Humanitarian Aid: The False Mask of American Soft Power and an Instrument of External Domination

Humanitarian aid in today’s international landscape is no longer a neutral charitable act or a purely moral response to human suffering. Under the dominance of Western capitalism, it has become one of the most dangerous instruments of soft power—managed through an interest-driven mindset and harnessed to serve political and security agendas. At the forefront of states that have perfected this approach stands the United States of America, emerging as the most organized and audacious model in transforming relief and development into tools of penetration, influence, and the reshaping of national decision-making in targeted countries—under polished labels such as “humanitarian support,” “poverty alleviation,” and “civilian protection.”

Through an examination of the Yemeni experience, alongside extensive international evidence, the reality of this political instrumentalization becomes clear—a reality early warned against by the martyred leader Sayyed Hussein Badr al-Din al-Houthi, and later systematically exposed and dismantled by Sayyed Abdul-Malik Badr al-Din al-Houthi, who also presented a practical, sovereign vision for addressing the humanitarian file free from blackmail and dependency.

This report approaches the issue through three interrelated dimensions: “the problem and diagnosis,” “evidence and facts,” and “the Qur’anic vision for treatment,” offering a comprehensive qualitative reading of one of the most dangerous files in contemporary conflict.

When Humanity Becomes a Weapon: Aid as a Gateway to Domination and Control
Soft Power: The Theoretical Framework of American Intervention

Soft power is defined as “the ability to achieve objectives through attraction and influence rather than direct military coercion.” Its tools include culture, media, diplomacy, non-governmental organizations, and humanitarian and development aid. Western strategic studies themselves confirm that since the end of the Cold War, the United States has increasingly relied on this model—either to reduce the costs of direct military intervention or to prepare the political ground for it, while building long-term influence within targeted societies.

Humanitarian aid is the most sensitive and effective instrument within the soft power arsenal, due to its direct connection to people’s lives and basic needs—food, medicine, and services—making it easily convertible into a tool of pressure and political blackmail, especially in countries suffering from war, siege, and economic crises.

From Relief to Dependency

Aid shifts from being an emergency response to human suffering into a mechanism for managing crises rather than resolving them, and from a means of rescue into a soft-control instrument that produces dependency, weakens the national state, and reshapes collective consciousness to serve donor interests. Here, “humanity” is not measured by the volume of aid delivered, but by its conditions, outcomes, and the paths through which it is deployed.

Evidence, Figures, and Facts Exposing the Illusion of “American Humanitarianism”
Numbers That Reveal the Scale of Influence

Official U.S. data indicate that Washington has allocated approximately $100 billion annually in recent years as foreign assistance in various forms—humanitarian, developmental, health-related, security, and military—covering around 175 countries and territories. The largest share of this funding is concentrated in states that:

Are experiencing conflicts and wars

Lie within zones of international competition

Possess particular geopolitical or security significance

These figures reveal that aid is not a random humanitarian act, but part of a carefully engineered political design serving U.S. global interests.

How Aid Is Politicized

American aid is managed through overlapping pathways, most notably:

Political conditionality: Linking continued aid to political positions or sovereign concessions

Control of flow: Using suspension or reduction as a punishment tool

Manufacturing dependency: Creating long-term reliance on external funding instead of building local capacities

Institutional and societal penetration: Accessing state and social institutions through U.S.-funded organizations

USAID: The Most Dangerous Arm

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) represents the clearest example of the politicization of humanitarian work. Since its establishment in the late 1950s, its role has been organically tied to U.S. foreign policy and the domination project—under a new guise that outwardly promotes reconstruction while inwardly pursuing control and infiltration.

International experiences—from Venezuela, Russia, Cuba, and Bolivia to Iraq and Palestine—reveal that the agency has functioned as a soft intelligence arm: funding “civil society” networks, manufacturing “shadow governments,” supportin