When we meet for the historic World Humanitarian Summit next year it will be exactly 40 years since I started humanitarian work as a 19 year old volunteer in Colombia. Much has improved since then: humanitarians save more lives, heal more wounds and feed more hungry people in more places than we could dream of a generation or two ago. Mortality, disease and malnutrition in conflicts and disasters have decreased, while provision of water, sanitation, education and shelter is available for tens of millions in need.
While we should note our achievements, we must in Istanbul in 2016, focus our attention on those we are still failing. We are as relief workers too often absent when the most vulnerable need us the most. International relief agencies and often underestimated local organizations are able to work with most of the needy in most of the not so difficult places. But we are still remarkably absent in hundreds of communities across war-torn Syria, South Sudan and Central African Republic. There was too little assistance too late in many Ebola stricken places and too few organizations are capable of expanding their presence in areas where armed opposition groups or designated terrorist organisations rule over millions of civilians.
Humanitarian workers will only be able to reach civilians in the cross-fire if we uncompromisingly uphold our principles. We must provide relief and durable solutions impartially and be neutral and independent of military or political agendas. In Istanbul, some governments will try to argue against our right of access to those who are suffering. They will wrongly argue that they need to take over the relief according to their agendas. Armed opposition groups provide similar obstacles where they control territory. Others will not admit that they have militarized and politicised humanitarian aid to win ‘hearts and minds’ and help their forces win wars. Some communities will suffer as humanitarians must limit assistance due to restrictive laws and policies, including those related to counter-terrorism. We need to stand against all these measures restricting principled humanitarian access across any and all frontlines.
In Istanbul we must not only modernize humanitarian assistance through the systematic use of new technology, adapt from in-kind to cash transfers, better assess needs, and introduce climate forecasting in humanitarian work – we must also reaffirm our humanitarian roots and unyieldingly stand up against those who want to limit access for political reasons.
We need to strengthen our protection of survivors of disaster and conflict and ability to restore their dignity and rights. The laws protecting civilians, including women, children and elderly, have never been stronger. The bans and controls on weapons and warfare have never been better. And still massacres, torture and gender-based violence continue unabated and unwitnessed in many conflict and disaster areas.
Humanitarian work has never only been about providing material relief. There was always an obligation to speak up for the vulnerable and protect those at risk. A person gang raped by a soldier or militia member needs so much more than a blanket and a meal. Support must include psychosocial assistance, justice and knowledge that future generations will not risk the same abuse. Protection action means impact at the frontline for the vulnerable, not a series of seminars in UN or donor headquartered cities. Protection initiatives should therefore be exposed to an ‘Aleppo’ or ‘Kivu’ test: will our activities actually increase our effective presence among the vulnerable and reduce killings, abductions or rape?
I hope we can, as humanitarians, diplomats, politicians, and donor representatives, be ruthlessly honest with ourselves in Istanbul. Only then can we make the progress the vulnerable deserve.
Jan Egeland, Secretary General, Norwegian Refuge Council.
Comments