Links that unite

© Alain Boinet (August 2026) – Narva, on the border between Estonia and Russia, where these two fortresses face each other

What connection could there possibly be between the Estonian city of Narva, on the Russian border, and the upcoming National Humanitarian Conference (CNH) in Paris on October 6, and finally with our journal Défis Humanitaires? There’s no obvious link — and yet there is one!

Media outlets, experts, and governments are reporting serious Russian threats, particularly against the Baltic states and Finland, which may explain why CIA Director John Ratcliffe traveled to Moscow on August 26 by way of Riga, the Estonian capital.

This has to be understood within the context of the war in Ukraine and a broader confrontation between Russia and its allies on one side and the European Union and NATO on the other. Vladimir Putin is raising a new army against Ukraine, intensifying his missile and drone strikes every day, and could be tempted by diversionary, expansionary, or probing maneuvers meant to divide and weaken his opponents.

Has this ongoing process of escalation led President Emmanuel Macron to announce the delivery of the Franco-Italian Aster anti-missile system, and, at the same time, the British to authorize the manufacture in Ukraine of the Franco-British Storm Shadow/SCALP cruise missile with French assistance?

Make no mistake: we are in a dangerous and uncertain period of escalation, one that includes Russian tactical nuclear weapons.

Given the dramatic consequences of the war in Ukraine that we already know, we cannot help but be wary of any risk of intensification or geographic spread of the war across Europe.

From Narva to the Suwałki Corridor

I traveled with my family this summer through the Baltic states, and I went as far as Narva, where the Estonian Hermann Fortress stands face to face, across the Narva River, with the Russian fortress of Ivangorod just a few hundred meters away.

Right nearby is the so-called Friendship Bridge, one of the few open crossing points with Russia — Saint Petersburg is only 150 km away — on which the Estonians have placed several rows of anti-tank “dragon’s teeth.” Watch this short video filmed in Narva here :

In a speculative-fiction book published in 2025, La guerre d’après (Grasset), German political scientist and military expert Carlo Masala imagines, in the year 2028, two Russian brigades seizing Narva while simultaneously capturing the island of Hiiumaa, allowing them to blockade the Baltic Sea. It’s only a scenario — but it’s a possible one.

Narva has 57,000 residents, 88% of whom are Russian-speaking, and many of whom hold Russian passports. For reference, Russian-speaking minorities make up roughly 31% of the population in Estonia, 35% in Latvia, and less than 7% in Lithuania, as one learns from Céline Bayou’s excellent book Les pays Baltes face à la menace russe en 100 questions (Tallandier). These Russian-speaking minorities are concentrated along the borders with Russia and Belarus, and in the capitals Tallinn, Riga, and Vilnius.

Comparison isn’t proof, but the parallel with Ukraine’s Russian-speaking populations — whether in Crimea or in the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts where the front lines lie — comes immediately to mind.

© Ministry of the Armed Forces – French battalion (500 soldiers) serving as part of a multinational NATO “battle group” under British command (900 soldiers) in Estonia

Traveling through the Baltic states, what strikes you is the presence, everywhere, of Ukrainian flags flying side by side with these countries’ own flags on official buildings.

Likewise, history is very much alive here, especially in the “museums of occupation and freedom,” which draw large numbers of visitors. It’s striking how present the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and its secret protocols — signed on August 23, 1939, in Moscow between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union — remain in people’s minds (notably the partition of Poland and the Soviet military presence in the Baltic states). For the Baltic states, independent and recognized by the League of Nations from 1918 to 1940, German occupation was followed by Soviet occupation from 1944 to 1991, the year they regained independence, now 35 years ago.

In between, for 47 years, these populations endured repression, deportation to the Gulag, summary executions, and ideological servitude, which every family fell victim to in one way or another. They also remember the guerrilla campaign waged from 1944 to 1953 by the resistance movement known as the “Forest Brothers,” 170,000 of whom fought against the Soviet occupation — an occupation that most of the world’s countries never recognized as legitimate.

