To highlight the $2.726bn shortfall in humanitarian aid to Syria, Oxfam has analysed how generous donors are compared to their GDP to identify which countries are pulling their weight, and who is giving too little.
Kuwait comes out as the most generous of the 28 countries analysed, having given over four times its fair share, followed by Denmark and Luxembourg, who have given over twice their fair share, and then Saudi. The UK hasn’t performed too badly, having given 154% of its fair share, but the US has only given 63% of what it should, given its GDP.
At the very bottom of the list are New Zealand, which has only contributed 1% of its fair share, followed by North Korea (2%) and – and this is where it gets interesting – Qatar and Russia who both only gave 3%.
Qatar’s low level of humanitarian support for Syria stands in stark contrast to its military support for rebel fighters, with the FT estimating in May that it has spent as much as $3bn to support rebel fighters. Qatar has also spent billions supporting Islamist parties in the aftermath of the Arab Spring, giving $8bn to Egypt alone. Its commitment to humanitarian relief is clearly not as strong as its commitment to influencing regional foreign policy in its favour.
Of course it’s not the only one to have adopted this position. France, by far the most hawkish European country when it comes to Syria has only given 47% of its fair share. The US's position also makes Obama's appeals to the public to intervene in Syria on humanitarian grounds sound a little hollow. The $819m shortfall in humanitarian funding is considerably less costly than military intervention, and would be a good first step while the US and Russia fight over the finer details of the latest plan.
And while I'm on the subject of Russia, according to Reuters, 50% of the Syrian government’s arms come from Russia, with Assad known to be currently settling bills for over $1.5bn worth of arms deals. Russia's $17.8m aid bill is nothing compared to the income its receiving from weapon sales.