Success in Kashmir: a positive trend in civil–military integration during humanitarian assistance operations

The modern cast of disaster relief actors includes host nations, non-governmental organisations, private volunteer organisations, military organisations and others. Each group, civilian or military, has valuable skills and experiences critical to disaster relief work. The goal of this paper is to supplement the study of civil–military relief efforts with contemporary anecdotal experience. The paper examines the interaction between US military forces and other disaster relief actors during the 2005 Kashmir earthquake relief effort. The author uses direct observations made while working in Pakistan to contrast the relationships and activities from that effort with other accounts in prevailing scholarly disaster literature and military doctrine. Finally, this paper suggests that the Kashmir model of integration, coordination and transparency of intent creates a framework in which future humanitarian assistance operations could be successfully executed. Recommendations to improve civil–military interaction in future relief efforts will also be addressed.     

Normalising the Crisis in Africa

Developmental relief has become the central doctrine of 'good practice' in humanitarian responses to complex political emergencies. This is despite the fact that a proliferation of such emergencies reflects a failure of development for people in those countries in crisis. Drawing on case study material from Sudan, Somalia, Rwanda and Uganda, this paper challenges assumptions made about the efficacy of developmental relief models in complex emergencies. The trend towards developmental relief practices coincides with an increasing acceptance of higher levels of humanitarian distress in Africa. Myths of aid dependency and the pursuit of sustainable programming in the midst of war are linked to a global reduction in aid. The mantra of 'local solutions to local problems' locates the causes of crises firmly within those societies in crisis. It provides a premise for international disengagement, and the denial of international responsibility for the genesis and prolongation of humanitarian crises in Africa. Assigning solutions to the poor, the marginalised and victimised through enhanced 'participation' and local financing of services sustains a myth that development is occurring, when in fact levels of distress are rising.     

Humanitarian emergencies and military help: some conceptual observations

In 1988 the International Peace Academy, New York, sponsored a study exploring the interface between security and the delivery of humanitarian aid. The aim was to evaluate the possible use of military help to support humanitarian relief workers during armed conflicts. As part of this pioneering work, the authors of this paper discuss the conceptual questions that must be raised before dealing with the associated practical difficulties. It examines those circumstances in which foreign military organizations might offer help in humanitarian emergencies; the nature of contemporary examples of humanitarian need that result in international responses; and the importance of factors which affect how these are perceived. The paper then analyses the pertinent functions that military units might undertake and finally examines the constraints that would apply if such forces were to become involved.     

Apples, Pears and Porridge: The Origins and Impact of the Search for 'Coherence' between Humanitarian and Political Responses to Chronic Political Emergencies

During the 1990s a consensus emerged within the international humanitarian system that there was a need to enhance the 'coherence' between humanitarian and political responses to complex political emergencies. Closer integration between aid and political responses was seen to be necessary in order to address the root causes of conflict-induced crises, and to ensure that aid did not exacerbate political tensions. This paper explores the theory and practice of coherence over the past decade. It argues that, by sleight of hand, the coherence agenda has been reinterpreted such that humanitarian action has become the primary form of political action, rather than merely a substitute for it. The coherence agenda has been driven by geopolitical events, domestic policy considerations in donor countries and the more parochial concerns of aid policy, and is reflected in a number of substantive changes in the humanitarian architecture. Many of the tenets of this 'new humanitarianism' have been embraced by the majority of relief agencies, and thus legitimised it. The paper concludes that political humanitarianism, as opposed to active engagement by political and military actors, is flawed ethically and technically. It will provide neither an effective palliative for the ill effects of war, nor address its causes.     

Military Participation in Emergency Humanitarian Assistance

Military forces of the United States and other countries possess training, equipment and capabilities that are suited for work in disaster preparedness and assistance. Information on the use of military units in domestic and foreign disaster-related efforts, particularly by United States forces in the medical area, was obtained by review of the literature and unpublished military reports, and from interviews with people who have been involved with disaster-related activities. The historical reasons for viewing United States forces as resources in disaster situations are identified. Additionally, issues and problems related to disaster preparedness and assistance in general, and more specifically, to the past and future use of military personnel for this mission are examined. The need for a defined military mission for emergency humanitarian assistance and the need for a military organizational structure to support this mission are identified. Once these two critical issues have been properly addressed, the United States military should participate in the establishment of a disaster institute for joint civilian-military disaster planning and training, in both domestic and foreign areas.     

Military humanitarian and disaster governance networks in Southeast Asia: framework and analysis

Behind humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) efforts are governance networks of actors working together to facilitate, coordinate, and deliver joint aid and response initiatives. Militaries are key stakeholders in these networks because of their unique capabilities, particularly in Southeast Asia. This paper explores the role of military governance networks in shaping HADR affairs. It presents a framework for examining military-to-military relational structures in humanitarian and disaster contexts using network theory and social network analysis. It also assesses the nature of military ties and their influence on two capability areas essential to humanitarian activities in the region: (i) the distribution of military assets and equipment used in HADR; and (ii) the coordination of HADR exercises and training. This paper seeks to provide insights into how governance network features and properties affect the capacity of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) militaries to use available resources efficiently and to achieve shared objectives in regional disaster response.     

