First of all, a happy new year to you, with our warmest wishes for 2026, for you, your families and your projects. We thank you for your loyalty and for your support as we announce a new project for Défis Humanitaires presented at the conclusion of our editorial.
The year 2026 begins in spectacular fashion with the abduction by the United States of the Venezuelan president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife Cilia Flores, on Saturday January 3 in the middle of the night in Caracas during a surgical military operation. His photo as a prisoner went around the world and Donald Trump watched his arrest live “like on television”. It reminds us of Iraq and Saddam Hussein!
During a nighttime press conference Donald Trump notably declared that he was taking control of Venezuela to “ensure a safe, appropriate and well-considered transition”. We shall see what comes of it, as what follows may prove more complicated. Despite all the criticism that can be made of Nicolás Maduro’s dictatorial regime, this show of force raises the question of respect for the sovereignty of nation-states and the right of peoples to self-determination.
“Enough utopian idealism, time for pure and hard realism”. Pete Hegseth.
What we are witnessing is the implementation of the new “National Security Strategy of the United States”. And, more precisely, the forceful reaffirmation of the Monroe Doctrine to “restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere”, that is to say Central America and South America, combined with the “Trump corollary”.
All the countries of the region are thus warned about what may await them, as well as external countries that might venture to interfere in this exclusive sphere of influence! This promises further developments to come.
What we are witnessing in Venezuela is a perfect illustration of the new strategy of Donald Trump’s United States. No more endless great crusades at the risk of getting bogged down against the axis of evil and supposedly democratizing the universe. But rather a force serving only American interests based on massive military, economic and technological superiority.
If Trump is not a neo-conservative warmonger according to experts, he is the “sheriff” who disregards the law and “who ordered more strikes in one year than Biden during his four years in office” (Le Grand Continent). It is no longer hyperpower at the service of free-trade globalization, but a determined and targeted force for the benefit of American supremacy for decades to come.
National Security Strategy of the United States.
This new strategy signals the end of United States foreign policy as it has existed since 1945. This document is a true indictment of the elites who have led American policy since the Cold War. At the heart of this doctrine now stands a slogan destined to become a watchword, “peace through strength”, which may be the Trojan horse for many other appetites and objectives without borders.
Make no mistake, this strategy is already at work and will intensify, adapting if necessary. It concerns both domestic policy and major international actors. It has the merit of clarity.
Thus, if the fate of South America is that of the Monroe Doctrine of limited sovereignty, as in Brezhnev’s time with Central and Eastern Europe, today’s Europe is considered a declining continent lacking confidence and identity and which must nevertheless have its “greatness promoted” for the benefit of the United States through a “made in Trump” recovery program.
And to underline that Europe has lost its share of global GDP, falling from 25% in 1990 to 14% today! This should moreover shake us out of our torpor. Weakness is now incompatible with freedom, prosperity, independence and sovereignty in the world of Trump, Xi Jinping, Putin, Erdogan, where force is the sine qua non condition of existence.
Faced with this strategy which favors bilateralism over multilateralism, sovereignty over international institutions, the national over internationalism, and which intends to ensure its hegemony while declaring “not wanting to dominate the world and not wanting to change differences”, Europe is led to rethink its foundations, which are those of the nations that constitute it and which are its political legitimacy and moral strength. Individually these nations would be vassalized; together they will be just as much so if Europe does not reinvent itself in the world as it is becoming.
The member states and the European Union, originally founded on peace, law and trade, cannot avoid questioning their existence in a world dominated by the return of empires, the use of force and the abandonment by the United States.
As a Conference of the Coalition of countries willing to support Ukraine is held on Tuesday January 6 in Paris, the American position is clear. To negotiate a rapid cessation of hostilities and restore strategic stability with Russia. Here we see the idea of the “realpolitik” of spheres of influence but also the objective of severing Russia’s “unbreakable alliance” with China, which has become the systemic adversary since Barack Obama.
For Europe and its countries such as Poland and the Baltic States, which know Russia well, the question is posed very differently. What will be the price of the end of the war and what security guarantees for Ukraine and its neighbors? This is the whole issue, including for the United States.
There would still be much to say about the National Security Strategy of the United States. You will find in this edition the excellent article by Pierre Brunet, which I invite you to read on this subject.
And what about humanitarian action in all this?
To get straight to the point, the equation is simple and brutal. Humanitarian needs are increasing while resources are falling drastically. This concerns not only ongoing crises, but also anticipating what 2026 has in store for us: epidemics, disasters and wars against a backdrop of extreme poverty.
Will the crisis opened in Venezuela, which already counts millions and millions of refugees from Nicolás Maduro’s dictatorial rule, be resolved peacefully at the ballot box? We hope so. Will the show of force by the United States in Venezuela soon be followed by others as Donald Trump announces? Not to mention the example Venezuela could inspire by triggering geopolitical competition marked by predation and violence.
