Trump, Putin, France and Europe, humanitarianism!

Vladimir Putin & Donald Trump in Helsinki July 2018. (Image Credit Kremlin.ru via Wikimedia Commons)

By signing an executive order abruptly freezing US international aid budgets and putting an end to the USAID agency, President Donald Trump has provoked shock followed by a storm in humanitarian organisations, coupled with uncertainty about the future, by combining exemptions for certain programmes with contradictory orders and counter-orders that sow confusion.

The big question is why this decision and its disastrous consequences.

All the more so as this slump in official development assistance from the United States, the world’s biggest donor, was shortly preceded by significant cuts in a number of European countries. I confess to being surprised by the great silence of the institutions on this subject, as we saw at the 10th anniversary of the CNDSI (Conseil National du Développement et de la Solidarité Internationale) in Paris or in the programme of the next European Humanitarian Forum on 19 and 20 in Brussels.

How can we explain the great return of geopolitics that we are witnessing, and what new period are we entering blindly?

What are the consequences for humanitarian and development aid for populations and, much further afield, for nation states and the international community that represents them at the UN, itself shaken, unbalanced and divided?

Have we not entered a pre-war climate that is already manifesting itself in cyberspace, sanctions and the trade war, in the accelerated increase in defence budgets and armies, and in the strengthening of the resilience of populations in the face of rising perils?

Swedish manual for survival in times of crisis or war

The humanitarian consequences

To take the measure of the earthquake caused by the US administration on 24 January, when it wrote to its partners to immediately freeze its funding for 90 days for evaluation in 158 countries where USAID is present, it is useful to recall the figures.

In 2023, the year for which we have the official OECD figures, they show that global Official Development Assistance amounted to USD 233.3 billion, including USD 64.7 billion for the United States (see the link to Cyprien Fabre’s article DH 97). This amount includes 14.5 billion for humanitarian aid out of a total humanitarian budget of 43.6 billion that year.

The entire global humanitarian and development ecosystem was instantly shaken, leading to a cascade of programme interruptions or forced slowdowns.

The extent of the shock is clearer when you consider that the budgets of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) are each 40% funded by the United States. Allen Maima, head of public health at the UNHCR, says that 520,000 displaced persons in the DRC are at risk of death from infectious diseases because the 2025 health budget has been cut by 87% compared with 2024. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has been forced to cut its budget and programmes by 20%, as have all the United Nations agencies, to varying degrees.

In eastern Chad, the WFP distributes food to new arrivals from Sudan. Photo WFP / Jacques David

The Secretary General of the NGO Danish Refugee Council (DRC), Charlotte Slente, testifies that on 26 February she received more than 20 notices of termination of grants from USAID and the US State Department for 12 countries, amounting to USD 130 million! The Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), for its part, said that it had never experienced such a cut in funding in its 79-year history.

Among the humanitarian NGOs in France, Manuel Patrouillard, Director General of Handicap International/Humanité et Inclusion (HI), said that out of a budget of 270 million euros in 2024, 36 million came from USAID and that they had been forced to stop 36 projects overnight.

The same applies to Première Urgence Internationale (PUI), where CEO Thierry Mauricet explains that American funding accounts for around 30% of an annual budget of €130 million. At Solidarités International, the proportion is around 36%, according to its Managing Director, Kevin Goldberg. The same applies to Action Contre la Faim, ACTED, Triangle Génération Humanitaire (TGH) and many other humanitarian NGOs.

But beyond these cuts, uncertainty still reigns, as projects that were granted waiver to continue have subsequently been cancelled and then renewed in contradictory ways.

NGOs recently received letters on 21 March telling them that they could resume the various ‘life-saving’ programmes, without knowing whether these would continue if necessary when they expired. As a result, some NGOs are considering ending these programmes on the scheduled date without planning to follow up, due to the lack of American commitment at this stage.

Finally, the US administration owes a great deal of money to its partners, who have advanced the funds needed to implement the aid, without being reimbursed since December. Around €200 million is owed to 6 French NGOs, and the amount increases every month.

While the US Supreme Court has ruled that this money must be repaid, no one knows when this will happen. As a result, NGOs owed USD 25 or 30 million could find themselves out of business if the money is not repaid by June! So there are also major concerns about the cash flow of these organisations.

US Department of Defense. U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Isaac Ibarra/Released)

The origins of the earthquake

The US administration set out its position in a twenty-page document entitled ‘Designing a New Architecture for US International Assistance’. It states that ‘the US international assistance apparatus is inefficient and fragmented’ and that it lacks ‘a unified and coordinated delivery system’.