Proliferating Principles; Or How to Sup with the Devil without Getting Eaten

The international humanitarian system is seen by many to be in crisis. The reasons for this are complex but include the perception held by many that there is an increasing ambivalence on the part of powerful states to invest military, political and financial resources in upholding humanitarian principles, and a growing feeling that much humanitarian action both ignores human rights issues and can prolong conflict. As a result, much attention has focused on the notion of 'humanitarian principles' and there has been a proliferation of statements and initiatives on this topic in recent years.     

The Protection of Civilians and ethics of humanitarian governance: beyond intervention and resilience

The principle of the Protection of Civilians (PoC) in armed conflict has ethical repercussions in various actions undertaken by states and international organisations, from humanitarian relief, development aid, and peacekeeping, to warfare and military intervention. While the ethics of humanitarian intervention are instructive in this regard, most PoC practices should be conceived rather as modes of humanitarian governance across borders—from interventionist to resilience‐oriented kinds. The consequences of this for the ethics of PoC are explored in this paper, highlighting questions of power, culture, and complicity. By relating these questions to the ethical strands of solidarist and pluralist internationalism, it positions the ethics of PoC within the broader field of the ethics of world politics. Examples are drawn from recent scholarly debate on PoC efforts in war‐torn countries such as South Sudan. This analysis of the ethics of PoC reconfigures central positions in the debate on humanitarian intervention to an era of global humanitarian governance.     

Dividing disasters in Aceh, Indonesia: separatist conflict and tsunami, human rights and humanitarianism

This paper examines the interface between human rights and humanitarian action in the context of the conflict and tsunami in Aceh, Indonesia, between 1998 and 2007. It looks at the challenges international humanitarian non-governmental organisations (NGOs) faced as they engaged in human rights work in the conflict period and in conflict-related activities in the post-tsunami period. The paper argues that many large NGOs may have compromised what some would hold to be essential principles for humanitarian action because of domestic political concerns, donor restrictions and resistance among certain NGO chiefs. In contrast with the pre-tsunami period, in which NGOs worked for years amid military operations, in the post-tsunami period NGOs were decidedly apolitical, neglecting the conflict in their tsunami response--despite significant developments that permitted greater political engagement in Aceh's post-conflict transformation. The evidence suggests that NGOs are challenged in contextualising humanitarian responses and that there is a need to underscore donor flexibility and independence in humanitarian action.     

Depolarising the 'Broadened' and 'Back-to-basics' Relief Models

Prompted by the calls in recent years to link relief practice to peace-building, development, or both, several conferences and papers have recently mounted a strong critique, seeing these 'broadenings' of relief as 'eroding' or 'corrupting' core humanitarian principles and playing into neo-isolationist agendas to slash humanitarianism. This paper argues that whereas these critiques have important goals in mind when they encourage a concentration on the basics of relief, there has been a loss of subtlety in the ensuing debate. Considering each element of the debate in turn, the paper argues that there is more common ground between 'new' and 'old', 'broadened' and 'basics' relief than at first appears. In concluding, it is argued that further research on key questions, and an openness to hear all perspectives will get us further than entrenched positions and rallying cries.     

Researching Under Fire: Issues for Consideration When Collecting Data and Information in War Circumstances, with Specific Reference to Relief and Reconstruction Projects

The post-Cold War era has witnessed an increased number of conflicts and higher levels of international intervention by the humanitarian community and the military. Those who undertake to research the actions of relief and development agencies acting in these wars must act within new parameters that require a flexible, innovative and reflective approach. Not much is known about data collection in war. The most relevant publications come from the field of development studies. This paper is a beginning in a much-needed discourse on researching under fire; it is offered not as a definitive work, but as a starting-point for discussion.     

A Research Note about Military-Civilian Humanitarianism: More Questions than Answers

'Military-civilian humanitarianism'— or the coming together of military forces and civilian aid agencies to deal with the human suffering from complex emergencies — has numerous forms, but disenchantment has resulted from the Somalia and Bosnia syndromes. There is little political will at present, but evidence from the immediate post-Cold War era suggests how multilateral military operations could expand or contract in future to the benefit or peril of war victims. Partly a literature review but more importantly a framework for interpreting recent publications, this essay seeks to move beyond exchanging assertions. There is a contextualisation of recent literature; a definition of military-civilian humanitarianism; a discussion of possible military contributions to humanitarian action; a framework to assess the effectiveness of military-civilian humanitarianism; and a preliminary analysis of experience from northern Iraq, Somalia, Bosnia, Rwanda and Haiti. Caveat lector : At this point in time, there are still 'more questions than answers'.     

