Most would agree that the following two statements are true: One of the primary functions of a state is to improve the condition of the citizens of that state. We should help those in need. Luckily, those two statements, far from being mutually exclusive, are quite connected.
It benefits us to maintain stability as much as possible. A stable state promotes stability amongst its neighboring states; likewise, chaos breeds chaos. If a nation is beset by chaos, it will not be able to conduct trade in an effective manner. From a purely economic standpoint, a stable nation contributes more to the global economy than an instable one. Our world is an increasingly globalized one; as a result, every state nation is tied into the global economy, and so every single state benefits if other states are stable, and is damaged if they are not.
Instability does not come from an abyss. Rather, it is the result of years of humanitarian crises that culminate in chaos. If the citizens of a state are impoverished, or face hunger, or face mass disease, etc., they will turn to non-state actors for sustenance, thus undermining the stability of the state, with the obvious and oft-cited example of Palestine, or else simply lash out at their government.
If we deliver humanitarian aid, we increase the stability of the specific state where the humanitarian aid is delivered. If states remain stable, the global economy will become stronger. If the global economy becomes stronger, we benefit. Therefore, it is in our best interest to administer humanitarian aid whenever doing so does not counteract our national interest in some other way.

Mutual economic interdependence brings about stability, and stability brings about mutual economic interdependence. We should act in whatever way we can to ensure that this cycle continues.