Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Humanitarian Action under Fire: Reflections on the Role of NGOs in Conflict and Post-Conflict Situations

2012; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 19; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/13533312.2012.665698

1743-906X

Francis Kofi Abiew,

Religion, Society, and Development

Abstract The spate of attacks against humanitarian NGOs since 2003 has raised a series of fundamental questions for humanitarian operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and other conflict and post-conflict situations. This article reflects on the ‘new humanitarianism’ and how increasingly, this humanitarianism is under attack in violation of the Geneva Conventions on the Laws and Customs of War. It argues that humanitarian action is under attack because of efforts by Western governments (particularly the United States) to make humanitarian NGOs an extension of their military and political agendas. In circumstances of the politicization of humanitarian aid, it becomes difficult for combatants to distinguish between Western governments' agendas and those of NGOs. The article concludes by calling for the insulation of humanitarian aid from politics. This separation of politics and humanitarianism can only be realized by returning to traditional principles that have guided humanitarian action. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Research for this article was supported by a Faculty Professional Development Grant from the Office of Research and Scholarship, Kwantlen Polytechnic University, Surrey, Canada. I thank Michael Pugh and the anonymous reviewers of International Peacekeeping for their helpful comments. An earlier version of this article was presented at the 24th annual meeting of the Academic Council on the United Nations System (ACUNS), at Wilfrid Laurier University and the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), Waterloo, Canada, 2–4 June 2011. Notes See, for example, Abby Stoddard, Adele Harmer and Katherine Haver, ‘Providing Aid in Insecure Environments: Trends in Policy and Operations’, in Humanitarian Policy Group and Center on International Cooperation, HPG Report 23, Sept. 2006 (at: www.odi.org.uk/resources/docs/269.pdf) noting the trends and sharp increase in the absolute number of reported major acts of violence – killings, kidnappings and armed attacks against aid workers since 1997. See also documented attacks on humanitarian NGOs in Sudan in Human Rights First, ‘Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) Under Attack in Sudan’ (at: http://gen-ed.org/NGOs%20under%20attack.htm). In Afghanistan, ‘NGOs experienced a 20 per cent increase in security incidents in 2008 compared to 2007. In 2008, 31 aid workers were killed, 78 were abducted and 27 were seriously wounded in 170 security incidents, according to figures from the Afghanistan NGOs Safety Office’, quoted in ‘Report: Afghanistan: Humanitarianism Under Threat’ (at: www.charityandsecurity.org/print/52). Nicolas de Torrente, ‘Humanitarian Action under Attack: Reflections on the Iraq War’, Harvard Human Rights Journal, Vol.17, No.1, 2004, p.2. Ibid. Kenneth Anderson, ‘Humanitarian Inviolability in Crisis: The Meaning of Impartiality and Neutrality for U.N. and NGO Agencies Following the 2003-2004 Afghanistan and Iraq Conflicts’, Harvard Human Rights Journal, Vol.17, 2004, p.41. Ibid. Ibid., p.42. Mark Duffield, Joanna Macrae and Devon Curtis argue that humanitarian action is increasingly becoming an integral part of Western governments' strategy to transform conflicts, lessen violence and set the stage for liberal development. This is frequently called the ‘new humanitarianism’, and has characterized the international response to many recent conflicts. Mark Duffield, Joanna Macrae and Devon Curtis, ‘Editorial: Politics and Humanitarian Aid’, Disasters, Vol.25, No.4, 2001, p.269. Barnett for instance, notes how the term ‘humanitarianism’ has expanded to include human rights, provision of medical aid, economic development, promotion of democracy, and even building responsible states. Michael Barnett, ‘Humanitarianism Transformed’, Perspectives on Politics, Vol.3, No.4, 2005, p.723. Kurt Mills has also argued that the changing nature of conflict has led to an era of ‘neo-humanitarianism’ characterized by the embeddedness of humanitarianism within, rather than at the margins of, contemporary conflict. This is distinguished by the manipulation of humanitarianism for political or military gain in a conflict or as a substitute for political and military action. Consequently, international humanitarian organizations are both manipulated by various actors in the middle of conflict and participated in this transformation. Kurt Mills, ‘Neo-Humanitarianism: The Role of International Humanitarian Norms and Organizations in Contemporary Conflict’, Global Governance, Vol.11, No.2, 2005, p.162. David Chandler, ‘The Road to Military Humanitarianism: How the Human Rights NGOs Shaped a New Humanitarian Agenda’, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol.23, No.3, 2001, p.678. Ibid., pp.678–9. The ICRC was founded by Henry Dunant in 1863 after witnessing suffering during the battle of Solferino in 1859. The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 were the first international treaties establishing the laws and customs of war; ICRC, Handbook of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross, 1994 cited in de Torrente (see n.2 above), p.4; Martha Finnemore, National Interests in International