Yes. This will solve all the world's problems.

Angelina Jolie is now an official ambassador for more than just good will, reports UNHCR.

We will now have world peace.

CIDA and CSR

I don't know enough about this topic to comment adequately. But I know that CIDA's new corporate social responsibility strategy - funding corporations' CSR programs - is controversial, particularly when CIDA is cutting funding to NGOs.

CBC's The Current does a much better job at looking at the debate. Today's program devotes a half hour to this topic. You can listen to it on their Past Episodes page.  

What's it like doing humanitarian assistance in conflict affected contexts?

CBC's "The Current" had a half-hour documentary today looking at the experiences of three aid workers with Médicins Sans Frontières (MSF or Doctors Without Borders). You can listen to the podcast version here. Or go to the Current`s website to see past episodes.

If it's not for you - it's ok to get out

I have a couple of posts about how to get into aid work. I've been invited to speak on a couple of occasions to university students and to young people about aid work.  Most of the questions are about how to break in.

I usually try to stay pretty positive, but realistic – not mincing words about how much you may need to schlep before you “break in”. I have warned people looking at this field of work of the difficulties they may face – namely that the work may not be for the a) faint of heart or b) easily annoyed. I had not thought – however- to tell people that it is ok to quit. And more importantly, that it will not ruin your career. The message is important, and not one I’d thought sharing before.

Alanna Shaikh at Blood and Milk wrote a post on quitting the Peace Corps back in November.  I had wanted to post this for a while. It think it is an extremely important message – not just for Peace Corps volunteers, but anyone heading off on a longer term volunteer/internship program that really would like to take on a career in humanitarian aid and development. In Canada this could be CUSO VSO or the International Youth Internship Program which comparably throws you out of your comfort zone. The position could be wrong for you. You may feel isolated, lonely, homesick or worse, unsafe. There are a number of reasons why this particular position may not be the right fit - it doesn't mean that your not cut out for aid and/or development work. 

I wish someone had said this to me. I had an internship where the head of the office was verbally abusive to all staff, and physically abusive to some. There were times where I actually thought I was in physical danger. Colleagues were physically ill with stress when he was in the office. But I did not think I could quit because I worried that I would not have another shot at an international internship or job. So I stuck it out and eventually was moved. I know now that I likely could have jumped ship and started over. I may have taken a different path, but I could still have worked in the same field.

So I have taken note. I’m sharing the post. And in the future I will be sure to mention that it is ok to quit. 

Wikileaks – What does this mean for humanitarian aid and development?

I haven’t had a lot of time to focus on external writing, and in truth I would rather spend my time focusing on a good post for 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence (which will happen – the 6th is my personal deadline). However, the fallout or I guess potential fallout for people in the field of development and humanitarian aid could be quite big from this Wikileaks fiasco. I’ll admit I find the whole thing entertaining to read – it’s a bit like an OK! for politicos. And for the most part it says what everyone who is mildly intelligent and mildly follows international politics already knew – it was just never put in writing.

Will this have an effect of development funding and activities? Funding – unsure. I can’t see why states would use this to lower their aid budgets. If anything – it may open them up a bit wider to repair damage. What it could do is make access more difficult. Quiet diplomacy just had a pie thrown in its face and this could result in difficulties for aid agencies and other NGOs in certain areas to get permission to operate, acquire visas for international staff, and have activities approved by their host governments. It will be interesting to see what happens in this regard over the next year.

There has been some writing on what this means for people who work in development – they write much better than I, so here’s two gloomy articles.

-[Guardian] How Wikileaks could affect the USG and international development funding.
-[Globe and Mail] Wikileaks made the world more repressive

Oral histories and viewpoints

UNRWA has put together a beautiful campaign of video histories and viewpoints. Through 15 stories it chronicles the very different and similar experiences Palestinians have throughout the Middle East. The stories are moving but also inspiring, and provide an overview of the vast amount of assistance UNRWA gives to Palestinians. At a time when people question the relevance of this UN Agency - particularly those that assert that it prevents assimilation into a Palestinian state through perpetuating refugee status (which is ridiculous for a great number of reasons...) - promoting the rights of Palestinians and the hard work of this agency will hopefully increase support and understanding of the issues.



