Depicted above: US Vice President Kamala Harris broke into a nervous laugher after she was asked whether America will take Ukrainian regufees. Source: The Indian Express
I don’t know if anyone picks up nuances in the language, but the proverb “a friend in need is a friend indeed” can have a cynical interpretation due to referential ambiguity. Who is the friend, and who is the person in need?
The dictionary definition explains this as the person in need praising their friend for helping them out. If the world is completely righteous, this is the only definition we would ever need. But even the dictionary recognizes that this kind of friendship is remarkable, in contrast to friends who disappear when you ask them for help.
When spoken from the person providing aid, the “friend indeed” would be themselves helping a needy friend, so this would be a form of humble brag. It is possible they meant “you’re welcome; I’m your friend” after they helped. This is usually only appropriate when the person getting the help expressed their gratitude first. If you say “you’re welcome” without being thanked, it sounds like “you should have been more appreciative, you thankless twit.”
But when someone is being asked to help but is relunctant, it sounds like “here I am lending you a helping hand; look who is your friend?” Or worse, “you are only my friend when you need something from me.” There is probably some truth to that, but it is still pretty condescending when spoken out loud.
Even when spoken from a third person admiring the quality of someone selflessly helping their friend, it sounds like “how kind of them to do that (but not me).”
Only the person getting the help should be using this proverb to express gratitude. Anyone else using it would be utterly tone deaf.