An interesting article in Slate Magazine from the Washington Post appeared this week, and continues my discussion on the mixing of military and civilian organizations in humanitarian aid work.
As per previous posts (namely the one where I went on and on about the humanitarian code of conduct vs. the USG plans to implement SPOT), I do not agree with the blurriness that continues between where military ends and the humanitarian work begins. This article, written by Anna Huskarska from the International Rescue Committee in Afghanistan further highlights the problems facing aid agencies in even receiving credit for their work or their committment to the communities and countries in which they operate.
Huskarska writes of a school opening of the CAI (famous from the book "Three Cups of Tea") depicted by Thomas Friedman of the New York Times in Aghanistan shows how the hard work of agencies can often be used as a means to show the "good donations" (=work) of the donors - and now in many cases in post-conflict settings, the military. This associations leads one to believe that without the US government (or any other donor agency)secular schools for children would not be built (and everything will go to hell in a handbag!), ignoring the longstanding relationships and commitment of the community and the aid agency to the project and the area.
This is not to say that some credit for donation is not due to a donor. However, activities such as this should be more of a celebration of the community rather than the aid aganecy or the donor agency - and it should most certainly not include the military.
The Afghanistan experience parallels that of Iraq, where military representative from Provincial Reconstruction Teams are often present at events. This gives the impression to the local community that none of this was possible without "us giving you freedom". If the military goes away - so do all these nice projects. Scary.
To move away from this, strict policies can be put in place to ensure that this association is not made. Low profile security in dangerous areas, strict rules about "no guns" (which are also applied to your donor), and refusal to work with the military (including PRTs). This helps to distance an agency from these associations, and to quote the title of the article - give "credit where credit's due".
Showing posts with label military. Show all posts
Showing posts with label military. Show all posts
Thursday, 20 August 2009
Thursday, 13 August 2009
Gaining acceptance vs. Getting kidnapped
There's an article today on Reuters Alertnet (Reuters news source for those who care about humanitarian causes that is a bit more edgier that IRIN - I follow their "tweets"... I am a dork) that reviews that dangers of providing humanitarian in conflict and recent post-conflict societies.
Aid workers all know their environment is changing - at least I hope most do - and our families always assumed it was worse than what it actually is. Until now (duh-duh-duuuuuh).
It's been reported that aid workers in the Horn and Central Africa are being robbed weekly and that kidnappings all around have increased.
Additionally, we can often be seen as collaborators with the "enemy" - as seen in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.
Anyways - it's pretty interesting to read the article - (here!) And interesting to note that one method of protecting aid workers is to become more accepted in the community. In my case here in Iraq - aid workers have been doing the opposite. Until recently only a few were operating low profile in communities - most (including my own) are/were working remotely from the north or neighbouring country or high profile behind compounds and security companies. Doing this associates us with immediate relief and money - and makes us seem superficial. Acceptance requires us to be in the communities, building relationships and understanding of the work we do.
Aid workers all know their environment is changing - at least I hope most do - and our families always assumed it was worse than what it actually is. Until now (duh-duh-duuuuuh).
It's been reported that aid workers in the Horn and Central Africa are being robbed weekly and that kidnappings all around have increased.
"Humanitarian workers are seen as rich people in places where most of the population is poor," said Philippe Adapoe, the Country Director of the International Rescue Committee (IRC) in Chad.
"In general aggressors target assets and money and we have visible assets such as cars, satellite phones, money and laptops."
Additionally, we can often be seen as collaborators with the "enemy" - as seen in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.
Anyways - it's pretty interesting to read the article - (here!) And interesting to note that one method of protecting aid workers is to become more accepted in the community. In my case here in Iraq - aid workers have been doing the opposite. Until recently only a few were operating low profile in communities - most (including my own) are/were working remotely from the north or neighbouring country or high profile behind compounds and security companies. Doing this associates us with immediate relief and money - and makes us seem superficial. Acceptance requires us to be in the communities, building relationships and understanding of the work we do.
Tuesday, 30 June 2009
Happy U.S. Troop Pull-Out Day!
In the event of the US Army withdrawing from urban centres (there will still be 130,000 in the country), the governments in both Iraq proper and the KRG have called... of course... and official holiday! For those places south of Erbil, Dohuk and Sulaimaniyah, yes - this is a good move. Security wise, its good to have people at home with their families... up in the three northern governorates...
The organization I work for has a pretty strict policy on holidays. This came about because some countries have a tendancy to have a lot of them. Often impromptu. Iraq is no different. Because of this, my current organization gives 15 pre-determined days a year that staff can have as holidays. Anything extra is evaluated, but usually not granted.
