WHENEVER a country needs economic support, they will turn to world aid agencies.
The problem is that these agencies have recently run out of funds. The United Nations’ Humanitarian Response Plan, for example, is only 18 percent funded to date, even as the global food crisis starts spreading all over the world. I expect other organizations are facing the same situation.
Many countries are highly dependent on global aid to keep their people from starving, and that was true before the current global food crisis. With one, however, those countries will likely be facing a humanitarian crisis.
But the thing is, global aid institutions are a product of the liberal global order, and that in turn is a fragile thing. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is proof of that. By cutting off a single country in Eastern Europe from the global order, Russia has shown that the global food logistics was frail and brittle. And now, we have a food crisis among the world’s poorest countries.
The question now is, will the world be able to resolve the situation?
China and India have shown the willingness to do so, but only when it serves their geopolitical interests. Both have stepped in to help Sri Lanka, for example.
Europe may help, but looking at their energy problems right now, they may not be in a position to do so.
Which only leaves the US. But it’s not likely to carry the burden indefinitely, and if the crisis gets worse along with a recession, it may not have the political or economic will to do so.
Now, it’s possible that the world is resilient enough to weather this period, and come out the other side relatively fine. But I doubt they will come out unchanged. When institutions fail, they lose credibility, and with it, trust.
I see world aid agencies as products of excess wealth. When wealth disappears, the willingness and capability to help other countries also die./PN
