The United States has significantly reduced its contribution to the United Nations’ humanitarian aid budget, slashing funding to $2 billion for the upcoming fiscal year.
This move marks a sharp decline from previous allocations and comes amid renewed calls from President Donald Trump for sweeping reforms within the UN system.
The decision, which was confirmed by the US State Department, reflects growing frustration among US policymakers over perceived inefficiencies and mismanagement within the organisation.
According to sources within the US government, the reduction is part of a broader strategy to pressure the UN into adopting structural changes. The administration has cited concerns over transparency, accountability, and the use of funds in conflict zones.
“We are not withdrawing from the UN, but we are demanding that it becomes more effective and efficient,” said a senior State Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The move has drawn criticism from humanitarian organisations and UN officials, who warn that the funding cut could jeopardise life-saving operations in regions affected by conflict and natural disasters.
The $2 billion figure represents a 30% drop from the $2.8 billion allocated in the previous fiscal cycle. This reduction affects programmes run by agencies such as the World Food Programme (WFP), the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and the World Health Organisation (WHO).
In response, the UN Secretary-General has urged the US to reconsider its position, stating that “the most vulnerable populations cannot afford further reductions in humanitarian support.”
The UN has already begun assessing the impact of the funding cut, with internal reports indicating potential delays in food distribution, vaccine delivery, and emergency medical services across Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia.
The shift in US policy coincides with increased political discourse surrounding the role of the UN in global governance. US President Trump has long been a vocal critic of the organisation, accusing it of bias and inefficiency.
In recent months, his administration has pushed for reforms including greater financial oversight, reduced bureaucracy, and stronger accountability mechanisms.
While the current administration has not formally adopted all of Trump’s proposals, the funding cut signals a growing alignment with his reform agenda.
Humanitarian groups have expressed concern over the potential consequences of the reduced funding. “This is not just a budget cut, it’s a human cost,” said Sarah Thompson, director of the International Relief Coalition.
“Millions of people rely on these programmes for food, shelter, and medical care. Any reduction risks lives.” The US has maintained that its decision is not a withdrawal from global aid efforts, but a strategic realignment to ensure that aid is delivered more effectively.
Despite the backlash, the Biden administration has not reversed course. Officials have indicated that future funding will be tied to measurable improvements in transparency and efficiency within the UN system.
The international community now awaits further developments, particularly from other major donor nations, as the global humanitarian landscape faces increasing strain.
Sources: The New York Times, BBC News, Reuters, The Guardian
