In the aftermath of the Rwanda genocide international consensus emerged that aid cannot be substituted for political action during conflict. There was, it was argued, a need for greater coherence of humanitarian and conflict reduction objectives. Is this ‘new humanitarianism’ working? Can the tension between conflict management and humanitarian principles of impartiality and neutrality be resolved? Are political criteria shaping aid allocation decisions?

A study from the Overseas Development Institute’s Humanitarian Policy Group reports on the origins and implications of international responses to political crises. Based on case studies of official policy in the UK, the Netherlands and the UN, as well as examples from Serbia, Kosovo and Afghanistan, the study highlights the pitfalls of trying to integrate humanitarian action with wider foreign and defence policy objectives.

It warns of the pitfalls of ‘bilateralisation’ – the process of bringing bilateral donors closer to operational decision-making. Driven by concerns over performance and accountability, bilateralisation has involved donors using field staff, contracting NGOs directly and getting more involved in co-ordination. How successful is bilateralisation? Is it contributing to the politicisation of humanitarian assistance and undermining independent, multilateral action and violating principles of neutrality?

Among the key findings presented in this report are:

• Responsibility for the management of political crisis has shifted from diplomacy to aid – yet there is little evidence that aid provides significant leverage during a conflict..
• At the same time, humanitarian values are being compromised without any significant political gain.
• There is a need to revive political responses to chronic conflict in a way that is distinct from the humanitarian response.

Among the recommendations offered to official donors, the UN and NGOs are:

• The OECD/DAC should promote consistent legal codification which stresses donor government commitment to independent character of humanitarian assistance.
• Official donors should review critically the implications of the trend towards bilateralisation.
• Official donors should underpin their commitment to the impartial allocation of humanitarian resources by publishing accurate data on the distribution of assistance by county, and working to enhance the methodologies used to calculate need and to match this with response.
• The United Nations should clarify quickly the relationship between its political and humanitarian response. This has become more pressing since the publication of the so-called ‘Brahimi’ report on peace-keeping.
• Operational agencies need to enhance their capacity to interpret and apply humanitarian principles, if they are legitimately to resist donor pressure for tighter scrutiny and control.

Source(s):
‘Shifting sands: the search for ‘coherence’ between political and humanitarian responses to complex emergencies’, Humanitarian Policy Group Report 8, Overseas Development Institute, by Joanna Macrae and Nicholas Leader August 2000 Full document.
'The politics of coherence: humanitarianism and foreign policy in the post-Cold War era', HPG Briefing Paper #1, ODI: London by J. Macrae and N. Leader (2000)

Funded by: Disasters Emergency Committee, DFID, Henri Dunant Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, ActionAid

id21 Research Highlight: 1 June 2001

Further Information:
Joanna Macrae
Humanitarian Policy Group
Overseas Development Institute
111 Westminster Bridge Road
London SE1 7JD
UK

Tel: +44 (0)20 7922 0300
Fax: +44 (0)20 7922 0399
Contact the contributor: r.lovelace@odi.org.uk

Contact the contributor: j.macrae@odi.org.uk

Humanitarian Policy Group, ODI, UK

Other related links:
'Welcome relief ? Getting humanitarian responses right'

Visit the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

Also see the UN site for Peace and Security

The Centre for Conflict Resolution has the latest related research

The Centre of Excellence focuses on Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance

Go to the European Platform for Conflict Prevention and Transformation