Site icon WBHM 90.3

Feeding the hungry will be harder than ever for the world’s largest food aid agency

TOPSHOT - Ethiopian refugees who fled the Tigray conflict rest in the shadow of a warehouse erected by the World Food Programme (WFP) at Village Eight transit centre near the Ethiopian border in Gedaref, eastern Sudan, on December 2, 2020. (Photo by Yasuyoshi CHIBA / AFP) (Photo by YASUYOSHI CHIBA/AFP via Getty Images)

Ethiopian refugees rest in the shadow of a warehouse erected by the World Food Programme near the Ethiopian border in Gedaref, eastern Sudan.

The United Nations World Food Programme is by far the largest international organization fighting hunger. It reports that it served more than 100 million people in 2024. FIve years ago, it won the Nobel Peace Prize.

But WFP is about to radically downsize in the wake of dwindling donations and the Trump administration’s cuts to foreign aid.

WFP spent $9.8 billion on aid last year — nearly half of the funds were contributed by the U.S. But this year, it’s facing a projected 40% reduction in funding.

In a memo emailed to all WFP employees on April 24, leadership told staff to expect job cuts of 25-30%, or about 6,000 positions. The email, obtained by NPR, said the cuts would affect every level of the organization and every place they operate.

WFP is funded by voluntary contributions. Countries contribute the bulk of the budget, with some additional funds from the U.N. and foundations and other sources.

Prior to 2025, donor countries in Europe began reducing their contributions, reflecting a global trend of prioritizing military and national security needs. The latest and most abrupt blow came when the U.S., by far the largest funder, canceled hundreds of millions in grants.

“I’ve been working in the humanitarian field for nearly 30 years now, and I’ve never seen such a situation before,” says Paul Spiegel, director of the Center for Humanitarian Health at Johns Hopkins University.

He says even though funding shortfalls are not new in the humanitarian sector, drastic cuts to the world’s food safety net will be devastating.

“I understand the humanitarian and donor fatigue, because there seem to be so many emergencies, often at the same time,” he said. “But [the WFP cuts are] different, and we’re going to see enormous amounts of, sadly, increased numbers of deaths in these humanitarian settings because of both the magnitude of these cuts and the abruptness of these cuts.”

In a statement to NPR, a U. S. State Department spokesperson said that USAID has canceled only a small number of its WFP contracts, mainly due to concerns about money ending up in the hands of terrorist groups. That’s the rationale for cutting $680 million for Afghanistan and Yemen.

A pullback in Afghanistan

The WFP warned in an April post on X that planned U.S. cuts to programs in 14 countries would amount to a “death sentence for millions of people.” The Trump administration later undid some but not all of those cuts, declining to restore contracts in countries such as Afghanistan and Yemen due to “concerns about funds benefiting terrorist groups like the Houthis and Taliban, or because they did not align with America First priorities,” according to the State Department.

Grants to WFP programs in Afghanistan through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) totaled about $280 million in 2024, before the Trump administration zeroed them out.

“In the past there have been crises where funding has dried up for various reasons but not on the sort of global scale we’re seeing now,” says Harald Mannhardt, WFP’s deputy country director in Afghanistan.

The U.N. says about half the Afghan population depends on humanitarian aid to survive and warns that more than 3 million people are on the brink of starvation. Mannhardt says WFP lacked the funds to keep up with the country’s desperate need, even before the U.S. cuts.

“There’s so much concern from the people that I meet about the end of food assistance,” he says. “Whenever I’ve been visiting over the last six months or so distribution sites, there’s a lot of people outside there asking why they can’t be included in the programs. We’re already only feeding half, or less than half, of who we should be assisting,” he says.

The situation is especially desperate for women, whose rights under Taliban rule have been severely curtailed, and for children. In its 2024 country report, WFP said Afghanistan was experiencing a record-high spike in child malnutrition, affecting some 3.5 million children. According to UNICEF, 41% of Afghan children experience “stunting” — slowed-down growth due to malnourishment.

“The acute malnutrition means, sadly, a lot of children are going to die,” says Spiegel of Johns Hopkins. “And the chronic malnutrition, the stunting, has generational effects. It’s not just those children: Sometimes the children of those children also can be stunted.”

The WFP also acts as a primary coordinator of logistics for other aid groups and U.N. agencies. Those groups rely on the WFP’s U.N. Humanitarian Air Service (UNHAS) to get into remote places.

UNHAS now has the money to operate just two aircraft for all of Afghanistan, down from five.