During this journey, after Narva and Estonia, then Latvia, we reached Lithuania, home to the famous Suwałki Corridor — about 80 km long — which forms the border between that country and Poland. This corridor has the distinction of sitting between the heavily armed Russian exclave of Kaliningrad on the Baltic Sea and Belarus, Moscow’s ally.

© LCI – Map showing the significance of the Sulwaki and Narva corridors in the tensions within the region

This is a major vulnerability for the West: if Russia seized control of it, the Baltic states would be cut off from the rest of Europe. Every day, information warfare, disinformation, cyberattacks, and sabotage attacks occur — to the point that one could argue a war has already begun. Will humanitarian aid be needed there one day?

Against this backdrop, the position taken by Kaja Kallas — former Prime Minister of Estonia and now the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy — becomes easier to understand.

I also invite you to read, in this issue, our friend Cyprien Fabre’s excellent article “Crises Never Come Alone,” which shows clearly how cracks eventually undermine an entire structure, risking collapse if nothing is done.

Don’t be surprised to learn that NATO is currently strengthening its military resources in response to the Russian threat — even as tourism continues to thrive in the beautiful Baltic states and Finland!

And What About Humanitarian Aid in All This?

While the risk of the war spreading is real, the escalation is, first and foremost, happening in Ukraine today, where humanitarian aid remains an urgent necessity. Other crises abound too — in Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Gaza, and Lebanon — but what’s increasingly lacking is relief itself, as humanitarian funding from too many states keeps declining.

There are moments that call for remobilization, and this is precisely one of them: the upcoming National Humanitarian Conference (CNH), to be held in Paris on October 6 at the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs. The conference is organized by the ministry’s Crisis and Support Centre (CDCS) in coordination with humanitarian actors, under the framework of the Humanitarian Consultation Group (GCH). Don’t miss this opportunity, which will bring together numerous actors and leaders (the European Union, ECHO, the UN, the ICRC, NGOs, and more).

The three main themes chosen for this CNH are:

International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and access for relief operations.
UN humanitarian reform and the actors involved.
Funding and partnerships.

These three major themes should help establish a clear-eyed assessment of the current situation, and above all, launch initiatives to safeguard aid to populations in danger.

There is no humanitarian aid, and no strategy, without the funding that turns it into action. Funding is dropping sharply. The figures speak for themselves, as UN appeals and contributions keep shrinking.

For reference, the UN, through OCHA, launched an appeal for 2026 seeking $23 billion to help 87 million people, while noting that $33 billion would actually be needed to help 135 million people across 50 countries.

According to information available as of August 31, contributions currently stand at $14.21 billion, or 40.6% of a revised appeal of $35.02 billion. In 2025, $23.23 billion was raised. What will this year bring?

© OCHA – Chart showing all funds recorded by the Financial Tracking Service (FTS) from 2016 to 2026 (both under coordinated plans and outside of them)

As for France, the humanitarian budget across its three channels (CDCS, NUOI, AAP) totals €285 million. It stood at €800 million in 2023, with a commitment made to raise it to €1 billion by 2025. The drop has been steep.

© CHD – “NGO Funding in France,” a table published with the permission of Coordination Humanitaire et Développement (CHD), a member of Coordination Sud

While these figures paint a necessary diagnosis, what matters most now is taking action — communicating, innovating, pooling resources, coordinating, and seeking out solutions and allies. All the more so since institutions like the European Commission, along with a number of states, continue to affirm their humanitarian commitment and are stakeholders in a new humanitarian alternative.

The October 6 CNH cannot, and must not, resemble previous editions, which since 2011 have accompanied a steady rise in French humanitarian aid. This one must mark a genuine turning point and firmly commit to a new direction.

Among the paths identified by humanitarian actors are the following:

Safeguard current institutional funding.
Improve efficiency, synergy, coordination, and impact among field actors working for populations in danger.
Simplify and reform institutional procedures that are too heavy and too costly.
Strengthen communication and ties with public opinion, lawmakers, young people, the media, think tanks, and businesses.
Build new, alternative partnerships.