Society, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1996, pp.69–88. de Torrente (see n.2 above), p.4. Ibid. Michael Ignatieff, The Warrior's Honor: Ethnic War and the Modern Conscience, New York: Holt Paperbacks, 1998, p.119, quoted in Chandler (see n.8 above), p.680. Amnesty International (at: www.amnesty.org). UNHCR (at: www.unhcr.ch). See Save the Children and Oxfam website (at: www.savethechildren.org.uk; www.oxfam.org.uk). Chandler (see n.8 above), p.680. Ibid., p.681. Ibid. Bruce Nichols, ‘Rubberband Humanitarianism’, Ethics and International Affairs,Vol.1, No.1, 1987, p.195, quoted in Ibid. Ibid., p.682. Mohonok criteria (at: www.wcrp.org/whatsnew/Humanitarian.html); Red Cross Code of Conduct (at: www.icrc.og/icreng.nsf); Larry Minear and Thomas Weiss, Humanitarian Action in Times of War: A Handbook for Practitioners, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1993. Chandler (see n.8 above), p.683. Chandler also notes that ‘[t]he NGOs that want a more committed solidarity form of intervention in conflict situations have emphasized the need for protection or security as well as assistance. The developmental NGOs have argued that humanitarian intervention should also include long-term assistance such as peacebuilding, capacity building, empowerment, and development as reflected, for example, in the Mohonk Criteria’. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International exemplify solidarity NGOs, while the developmental approach characterizes the work of Oxfam and Save the Children, although these divisions are not firm, since Médicins Sans Frontières for example, is increasingly involved in both spheres. Ibid. Quoted in ibid., p.685. Ibid. Barnett (see n.7 above), p.724. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid.,pp.724–5. Barnett also notes how many commentators, reflecting the anxieties of this mixing of politics and principle started to speak of humanitarianism in ‘crisis’ and cautioned against the dangers of ‘supping with the devil’, ‘drinking from the poisoned chalice’, and ‘sleeping with the enemy’. Ibid., p.725. In this context, Barnett also observes that the flood of aid agencies in Zaire whose work potentially caused more harm than good in the aftermath of the Rwandan genocide marked a turning point as that tragedy and other events resulted in the entire aid community undergoing a painful introspection that raised troubling questions regarding the legitimacy and effectiveness of humanitarian action. Ibid. Ibid. Fiona Fox, ‘New Humanitarianism: Does It Provide a Moral Banner for the 21st Century?’, Disasters, Vol.25, No.4, 2001, p.275. de Torrente (see n.2 above), pp.25–6. For an exposition on the origins and evolution of the coherence agenda, see Joanna Macrae and Nicholas Leader, ‘Apples, Pears and Porridge: The Origins and Impact of the Search for “Coherence” between Humanitarian and Political Responses to Chronic Political Emergencies’, Disasters, Vol.25, No.4, 2001, pp.292–304. The Western political project of imposing a ‘liberal’ peace is associated with establishing democracy and respect for human rights, as well as, support for a deregulated global economy, on societies torn apart by conflict or emerging from conflict. See, e.g., Roland Paris, At War's End: Building Peace after Civil Conflict, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004; Oliver P. Richmond, A Post-Liberal Peace, London: Routledge, 2011. Macrae and Leader (see n.33 above), p.294. de Torrente (see n.2 above), p.26. Barnett (see n.7 above), p.726. de Torrente (see n.2 above), p.26. Macrae and Leader (see n.33 above), p.304. In definitional terms, politicization is not primarily about politicians coercively directing aid operations but, as Macrae and Leader point out, it is ‘a more subtle process whereby many humanitarian organizations assume a set of values associated with the political culture of the West and volunteer to contribute to a wider process of peace-building’. Ibid., p.305. See, for example, de Torrente (n. 2 above), pp.6–12. Ibid., p.9. Secretary of State Colin Powell, ‘Remarks to the National Foreign Policy Conference for Leaders of non-governmental Organizations’ (at: www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2001/5762.htm), quoted in ibid., p.9. Ibid., InterAction, the largest alliance of US based humanitarian organizations, has often stressed the role of overseas assistance in promoting US foreign policy and national security goals. de Torrente (see n.2 above), p.22. InterAction, Natsios: NGO Must Show Results; Promote Ties to U.S. Or We Will ‘Find New Partners’ (at: www.interaction.org/forum2003/panels.html), quoted in ibid., p.22. See Greg Hansen, ‘The Ethos-Practice Gap: Perceptions of Humanitarianism in Iraq’, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol.90, No.869, 2008, pp.119–36. Ibid., p.121. In this context, an Iraqi physician and NGO worker emphasized his understanding of ‘genuine’ humanitarian action stating, ‘[y]ou have to demonstrate allegiance to and solidarity with victims. Are you going to do it genuinely, speak about it as you are living it? Or are you going to say the right things – use instrumentalized impartiality – to gain access?’, quoted in ibid. Ibid., p.125. Ibid., pp.125–6. Hansen notes that ‘[m]any Dunantist-leaning organizations, whose organizational cultures stress close adherence to the principles of humanity, neutrality and impartiality, remain bitter over successive compromises, in their view, of principle with pragmatism in the Iraq context, and argue that the choices