The politics of humanitarian aid: an analysis of the dynamics of selectiveness in humanitarian assistance through a comparison of the Syrian and Ukrainian cases

The changing approach to humanitarianism has created a shift of axis in humanitarian assistance, moving from a short-term, needs-based focus to a rights-based, development focus. The traditional understanding of aid, which is grounded in the provision of basic relief to meet the immediate needs of affected populations, has been replaced by long-term developmental relief that encompasses the defense of human rights. This has resulted in a profound evolution of aid, which is now closely interlinked with politics and includes humanitarian military intervention within its scope. The politicization of aid has brought about a new form of conditionality that prioritized certain humanitarian emergencies over others. This selectiveness driven by neocolonial factors provokes unequal allocation of aid, where the most in need and vulnerable populations are often unheeded. How can we make sense of the selectivity in humanitarian assistance from a postcolonial perspective, particularly evident in Syria compared to Ukraine? This research employs postcolonial theory and critically analyzes the enduring impacts of colonialism on current power structures that influence the neocolonial factors causing selectivity in aid. This thesis is based on qualitative methods that include analysis of secondary and primary data through in-person interviews with humanitarian agencies and institutional donors operating within the contexts of Syrian and Ukrainian conflicts and affected community members in these regions. This study offers practical recommendations tailored for policymakers, I/NGOs, UN agencies, civil society and other influential actors within the international humanitarian framework, aiming to foster more effective collaboration and response strategies that benefit the most vulnerable.