this post was submitted on 01 Jan 2026
32 points (100.0% liked)

News

36912 readers
2359 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The $2bn (£1.5bn) of aid the US pledged this week may have been hailed as “bold and ambitious” by the UN but could be the “nail in the coffin” in changing to a shrunken, less flexible aid system dominated by Washington’s political priorities, aid experts fear.

After a year of deep cuts in aid budgets by the US and European countries, the announcement of new money for the humanitarian system is a source of some relief, but experts are deeply concerned about demands that the US has imposed on how the money should be managed and where it can go.

When the US state department announced the pledge on Tuesday, it said the UN must “adapt, shrink or die” by implementing changes and eliminating waste, and demanded that the money be funnelled through a pooled fund under the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (Ocha) rather than to individual agencies.

It also stipulated that the money be used for 17 priority countries chosen by the US, excluding some undergoing profound humanitarian crises such as Afghanistan and Yemen.

Themrise Khan, an independent researcher on aid systems, said: “It’s a despicable way of looking at humanitarianism and humanitarian aid.”

top 3 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] allywilson@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I don't understand. The US already has the organisation(s) and people in-place to fund $2bn into 17 countries rather than direct the UN to do it through OCHA. So, why bother?

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 months ago

Control. All bullies have the desire to control others and Trump is, if nothing else, a bully of epic proportions.

[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Influence of other member states. It is among the most direct examples of "soft power". If you just did it yourself, other nations would just do their own thing individually and as groups, without you. Those things the others did may be contrary to your goals.