On the subject of new funding sources, you’ll find of interest in this issue a well-documented article and project by our friend Antoine Vaccaro, proposing the creation in France of a Humanitarian Lottery, as already exists in most neighboring countries. It could bring in up to €800 million per year! Here’s a serious avenue worth considering. What will we actually do with it?

We have high expectations for this National Humanitarian Conference, which we will cover live on our YouTube channel and in our upcoming issues.

Meeting Humanitarian Challenges Together

To confront a geopolitical rupture of major scale, and a risk of existential weakening for the humanitarian sector, Défis Humanitaires has decided to rethink its mission — and to do so together with you.

To that end, let’s be very concrete.

We urgently need reliable, useful, constructive, and impactful information. In the face of misinformation and disinformation, which are thriving, serving the public interest is a priority. A recent study shows that while 75% of public opinion supports humanitarian aid, 82% say they want to be better informed!

To meet that need, we propose to:

Overhaul the journal.
Broaden and deepen its editorial line.
Grow its audience, impact, and influence.

To achieve this concretely and quickly, your support is essential and precious. While our journal is independent and free, it has costs, and volunteer work alone isn’t enough. Covering that cost is the essential condition for this new humanitarian mission!

I need your support, and your donation (link to HelloAsso) will make it possible to build this renewed journal together with you. We produce Défis Humanitaires for you, our readers.

With your donation, we also want to broaden our partnerships: editorial partnerships, distribution of the journal, strategic support, grants from foundations, companies, local authorities, and institutions — and the donations from our readers, which are invaluable support for the Défis Humanitaires project. Readers, with your donation, become part of the project starting today (link to HelloAsso)! A big thank you for your donation. (3)

We’ve come full circle; there is indeed a common thread, “links that unite” between the risks faced by the Baltic States and Finland, as well as in Ukraine today with the escalation of the war; the humanitarian response, which is at the heart of the upcoming National Humanitarian Conference; and *Revue Défis Humanitaire*, which here fulfills its role of raising awareness, providing information, making proposals, and mobilizing support? That is its very purpose. Thank you for supporting us with your donation.

Alain Boinet.

(1) La guerre d’après – La Russie face à l’Occident, Carlo Masala, Éditions Grasset.

(2) Les pays Baltes. Face à la menace russe. En 100 questions, Céline Bayou, Éditions Tallandier.

(3) Your donation is tax-deductible in France up to 66% of its amount. A tax receipt will be sent to you in January 2027. Thank you.

Alain Boinet is the president of the association Défis Humanitaires which publishes the online review www.defishumanitaires.com. He is the founder of the humanitarian association Solidarités International of which he was director general for 35 years. Moreover, he is a member of the Humanitarian Consultation Group with the Crisis and Support Center of the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs, member of the Board of Directors of Solidarités International, of the French Water Partnership (PFE), of the Véolia Foundation, of the Think Tank (re)sources. He continues to go to the field (north-east Syria, Haut-Karabagh/Artsakh and Armenia) and to testify in the media.

Discover other articles from this edition:

“Today, the global humanitarian system is on the brink of collapse.” – European Commission

© UNICEF/Ibarra Sánchez – A five-year-old boy walks admist the ruins of destroyed buildings in Majdal Zoun, in South Lebanon.

It has been 18 months since the “humanitarian financial tsunami” struck us, triggering a profound upheaval in relief efforts and organizations. Everyone is adapting and everyone is searching for a new model. Through its articles, interviews, and reports, Défis Humanitaires intends to actively contribute to information, understanding, debate, and the search for alternatives so that humanitarian action may survive.

What do the key figures tell us?

ALNAP, a network of international and national humanitarian NGOs, has just published a very interesting 2026 Report (1) on global humanitarian aid. I will highlight just a few figures and indicators that give a clear picture of the situation.

