Framework for the delivery of humanitarian assistance

Session 2: Handout 2.3

Five additional points on which to base activities

The three principles, namely the humanitarian imperative, neutrality and impartiality should be an absolute minimum in building up a framework for the delivery of humanitarian assistance in a complex emergency, but a number of other important issues should also be considered for humanitarian aid to be principled:

• First: -not to prolong a conflict or do no/less harm: Aid becomes part of the dynamics of the conflict and may even prolong it, and the question then is how can the aid community do as little harm as possible? Aid increases resources available in the society overall, and the argument is that aid therefore sustains conflict. The humanitarian actors need to be aware of this and see how they can minimize the harm in the following situations:

When aid is used as an instrument of war by denying access or attacking convoys. When aid is an indirect part of the dynamics of the conflict because it creates jobs, gives incomes in form of taxes, leaves no or little responsibility on the state for social welfare, etc. When aid exacerbates the root causes of the conflict by securing rebel activities

• Second: to respect culture and custom: Understanding local customs and traditions is, of course, important, not only in carrying out your work, but also in understanding local values when connecting them to internationally recognized human rights. In promoting human rights standards, it is always important to point out, however, that human rights are not culturally relative, but that certain universally accepted human right are applicable to all human beings, no matter what the cultural setting. Some interventions require particular sensitivity to local customs. For example, in dealing with victims of rape it is important to be aware of how rape and victims of rape are perceived in the local community.

• Third: to enhance capacity building: Humanitarian action tends to be looking at short-term needs and forgets the responsibilities of the aid community to give sustainable aid. Because of breakdown of local service delivery and administrative structures there is reliance on external support. In our work it becomes important to focus on capacity building and participation of beneficiaries in all that we do. As a result, part of the strategy must be to empower civil society so that the beneficiaries are able to claim accountability from governing authorities and humanitarian agencies.

• Fourth: to coordinate efforts for the maximum benefit: Not only must different agencies make sure they complement each other in the actual delivery of aid, but it is also important that decisions about, for example, stopping the delivery of aid are taken in a principled fashion. This may be cause for major disagreement between aid agencies, as it tends to be difficult to agree the development of policies on some more sensitive areas of coordination. Nevertheless, humanitarian actors must have a common standpoint for maximum benefit. But coordinating for the maximum benefit also entails creating an alliance of partnership in government and civil society. Such is, for example, the role of UNICEF in maximizing the protection of the rights of the child.
• Fifth: to take gender dimensions into account: Many aspects of emergency response – from camp facilities to food access, to disruption of employment, to risk of violence, to social standing – will affect men and women differently, with the impact often most severe on women. Just as important, the experience of war, displacement, loss of family members, etc. is likely to affect the social relationships between genders. Recognition of this reality is a core element of sound action.

Group work Exercise on disengagement Humanitarian organizations have been criticized for providing aid to Hutu refugees in the camps in Eastern Zaire. The aid, it is argued, is being controlled by men who carried out acts of genocide and it is allowing them to prepare for continued attacks in Rwanda. By providing humanitarian assistance in a context of increasing violence, aid is simply sustaining a violent status quo. Withdrawing aid would help reaching a solution to the situation. Others argue that abandoning women, children and elderly people to die from starvation is unconscionable whatever the circumstances. Answer the following questions and debate the different arguments: What humanitarian principles are at stake?     In a decision to disengage, what conditions, if any, might justify withdrawing humanitarian assistance?     Who would have the right to make such a decision?