Implications for future food crises

Besides logistics and emergency food aid, the WFP provides support for farmers and nutrition assistance, which are intended to build the self-sufficiency of low-resource countries.

Caitlin Welsh, director of food and water security at the bipartisan think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies, says U.S. funding cuts to the WFP will hurt the poorest countries in both the long- and the short-term.

“[The U.S.] is cutting the emergency assistance for those in most need, and the other types of assistance [that are] intended to make sure that people wouldn’t need that assistance in the first place,” she says.

Welsh says the Trump administration’s turn away from humanitarian assistance represents a major policy realignment.

“Since the 1960s, the U.S. has expressed that it’s in the U.S. interest to support agriculture, to support food security and provide lifesaving food and nutrition assistance,” she says.

“It’s a moral, economic and national security imperative. This is a matter of the country with far and away the highest GDP in the world using its resources to stave off some of the worst forms of suffering in other populations.”

Meanwhile, WFP said in a statement that it plans to “prioritize its limited resources on vital programs that bring urgently needed food assistance to the 343 million people struggling with hunger and increasingly facing starvation.”

Transcript:

ARI SHAPIRO, HOST:

The number of people in the world facing hunger has stayed stubbornly high since the pandemic. At the same time, international support for food aid has been dropping. And then came the Trump administration’s dramatic cuts to humanitarian assistance. Now, one of the world’s largest humanitarian aid groups is planning to radically downsize. Reporter Gabriel Spitzer has the story.

GABRIEL SPITZER: An email went out recently to employees at the United Nations World Food Programme. The subject line said, workforce update. The memo said, job cuts are coming. The World Food Programme is the major international effort to fight hunger. Last year, the organization reports it served more than 100 million people. Five years ago, it won the Nobel Peace Prize. In the email obtained by NPR, WFP leadership said to expect staff cuts of 25- to 30% – about 6,000 jobs. They said the cuts will affect every level of the organization in every place they operate. Paul Spiegel directs the Center for Humanitarian Health at Johns Hopkins University.

PAUL SPIEGEL: You know, I’ve been working in the humanitarian field for nearly 30 years now, and I’ve never seen such a situation before in these 30 years.

SPITZER: Donor countries in Europe had already been scaling back their contributions. The latest and most abrupt blow came this year when the U.S., the largest funder of the World Food Programme, canceled several hundred million in grants. Last year, the U.S. had contributed $4.5 billion to the WFP.

SPIEGEL: I understand the donor fatigue because there seem to be so many emergencies, but this is different, I think, and we’re going to see enormous amounts of – sadly – increased numbers of deaths in these humanitarian settings.

SPITZER: The World Food Programme projects that next year, the organization will get less than half of what it needs.

HARALD MANNHARDT: In the past, there have been crises where funding has dried up for various reasons, but not on the sort of global scale that we’re seeing now.

SPITZER: Harald Mannhardt is the World Food Programme’s deputy country director in Afghanistan, where he says the funding cuts have been especially painful. In that country, the U.S. contributed $280 million through USAID last year. This year, the Trump administration canceled those contracts. According to the U.N., about half the Afghan population depends on aid for survival, and more than 3 million are on the brink of starvation. And yet, Mannhardt says, the WFP could not afford to keep up with the needs even before the latest U.S. cuts.

MANNHARDT: Whenever I’ve been visiting, over the last six months or so, distribution sites, there’s a lot of people outside there asking why they can’t be included in the programs. We’re already only feeding half or less than half of who we should be assisting.

SPITZER: Policy experts say it’s not just emergency assistance that will be affected, but also projects meant to make countries self-sufficient. Caitlin Welsh is director of food and water security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. It’s a bipartisan policy think tank. She says cuts planned at the WFP will also hurt countries over the long term, and a drop in support from the U.S. will only make things worse.

CAITLIN WELSH: So it’s both types of assistance that the U.S. government is cutting – the emergency assistance for those in most need and the other types of assistance that’s intended to make sure that people wouldn’t need that assistance in the first place.

SPITZER: In a statement to NPR, a State Department spokesperson said that USAID has canceled only a small number of World Food Programme contracts, and that those were due to, quote, “concerns about funds benefiting terrorist groups like the Houthis and Taliban.” The World Food Programme would not comment on its planned staffing cuts, but said in a statement it will prioritize its limited resources toward the 343 million people struggling with hunger and, increasingly, starvation.

For NPR News, I’m Gabriel Spitzer.

Exit mobile version