It states that ‘As Secretary Rubio has made clear, all U.S. international assistance efforts should make America safer, stronger and more prosperous’.

According to the new US administration ‘The United States had an archaic system that needed to be dismantled’ and President Trump’s ‘decisive actions’ are an opportunity to ‘restructure the system and establish an architecture for international cooperation that respects the taxpayer and achieves measurable results, particularly through the private sector, and aligns with America’s strategic interests.

In fact, it’s a question of restructuring American aid in depth, and this seems to have been thought out in advance when we discover the very precise and detailed roadmap for its implementation. In particular, USAID is to change its name, following changes to its articles of association, to become the US Agency for International Humanitarian Assistance (IHA). Similarly, the Office of Humanitarian Assistance (OHA) will become the Office of Humanitarian Assistance.

This is clearly a vast plan aimed at redefining the objectives, priorities, partners and organisational and operational methods for implementing this policy.

Press Conference by the President of the United States © NATO

But it is important to understand that this American earthquake in their humanitarian and development aid is part of a much broader and deeper perspective that can be summed up by Donald Trump’s political project of illiberalism. This aims to go beyond the limits of a liberal democracy deemed too slow, contradictory in its compromises and ill-adapted to the challenges of today’s world. A project that calls into question the separation of powers and the hierarchy of standards in the name of popular suffrage embodied by a leader who wields a great deal of power.

At this stage, I wondered whether Donald Trump’s America might not be the consequence of, or even the response to, the autocratic, even totalitarian, regimes of Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Recep Tayyip Erdogan and others, or an American copy of a global trend that is also seeing a diversified global South assert itself and clash in heightened global competition.

In any case, this epochal change means that the humanitarian and development world must take it fully into account and position itself beyond what immediately affects it.

Donald Trump has confirmed and completed this change of era, in which the war in Ukraine has played a triggering role. In a more conflictual and unpredictable world that is disrupting the globalisation of trade, geopolitics is once again asserting itself as the ‘queen of battles’.

The world is changing

When Donald Trump distances himself from Europe and its defence, he is pursuing the American policy initiated by Barack Obama and continued by Joe Biden of refocusing the United States strategically on the Asia-Pacific region, in the face of China’s now global ambitions.

In so doing, he has brought us face to face with Russia and our disarmament in the possible absence of the American umbrella that has prevailed since the creation of NATO.

Public opinion in France is not mistaken when three out of four people support the rearmament of our defence according to a recent poll (1). Similarly, a study (2) shows that 50% of young people aged between 18 and 30 would be prepared to join the army in the event of a conflict threatening our country. This is what Brice Teinturier, CEO of Ipsos, says when he notes that ‘the strict separation between national and international issues is a thing of the past’.

This is borne out by the fact that the defence budget was €32 billion in 2017; it will be €50.5 billion in 2025, and €67 billion in 5 years’ time. But the pace is increasing in line with the risks, and the Minister of Defence, Sébastien Lecornu, is now working at the request of the President of the Republic, Emmanuel Macron, on a budget of €100 billion, or 4% of Gross Domestic Product.

This trend is sweeping across Europe, and summits of Heads of State and Government, as well as Chiefs of Defence Staff, are being held in quick succession in Paris and London to address the threat posed by Ukraine, which could eventually affect the Baltic States and Poland, and consequently the whole of Europe.

© Ministère de la Défense ukrainien
Victory Day Parade in Moscow © mos.ru

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Faced with the threat posed by Vladimir Putin, backed by China, and the abandonment of Donald Trump’s America, a relatively disarmed Europe seems to be rediscovering General de Gaulle’s vision of strategic independence based on the ultimate nuclear deterrent. In the general upheaval of the usual reference points, let us add that the same General de Gaulle was in favour of a Europe of nation states as a guarantee of its roots and strength, as Ukraine is proving by fighting for its freedom and independence.

Humanitarian conclusion

The change in times we are living through is similar to those we experienced with the fall of the Berlin Wall or the attack on the World Trade Center in New York on 11 September 2001, with the global consequences we are all familiar with.

The future will tell us how the interdependence of ruptures and recompositions will play out over time.

For the time being, although humanitarian aid must first of all cope with the dismantling of USAID, the change of era is profound and general, and it is in this new world that we must pursue our mission with, I believe, two convictions.

The first is that being a French or any other citizen is compatible with international aid in the name of humanism, solidarity, history and even a ‘certain idea’ of one’s country and its responsibilities in the world.

The second is that, whatever the world that lies ahead, solidarity between human beings and nations is still urgently needed to save lives and overcome poverty through sustainable development.

