Another View of the US Reduced Contribution to the UN Humanitarian Appeal : Shared by John Gilmartin

"Adapt, Shrink or Die"  State speaks their new form of English.
OCHA gains.

Is this a rejection of UN style, ie the agencies waste too much time and money with their elaborate program planning?  Even with global media howling, the US appears to remain lead donor.

John Gilmartin

U.S. Pledges $2 Billion for U.N. Aid but Tells Agencies to 'Adapt, Shrink, or Die'

Author: Nick Cumming-Bruce
Publication: The New York Times
Date: December 29, 2025

Click here for the article

Summary

The Trump administration announced it will provide an initial $2 billion in 2026 to fund humanitarian aid coordinated by the United Nations, likely maintaining the United States as the largest international aid donor despite drastically reduced support levels. 

The funding will be channeled through the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) to 17 priority countries including Sudan, Syria, Haiti, Ukraine, Myanmar, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. Gaza is not covered by this agreement and will receive funding through other channels. 

The State Department warned that individual U.N. agencies must consolidate humanitarian functions to reduce bureaucratic overhead and duplication. The United States was the leading funder of U.N. humanitarian efforts in 2025 with approximately $3.38 billion, or 14.6 percent of the global sum, down sharply from previous years when it regularly contributed a third or more of total yearly funding. 

The $2 billion represents only a fraction of the $23 billion OCHA leader Tom Fletcher wants to raise for emergency relief programs in 2026, roughly 50 percent less than in 2025. By channeling aid through a consolidated fund instead of hundreds of overlapping project grants, the United States expects to save close to $2 billion and improve delivery efficiency.

Quotes

"The agreement requires the U.N. to consolidate humanitarian functions to reduce bureaucratic overhead, unnecessary duplication, and ideological creep. Individual U.N. agencies will need to adapt, shrink, or die."

"There are other countries that we will add, as we continue to get more funding into this mechanism. The hope is for the $2 billion to be only the beginning of a new partnership and funding model for U.N. humanitarian aid."

"I expect this to be a first signal that the Trump administration is back as a real and reliable contributor to global compassion and solidarity." - Jan Egeland, former head of OCHA who leads the Norwegian Refugee Council

"The catastrophic underfunding of humanitarian work is the worst I have seen in 40 years. Never has the gap between recorded need and available funding been so severe." - Jan Egeland