UN warns: war in the Middle East is making humanitarian aid more expensive and slower far beyond the region
In recent days, the United Nations and humanitarian agencies have been warning ever more openly that the consequences of the war in the Middle East can no longer be viewed only through the prism of the region itself. Pressure on humanitarian corridors, rising transport prices, more expensive insurance and security risks on key transport routes are already affecting the delivery of aid to a series of other crisis hotspots, from Afghanistan and Yemen to parts of Africa that depend on complex international supply chains. The problem is twofold: aid is becoming slower precisely where time is a decisive factor, while at the same time it is also more expensive at a moment when the humanitarian system is already under heavy strain from a lack of money and a growing number of people in need of assistance.
Such warnings are coming at a time when international organizations emphasize that the humanitarian sector is under pressure not seen in years. According to available estimates by the United Nations and the World Food Programme, the number of people needing urgent assistance remains enormous, while armed conflicts, forced displacement, climate shocks and funding cuts are simultaneously narrowing the room for response. When disruptions in air and maritime traffic linked to the war in the Middle East are added to this, the consequence is not merely another regional crisis, but a spillover of costs and delays onto the entire humanitarian system.
The humanitarian impact of the conflict is no longer a regional issue
The clearest warning came from the very top of the UN humanitarian system. In recent days, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs warned that the humanitarian consequences of the escalation of violence in the Middle East are becoming increasingly severe and complex, not only because of civilian casualties and new displacement, but also because the conflict is placing an additional burden on the capacities of agencies already operating in dozens of crisis zones. This assessment is important because it shows that the problem is not exhausted by the issue of immediate aid in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria or Yemen, but spills over into the logistical, financial and operational capabilities of a system that must respond elsewhere at the same time.
The World Food Programme, which manages the largest humanitarian logistics system in the world, said at the beginning of March that it is ready to expand operations in the Middle East, but at the same time stressed that supply routes are under pressure and that alternative routes are already being sought to maintain the flow of aid. The organization explicitly states that further border closures and transport disruptions could increase costs and cause delays in food deliveries, for example in Afghanistan. Even more importantly, WFP warns that central logistics hubs, including the Dubai hub in the humanitarian warehouse network, remain operational, but are working under conditions of disrupted flights and shipping routes, so aid is being maintained with additional adjustments and higher costs.
In other words, when a major regional conflict spills over onto air corridors, ports, insurance and security assessments, the humanitarian response does not affect only the countries where bombs are falling. It also affects countries that have for years been dependent on international transport of food, medicines, shelter materials and medical equipment. That is why the UN no longer treats this topic as a narrowly regional security problem, but as a global humanitarian disruption.
The Red Sea and diversion routes: more expensive logistics, longer lead times, greater risk
A key part of the story lies in the transport routes that connect Asia, the Middle East, Europe and much of Africa. Analyses by the UN Conference on Trade and Development show that disruptions in the Red Sea and around the Suez Canal have already sharply increased freight rate volatility. UNCTAD states that interruptions and rerouting of shipping have lengthened voyages, reduced the effective capacity of the fleet and increased operating costs, while greater distances, higher fuel consumption and rising insurance premiums have created strong pressure on prices. In such circumstances, ships that previously passed through the Red Sea are increasingly sailing around the Cape of Good Hope, which means longer transit times and more expensive delivery.
For commercial trade, this means more expensive goods and a greater risk of supply disruptions. For humanitarian aid, the consequences are even more severe. Humanitarian agencies do not transport only packages that can wait in a warehouse, but goods that are often tied to urgent deadlines: therapeutic food for malnourished children, vaccines and medical supplies, water purification equipment, temporary shelters and basic supplies for camps for displaced persons. Every additional transfer, detour or security check increases the risk of delay, and every increase in transport cost means that less aid can be purchased and delivered from the same budget.
In its analysis of the deepening crisis in the Red Sea, the World Bank also concludes that this is a hotspot disrupting maritime traffic and global trade, along with rising shipping and insurance costs. Such assessments are important because they confirm that the problem is not merely market perception or a short-term shock, but a real structural disruption. Humanitarian operations, which rely on the same ocean and air networks as the commercial sector, cannot remain spared when risk rises on one of the world’s most important routes.
Air bridges remain essential, but are becoming more expensive and more fragile
When maritime transport slows down or becomes unsafe, part of the pressure spills over onto air transport. In the humanitarian sector, this is especially sensitive because air operations are often the last link with hard-to-reach areas. The UN Humanitarian Air Service, operated by WFP, transported more than 355,000 humanitarian workers and almost 5,000 tonnes of aid during 2024 to 394 hard-to-reach locations in 21 countries, along with more than 1,400 medical evacuations and security relocations. These figures show how crucial the air segment already is for maintaining aid in areas where commercial carriers do not fly or fly only to a very limited extent.
But that system also becomes more vulnerable when the security picture expands. WFP materials for the executive board state that increased war-risk insurance premiums and high fuel costs have placed an additional burden on air operations. In translation, the same flight or the same air line to a crisis area can cost more today than before, and the decision on every rotation flight becomes more sensitive to changes in the security environment. This particularly affects humanitarian missions in countries that do not have stable infrastructure, where air bridges are the only realistic option for delivering personnel, light cargo, medical teams or emergency shipments.