The real humanitarian challenge now is to know how we are going to help and develop with fewer resources in the face of greater needs. That’s the challenge we have to meet.

Alain Boinet.

 

I invite you to read these interviews and articles published in the edition :

Syria: humanitarian aid in the face of a bloodless country and an uncertain future

Photo of PUI during a visit to Syria in January 2025

December 2024. The fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, after fourteen years of war, marks a major turning point for Syria. Power collapsed in a matter of days under the assault of rebel forces led by the Hayat Tahrir al-Cham (HTC) group, leaving the way open for an uncertain political transition. The establishment of an interim government, led by Ahmad al-Sharaa (Abu Mohammed al-Joulani), and the adoption of a provisional constitution in March 2025 are seen as steps forward, but they are not enough to meet the country’s immediate challenges: political instability, community and sectarian tensions, a lasting humanitarian crisis and large-scale reconstruction.

Syrians celebrated the end of the regime, but woke up a month later to an unchanged reality: a country in ruins, with no resources, and an uncertain future,’ observes Charlotte Baudoin, of the NGO Première Urgence Internationale.

On 30 March, Ahmad al-Sharaa, the interim president, announced a new Syrian transitional government composed mainly of his loyalists but including 4 ministers from minorities, a Christian, a Druze, an Alawite and a Kurd among its 23 members. The Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (editor’s note: autonomous Syrian Kurdish authority) declared that this government did not reflect the diversity and plurality of the country and that it was therefore not concerned by the government’s decisions! It should also be remembered that Ahmad al-Sharaa has full legislative, executive and judicial powers, and that he chairs the ‘National Security Council’, considered by some to be the country’s real government. The future will tell whether the promise of a representative, unitary government that respects minorities has been kept or not. That is the challenge after 14 years of war.

In this context, humanitarian action is more necessary than ever, but its new framework for intervention is still unclear. Some had hoped that the end of the regime would facilitate access to relief supplies. However, as Thomas Janny of the NGO Solidarités International points out, guaranteed access has not yet been achieved and humanitarian space remains restricted.

To analyse the humanitarian challenges ahead, this article draws on two complementary accounts. Thomas Janny, Regional Director for the Middle East at Solidarités International, and Olivier Routeau, Director of Operations and Charlotte Baudoin, Country Director for Syria at the NGO Première Urgence Internationale (PUI). Before the fall of the regime, Solidarités International was working in rebel-controlled areas (in the north-east and north-west of the country), while Première Urgence Internationale was working in regime-controlled areas, in 10 of the country’s 14 governorates.

Between the reorganisation of the humanitarian sector, reduced funding and strong political and geopolitical tensions, post-Assad Syria raises many questions about the future of aid and the conditions under which it is delivered.

A Blitzkrieg with uncertain consequences

The fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime was as sudden as it was unexpected, a veritable Blitzkrieg, as Thomas Janny puts it. In the space of ten days, HTS forces, supported by numerous other militias, took control of the capital, causing the total collapse of a regime that had held out for fourteen years with the support of Iran and Shiite militias, as well as Russia. This rapid changeover left the country without a functional state structure, with an improvised transitional government and an administration in ruins.

Interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa is seeking to stabilise the situation, notably by adopting an interim constitution in March 2025. This constitution guarantees certain fundamental freedoms, notably in terms of expression and women’s rights, but it maintains a powerful executive with few checks and balances. Although there have been declarations aimed at establishing a democratic framework, the foundations remain extremely fragile,’ explains Olivier Routeau of Première Urgence Internationale. The absence of solid structures and the lack of resources are complicating the establishment of a stable state, while the population sees few concrete improvements in their daily lives.

Nor has the collapse of the regime put an end to the violence. In the first few weeks, clashes broke out on the Syrian coast, particularly in Tartous and Latakia, historic bastions of the Alawite community. This violence, which caused more than 1,300 deaths (many of them civilians), rekindled the community and religious tensions that had characterised the Syrian conflict. There is a real danger of widespread reprisals against the Alawites, who are seen as Assad’s historical supporters,’ warns Charlotte Baudoin, from PUI. Many are fleeing to Lebanon, while the new authorities are struggling to impose their control over the security forces, who are implicated in these abuses.

At the same time, Syria remains a battleground for geopolitical rivalries. Turkey, sponsor of the new government, is concerned about the maintenance of Kurdish power in the north-east, and has stepped up its air strikes, targeting areas under the control of the Syrian Democratic Forces (FDS). Israel, for its part, has stepped up its strikes on Syrian military sites. The fall of Assad has not put an end to foreign interests in Syria; on the contrary, it has redistributed the cards,’ analyses Thomas Janny. We might even say that Turkey has replaced Iran in Syria.