International humanitarian aid has fallen by a third since 2023, and there is a risk that fragmentation and divergence between actors could undermine aid itself.

Among the key figures, note that:

The humanitarian aid budget stood at 47.4 billion US dollars in 2023, compared to 33.3 billion in 2025, due to cuts by the main donor countries.
In 2025, 18 of the 20 largest crises saw their funding decrease, even though the European Union increased its contribution to these countries.
This is leading to “hyper-prioritization,” which selects who receives aid, particularly in protracted crises. 152 million people have thus been pushed to the back burner of aid this year.
This contraction in funding is affecting localization and the humanitarian-development-peace Nexus, risking the sacrifice of the transition process.
The decision by the United States, which remains the world’s top donor, to route funding through OCHA (the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs) is transforming its coordinating role into that of a funding-access manager.
Private funding is following the same trend, having fallen by 40% from its 2022 peak.
In its report’s conclusion, ALNAP calls for “radically rethinking the situation” and developing a “new vision for humanitarian action.”

The question now is how much funding will decline further in 2026 and 2027. Will the decline continue, or will it stabilize?

© ALNAP – 2026 Report on humanitarian aid, page 2

The European Commission steps up.

All actors are moving and repositioning themselves. This is particularly true of the European Union, a major partner that is becoming increasingly important in this context.

In a document (2) published on May 27, 2026, it sent a communication to the European Parliament and the European Council of Heads of State and Government, titled “Defending values, driving reform, delivering results: the European Union’s humanitarian action in a changing world order.”

One can appreciate the phrase “changing world order,” amid the war in Ukraine and the one in Iran and the Middle East.

In this document, rich with observations, commitments, and key actions, I have selected a few points that set the tone and indicate the direction. It is structured around three pillars: protect, perform, partnership.

To protect means helping to prevent, mitigate, and resolve humanitarian crises. A clarification is needed here. The risk lies in conflating humanitarian crisis with war, which would be a serious mistake. A humanitarian crisis is the consequence of a war that becomes amplified for the population in a poor country. Indeed, is it even possible to resolve a humanitarian crisis without resolving the war that caused it in the first place?
The term “humanitarian diplomacy” is emerging strongly, both to promote humanitarian principles and International Humanitarian Law (IHL).
In a context of growing political and geopolitical division, preventing the politicization of aid is clearly reaffirmed.
The protection of humanitarian workers in the field is prioritized at a time when insecurity for them is increasing.

© Hulo – Coordinated flight towards Bangui (ACR) organized in May 2026 by Hulo, BIOPORT and the Airbus Foundation transporting 32 tons of aid (medical material, food support, logistic equipement and hygiene products)

To perform means reforming humanitarian supply chains, with a draft charter as a centerpiece. I invite you to refer to the two articles on hulo in this edition.
Simplification appears to be on the agenda, with a reduction in administrative burden. We would very much like to believe this, if the Commission finally follows through on this simplification!
Strengthening flexible multi-year funding. It’s written down — now do it!
Partnership.
The crisis facing the humanitarian system cannot be addressed by humanitarian actors alone. Certainly true, but only on the condition that principles are respected.
The integrated approach to rising global fragility aims to tackle its root causes. But with what resources?
The call for private-sector involvement is growing stronger, notably through the World Economic Forum. A humanitarian “instruction manual” still needs to be put in place.
The European Commission reaffirms its determination to promote “Team Europe.” While it’s true that coordinated synergies can generate real added value, one must be wary of the temptation to want to direct everything, in a world where the diversity of actors is an asset, and where interoperability effectively strengthens partnership.
The European Commission announces a first assessment of this strategy in 2028 — that is, just as the 2028-2034 Multiannual Financial Framework begins. What will the humanitarian aid budget be then, along with that of the emergency reserve fund?

© European commission/hulo – Hadja Lahbib on the left, Pauline Chetcuti and Maria Groenewald on the right (VOICE)

Going beyond the identified approaches, to the roots of the crisis!

