Yemen is a microcosm of why Labour foreign aid vs defence spending strategy is so wrong

Mahra, a 31-year-old mother of four who was expecting her fifth child, is one of 4.5 million people displaced by the ongoing conflict in Yemen, which has been heavily fomented by international powers, particularly the UK. The country faces extreme famine and drought, leaving 21 million people in dire need of humanitarian aid.

While attempting to fetch water, Mahra collapsed, highlighting the daily struggles faced by those in war-torn regions. Fortunately, she received medical care funded by the United Nations, but tragically, her unborn child did not survive.

This incident underscores the severe consequences of the conflict, which has intensified over the years.

Yemen: a war waged by Saudi Arabia – with complicity from the UK

In the UK parliament, MPs recently defended an increase in military spending by the government, without reflecting on the implications of such funding. This was in tandem with a cut to the foreign aid budget.

Since 2015, more than half of the combat aircraft used by Saudi Arabia in bombing campaigns against Yemen have been supplied by the UK, with British arms companies earning over £6 billion from these sales. These military actions have killed over 150,000 people and set off widespread crises of disease and famine.

Criticism has arisen regarding the government’s decision to cut foreign aid in favour of military spending. This decision is not only detrimental to those suffering from conflict, such as people in Yemen, but also perpetuates the very conditions that lead to war.

Around 80% of the world’s poorest countries either are currently experiencing or have recently faced violent conflict. A comprehensive approach to foreign policy would aim to address the causes of war, rather than deepen existing insecurities.

The government has also taken steps to target “illegal” migrants (even though there’s no such thing), showcasing a strategy that appears to neglect the plight of vulnerable individuals, both domestically and abroad. Cuts to essential support systems often affect the poorest members of society, raising questions about governmental priorities.

The right focus for the rich – the wrong focus for the rest of us

As the anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine arrives, the devastation caused by war is called into question. Amid ongoing tragedies, there is an urgent need to emphasise peace over militarism. The effects of violent conflict go beyond the battlefield, impacting mothers and families worldwide, leading to loss and grief.

Simultaneously, the looming threat of climate crisis disaster remains largely unaddressed. Individuals are dying from the consequences of droughts and flooding, yet their struggles receive little attention in political discourse.

The UK government’s focus seems reserved for those who benefit economically from warfare, with assertions from officials likening military expenditure to economic growth. This perspective raises concerns about the prioritisation of military funding over sustainable solutions that could genuinely foster safety and stability.

Critics argue that governments should rethink their approach to safety and security. For every pound spent on military solutions, there are pressing needs for investment in renewable energy and resources that could preserve life and promote a healthier planet. To build a secure and equitable society, prioritising a collaborative approach rather than militarisation could pave the way for a more peaceful world.

As conflicts around the globe, such as in Yemen and Ukraine, rage on, the focus of political leaders must shift to ensure they consider the profound impacts of their policies on the lives of those caught in turmoil.

Featured image via the Canary