HUMANITARIAN TAKEAWAYS: PRINCIPLES, POLITICS, AND POLITICISATION OF AID |
|
|
|
Dear Readers,
In our September issue, we shared the exciting news that Humanitarian Takeaways is now curated through a collaboration between the Centre for Humanitarian Action (CHA) and the International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA). We hope this partnership will make the Takeaways even more relevant and useful for you.
Each issue focuses on a specific humanitarian topic, offering diverse perspectives from various authors. This edition delves into the principles, politics, and politicisation of aid: what humanitarian responses are appropriate in highly political contexts like Myanmar, Gaza, or Ukraine, how humanitarians should address the climate crisis, and whether expecting neutrality from local actors is unreasonable. If you missed earlier editions, you can easily find them on the CHA website. Previously covered topics include locally led humanitarian action and humanitarian action in relation to digitalisation, climate crisis, gender, and anti-racism work. Other focus areas have included the Triple Nexus, Germany’s humanitarian strategies, the situation in Gaza, and the future of international non-governmental organisations (INGOs).
We value your feedback on how best to keep you informed about key debates and developments in the sector. Your input matters, and we welcome your suggestions for future topics. Please share your thoughts – we would love to hear from you!
Take care,
Goda and Edith
|
|
|
|
Blog and opinion articles |
|
|
|
By Adelina Kamal, Naw Hser Hser, and Khin Ohmar (The New Humanitarian, 01/02/2023)
In this article, Adelina Kamal, Naw Hser Hser, and Khin Ohmar shed light on the global neglect of Myanmar's crisis and the insufficient funding allocated by aid donors. They also criticise international aid organisations for maintaining problematic partnerships with the junta, which grants it legitimacy despite its direct role in perpetuating the crisis. The authors advocate for redirecting aid to local, community-based responders who resist the junta and have decades of experience providing border-based assistance during conflict. According to the authors, “[i]n a political crisis where people are fleeing and hiding from the military junta’s violent attacks, how aid is provided and who is providing it are much more important than the aid itself”. The authors argue that the humanitarian crisis is fundamentally a political issue, urging donors and aid organisations to support grassroots efforts rather than legitimising the junta.
|
|
|
|
By Shatha Abdulsamad (The Cairo Review, Spring 2024)
According to Shatha Abdulsamad, to examine the intricate relationship between politics and humanitarian aid in Gaza, it is essential to evaluate efforts to undermine United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) alongside the deliberate obstruction of humanitarian aid delivery and the push to establish alternative “humanitarian corridors”. Abdulsamad argues that new initiatives like airdrops (typically used in situations of climate disasters) and a maritime corridor are inefficient and politically motivated, undermining UNRWA while failing to address the root causes of the crisis: occupation, blockade, and systematic violations of international law. Meaningful humanitarian action must include halting arms transfers and enforcing immediate ceasefire, unrestricted humanitarian access and accountability.
|
|
|
|
By Shatha Elnakib, Sarah Aly, Yara M Asi, and Yusra Ribhi Shawar (The Lancet 21/09/2024)
According to Shatha Elnakib, Sarah Aly, Yara M Asi, and Yusra Ribhi Shawar, apolitical humanitarianism is fundamentally flawed for three key reasons. First, it prevents humanitarian organisations from confronting state interests and addressing the use of aid as a geopolitical tool. Second, depoliticising humanitarianism often leads to complacency, where actors either tolerate or inadvertently legitimise systems of oppression. Third, it neglects marginalised populations, failing to challenge the power structures that perpetuate their vulnerability. The authors call for humanitarian actors to openly oppose both visible and hidden forms of oppression and to rethink traditional approaches, such as the Dunantist model, which may no longer adequately address the complexities of modern conflict.
|
|
|
|
Research articles and reports |
|
|
|
By Pauline Mahé and Véronique de Geoffroy (Groupe URD, 05/10/2023)
The relations between humanitarian aid and the political realm: Past, present and future
This essay starts by providing a brief history of modern humanitarianism, including its apolitical aspirations and how neutrality became an “established dogma”. It also evokes older, solidarity-based humanitarian models and highlights the rejection of "traditional" principles and approaches by certain actors. According to the authors, “[t]he word ‘political’ encompasses a wide variety of concepts and connotations: political activism, the political power of the state and of government, the expression of a political opinion or viewpoint, etc. In the humanitarian world, it is clear that ‘political’ is a particularly sensitive word”.
