Europa > European Union in the World > European Union @ United Nations > Commissioner Nielson's speech on international humanitarian assistance in conflict situations

Site map | A-Z Index | Internships/Jobs | Links | Contact us

English Español Français

 

 

Commissioner Nielson's speech on international humanitarian assistance in conflict situations

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It gives me great pleasure to be here as European Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid to address this Intensive Programme for the new NOHA students today in Louvain-La-Neuve.

I am pleased to see so many young people dedicated to one of the most challenging but also most rewarding professions one can imagine: to prevent and alleviate human suffering around the world.

As a European Commissioner I am proud that my institution is contributing actively to the NOHA programme. We all know that helping people to survive is not only a noble, but a challenging task. It may even involve personal risks to those who provide such help, as we all have so sadly seen with the tragic death of UN Special Envoy to Iraq, Sergio Vieira de Mello, and many of his crew.

Good intentions are certainly not enough. Security is one reason for this, performance is another. Courses like NOHA are essential prerequisites for successful aid programmes. Humanitarian aid in conflict situations is not just charity. It is a profession. Sending a corps of ill-trained idealistic young European volunteers as aid workers into conflict situations, as some members of the European Convention apparently envisage, is definitely not a good idea.

To enhance professional standards: This is why the Commission has supported NOHA for many years. Because we know that you will receive a quality training here and we know that the NOHA people will provide you with the tools and knowledge you need to meet the humanitarian challenges.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In my speech today I will talk about "international humanitarian assistance in conflict situations". This is not an easy subject since conflicts are abundant and humanitarian aid is scarce. Let me start by giving you an overview of the situation worldwide.

Conflict researchers have counted no less than 33 wars and violent crises raging at this very moment in all quarters of the world. Most of them are located in Africa - in Liberia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Burundi or Northern Uganda, to name only a few.

Others rage in Asia such as Afghanistan, a country far from being pacified, or Kashmir, disputed between India and Pakistan for decades, and not to speak about Iraq. Or take Latin America, a continent with traditionally few interstate conflicts but substantial internal violence as can be seen in Colombia. Even remote islands in the Pacific Ocean are occasionally haunted by conflict and violence as can be seen in the Solomon Islands. No continent in fact, except for Australia and Antarctica is free of war and violent conflict.

The humanitarian impact of wars and conflicts on the population of affected countries is dramatic. Thousands are killed every year, in some years the death toll amounts to millions as in the Rwandan genocide in the mid nineties.

UNHCR, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, has recently published the latest figures on refugees: more than 10.3 million people have fled their home countries in search of peace and security in 2002. Global IDP, a project analysing the situation of internally displaced persons, has counted more than 26 million people worldwide that are uprooted within their own country as internally displaced persons due to conflict.

Many of these people ultimately depend on outside help through humanitarian aid. Therefore, it is not surprising that 80% of ECHO´s funds are allocated to conflict situations every year. 100 million Euro alone are allocated to Iraq this year to provide clean water, food parcels, blankets and other essential relief items to the Iraqi population. ECHO also provided 45 million Euro to Afghanistan, 35 million to DRC and 26 million to the Chechen crisis in the Northern Caucasus, meanwhile a widely forgotten crisis, and 25 million for the victims of the Middle East conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. Unlike in the wars of the 19th century, most of the affected people in these wars are civilians, not combatants. In most of these crises, humanitarian assistance is the only lifeline for millions of victims, thus ensuring a minimum of dignity for the affected population. Frustrating as it sometimes may be for humanitarian aid workers involved day-after-day in apparently endless crisis situations, in many cases your engagement does prepare the ground for long-term solutions. Giving hope is also part of what motivates people to compromise and reconcile.

Without humanitarian assistance the victims would be left entirely on their own. Therefore it is particularly disturbing to note that humanitarian aid workers are increasingly becoming targets themselves. The UN security coordinator UNSECOORD reports that 74 instances of hostage-taking and kidnapping, involving 261 UN staff took place between 1994 and October 2002, of which eight happened in 2002, in separate incidents in Somalia, Sudan and Guyana. The most recent event was the tragic event of the bombing of the UN compound in Baghdad. This senseless act of barbarism is shocking in itself. But it is all the more regrettable and disheartening if it is the result of a change in the perception of the role of the humanitarian aid agencies, be it from the UN family or NGO's. We can not afford to have the role of humanitarian work and humanitarian workers being questioned or redefined to cater for changing political circumstances. In this grim reality I consider it to be of the utmost importance to underline the importance of the three basic humanitarian principles

• humanity
  
  
• neutrality
  
  
• impartiality

These three principles are and will probably remain the main guarantors of security of personnel and access to victims in conflict situations. Only if humanitarian aid stays "at arm´s length from politics", if it is seen as a neutral force in a conflict is there a chance that it will not become an easy target for rebels or guerrillas.

A lot has been said recently about the relationship between the military and humanitarians. I will not hide from you that I am as concerned as other international humanitarian actors (OCHA, UN humanitarian agencies, Red Cross, NGOs) at the possible encroachment of the humanitarian space by military actors.

The use of military and civil defence assets for the delivery of humanitarian aid can lead to a dangerous blurring of roles which is detrimental to both the afflicted populations and to the security of humanitarian workers. If the military engaged in an armed conflict are involved in the delivery of humanitarian assistance, the opponents can regard it as an act of war. If humanitarian aid is seen as partisan, as part of "winning hearts and minds" strategies, the aid itself and aid workers will become a war target and access to the victims will be denied.

There is also a genuine risk of operational confusion and inefficiency if military forces are used to deliver EU humanitarian aid. These forces have specific mandates and operating principles, which are different from those applying to conventional humanitarian actors and usually they lack the true humanitarian focus and expertise necessary for effective delivery.

This does not exclude, however, that in specific and well-defined situations EU humanitarian aid cannot or should not be delivered in parallel with an EU crisis management operation. This can be the case where humanitarian actors cannot overcome logistical or security-related obstacles to the delivery of aid. But it should be done in accordance with its own set of principles. The military and the humanitarian side have to work side by side, but each doing their task. The use of military and civil defence assets should be at the request and in support of humanitarian organisations, and not to gain public support for an otherwise disputed military campaign.

The use of the military for humanitarian purposes would have to respect the international norms and principles governing humanitarian assistance.

Such an approach is actually shared and endorsed at the UN level, with the support of many States, including EU Member States and major humanitarian actors. Guidelines on "the Use of Military and Civil Defence Assets to support United Nations Humanitarian Activities in Complex Emergencies" have been established, clarifying the respective roles of military and humanitarian actors in the conduct of humanitarian operations.

This, hopefully, will bring more clarity and safeguard the humanitarian space in the interest of both, humanitarian staff and beneficiaries.

Let me therefore conclude by repeating my three main messages:

First: In conflict situations, humanitarian aid is often the only lifeline for millions of people in their struggle for survival. Professional delivery of humanitarian assistance, access to the victims and safety of those who deliver the aid are essential prerequisites for the survival of the victims.

Second: The delivery of humanitarian assistance ultimately depends on the perception that it is based on humanity, neutrality and impartiality.

Third: Military assets, therefore, should only be used is precisely defined situations.

I think you will have ample opportunity to discuss these points at length during your course. I will therefore finish by wishing you a fruitful conference.

Thank you for your attention.

| Top |

Advanced search