SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The Trump administration has proposed drastic cuts to humanitarian aid programs in the midst of the worst humanitarian crisis since 1945. (Photo: Gerry & Bonni/Flickr/cc)
The vast majority of Americans are "oblivious" to the fact that more than 20 million people are on the brink of starvation in Yemen, Somalia, South Sudan, and Nigeria, according to a recent survey conducted by the International Rescue Committee (IRC).
A "staggering" 85 percent of Americans simply don't know that these nations are facing such dire shortages of food and other necessary resources, IRC discovered.
"The world's most powerful leaders must now act to prevent a catastrophe happening on their watch."
--Winnie Byanyima, Oxfam
Lack of awareness, however, does not imply deliberate lack of concern, IRC is quick to observe.
Once Americans are briefed on the relevant facts, the organization notes, "the issue immediately rises to a top global concern."
IRC goes on to note that "[n]ear-famine, which is affecting 20 million people in Africa and the Middle East, is likely the least reported but most important major issue of our time," implying that the media is at fault for not keeping such a crucial issue at the center of public discussion.
The survey also found that most Americans favor providing more humanitarian aid, not less, as President Donald Trump has proposed:
Americans want not just more aid, but better aid. At least two-thirds of Americans believe the rules of engagement for the U.S. government on this issue should focus less on 'obligation,' and more on the fact that the U.S. and NGOs such as the IRC can lead the way in humanitarian aid reform and evidence-based outcomes. 68% of registered voters agree that foreign aid from wealthy nations like the U.S. is needed now more than ever, especially since it is proven to help prevent disasters that would end up costing more if neglected--like Ebola.
Millennials, the poll found, are particularly concerned about addressing what has been deemed by the United Nations the worst humanitarian crisis since the Second World War.
"Millennials see humanitarian aid as a defining issue for their generation (78% concerned), and the United States," IRC's report notes. "On nearly every measure tested in the poll, millennials are more concerned than other generations, believe it is a moral obligation for the U.S. to provide assistance, and are most willing to engage."
IRC's report comes in the midst of strong indications from the White House that President Donald Trump intends defy public opinion by attempting to slash rather than bolster humanitarian aid. As the New York Times has reported, the administration is pushing "military might over humanitarian aid."
"If enacted, these cuts would result in the wholesale dismantling of America's humanitarian and development work, increase suffering and make the world a more dangerous place."
--Michelle Nunn, Care USATrump's proposed cuts to food and development programs have deeply alarmed charitable organizations, activists, aid workers, who argue that famines are in large part political crises--and are therefore solvable if the world's wealthiest nations are willing to commit resources.
"The world's most powerful leaders must now act to prevent a catastrophe happening on their watch," Oxfam executive director Winnie Byanyima recently said.
Bernice Romero, senior director for policy and humanitarian response for Save the Children, told the Los Angeles Times that the White House's move to cut rather than strengthen humanitarian aid in the face of widespread starvation is "unconscionable and could really have devastating consequences."
Care USA president Michelle Nunn agreed, concluding: "If enacted, these cuts would result in the wholesale dismantling of America's humanitarian and development work, increase suffering and make the world a more dangerous place."
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The vast majority of Americans are "oblivious" to the fact that more than 20 million people are on the brink of starvation in Yemen, Somalia, South Sudan, and Nigeria, according to a recent survey conducted by the International Rescue Committee (IRC).
A "staggering" 85 percent of Americans simply don't know that these nations are facing such dire shortages of food and other necessary resources, IRC discovered.
"The world's most powerful leaders must now act to prevent a catastrophe happening on their watch."
--Winnie Byanyima, Oxfam
Lack of awareness, however, does not imply deliberate lack of concern, IRC is quick to observe.
Once Americans are briefed on the relevant facts, the organization notes, "the issue immediately rises to a top global concern."
IRC goes on to note that "[n]ear-famine, which is affecting 20 million people in Africa and the Middle East, is likely the least reported but most important major issue of our time," implying that the media is at fault for not keeping such a crucial issue at the center of public discussion.
The survey also found that most Americans favor providing more humanitarian aid, not less, as President Donald Trump has proposed:
Americans want not just more aid, but better aid. At least two-thirds of Americans believe the rules of engagement for the U.S. government on this issue should focus less on 'obligation,' and more on the fact that the U.S. and NGOs such as the IRC can lead the way in humanitarian aid reform and evidence-based outcomes. 68% of registered voters agree that foreign aid from wealthy nations like the U.S. is needed now more than ever, especially since it is proven to help prevent disasters that would end up costing more if neglected--like Ebola.