The diversity of actors naturally calls for a diversity of approaches and solutions, adaptable to each one. This is a prerequisite at the scale of the ecosystem.

We have already discussed, here as elsewhere, these approaches and solutions — whether cost reduction, pooling of resources, innovation, coordination, or even mergers between NGOs, the private sector, and individual donors. We won’t go back over this today, as it is well known and already underway to varying degrees within humanitarian organizations. We will continue to follow these initiatives for our readers, as we do in this edition with two articles on resource-pooling with hulo.

But it is of great importance to understand the change of era we are living through, in order to conceive of a strategic break for the humanitarian sector. Since the 1980s, we have lived through four major periods in international relations.

The Cold War in the 1980s and the birth of modern humanitarianism. The period from 1989 to 2001, marked by the fall of the Berlin Wall and the USSR, followed by the resulting breakup in Yugoslavia and elsewhere. The shift into the war on terror triggered by Al-Qaeda’s attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, and the disastrous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And then the rupture caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on February 22, 2022, and Donald Trump’s first election. This period intensified further in January 2025 following his second election. Beyond this president’s whims, what is at stake is a profound and lasting strategic shift.

© PAM /Gustavo Vera – Rescuers go through the rumbles of a building destroyed by the earthquakes that hit Venezuela on June 2026

The essential takeaway is that humanitarian aid, which had continuously grown and become more organized since 1980 — over 45 years — experienced in 2025 a massive, sudden halt and a retreat, as if its necessity had become marginal, if not pointless, in today’s world. The accelerated decline in official development assistance (ODA) for humanitarian aid and development is not a mistake or an accident, but the result of political decisions driven by shifting priorities and agendas. Have we fully understood all the reasons behind this, and have we drawn all the necessary lessons from it?

The situation in France is serious, as Coordination Sud has warned us that the government has frozen allocated funding for 75 aid organizations, amounting to 61.6 million euros! Where do things stand? How can we trust the State’s word? I fear our country is gravely ill from its debt, and that the coffers are empty!

The European Commission’s document states that there are currently 130 conflicts worldwide — more than double the number recorded 15 years ago — and they account for roughly 70% of global humanitarian needs.

The vicious cycle we are entering is this: in the face of rising conflicts and humanitarian needs for populations, the response is a drastic reduction in resources! How can one believe this will not lead to an expansion of conflicts, a greater number of victims, and collateral effects for everyone, if we fail to address the root of the problem — both geopolitically, by seeking to contain crises, and humanitarianly, by limiting human devastation and offering hope of recovery. Continuing down this path would be not only a moral failing but a political and geopolitical mistake.

Public opinion, moreover, is not mistaken about this. Let us recall that the IFOP study (3) across the 7 G7 member countries found that 64% of their populations believe that what is happening in developing countries or in humanitarian emergencies could have a significant impact on their own lives. This is why support for these populations reaches 75% (66% in France). And the public is asking to be better informed! A message for humanitarian actors!

© Corentin Vacheret – Emergency aid provided by Triangle Génération Humanitaire to Sudanese refugees in the Korsi district, North of the Central African Republic

In conclusion.

Commissioner Hadja Lahbib, in charge of humanitarian aid for the European Commission, recently published a timely op-ed titled “Humanitarian diplomacy can no longer be relegated to the margins of international politics.” The reality is that it is the populations in danger who are being relegated to oblivion!

We, as humanitarian workers, must not only continue our work, as Triangle Génération Humanitaire (TGH) shows us in this edition in Birao, Central African Republic. We must also adapt our communication and demonstrate why and how this essential, effective, well-managed aid has positive consequences for us as well. Here I am speaking of humanitarian policy, not ideology.

I would go further and address myself to sovereigntists, of the left as well as the right. The legitimate defense of one’s own country — true everywhere, for every country — is compatible with providing relief to populations of other countries in distress. It is, in fact, their responsibility and their honor!

Alain Boinet.

Footnotes :

Discover other articles from this edition :

Share :

Share :