In this chaotic context, the reconstruction of the country seems out of reach in the short term. At the Brussels summit on 19 March, international donors pledged $6.5 billion, a limited amount compared with the $400 billion needed for reconstruction. In addition, US sanctions remain in place, hampering the necessary investment and slowing down any attempt at economic recovery. The European Union has lifted some restrictions, notably on the energy sector, but their impact remains limited. Without the lifting of US sanctions, Syrian recovery is impossible’, notes Olivier Routeau.

For the NGOs working on the ground, this transition period represents a major challenge. The end of the regime has turned the organisation of humanitarian aid upside down, raising new questions about access to populations and cooperation with the new authorities. While Syria has immense needs in terms of aid and reconstruction, humanitarian aid workers have to deal with an unstable environment and a future that is still uncertain.

Opening pipes to the water network in a camp in northern Syria © Solidarités International

Minorities in Syria: between fragile integration and persistent tensions

The rapid fall of the Assad regime has reshuffled the cards of power in Syria, but it has not put an end to community divisions. While the transitional government claims to want to build an inclusive nation, religious and ethnic tensions are a reality that the new government must resolve. Minorities, historically caught up in the conflict, now find themselves in an uncertain position, between fears of reprisals and promises of integration.

The Alawites, long seen as the mainstay of the Assad regime, are now the most vulnerable. In Tartous and Latakia, atrocities targeted the community from the very first days of the transition, killing more than 1,300 people. The government has condemned the violence, but probably does not have the means to prosecute these crimes,’ observes Charlotte Baudoin of Première Urgence Internationale. Weakened by years of war and impunity, the Syrian judicial system seems incapable of fulfilling its role for the time being.

The Kurds, for their part, gained political recognition with the agreement of 10 March, which provides for the integration of the FDS into the national army. This agreement, which enshrines the place of the Kurds in the new Syria, is nevertheless fragile. Tensions persist between Kurdish units, former jihadists and pro-Turkish mercenaries. It will be difficult to unify these forces under a single structure,’ stresses Charlotte Baudoin. Moreover, this agreement has not prevented Turkey from continuing its strikes in north-eastern Syria, a sign that Damascus’ recognition of the Kurds does not mean an end to the bombing and fighting, which could resume at any time.

For the Druze, the transition raises as many hopes as concerns. Their religious leader, Hikmat al-Hajri, has publicly criticised the new government’s constitutional declaration as being too centralised and unrepresentative of Syria’s diversity. The question of autonomy, granted to them under Assad as part of the ‘Alliance of Minorities’, remains unresolved. In a country where community balances are still unstable, the challenge will be to guarantee a system where each group finds its place without stirring up resentment.

This situation makes access for humanitarian aid particularly delicate. For Solidarités International, which has been operating in areas that were not held by the Assad regime, since the beginning of its work, the displacement of populations and the new humanitarian needs represent a major challenge. During the HTS offensive towards Damascus, our teams on the ground witnessed massive displacements of Kurdish populations towards the north-east, where they had to put in place an emergency response in just a few days’, explains Thomas Janny. PUI, which was initially present in the government zone, is also emphasising the need for reconstruction to include all minorities in order to avoid further fractures.

United Nations (UN). (2025). Humanitarian Response Priorities: January – March 2025 – Syrian Arab Republic. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) [2]
Uncertain humanitarian access

Humanitarian needs in Syria

  • 16.5 million people require humanitarian aid.
  • 14.56 million people are food insecure, of whom 9.1 million are classified as acutely food insecure (including 1.3 million in a severe situation).
  • 8 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) since 2011.
  • 823,302 people newly displaced in 2024, of whom 522,600 returned in December alone.
  • Nearly 6.5 million people have fled Syria since the start of the civil war, including: more than 3 million to Turkey, around 784,000 to Lebanon, more than 705,000 to Germany, and almost 650,000 to Jordan.

Figures from the OCHA 2025 report on humanitarian needs in Syria[1].

Humanitarian aid budget in 2024

  • In 2024, the United Nations has estimated the aid budget required at 4.07 billion dollars.
  • At the end of the year, only 1.46 billion dollars (or 35.9%) had been raised.

Humanitarian Action 2024 figures[2]

The fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime has opened up new prospects for humanitarian action in Syria. NGOs have been able to access previously unreachable areas from their respective zones of operation before the overthrow of the regime.

