialize, as the US demands cuts to "bloat" and duplication within UN mechanisms, making the pledge more a promise than a guaranteed transfer.