I was working for another organization previously here in Iraq, and I can see why the 15 day rule is useful. In December of 2008 and 8, because of a combination of pre-determined holidays and impromptu holidays, I think my staff worked a total of 8 days the entire month. A little ridiculous. Between the KRG and the GOI, and many last-minute declared holidays (often the day before - with a phone call at 4pm from the Operations Manager saying - the government says there is a holiday tomorrow so we are not coming to work), which of course you need to give to staff in both areas, actual work can go a little slow.
Now in this case, my current organization has granted the holiday for June 30th. But only for staff in the central regions (Baghdad, Anbar and Babylon) as a security precaution. We don't want people travelling around cities when we do not know what is going to happen. Our staff in Baghdad already has already faced difficulties working over that last two weeks because of all of the insecurities in the central region. We haven't, however, given the holiday to the northern staff. We'll see what morale is like in the office.
As for the pullout (or more appropriate "pullback"). On va voir!
For more on the US troop pull-out:
Washington post: Jubiliation in Iraq on Eve of US Pullback
NYTs: US leaves Iraqi Districts where anger still lingers
The organization I work for has a pretty strict policy on holidays. This came about because some countries have a tendancy to have a lot of them. Often impromptu. Iraq is no different. Because of this, my current organization gives 15 pre-determined days a year that staff can have as holidays. Anything extra is evaluated, but usually not granted.
I was working for another organization previously here in Iraq, and I can see why the 15 day rule is useful. In December of 2008 and 8, because of a combination of pre-determined holidays and impromptu holidays, I think my staff worked a total of 8 days the entire month. A little ridiculous. Between the KRG and the GOI, and many last-minute declared holidays (often the day before - with a phone call at 4pm from the Operations Manager saying - the government says there is a holiday tomorrow so we are not coming to work), which of course you need to give to staff in both areas, actual work can go a little slow.
Now in this case, my current organization has granted the holiday for June 30th. But only for staff in the central regions (Baghdad, Anbar and Babylon) as a security precaution. We don't want people travelling around cities when we do not know what is going to happen. Our staff in Baghdad already has already faced difficulties working over that last two weeks because of all of the insecurities in the central region. We haven't, however, given the holiday to the northern staff. We'll see what morale is like in the office.
As for the pullout (or more appropriate "pullback"). On va voir!
For more on the US troop pull-out:
Washington post: Jubiliation in Iraq on Eve of US Pullback
NYTs: US leaves Iraqi Districts where anger still lingers
Thursday, 4 June 2009
Sicilian-American Food from Turkmerica Hawler Style
Yesterday we had our first real "scare" of a potential IED threat in the city centre in a while. Nothing has been found as of yet, but there were loads and loads of under cover and uniformed Peshmerga and secret service everywhere. I'm torn between thinking potential violence leading up to the election or political ploy to show how safe the current government is making Erbil. I wouldn't put it past them – a lot of these ministries are shameless in trying to get exposure on anything they can – particularly if it's going to make those dreaded "islamists" look worse.
Kurds like their vices – especially alcohol. And they like being Kurdish first. I think the likelihood of this region switching over to radical Islam in one election is unlikely. But that is just me.
And don't get me wrong – I take my IED threats very seriously. I won't be going to the market or crowded places all the way up to the elections. Maybe even after. I'm really trying to not become complacent in the belief that the KRG is safe (which it's not – there's a reason they have serious checkpoints everywhere) especially after moving up from Baghdad. I just wonder sometimes…
In other news – it is the weekend and I'm looking forward to meal prepared by a friend who lives part-time in Turkey. Meaning it will include ingredients that we can only dream of here… like maybe avocado, canned tomatoes (not tomato paste), or whole grain rice!!!! I may be getting ahead of myself but TGIT!
Kurds like their vices – especially alcohol. And they like being Kurdish first. I think the likelihood of this region switching over to radical Islam in one election is unlikely. But that is just me.
And don't get me wrong – I take my IED threats very seriously. I won't be going to the market or crowded places all the way up to the elections. Maybe even after. I'm really trying to not become complacent in the belief that the KRG is safe (which it's not – there's a reason they have serious checkpoints everywhere) especially after moving up from Baghdad. I just wonder sometimes…
In other news – it is the weekend and I'm looking forward to meal prepared by a friend who lives part-time in Turkey. Meaning it will include ingredients that we can only dream of here… like maybe avocado, canned tomatoes (not tomato paste), or whole grain rice!!!! I may be getting ahead of myself but TGIT!
Monday, 18 May 2009
Do no harm?