Go to the Peace Starts Here website

Young Professionals in Human Rights

I'm guest blogging at YPHR about choosing a field posting or a HQ post. YPHR is a great resource for those living in the UK, providing a chance to network and learn about careers in the broader human rights sphere.

Working in relief or development

As with many of us that work in the field of international relief or development, we're regularly approached by people asking whether we can advise them or their [Insert child/friend/relative] on how to get jobs in the field. I usually rally off the same stuff. However, thanks to Good Intentions Are Not Enough I was directed to this blog posting from a couple of years ago that is really great written by Alanna Shaikh (of many other blogs fame). I may use it in the future.

Why you probably can't get an international job (and what to do about that)

Good Intentions also has a great series on volunteering internationally as well.

I wish I had found these earlier ... so much less writing!

What's there to do for fun in a refugee camp?

May not be the first thing you'd ask when you get there. But for children and youth in refugee/displacement camps (or in locations affected by conflict or natural disaster) the opportunity to let loose is an important part of retaining some of the "normal" in their lives, and thus caring for their psycho-social well being.



There are a lot of fantastic programs that promote play for children and youth. One of my favourites is Right to Play, an organisation that started in Canada running sports programs in conflict affected areas. They have moved now to training physed teachers as well, so the concept of play pervades that curriculum, in addition to running sports programs for kids. They rely heavily on dedicated volunteers to carry out the projects, and occasionally get a few olympians along the way to give their time.

There are other fantastic initiatives that I have seen that have been wildly successful in popularity amongst kids. I have seen great work done by circus schools in the West Bank. One of my favourites is Capoeira programs which kids, both boys and girls, seem to take to like a fish to water. Oragnisations such as Capoera Arabe and Bidna Capoeira have been running programs for Palestinian and Iraqi refugee children and youth. The program teaches children to dance capoeira, an Afro-Brazilian dance style, as well as the songs and instrumental accompaniments. The basic moves mimic martial arts, but there is no contact. The dance is about creativity, and designed by oneself, giving the dancer the opportunity to choose what they do next - it's not dictated by choreography. It may seem trivial, but an outlet to vent frustration through dance driven by ones own creativity gives an important elemental of control to that kid when many other things seem out of their hands. What is more, the program to my knowledge has attracted both girls and boys (but I am unsure about young women).

Youth often get left behind in aid - particularly in fragile areas. When they are focused on, it's out of fear that young men left idle may turn into a source of instability (scary scary youth bulge). There are very few well documented initiatives of programs aimed at young women - often left out of the youth sphere. Culturally they may not even be considered youth at all, with the passage from childhood to woman hood marked by menstruation, or early marriage/pregnancy. More creative solutions are needed to address this. And more youth-led initiatives should be developed.

PS: Guardian has a new site on international development. It says it has "the best ideas on the biggest challenges". That may be a bold, premature statement. However. At least it exists.

Microfinance Superstar: Little Luxuries of HQ life

One of the great things I’ve found about staying on the HQ side of things is that my day to day experiences may not be “as exciting” (read: I’m in Ottawa) but I do have the fortune to attend fantastic events.

The International Development Research Centre is 40 years old this year and are holding a year-long anniversary celebration. While most people face a mountain full of “Over the Hill mugs” and surprise parties at their 40th, IDRC is running a lecture series. Yesterday I got to see Mohammed Yunis, of Grameen Bank or Nobel Prize fame.

He is an incredibly engaging speaker that inspires many to work for social change. His views on the banking industry are spot on and he has incredible vision for the world of business and industry. I was however left questioning a few things.
A few questions from the audience were left unanswered. The first being: Was there any backlash from some elements of the community against the bank? Yunis talked at length about Loan Sharking, and how that activity drew him to develop an alternative method of loans for the poor. However once loans could be obtained from a safe, less invasive source, what happened to the loan sharks? I have not managed to find any information on this but I’d be interested to find out whether this happened – and if so how was it mediated. Secondly, the money was put primarily in the hands of women who had never had the opportunity to control finances before. This is incredibly empowering, but must have been equally disempowering for men. What was done to address any backlash in the community regarding this? Nowadays if an organisation employs gender mainstreaming into its programming, women’s empowerment projects such as microfinance would include an element of engagement with men, so that threat is reduced. However, was this done initially?

