IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/diedps/327980.html

Strategic humanitarian aid, trust in Europe and support for authoritarianism

Author

Listed:
  • Sinanoglu, Semuhi

Abstract

How does international assistance impact public attitudes towards donors in the recipient country when tied to strategic interests? European leaders increasingly highlight the strategic and transactional nature of international assistance. Yet, we still do not know much about how such shifts in the framing of international assistance are perceived by the recipient public, especially in contexts with prevalent anti-Western attitudes and propaganda that dismisses aid as hypocritical and disingenuous. I conducted an online survey experiment in Turkey to assess the attitudinal and quasi-behavioural effects of different types of international assistance post-disaster - conditional, unconditional, and strategic - and whether they help sway public attitudes in the face of authoritarian propaganda. Strategically distributed humanitarian aid decreased trust in the government as a defender of national interest among conservative, nationalist and Eurosceptic regime supporters, and also increased trust in European organisations. It did so partly by mitigating conspiracism and evoking positive emotions among pro-government voters whose views are hard to change. However, this comes at a cost: increased trade scepticism and decreased engagement with foreign media outlets among regime opponents. The findings have significant implications for international assistance strategies for increasing European soft power.

Suggested Citation

  • Sinanoglu, Semuhi, 2025. "Strategic humanitarian aid, trust in Europe and support for authoritarianism," IDOS Discussion Papers 28/2025, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:diedps:327980
    DOI: 10.23661/idp28.2025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/327980/1/1935494112.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.23661/idp28.2025?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew Boutton, 2019. "Of terrorism and revenue: Why foreign aid exacerbates terrorism in personalist regimes," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(4), pages 359-384, July.
    2. Helen V. Milner & Dustin Tingley, 2013. "Public Opinion and Foreign Aid: A Review Essay," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(3), pages 389-401, July.
    3. Blaydes, Lisa & Linzer, Drew A., 2012. "Elite Competition, Religiosity, and Anti-Americanism in the Islamic World," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 225-243, May.
    4. Allen, Michael A. & Flynn, Michael E. & Machain, Carla Martinez & Stravers, Andrew, 2020. "Outside the Wire: U.S. Military Deployments and Public Opinion in Host States," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 114(2), pages 326-341, May.
    5. Blair, Robert A. & Marty, Robert & Roessler, Philip, 2022. "Foreign Aid and Soft Power: Great Power Competition in Africa in the Early Twenty-first Century," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(3), pages 1355-1376, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kim, Sung Eun & Park, Jong Hee & Rhee, Inbok & Yang, Joonseok, 2025. "What do aid recipients want? Public attitudes toward foreign aid in developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    2. Mattingly, Daniel & Incerti, Trevor & Ju, Changwook & Moreshead, Colin & Tanaka, Seiki & Yamagishi, Hikaru, 2022. "Chinese State Media Persuades a Global Audience That the “China Model” is Superior: Evidence From A 19-Country Experiment," OSF Preprints 5cafd_v1, Center for Open Science.
    3. Austin Strange, 2025. "Influence and support for foreign aid: Evidence from the United States and China," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 443-470, September.
    4. Dylan Bugden & Jesse Brazil, 2024. "The role of geostrategic interests in motivating public support for foreign climate aid," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 14(4), pages 803-813, December.
    5. Perrotta Berlin, Maria & Lvovkskyi, Lev, 2025. "Russia’s Involvement on the African Continent and its Consequences for Development: The Aid Channel," SITE Working Paper Series 64, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics.
    6. Eichenauer, Vera Z. & Fuchs, Andreas & Brueckner, Lutz, 2018. "The Effects of Trade, Aid, and Investment on China's Image in Developing Countries," Working Papers 0646, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    7. Chi Him Lee & Brian Tse & Nathaniel Lai & William Goggins & Larry Baum & E Anthony S Nelson, 2018. "Hong Kong’s role in global health: Public opinion of official development assistance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Zhiming Cheng & Russell Smyth, 2016. "Why Give it Away When You Need it Yourself? Understanding Public Support for Foreign Aid in China," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(1), pages 53-71, January.
    9. Bau, Nicolas & Dietrich, Simone, 2025. "What geopolitical returns does ODA bring?," Kiel Working Papers 2305, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    10. Linda Alvarez & Constantine Boussalis & Jennifer L. Merolla & Caryn A. Peiffer, 2018. "Love thy neighbour: Social identity and public support for humanitarian aid," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 36(S2), pages 935-953, September.
    11. Schneider, Sebastian H. & Eger, Jens & Bruder, Martin & Faust, Jörg & Wieler, Lothar H., 2021. "Does the COVID-19 pandemic threaten global solidarity? Evidence from Germany," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    12. Christopher Kilby & Carolyn McWhirter, 2022. "The World Bank COVID-19 response: Politics as usual?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 627-656, July.
    13. Qian Liu & Yingying Wang & Ning Kang, 2023. "Analyzing the Influence of BRI Foreign Direct Investment on Governance: Perspective from Southeast Asian Countries," Global Journal of Emerging Market Economies, Emerging Markets Forum, vol. 15(2), pages 289-305, May.
    14. Fuchs, Andreas & Kaplan, Lennart & Kis-Katos, Krisztina & Schmidt, Sebastian S. & Turbanisch, Felix & Wang, Feicheng, 2020. "Mask wars: China's exports of medical goods in times of COVID-19," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 398, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    15. Seo-Hyun Park, 2019. "Dueling nationalisms in North and South Korea," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, December.
    16. Terence Wood, 2018. "Aid Policy and Australian Public Opinion," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 235-248, May.
    17. Axel Dreher & Jingke Pan & Christina Schneider, 2025. "Foreign Aid and Targeted Political Violence," CESifo Working Paper Series 11970, CESifo.
    18. Angelika J. Budjan & Andreas Fuchs, 2021. "Democracy and Aid Donorship," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 217-238, November.
    19. Choyon Kumar Saha, 2024. "Least developed countries versus fossil fuel incumbents: strategies, divisions, and barriers at the United Nations climate negotiations," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 91-120, March.
    20. Kobayashi, Yoshiharu & Howell, Christopher & Heinrich, Tobias, 2021. "Vaccine hesitancy, state bias, and Covid-19: Evidence from a survey experiment using Phase-3 results announcement by BioNTech and Pfizer," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:diedps:327980. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ditubde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.