Millennials, the poll found, are particularly concerned about addressing what has been deemed by the United Nations the worst humanitarian crisis since the Second World War.
"Millennials see humanitarian aid as a defining issue for their generation (78% concerned), and the United States," IRC's report notes. "On nearly every measure tested in the poll, millennials are more concerned than other generations, believe it is a moral obligation for the U.S. to provide assistance, and are most willing to engage."
IRC's report comes in the midst of strong indications from the White House that President Donald Trump intends defy public opinion by attempting to slash rather than bolster humanitarian aid. As the New York Times has reported, the administration is pushing "military might over humanitarian aid."
"If enacted, these cuts would result in the wholesale dismantling of America's humanitarian and development work, increase suffering and make the world a more dangerous place."
--Michelle Nunn, Care USATrump's proposed cuts to food and development programs have deeply alarmed charitable organizations, activists, aid workers, who argue that famines are in large part political crises--and are therefore solvable if the world's wealthiest nations are willing to commit resources.
"The world's most powerful leaders must now act to prevent a catastrophe happening on their watch," Oxfam executive director Winnie Byanyima recently said.
Bernice Romero, senior director for policy and humanitarian response for Save the Children, told the Los Angeles Times that the White House's move to cut rather than strengthen humanitarian aid in the face of widespread starvation is "unconscionable and could really have devastating consequences."
Care USA president Michelle Nunn agreed, concluding: "If enacted, these cuts would result in the wholesale dismantling of America's humanitarian and development work, increase suffering and make the world a more dangerous place."
The vast majority of Americans are "oblivious" to the fact that more than 20 million people are on the brink of starvation in Yemen, Somalia, South Sudan, and Nigeria, according to a recent survey conducted by the International Rescue Committee (IRC).
A "staggering" 85 percent of Americans simply don't know that these nations are facing such dire shortages of food and other necessary resources, IRC discovered.
"The world's most powerful leaders must now act to prevent a catastrophe happening on their watch."
--Winnie Byanyima, Oxfam
Lack of awareness, however, does not imply deliberate lack of concern, IRC is quick to observe.
Once Americans are briefed on the relevant facts, the organization notes, "the issue immediately rises to a top global concern."
IRC goes on to note that "[n]ear-famine, which is affecting 20 million people in Africa and the Middle East, is likely the least reported but most important major issue of our time," implying that the media is at fault for not keeping such a crucial issue at the center of public discussion.
The survey also found that most Americans favor providing more humanitarian aid, not less, as President Donald Trump has proposed:
Americans want not just more aid, but better aid. At least two-thirds of Americans believe the rules of engagement for the U.S. government on this issue should focus less on 'obligation,' and more on the fact that the U.S. and NGOs such as the IRC can lead the way in humanitarian aid reform and evidence-based outcomes. 68% of registered voters agree that foreign aid from wealthy nations like the U.S. is needed now more than ever, especially since it is proven to help prevent disasters that would end up costing more if neglected--like Ebola.
Millennials, the poll found, are particularly concerned about addressing what has been deemed by the United Nations the worst humanitarian crisis since the Second World War.
"Millennials see humanitarian aid as a defining issue for their generation (78% concerned), and the United States," IRC's report notes. "On nearly every measure tested in the poll, millennials are more concerned than other generations, believe it is a moral obligation for the U.S. to provide assistance, and are most willing to engage."
IRC's report comes in the midst of strong indications from the White House that President Donald Trump intends defy public opinion by attempting to slash rather than bolster humanitarian aid. As the New York Times has reported, the administration is pushing "military might over humanitarian aid."
"If enacted, these cuts would result in the wholesale dismantling of America's humanitarian and development work, increase suffering and make the world a more dangerous place."
--Michelle Nunn, Care USATrump's proposed cuts to food and development programs have deeply alarmed charitable organizations, activists, aid workers, who argue that famines are in large part political crises--and are therefore solvable if the world's wealthiest nations are willing to commit resources.
"The world's most powerful leaders must now act to prevent a catastrophe happening on their watch," Oxfam executive director Winnie Byanyima recently said.
Bernice Romero, senior director for policy and humanitarian response for Save the Children, told the Los Angeles Times that the White House's move to cut rather than strengthen humanitarian aid in the face of widespread starvation is "unconscionable and could really have devastating consequences."
Care USA president Michelle Nunn agreed, concluding: "If enacted, these cuts would result in the wholesale dismantling of America's humanitarian and development work, increase suffering and make the world a more dangerous place."