The second question was regarding the role of Cooperatives in microfinance. The answer was essentially – yeah I guess there is a role there – which is not incorrect. I was disappointed in this because so much time was spent explaining many elements of the bank and of Yunis’ Social Business model, but an opportunity to highlight what I can see is an important tool to further empower and develop communities was not highlighted as well. So much of the presentation was about teaching, and I felt an opportunity was lost.

Major questions, such as how does Microfinance and Social Business account for economies of scale. Essentially, how do you make sure you are not flooding the market with tailors rather than building industry? Moreover, how does your goal of “cutting out the middle man” (he uses the example of Shea butter and L’Oreal) affect price inflation in a state? Finally, Yunis has, what seems like an interesting take on welfare systems in western states. It comes across as if he believes that they are a system to be abused and that they can be replaced with social business and microcredit. If this is the case I would be interested in hearing what his views are on safety nets for those who are in between jobs, or those with mental illness.

The lecture was still fantastic and microfinance has still revolutionised economic recovery programming. Definitely worth a viewing. All of the lectures in the series are recorded and can be found here.

Comprehensive example of the business of humanitarian aid

The New York Times Magazine is running this article on Plumpy'Nut. Which in theory I have a pretty soft spot for. I'm not in health policy or practice, but in terms of its success rate it's pretty damn amazing.

Because it's so amazing, it's also become popular amongst other producers. Right now a French company, Nutriset, owns the patent to make the product (as well as off-shoots). They have relinquished rights to the developing area producers as well. The product promotes growth in the peanut producing industries in the global south through sourcing many of Plumpy's ingredients there instead of say... the US. However now others want in, including Pepsi and peanut farmers in the US. A powerful company and a powerful lobby may hurt whatever positive gains economically this product has for producer Nutriset, who has faced complaints of monopoly, but also for developing nations.

Article: Could a Peanut Paste Called Plumpy'nut End Malnutrition? - NYTimes.com

NGO's Pawns in Terrorism?

This is a pretty comprehensive- yet cynical view - of international NGO activities in conflict and post conflict areas from The New Republic. I wrote a post last May introducing the SPOT requirement on all US government funding in Iraq and Afghanistan (and possibly to be implemented in Somalia... and everywhere?!). It stands for Synchronized Predeployment and Operational Tracker This requirement requires all US contractors (including INGOs) to provide the US government and the military with the GPS location of all programs and the names, positions and nationalities of all staff so that the military can keep tabs on all activity and movement (including movement in, out and around the country).

There are some major points of concern here. The first is the close association this put INGOs in with the US military. It runs counter to a lot of impartial and neutral stances of many of the major players. Close association with the US government can put beneficiaries in danger of attack from non-us friendly actors. Secondly, it reduces the capacity of donors like USAID to collect information effectively. This has been highlighted by the GAO. I know that despite a concerted effort from NGO consortiums like InterAction, a few INGOs have signed contracts (whether they knew it was in there or not) which include SPOT. Contributing further to the bleak situation David Rieff paints.

A good point that is brought up in the article is the fact that in countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq, the goal is not really development but national security. The budgets are simply not high enough to actually conduct development per say. Moreover, one needs to look at the types of civil society and governance programs that are actually funded here. In Iraq, programs such as the Community Action Program (CAP) which was in its third incarnation during my time, was in all matter of fact a way for the government to provide lots of material stuff to communities so that they would not hate what is happening to the country - Despite what the NGO (or development company in some cases) intended it to be. Another gem included a 2 year nation-wide peacebuilding program (peace in Iraq... in 2 years!) that was intended to be a front for counter insurgency information.

I wouldn't go as far to say that NGOs are pawns. Many know exactly what is going on and fight it continuously with lobbying. In regards to SPOT it may actually work (inshallah). The US administration is reviewing how USAID operates and SPOT seems to be on the list for review after it was blasted by the GAO. However the cynicism is warranted.

