Today marks World Humanitarian Day, designated by the UN General Assembly in 2008 to commemorate the 2003 bombing of the UN headquarters in Baghdad and to honour humanitarian workers around the world. The day serves as a reminder of the immense risks faced by those who provide assistance to people caught in wars, disasters and other crises. Despite the protection afforded to them under international law, humanitarian workers continue to be killed, injured, abducted, detained and obstructed while carrying out their duties. Most of them are national staff working in their own communities, often under extraordinarily difficult and dangerous circumstances. World Humanitarian Day is therefore also an opportunity to reaffirm solidarity with both aid workers and the millions of people who depend on their assistance.
Unfortunately, whatever sympathy and support remains for humanitarian workers and the people they are trying to save increasingly appears to be rhetorical rather than substantive. The world seems to be running short of concrete, measurable forms of humanitarian support. According to reports, official development assistance fell by 23 per cent last year — the steepest decline on record. The United States has been at the forefront of this aid recession, despite having spent decades championing humanitarian assistance and frequently lecturing other countries on human rights and governance.
Even more disturbing is the growing toll being paid by humanitarian workers themselves. Last year alone reportedly saw the deaths of 350 aid workers, taking the number killed over the past three years to more than 1,000. A large majority of these deaths occurred in Gaza and Sudan, with Gaza emerging as the particularly deadly theatre for humanitarian personnel. Around 186 humanitarian workers were reportedly killed in the strip last year. These figures should prompt a serious question: will those responsible for turning a small, densely populated strip of land into one of the most dangerous places in the world for aid workers ever face meaningful accountability?
So far, the answer appears to be no. At the same time, the decline in humanitarian assistance has coincided with a dramatic increase in global military spending. Towards the end of 2025, the UN estimated that the world had spent around $2.7 trillion on defence over the preceding year. The contrast is difficult to ignore. While humanitarian agencies struggle with shrinking resources and aid workers risk their lives to save civilians, governments continue to allocate vast sums to weapons and military capabilities. From Gaza and Iran to Ukraine and Sudan, major conflicts appear to be entering a period of renewed intensity. Against this backdrop, repeated declarations of support for humanitarian workers and vulnerable populations risk sounding increasingly hollow.
For developing countries such as Pakistan, this should be a cause for serious reflection. The protection of humanitarian workers and the people they seek to assist remains an important international objective. The failure of powerful states to consistently enforce international law or hold those responsible for violations accountable should not discourage Pakistan and other like-minded countries from continuing to advocate for justice and humanitarian principles at the international level. Indeed, maintaining pressure for accountability is particularly important at a time when the credibility of the international system is under growing strain.
At the same time, the decline in international aid means that developing countries may have to prepare for a future in which they can rely less on external assistance. The widening gap is likely to increase the importance of national, regional and South-South humanitarian networks. There is certainly a strong argument that countries in the Global South deserve far greater support and compensation from wealthier nations, particularly in light of historical injustices ranging from colonial exploitation to the unequal burden of climate change. Yet moral and historical arguments alone may not be enough to persuade wealthy countries to substantially increase their aid commitments.
Paradoxically, reduced dependence on Western funding could eventually prove beneficial if it encourages developing countries to build stronger domestic capacities and regional mechanisms for responding to crises. This does not mean that international assistance should be abandoned or that wealthy countries should be allowed to escape their responsibilities. Rather, it means that vulnerable countries must recognise the risks of relying excessively on external generosity that can disappear when political priorities change.
Pakistan is not currently facing conflicts on the scale witnessed in Gaza or Sudan, but it has significant security challenges and is no stranger to devastating climate-related disasters. Floods, heatwaves and other extreme weather events have repeatedly displaced millions of people and created enormous demands for food, shelter, healthcare and other forms of assistance. As climate change intensifies and international humanitarian resources become increasingly constrained, the country must be prepared for the possibility that future crises will require a much greater reliance on its own resources.
World Humanitarian Day should therefore be more than an annual expression of sympathy. It should serve as a reminder that humanitarian principles have little meaning without resources, protection and accountability. For Pakistan and other developing countries, the message is equally clear: continue demanding justice and international solidarity, but simultaneously build the capacity to shoulder a greater share of the humanitarian burden ourselves.
Shafaqna Pakistan
pakistan.shafaqna.com
Note: Shafaqna do not endorse the views expressed in the article