The article reminds that the context in which humanitarian aid is provided is political: the responsibility of governments to prevent and resolve crises is political, and the existence and persistence of humanitarian needs – due to armed conflicts and the climate crisis – are the result of political choices, including the neoliberal policies. At the same time, not only the existence but also the recognition of humanitarian needs is not apolitical. Overall, the authors note that humanitarians need to find a “delicate balance between the duty to provide assistance and protection – which consists of making up for the shortcomings of states (substitution role) – and their obligation to criticise certain immigration and hosting policies (advocacy role)”.
The article also discusses contexts in which humanitarian work might be political by nature (Myanmar, Ukraine, Lebanon, Afghanistan), especially for the local civil society. The authors note that expecting local actors to always remain neutral and not trusting them in this regard restricts their operational flexibility and denies them access to formal funding mechanisms.
|
|
|
|
By Karen Hargrave and John Bryant, with Sarian Jarosz, Sasha Tselishcheva and Maryana Zaviyska (ODI/HPG, 08/11/2024)
Article length: 72 pages
This research explores how narratives – defined as stories and frames intended to shape beliefs, attitudes and decisions – have influenced humanitarian response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It consists of three case studies focused on Ukraine, Poland, and the United Kingdom, and was conducted collaboratively by researchers from HPG at ODI in the UK, Open Space Works Ukraine, and the Migration Consortium in Poland. Using a mixed-methods approach, the study combined an online survey and semi-structured interviews with 81 key informants, including humanitarian staff, civil society actors, donors, journalists, and academics.
Two identified sets of narratives are related to humanitarian principles: (1) a narrative of strong solidarity with Ukraine from governments and communities across Europe, which has reignited debates on neutrality within the international humanitarian community; (2) a narrative of exceptionalism, framing Russia’s war in Ukraine as a “different kind of crisis”, which shaped concerns related to impartiality (for example, those regarding the disproportionate government funding allocations or different refugee responses).
Other dominant narratives emphasised the vulnerability
of Ukrainians, which come into tension with those centring Ukrainians' resistance and agency – especially with regard to the local actors. With regard to the latter, the humanitarian response to the war in Ukraine has been framed as a chance to advance localisation, driven by bottom-up Ukrainian mobilisation. However, this narrative reveals biases in the international system, which often values local capacity only when it mirrors its own. Additionally, while international actors praise the response as a localisation success, local civil society expresses frustration over inflexibility and paternalism.
As the war in Ukraine continues, narratives of waning solidarity have emerged, with declining media attention and compassion fatigue reported; however, for example, in the UK, the government’s strong commitment to Ukraine appears to pre-empt potential declines in public and political backing. Lastly, narratives of recovery and reconstruction, tied to visions of a future Ukrainian victory, have offered optimism but risk diverting attention from ongoing humanitarian needs. These recovery narratives also conflict with calls in Poland and the UK for greater focus on long-term integration of Ukrainian refugees.
|
|
|
|
Is something missing?
Send us your feedback – we are eager to hear it:
|
|
|
|
Podcast episode with Hugo Slim (07/2024)
In this podcast, Hugo Slim from the Oxford University shares his ideas on how donors could refocus their aid. According to Slim, in times of prioritisation, political angles, proximity, and good governance should become the criteria for the allocation of humanitarian aid, even if this contradicts its principles of neutrality, impartiality, and independence.
|
|
|
|
Publication by Groupe URD and various authors (05/10/2024)
Created in 2008, the “Humanitarian Aid on the Move” review is published by Groupe URD to exchange experiences and ideas between practitioners. This edition, themed “The end of political innocence?”, explores the evolving relationship between humanitarian aid and politics. It features discussions on transforming aid in a changing world, the potential for a radical humanitarian sector, and the need for humanitarian NGOs to address the climate emergency. The publication also highlights the role of civil society in Haiti's ecological transition, the importance of a new global financing pact for humanitarian aid, and the contributions of diasporas in crises like Myanmar. Additionally, it examines Médecins Sans Frontières' sea rescue operations and the civic efforts in Briançon to assist exiled individuals.
|
|
|
|
Did you find it helpful?
If you haven't done it yet,
|
|
|
|
|