That is precisely why the war in the Middle East does not spill over onto humanitarian aid only through a symbolic sense of global instability, but through very concrete cost sheets. Higher fuel prices, higher insurance premiums, route changes, more security procedures and less predictability in schedules gradually consume funds that would otherwise go directly to aid recipients. In a world where humanitarian budgets are already stretched to the limit of endurance, a logistical удар often turns into reduced rations, delayed deliveries or cutting the number of people who can be covered by the programme.
Why Afghanistan, East Africa and other crisis zones are feeling the consequences
At first glance, it might seem that the countries directly affected by the war will bear the greatest burden of disruption. But the humanitarian system functions as a global network: warehouses, contracts with carriers, air routes, ports, regional logistics centres and donor funds are interconnected. When disruption occurs at one of the central hubs, the consequences spread much farther than the battlefield itself. That is why WFP is already warning that further border closures and deterioration of the security situation could increase costs and slow the delivery of aid in Afghanistan, which even without that remains one of the most fragile humanitarian crises in the world.
A similar pattern can be seen in numerous operations in Africa and Asia. Many countries where the UN, NGOs and international partners operate depend on a combination of maritime delivery, regional transshipment and internal air or land transport. When the journey of a ship is prolonged, the entry of goods into regional warehouses is also delayed. When insurance and fuel prices rise, the price of the last mile also rises, that is, the final delivery to camps, hospitals and isolated communities. And when the security assessment becomes stricter, some routes fall away or require additional permits and protective procedures. In practice, this means that aid for malnourished children in one African country may be delayed because of a geopolitical shock thousands of kilometres away.
In this lies the broader political message of this crisis as well. Humanitarian aid is often presented in public as a pure moral obligation, but its implementation depends on the same global transport, financial and insurance mechanisms as the rest of the global economy. When the most important corridors in the Middle East are shaken, the consequences do not stop at the map of the region. They enter agency budgets, contracts with shipping companies, aircraft schedules, storage costs and ultimately the quantity of food or medicines that reaches beneficiaries.
The humanitarian system is already exhausted, and new costs are eroding it further
This escalation is happening at a moment when humanitarian organizations are already warning of a chronic gap between needs and available money. In their overviews for 2025 and 2026, the United Nations emphasizes that humanitarian operations are stretched, underfunded and exposed to ever more difficult security conditions. In its global outlook for 2026, WFP warns that acute hunger remains at alarming levels and estimates that hundreds of millions of people are facing serious food insecurity. In such a picture, a logistical blow does not play a secondary role. It directly determines how far the available money can be stretched.
That is also why messages from the UN in recent weeks are being read much more seriously than in earlier phases of the crisis. It is not only that a new war produces new victims, but also that it simultaneously weakens the ability of the international system to respond to existing disasters. If more expensive transport, slower routes and more expensive insurance eat up part of the budget, humanitarian organizations must choose between a smaller volume of aid, a smaller number of beneficiaries or additional pressure on donors. And none of those options is good in a year in which the number of crises is not falling, but rising.
What follows if the security and transport crisis deepens
According to available information, the UN and its agencies are for now trying to mitigate the consequences by adapting routes, prepositioning supplies and keeping key hubs operational, including the WFP logistics network and the humanitarian air transport system. However, the room for adjustment is not unlimited. The longer the conflict lasts and the more it spreads to transport and security points of global importance, the harder it will be to maintain the same level of aid without additional funding and without political de-escalation.
That is precisely why the UN’s warnings should also be read as a message to donor states and political actors. The humanitarian consequence of war is measured not only by the number of dead and displaced in the Middle East itself, but also by how many people in other crisis zones will be left without timely food, medicines and protection because global routes have become more expensive, slower and more dangerous. When one war disrupts shipping, insurance and flights at the level of the entire system, humanitarian aid ceases to be a local issue and becomes a test of the resilience of an international order that is already showing serious cracks.
Sources:- UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs – warnings about the increasingly severe humanitarian consequences of the escalation of violence in the Middle East (link)- World Food Programme – statement of 3 March 2026 on readiness to scale up operations in the Middle East and pressure on supply routes (link)- World Food Programme – warning that disruptions and possible border closures increase costs and cause delays, including consequences for Afghanistan and the global warehouse network (link)- UNCTAD – review of maritime transport 2025 and analysis of freight rates, with data on the effect of disruptions in the Red Sea on routes, costs and voyage duration (link)- UNCTAD – text on rising freight rates, longer routes, higher fuel consumption and rising insurance premiums due to disruptions on key routes (link)- World Bank – analysis of the deepening Red Sea crisis and its effect on global maritime traffic and insurance costs (link)- WFP / UNHAS – executive board report on the scope of humanitarian air transport in 2024, including the number of passengers, quantity of cargo and hard-to-reach locations (link)- WFP / UNHAS – executive board update noting increased war-risk insurance premiums and high fuel costs in humanitarian air operations (link)- WFP Global Outlook 2026 – estimates on acute hunger and pressure on the global humanitarian system in 2026 (link)
Find accommodation nearby
Creation time: 4 hours ago