Skip to content

Imperialist powers refuse money to feed Yemen

Marxist Theory · 2026-05-13

Core Argument

The article argues that the catastrophic humanitarian crisis in Yemen is not a natural disaster or a regrettable byproduct of conflict, but a deliberate, man-made outcome of imperialist strategy. The central claim is that the refusal of Western powers — particularly the UK and US — to provide adequate humanitarian funding is not a failure of generosity but a logical expression of imperialist priorities: profit, geopolitical control, and the maintenance of proxy-war architecture take precedence over human life. The donor conference's shortfall of over $2 billion is presented not as an accident but as a policy choice that reveals the true calculus of capitalist states.

Theoretical Grounding

The analysis is rooted in the Marxist theory of imperialism as developed by Lenin and Bukharin, with particular emphasis on the subordination of human need to the accumulation requirements of capital and the geopolitical interests of the dominant imperialist states. The article draws on the classical Marxist understanding of war and famine as inherent features of capitalist competition, not aberrations from it. The concept of "man-made disaster" is deployed here as a direct refutation of bourgeois humanitarianism — the idea that capitalism can be reformed into a system that prioritises human welfare. The piece also implicitly draws on the Marxist critique of the state as an instrument of class rule: the British government's simultaneous profiteering from arms sales and slashing of aid budgets is not hypocrisy but consistency.

Conjunctural Relevance

The article is written in March 2021, at a specific conjuncture: the transition from Trump to Biden, the ongoing COVID-19 crisis, and the sixth year of the Saudi-led war in Yemen. It situates the aid shortfall within concrete material realities:

  • The UK pledged £87 million — less than half its 2019 pledge — while cutting its overall aid budget from 0.7% to 0.5% of GDP, and simultaneously profiting from arms sales to Saudi Arabia.
  • Biden pledged $191 million, a modest increase on Trump, but his $1,900 billion stimulus package included $110 billion in business support, while the US defence budget stood at $730 billion.
  • The EU pledged $116 million while spending €22.7 billion on migration and border security — a direct illustration of the imperialist preference for keeping the starving out rather than stopping starvation.
  • Saudi Arabia, the architect of the war, pledged $430 million — a fraction of the estimated $100 billion it spent on the conflict.

The article identifies the war as a proxy conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran, with the US and UK backing Riyadh to prevent Iranian influence over Yemen's strategic coastline, through which much of the world's oil trade passes. The Houthi advance on Marib, a key oil production hub, is identified as the immediate geopolitical trigger for the imperialist powers' desire to exit the conflict — not out of humanitarian concern, but because they have lost the war and now seek a face-saving negotiated settlement.

Where the Argument Continues

The article is a relatively short, conjunctural piece and does not develop several lines of argument that are explored elsewhere in the In Defence of Marxism corpus:

  • The political economy of the Saudi state and the internal contradictions of the Gulf monarchies is left largely implicit. For a deeper treatment, see IDOM articles on the Saudi succession crisis and the fragility of the Gulf regimes.
  • The role of the Houthi movement itself — its class character, its relationship to Iran, and its political programme — is not analysed. This is a significant gap that is addressed in other IDOM pieces on the Yemen conflict.
  • The article gestures towards the comparison with Iraq and Syria — "uneasy compromise" followed by continued suffering — but does not develop the theoretical implications for understanding imperialist "exit strategies" and the reconstruction question. This is a theme taken up in Against the Stream episodes on the reconstruction of Syria and the political economy of post-war capitalism.
  • The concluding call to "get rid of imperialism and capitalism once and for all" is a political conclusion, not an analysis of the strategic pathway to that goal. The question of revolutionary strategy in the Middle East — the role of the working class, the national question, and the relationship between anti-imperialist struggle and socialist revolution — is developed in broader Marxist texts on the region.

Connections

  • Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism — the theoretical foundation for understanding the war in Yemen as a product of inter-imperialist rivalry and the export of capital.
  • Bukharin, Imperialism and World Economy — for the analysis of the state as an instrument of the capitalist class in the global arena.
  • Trotsky, The Revolution Betrayed — for the understanding of how "peace" under capitalism means the consolidation of imperialist domination, not liberation.
  • IDOM articles on the Saudi-led war in Yemen, particularly those analysing the blockade and the role of the UK and US arms industries.
  • Against the Stream episodes on the reconstruction of Syria and the political economy of imperialist "humanitarian" intervention.

Key Quotes

  1. "The truth is of course, that without these countries meddling in the affairs of Yemen, there would be no need for aid. The widespread famine facing the Yemeni people is a manmade disaster."

  2. "The British government, in a true spirit of international cooperation and solidarity, is proposing to cut its aid budget from 0.7 percent of GDP to 0.5 percent, although it is trying to avoid holding a vote on it in the British Parliament until after the G7 meeting in June."

  3. "Bombing Syria clearly remains more of a priority to the new Biden administration than feeding hungry children in Yemen."

  4. "The war in Yemen is a proxy war for the Saudis, desperately trying to avoid Iranian influence extending to their southern border. The imperialist powers share this interest. Much of international oil trade passes the coast of Yemen."

  5. "The only problem is that they lost the war. The Houthi militias have held out and are now even threatening Marib, one of the most important hubs for Yemeni oil production."

  6. "The ruling elite of the regional powers in the Middle East and their even more powerful imperialist friends in London and Washington are only interested in power, profit and privileges. At the bottom of the list come the Yemeni people."