made and paths followed by the UN system and many NGO colleagues have had severe consequences for the entire humanitarian apparatus’. Ibid. Ibid., p.126. Ibid., p.131. Note that humanitarian action in Afghanistan preceded the invasion of 2001. Donini for instance, characterizes the humanitarian response to the Afghan crisis into four distinct phases for analytical purposes: from the Soviet invasion to the fall of President Najibullah (1979–92) or the cold war era and its immediate aftermath; the civil war and the triumph of warlordism (1992–96); the Taliban period (1996–10 September 2001); and post-9/11. Each period corresponds to a shift: from weak unitary state to fragmenting state; from fragmenting to failing state; from failing to rogue state; and from rogue state to a corrupt and fissured ‘protégé’ state; Antonio Donini, ‘Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Integration or Independence of Humanitarian Action?’, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol.92, No.880, 2010, pp.2–3. For purposes of this article, the focus is on the latter period. Antonio Donini, ‘Afghanistan: Humanitarianism under Threat’, Feinstein International Center Briefing Paper, Mar. 2009, p.2 (at: www.fic.tufts.edu). Ibid. Ibid. He also points out that ‘[a]ccess and operational space are almost nonexistent in the south, south-east, and parts of the west of the country… The combined effects of conflict, drought, increased food prices and a long history of recurring disasters are thought to be severe in parts of the country, but the actual depth and breadth of the crisis are as yet unknown’. Ibid., p.3. See Mohammed Haneef Atmar, ‘Politicisation of Humanitarian Aid and its Consequences for Afghans’, Disasters, Vol.25, No.4, 2001, pp.321–30. See the discussion and examples in Atmar (ibid.). In a similar vein regarding Afghanistan, Donini has also observed that ‘there is no humanitarian consensus that would define the basic operational requirements of humanitarian agencies in a conflict setting, no clarity on humanitarian needs, and an extremely politicized environment where aid agencies are pressured into supporting the coalition and the government's political and military agendas. As a result, there is little understanding of, and respect for, humanitarian principles by the Taliban and other insurgents who tar the UN and NGOs with the occupiers’ brush'. Donini (see n.53 above), p.14. Donini (see n.54 above), pp.2,4; Dominik Zaum, ‘International Non-Governmental Organisations and Civil War’, Civil Wars, Vol.11, No.1, 2009, p.34. Fox notes in this context the danger of the new ‘developmental relief’ or ‘goal-oriented relief’ of peace before people, which aims at strengthening processes and institutions before saving lives. The logic being lives lost now can help save lives in the future. See Fox (n.32 above), pp.282–4. Ibid., p.284. Ibid. Ibid., p.285. de Torrente (see n.2 above), p.5. Barbara Riefffer-Flanagan reminds us that understanding neutrality can be as difficult as understanding ‘power’, ‘democracy’, and other contested concepts in international relations. Barbara Riefffer-Flanagan, ‘Is Neutral Humanitarianism Dead? Red Cross Neutrality: Walking the Tightrope of Neutral Humanitarianism’, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol.31, No.4, 2009, pp.892–6. It is therefore not surprising that Hugo Slim notes after consultations with the UK's leading agencies regarding humanitarian principles, that ‘neutrality’ has become a ‘dirty word’ and seen as undesirable, either because it is considered amoral – remaining silent in light of human rights violations – or, simply because the main role of NGOs in highly political complex emergencies makes it impossible to achieve. Cited in Fox (see n.32 above), p.277. de Torrente (see n.2 above), p.5. Ibid., pp.5–6. Ibid., p.23. Paul O'Brien suggests that humanitarian NGOs cannot claim to be apolitical. Rather, there is a need for understanding and articulating how their political solidarity with the people they serve trumps any political obligations they may have to their donors or to the sovereign governments where they work. O'Brien, ‘Politicized Humanitarianism: A Response to Nicholas de Torrente’, Harvard Human Rights Journal, Vol.17, 2004, p.33. Donini (see n.54 above), p.15. Barnett (see n.7 above), p.734. However, Rieffer-Flanagan shows that the difficulties associated with neutral humanitarianism are not new, that the challenges posed are surmountable, but in spite of neutrality's limitations aid agencies should strive for it. Rieffer-Flanagan (see n.66 above), pp.889–915. de Torrente (see n.2 above), p.5. However, see O'Brien (n.69 above), p.32 (arguing that this rings like an honourable lament for the past, which no longer provides adequate guidance to humanitarian actors in highly politicized settings). Quoted in Bronwyn Leebaw, ‘The Politics of Impartial Activism: Humanitarianism and Human Rights’, Perspectives on Politics, Vol.5, No.2, 2007, p.225. Donini (see n.54 above), p.3. Duffield, Macrae, and Curtis (see n.7 above), p.273. In the context of the ‘coherence agenda’ for example, Macrae and Leader suggest rather than pursuing closer integration between humanitarian and political action, the emphasis should be on increasing their complementarity. Macrae and Leader (see n.33 above), p.304. Similarly, Donini cautions that ‘the use of the term “humanitarian” for stabilization activities that are not based on need but on a political-military agenda further muddies the waters’. Donini (see n.54 above), p.15. Ibid.