Now, where do we stand in terms of humanitarian resources. The year 2025 is indeed that of the funding tipping point. As a reminder, the United Nations appeal with OCHA was 45.46 billion dollars intended to assist 181.2 million people in danger. Faced with the brutal drop in funding from the United States and other countries, OCHA had to revise its plan downward on June 16, 2025 to a budget of 29 billion dollars intended for 114 million people.
As a reminder, the initial assessment of people in need of life-saving assistance was 300 million people in 72 countries. Which led Tom Fletcher to say, “We have been forced to triage human survival”. Ultimately, the 2025 budget amounted to 23.23 billion dollars, of which 13.41 for the consolidated appeal and 9.9 billion from other funds.
The UN has launched an appeal for 2026 of 23 billion dollars to assist 87 million people affected by war, disasters, epidemics and crop failures, indicating that a total of 33 billion would be needed to meet the essential needs of 135 million people in 50 countries.
What will happen? Will the decline in humanitarian aid stabilize or continue and with what human consequences? What is certain is that humanitarians must mobilize without reserve to fight against the retreat and abandonment that are underway. Not to mention new conditionalities likely to call humanitarian principles into question and the burden of increasingly heavy and paralyzing accountability.
The United States has just pledged 2 billion dollars for humanitarian aid with 3 conditions for the UN: a structural reform, centralized control and strict accountability, while warning that the use of these funds must respond to “American national interests” and that certain countries were excluded such as Afghanistan, Yemen and Gaza. Other actors who finance humanitarian aid will therefore have to compensate for the absence of the United States and mobilize sufficient resources for the victims of major crises.
International humanitarian law under strain.
Another sign of the times, the Israeli authorities confirm the ban on 37 international humanitarian NGOs from continuing to provide aid in Gaza for having refused to communicate the list of their Palestinian employees. From the point of view of humanitarian principles, these NGOs are right and must be supported.
This reminds us of the expulsion of all NGOs from Kabul by the Taliban in the 1990s, but also that of more than 30 NGOs from Rwanda in 1996 by the regime of Paul Kagame and, finally, the forcible expulsion of 14 NGOs from Darfur by President Omar al-Bashir in 2009 following his indictment by the International Criminal Court.
Without the cancellation of this ban requested by many countries and by the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, this will lead to immediate humanitarian consequences for the population of Gaza, already severely tested. But the objective may precisely be to replace them with a structure established and controlled by Israel.
The future humanitarian space is not only shrinking due to severely reduced budgetary capacities, but also through access being denied as soon as NGOs become inconvenient and no longer have sufficient support from major international actors and public opinion.
At the beginning of 2026, the abduction of Nicolás Maduro and the banning of 37 NGOs in Gaza are significant signals of change that require individual and collective responses commensurate with the challenges.
The aggiornamento of Défis Humanitaires and a new project.
In this context of rupture it is essential for Défis Humanitaires to evolve and adapt in order to pursue our mission of information, debate, alert and proposals.
This is all the more true as we are increasingly confronted with disinformation, so-called alternative truths and large-scale cyber manipulation campaigns.
This evolution first concerns the editorial line, which must give more space to the humanitarian geopolitics of crises, to the links between political choices and their consequences, such as Official Development Assistance. Likewise, the context leads us to develop topics related to innovation, pooling, financing and more effective advocacy towards public authorities and the media.
The other major axis of our evolution concerns the medium itself, with a change to a media-press type layout benefiting from new functionalities to mobilize more readers, easy and rapid access to archives and the translation of our articles into a greater number of languages.
Défis Humanitaires is an independent, free journal, but it has a cost. If this cost is largely borne by volunteer work, it also requires essential funding to call upon a competent specialized agency to design the new layout. Likewise, the evolution of the editorial line and of the editions requires a strengthening of the editorial team.
Thus, at the beginning of this year, I am launching an appeal to all our readers, who are our best allies, to finance this development through their support, reminding you that your donation is tax-deductible at 66% of its amount and that you can do so today here: Your donation is a lever for humanitarian action, many thanks. – Helloasso.
I thank you in advance and once again extend my best wishes, assuring you that you can count on Défis Humanitaires.
Alain Boinet.
Alain Boinet is the president of the Défis Humanitaires association which publishes the online journal www.defishumanitaires.com. He is the founder of the humanitarian organization Solidarités International, of which he was chief executive officer for 35 years. He is also a member of the Humanitarian Consultation Group with the Crisis and Support Centre of the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs, a member of the Board of Directors of Solidarités International, the French Water Partnership (PFE), the Veolia Foundation, and the think tank (re)sources. He continues to go to the field (north-east Syria, Nagorno-Karabakh/Artsakh and Armenia) and to testify in the media.
Discover the other articles in this edition:
- US National Security Strategy – Pierre Brunet
- Between stagnation and transformation: how macroeconomics is rebuilding philanthropy – Antoine Vaccaro
- Salary practices, attractiveness, and HR equity in French international solidarity organizations – Matthieu de Bénazé
