The scale‐back in assistance stretched across multiple facets of the humanitarian infrastructure. For example, the UN’s Humanitarian Air Service reduced its helicopter fleet, limiting aerial lifts for badly affected areas.
As Afghanistan reels from deadly earthquakes that struck the country on August 31, with a magnitude of 6.0, analysts, aid workers, and health officials are warning that sharp reductions in US and international assistance have severely constrained the disaster response – leaving thousands of vulnerable people exposed and in peril.
At least 2,200 people were killed in eastern Afghanistan during the earthquakes. This was the first major disaster to strike since the Trump administration suspended US foreign aid to Afghanistan in January. While Washington released statements of sympathy, it has made no formal pledge of direct financial assistance to quake relief.
“We had much less of a capacity to respond”
Abdurahman Sharif, a senior humanitarian director with Save the Children, described the response in the immediate aftermath as significantly weakened. “We had fewer teams, fewer supplies, and less flexibility to scale up quickly,” he said.
Hospitals across the affected region were overwhelmed. In the first 72 hours after the quake, more than 950 injured people sought treatment at Nangarhar Regional Hospital across five eastern provinces. Of those, 541 were admitted for in‐patient care in a facility with only 650 beds.
Many of the dead and injured came from remote villages with limited or no capacity to deal with catastrophic injuries caused by collapsing houses, aftershocks, and blocked roads. Clinics in those areas were often equipped only for basic care – if they functioned at all.
Shrinking Aid, Eroded Infrastructure
The US aid cuts are part of a broader trend. By the time the quake hit, international aid to Afghanistan had already dropped by about 50 per cent compared to earlier in the year. Decades of donor retrenchment had also taken a toll: this year alone, 422 local clinics were closed – over half of them in the two provinces hardest hit by the quake, Nangarhar and Kunar.
The scale‐back in assistance stretched across multiple facets of the humanitarian infrastructure. For example, the UN’s Humanitarian Air Service (UNHAS) reduced its helicopter fleet, limiting aerial lifts for badly affected areas. As a result, many injured were flown in only by using fewer remaining helicopters, because road access was poor or blocked, and many areas were inaccessible at night.
Health facilities were understocked. At Nangarhar Regional Hospital, supplies were missing: stretchers, ultrasound machines, blood pressure gauges, pulse oximeters – the basics often taken for granted in more stable settings. Health staff struggled to treat both earthquake victims and non‐quake patients, as normal hospital operations remained disrupted.
Delays and Geographic Barriers
Access remained a major challenge. In several districts, roads were impassable. Aid teams, both local and international, sometimes had to hike for hours to reach isolated villages. The cutbacks in aid had reduced logistical flexibility, including fewer mobile teams and limited ability to quickly deploy field clinics or search and rescue units.
Some of the region’s remote residents received no care at all in those early crucial hours after the quake. “Families with injured relatives were receiving delays of care or none at all,” said Sharif.
Who is Stepping In – And What’s Missing
In the wake of reduced US engagement, others have attempted to fill the gap. Countries including Australia, Ireland, the UK, and Germany contributed aid; regional powers like Qatar, UAE, Türkiye, Iran, India, and China have also supplied material support, rescue teams, food, and shelter.
Qatar notably sent field hospitals and large supply shipments; a ceremony on September 4, when Qatar delivered two field hospitals and relief goods for more than 11,000 affected families, drew attention because a female Arab government minister handed over aid inside Afghanistan – something seen as symbolically significant.
Still, observers say these interventions, while helpful, are no match for the scale of the humanitarian shortfall. Many survivors want longer‐term solutions – housing, compensation for damaged crops, livelihood training – not simply food and water bottles.
The Politics of Recognition and Aid
A recurring theme in the reporting is that political hesitance to engage with the Taliban-led government has hampered direct aid flows. Because many Western donors prefer to funnel assistance through international agencies to avoid legitimizing the Taliban, day-to-day operations are slower and less direct. Meanwhile, regional donors are more willing to work with the Taliban, giving them more practical on-the-ground presence even if their dollar contributions are smaller.
As one social worker from Kunar put it: “If we were recognised by the world, we would have had on-time rescuers and a lot of people would have been alive today.”
Humanitarian and aid groups warn that without sustained funding and renewed international focus, Afghanistan will struggle to manage disaster risks. The earthquakes have laid bare how years of aid cuts weaken health systems, degrade response capacity, and leave remote populations especially exposed.
As the death toll continues to rise, and aftershocks threaten destroyed infrastructure, many are calling for more than symbolic gestures – urgent, immediate funding, restored clinics, and logistics capacity. The gap between what is needed and what is being delivered remains wide, and for many Afghan families, time is running out.