Cruel Wars and Safe Havens: Humanitarian Aid in Liberia 1989–1996

This article considers the role of military intervention by peace-keeping and peace-enforcement troops in the provision of humanitarian aid to Liberia during the armed conflicts of the past seven years. The article focuses on the role of the de facto safe haven which peace-keeping and enforcing troops protected in Liberia between 1990 and 1996 and puts the Liberian case in the context of the growing debate about the usefulness of military interventions in humanitarian emergencies. It argues that the safe haven has enabled significant humanitarian acheivements but has also demonstrated fundamental failures. Central to these failures have been the absence of consent, under-resourcing and a loss of control of the safe haven to factional interests.     

Humanitarian War: A New Consensus?

The NATO bombing operation Allied Force against Yugoslavia in March-June 1999 represents the final disappearance of the narrowing divide between humanitarianism and politics: a war initiated and justified on humanitarian grounds. Although unlikely to be repeated any time soon, the Kosovo case appears to have cemented an ideological shift on the international right and even necessity of sing military force to protect civilians within sovereign states. Rather than humanitarians acknowledging the political context and consequences of their work, however, the case suggests the embrace of humanitarian principles of universality and neutrality by military organisations. This article discusses some consequences of the new consensus: neglect of the political context (both local and foreign) of such operations, interaction between the operational dynamics of relief operations and the logic of war and the political consequences of using the humanitarian legitimation and mission in such cases.     

The humanitarian common logistic operating picture: a solution to the inter‐agency coordination challenge

Although significant progress has been made in developing the practice of humanitarian logistics, further improvements in efficiency and effectiveness have the potential to save lives and reduce suffering. This paper explores how the military/emergency services’ concept of a common operating picture (COP) can be adapted to the humanitarian logistics context, and analyses a practical and proven approach to addressing the key challenge of inter‐agency coordination and decision‐making. Successful adaptation could provide the mechanism through which predicted and actual demands, together with the location and status of material in transit, are captured, evaluated, and presented in real time as the basis for enhanced decision‐making between actors in the humanitarian supply network. Through the introduction of a humanitarian logistics COP and its linkages to national disaster management systems, local communities and countries affected by disasters and emergencies will be better placed to oversee and manage their response activities.     

The Challenge of Civil-military Relations in International Peace Operations

The relationship between military and civilian humanitarian organisations has developed in an increasingly integrative way. Military initiatives to institutionalise the relationship, since the interventions in Somalia and the Balkans, entail a dilution of humanitarian independence as was manifested in practice in Kosovo. Further, the state-centric foundations of military intervention run counter to the potential for humanitarian organisations to foster a cosmopolitan ethos that would not only preserve humanitarian principles but also contest statist assumptions about conflict, development and power.     

Making humanitarian relief networks more effective: operational coordination, trust and sense making

Effective coordination of humanitarian assistance activities remains elusive. This paper briefly addresses some of the reasons for what is widely perceived as a coordination dilemma in humanitarian affairs and argues for a new conceptualisation of the issue. Rather than continue to request that more authority be vested in a single organisation to secure coordination through top-down control, it contends that it may be timely to consider whether relief agencies involved in an emergency should be reconceived as social networks and efforts made to achieve changes in their organizational cultures that encourage operational coordination across institutional lines. Since such labours imply the need to trust, this article explores what forms of trust might be employed to promote improved coordination among relief institutions and how those relationships could themselves be conceptualised. Finally, while acknowledging that coordination is not costless, it suggests that its effective pursuit may be advantageous even in scenarios where aid organisations balk at cooperating to secure it.     

From disaster to development: a systematic review of community‐driven humanitarian logistics

A plethora of untapped resources exist within disaster‐affected communities that can be used to address relief and development concerns. A systematic review of the literature relating to community participation in humanitarian logistics activities revealed that communities are able to form ad hoc networks that have the ability to meet a wide range of disaster management needs. These structures, characterised as Collaborative Aid Networks (CANs), have demonstrated efficient logistical capabilities exclusive of humanitarian organisations. This study proposes that CANs, as a result of their unique characteristics, present alternatives to established humanitarian approaches to logistics, while also mitigating the challenges commonly faced by traditional humanitarian organisations. Furthermore, CANs offer a more holistic, long‐term approach to disaster management, owing to their impact on development through their involvement in humanitarian logistics. This research provides the foundation for further theoretical analysis of effective and efficient disaster management, and details opportunities for policy and practice.     

Humanitarian action and military intervention: temptations and possibilities

Although the war in Liberia in July 2003 claimed hundreds of lives, the international community was reluctant to intervene. In this article, the author debates the question: does international military intervention equal protection of populations? The role of humanitarian organisations in military intervention is considered. Aid organisations cannot call for deployment of a protection force without renouncing their autonomy or appealing to references outside their own practices. Such organisations provide victims with vital assistance and contribute to ensuring that their fate becomes a stake in political debate by exposing the violence that engulfs them, without substituting their own voices for those of the victims. The political content of humanitarian action is also outlined and military intervention in the context of genocide is discussed. The author concludes that the latter is one of the rare situations in which humanitarian actors can consider calling for an armed intervention without renouncing their own logic.