Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Financial analysis reveals far-right governments steer funding toward migration control organizations over humanitarian agencies, indicating strategic repurposing rather than multilateral withdrawal.
The rise of far-right governments has put international organizations under pressure. The recent financial cuts to the United Nations system by the United States have highlighted how member states can influence international organizations through funding decisions. Yet, far-right governments do not simply withdraw from international organizations or withhold all their money. Instead, we argue, they aim at repurposing international organizations to implement their international policy priorities. Based on data on earmarked funding to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Organization for Migration between 2004 and 2023, we show that far-right governments aim to align international organizations’ operational work with their anti-immigration policies: They shift funding between organizations, preferring International Organization for Migration over United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, relative to non-far-right governments, because of its broader focus on migration and return management. They also allocate funding to operational activities that better align with their preferences, thereby shifting United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees project activities outside its core mandate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tokhi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: