The Agony of Relief?
Reconsidering Humanitarian Aid and Development
This panel addressed the complex issues that arise from international intervention in complex humanitarian emergencies. How do humanitarian aid efforts affect the lives of people in crisis? How do relief agencies assess their efforts with regard to their mandates and goals? What are the difficulties of linking temporary aid efforts to long-term development, and what is the necessity of such an endeavor? What are the possibilities for constructive organizational change?
 |
| Leila Abu Gheida |
|
 |
| Claude Bruderlein |
|
Complex Humanitarian Emergencies (CHEs) occur when the welfare of
populations is threatened by a situation in which the delivery of aid
is impeded both by organized violence and by the circumstances which
created the conflict. Such circumstances are often accompanied by
additional factors such as environmental disasters, famine, or economic distress, which further exacerbate the existing situation. CHEs involve multiple international and domestic actors that can include a combination of states, regional and international governmental organizations, non-governmental organizations, or other actors such as political opposition parties or military and guerrilla insurgencies. In the majority of cases, CHEs are magnified by the inability of the current regime to control, alleviate, or respond to either the conflict or its repercussions.
Since its founding in 1951, the United Nations High Commissioner for
Refugees has coordinated relief efforts in times of crisis when large
numbers of people are displaced, such as the recent events in Rwanda
and the Former Yugoslavia. Since the end of World War II, numerous
non-governmental organizations have joined forces with the UNHCR to
provide assistance in times of need, such as the International Rescue
Committee.
In recent years, however, these relief efforts have been criticized
for potentially doing more harm than good. Conflicting mandates of
providing aid and security and protecting human rights may prevent
relief organizations from successfully performing their original goals.
For example, an organization that generally works to support human
rights may choose to stay silent in cases of human rights abuse in the
host country for the sake of continuing aid to the people within the
country. Do such organizations have a duty to publicize all human rights abuses?
Another conundrum arises from the need for aid workers to keep roads
open to transport goods. This practice has had the unintentional effect
of providing militia groups with a mode of travel that enables them to
continue fighting. The relief workers also face a difficult task in
distinguishing between civilians and combatants as masses of people turn to the camps for assistance. In some cases, forces have been replenished with relief supplies. These, and other abuses of outside aid, may serve to increase instability and prolong a conflict that threatens millions of lives. The panelists addressed the tensions between promoting justice and peace and providing immediate aid.
International organizations also face problems of competition and
coordination. During a humanitarian crisis, a myriad of organizations
and agencies arrive on the scene. These agencies have different priorities and goals, and, in some cases, are competing with one another for prominence and funding sources. Here, a number of questions arise: Should these agencies seek to cooperate with one another in order to benefit the local populace? If so, how could organizations operate in tandem in an emergency situation to benefit all participants? Another problematic aspect of international aid and development organizations is the politics within each organization.
Finally, organizations' reliance on funding from outside sources can
detract from the autonomy of an agency in their decisions of where to go and what to do.
Critics of international humanitarian aid also contend that outside
workers arrive at a site with little understanding of the local context.
This can detract from an organization's ability to help the populace in
an effective manner that meets both short-term and long-term goals.
Occasionally, organizations may provide services that the populace
neither needs nor wants. Activists and aid workers may strive to work
with, and listen to, the local populace, but this also presents problems:
Which persons in the community should aid workers listen to? How can aid agencies avoid being manipulated? If organizations have a mandate of neutrality, how can they support this mandate and still work with the community in areas of conflict? Is neutrality still plausible with the changing nature both of conflicts, from international to civil, and of combatants? In many emergencies, aid agencies have little time to gather comprehensive information on both the country and the specific communities they are working to assist. Panelists discussed how these issues effect their own organizations, and ways in which to incorporate the voices of the people they are helping.
|