However, this opening has been accompanied by new administrative and logistical constraints. As the legal framework is not yet well defined, the potential implementation of new programmes remains compromised for the time being. According to Thomas Janny, the authorities are still hesitant about the relationship they wish to maintain with international NGOs (INGOs) and the freedom they will be granted. In addition, the security situation remains unstable: bombardments persist in certain regions of the north-east, and further atrocities cannot be ruled out. The humanitarian situation has continued to deteriorate,’ notes Charlotte Baudoin, ’Israeli air strikes have intensified, while ongoing hostilities in the north and south, as well as recent instability and the deteriorating situation in coastal areas, have worsened humanitarian conditions and increased protection concerns.

Another major challenge is the gradual return of refugees, estimated at 125,000 since the fall of the regime. According to the United Nations, nearly 6.5 million people have fled Syria since the start of the civil war, with a further 8 million internally displaced. These returns raise questions about access to basic services for people who return to their villages in ruins after years of exile, and about the capacity of NGOs to respond to new needs. In a context where funding is uncertain and infrastructures are still fragile, humanitarian organisations must find sustainable solutions to support this transition.

The humanitarian sector absolutely must succeed in this first phase of emergency response, to enable Syria to move on to the next stage, that of reconstruction’, explains Olivier Routeau.

Photo of PUI during a visit to Syria in January 2025

International support and financial uncertainties: a delicate balance

The role of the international community is now crucial to Syria’s recovery. Since the fall of the regime, several governments and multilateral organisations have announced plans to support reconstruction, emphasising the need for inclusive development and political stabilisation. The European Union, for example, has reaffirmed its commitment to a peaceful and sustainable transition, while institutions such as the World Bank are beginning to consider recovery projects.

This international support is essential to rehabilitate destroyed infrastructure, support basic services and encourage the return of displaced persons and refugees. Olivier Routeau stresses that without a strong commitment from international donors, local capacities will remain too limited to meet the immense humanitarian and reconstruction needs. This support should enable us to move away from an emergency approach and lay the foundations for more sustainable aid.

However, this dynamic has been disrupted by a reorganisation of humanitarian funding. The sudden freezing of American funds, which via the USAID agency amounted to a total annual budget of 42.8 billion dollars (42% of global humanitarian aid), has created major uncertainty for NGOs on the ground. American aid to Syria represented around a quarter of donations to the humanitarian response plan in 2024, i.e. 377.7 million dollars [3]. The suspension of funding has forced many organisations to drastically reduce their operations or even withdraw from certain areas.

Faced with these restrictions, humanitarian actors are having to reassess their funding strategies, and are looking to diversify their sources. However, this decision by the new Trump administration is part of a more general trend of reduced funding for international aid. Cuts in the Official Development Assistance (ODA) budgets of several European countries, including France, are giving rise to great concern and imposing a very short-term approach.

In this uncertain context, coordination between humanitarian and development aid is essential. We must avoid a humanitarian vacuum that would leave millions of Syrians without support at a critical time’, insists Olivier Routeau. Finally, the lifting of the remaining sanctions appears to be a necessary condition to facilitate economic recovery and enable humanitarian actors to work more effectively on the ground.

An unpredictable future, an essential commitment

As Syria enters a new phase in its history, the humanitarian challenges are immense. While the fall of the regime has opened up certain prospects, it has also left a devastated country, where humanitarian emergencies go hand in hand with the need for reconstruction.

International support will be crucial if another disaster is to be avoided. But with funding falling and instability on the ground, NGOs are struggling to adapt. The lifting of the remaining sanctions, better humanitarian coordination and appropriate funding will be essential to support Syria in the long term, if it is to stabilise and not fall back into conflict.

 

[1] Syrian Arab Republic Humanitarian Response Plan 2024 | Financial Tracking Service

[2] United Nations (UN). (2025). Humanitarian Response Priorities: January – March 2025 – Syrian Arab Republic. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).

[3] Humanitarian action, Syrian Arab Republic, 2024. Financials | Humanitarian Action

 

India Hauteville

India Hauteville holds a first Masters degree in International Politics from Sciences Po Bordeaux and is currently studying for a Masters degree in Integration and Change in the Mediterranean and Middle East at Sciences Po Grenoble. She is currently assistant to the founder of Solidarités International, Mr. Alain Boinet.

Particularly interested in the Syrian conflict, she is currently writing a thesis on the articulation between humanitarian principles and the realities on the ground in Syria, using the NGO Solidarités International as a case study.

 

 

I invite you to read these interviews and articles published in the edition :