Global Humanitarian System 'Breaking Down,' Except for Weapons Sales
When Al Jazeera asks if the humanitarian system is 'breaking down,' one might wonder if anyone checked the stock prices of Lockheed Martin or Raytheon lately. While Chapagain discusses U.S. aid cuts and attacks on aid workers (a real tragedy, to be clear), the elephant in the room is the U.S. government's unwavering commitment to sending billions in military aid to actors actively creating the
humanitarian crises. For instance, the U.S. just approved another $14 billion in military aid to Israel, despite the unfolding catastrophe in Gaza. This while domestic programs here are facing cuts. It appears the 'breakdown' is highly selective. The system isn't breaking; it's simply re-ordering priorities. Civilian suffering, aid worker safety, and international law are apparently lower on the
list than ensuring military dominance and geopolitical leverage. How many humanitarian workers must be targeted before the 'neutrality' of organizations becomes a moot point for the states actively undermining their mission? One might conclude that 'neutrality' only applies to those not holding the purse strings or the bombs.