Arg. There are certain principles that we (the collective we of aid workers) need to live and act by. Below is the ICRC Humanitarian Code of Conduct, signed by pretty, much every major NGO has signed up to:
ICRC Humanitarian Code of Conduct
I put this up because I have dealt with two episode this week that reflect a flaunting of these principles. One major... one a bit more minor.
1) Major - the SPOT
Good old US gov trying to get aid agencies to tell the military in Iraq where we're working (GPS location), who are staff are (?!?!?), if any major events happen in the area, and whether we have to evacuate or not (?!?!). It will become a requirement for anyone signing a US grant.
It's suppose to be for security - which in theory you may think - hey! having the military know where you're working may not be a bad thing... which in general... it's not. But staff names? numbers? exact locations? if there is a security incident? What happens if there is an incident - you report, then the military carries out an operation directly afterwards. Then community x goes... those NGOs are all working with the occupiers... lets make their life hell.
The blurring of military and aid work is a serious issue that will make any humanitarian work more difficult in any volatile country - having an even bigger impact on those most vulnerable. Let's hope this doesn't happen...
2) More minor but with a big impact...
One of my friends on facebook has joined one of those - click and feed a child groups. I was drawn to this because the profile pic of the group is a horrid image of an emaciated child near death. Now... I'm not an expert, but I'm thinking that's nearing 80's World Vision infomercial exploitation levels of target beneficiaries. Something any humanitarian knows... i hope... is a no-no. We pledge that we're suppose to use any images of our beneficiaries that are exploitative - they should depict resilience and respect the dignity of humans.
I was going to let the thing go, but I opened up the group and saw that it had 3 MILLION MEMBERS!!!! I had to write something to the group organizer - saying I thought the picture he chose was exploitative, and I respect his cause, but its promotion wasn't done in a very dignified way. He actual wrote back - but stated that all pictures were posted to show the state of the problem around the world - which may be - but there are only a few pictures posted... and they are all by him... and they are all exploitative. He can also monitor and remove any exploitative photos as the moderator of the group. What is more... I was referring mainly to the profile picture, something he has put up.
I'm very skeptical of these click and food goes to hungry child sites anyways - i think it's pretty dubious (where do they get this food/money from the click?). Moreover, I have mixed feelings about food aid unless in the most extreme cases. But to display these photos to so many people makes the public think this is ok! To exploit people is ok!
It's not.
ICRC Humanitarian Code of Conduct
I put this up because I have dealt with two episode this week that reflect a flaunting of these principles. One major... one a bit more minor.
1) Major - the SPOT
Good old US gov trying to get aid agencies to tell the military in Iraq where we're working (GPS location), who are staff are (?!?!?), if any major events happen in the area, and whether we have to evacuate or not (?!?!). It will become a requirement for anyone signing a US grant.
It's suppose to be for security - which in theory you may think - hey! having the military know where you're working may not be a bad thing... which in general... it's not. But staff names? numbers? exact locations? if there is a security incident? What happens if there is an incident - you report, then the military carries out an operation directly afterwards. Then community x goes... those NGOs are all working with the occupiers... lets make their life hell.
The blurring of military and aid work is a serious issue that will make any humanitarian work more difficult in any volatile country - having an even bigger impact on those most vulnerable. Let's hope this doesn't happen...
2) More minor but with a big impact...
One of my friends on facebook has joined one of those - click and feed a child groups. I was drawn to this because the profile pic of the group is a horrid image of an emaciated child near death. Now... I'm not an expert, but I'm thinking that's nearing 80's World Vision infomercial exploitation levels of target beneficiaries. Something any humanitarian knows... i hope... is a no-no. We pledge that we're suppose to use any images of our beneficiaries that are exploitative - they should depict resilience and respect the dignity of humans.
I was going to let the thing go, but I opened up the group and saw that it had 3 MILLION MEMBERS!!!! I had to write something to the group organizer - saying I thought the picture he chose was exploitative, and I respect his cause, but its promotion wasn't done in a very dignified way. He actual wrote back - but stated that all pictures were posted to show the state of the problem around the world - which may be - but there are only a few pictures posted... and they are all by him... and they are all exploitative. He can also monitor and remove any exploitative photos as the moderator of the group. What is more... I was referring mainly to the profile picture, something he has put up.
I'm very skeptical of these click and food goes to hungry child sites anyways - i think it's pretty dubious (where do they get this food/money from the click?). Moreover, I have mixed feelings about food aid unless in the most extreme cases. But to display these photos to so many people makes the public think this is ok! To exploit people is ok!
It's not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)