The burn out...

Apparently my last post was on January 31 2010. Since then so many things have happened. Elections... (didn't care), Settlement Debacle in West Bank... (could have written a good post), Hiking Club in Kurdistan... (meh... it's fun).

Finally something did prompt me - its what I would call... the burn-out.

I wikipediaed burnout. I wikipedia everything. It states that "burnout is a psychological term for the experience of long-term exhaustion and diminished interest." This pretty much explains my general state for the past 2 months - possibly longer.

I think, well I know, it's an affliction that hits many people in the aid field (and probably a lot of other professions). A common complaint that is heard is how understaffed projects and offices are by NGOs, the one I work for is no exception. There is too much work, and in a lot of cases insufficient capacity to conduct high level programming that is expected of international NGOs and international organisations. This leads to staff who are consistently overworked with no end in site. A co-worker of mine calls it "Emergency Mode".

Although "Emergency Mode" compounded with a harsh environment may make matters worse, this affliction transcends location and even context. Because aid workers (and development workers) work in Emergency Mode all the time... Even when there isn't an emergency.

Iraq has many needs, and there are the occasional emergencies that pop up. The fact is however, it is no longer an Emergency Context (I’m sure people will debate that - but I stick by it). Large amounts of people are not in need en masse of direct and immediate humanitarian assistance. Particularly not in the KRG where I am based.

I have never worked in an actual emergency context where emergency mode is acceptable. I'm not sure if an emergency context makes emergency mode easier to sustain? However I do know that it is not sustainable in an non-emergency context. I'm proof.

Signs of burnout:
- Neglecting needs and interests
- Withdrawal from social activities (or in some cases acting out through social activities... often negative ones)
- Denial
- Change in behaviour (such as becoming snappy or quick to anger)
- Depression
- Limited attention span

I also experienced fatigue and an inability to cope with certain situations, and finally it lead to not caring too much about anything. The whole process once I realised it was happening was very frustrating as well, because it stressed me out because I could not work as well as I use to.

Ways to cope/prevent:
- Excercise
- Ensure that you take time for yourself
- Take your R&R (or vacation) on time!!!
- Confide in a trusted friend or look into getting a life coach

And because the above may not be possible, make sure you take time out between postings. A good suggested amount is about 3 months.

I am fortunate to work for an organisation that provides free counselling services, not only in emergencies. Through talking with someone I learned that what I was experiencing in my line of work was normal, and to not beat myself up for how I was feeling, or even my performance level.

Many organisations understand that people need time off in between posts. It is easy as someone just starting out to feel like you need to continuously work otherwise you may not get another job. However, in a lot of cases this is not the case. It is in the NGOs interest to promote breaks in between posts so that people taking up new jobs are fresh and able to perform well. It is also in the NGOs interest to retain good staff.

It is common to take time off and still stay within the same organisation (but you can also move if you need to).

I'm not sure when my burnout happened exactly. Probably the day after my last post. I should have seen all the signs coming. But those are famous last words. I have decide to take my advice and take some time off (about 3 months) - spending time sleeping, learning, seeing friends and family and chilling out.

uhhhhhh....

Image: The Insider
Please tell me this is joke:

Noble Awards set to honour celebrity humanitarians?

It's going to be 2 hour awards show to honour celebrities that give up just that "little" amount of their time to a cause of their choice and have "really" made a difference.

Now don't get me wrong.

I've had this debate a number of times with friends about the merits of celebrity support for a cause. I'm on the pro-side. As long as it is done responsibly, celebrities can bring massive amounts of coverage to causes. Ambassadors such as Angelina Jolie and Alicia Keys highlight the plight of refugees or the disabled for organizations such as UNHCR, IRC and the amazing Best Buddies. They can meddle a bit too much, such as in the case of George Clooney and Darfur, or become so over exposed that we roll our eyes everytime they appear off-stage (eyes on Bono - but maybe thats more because people forget that he's not an expert on global poverty... but actually rock musician). I also have no doubt that many of these celebrities aren't doing this because it makes the look good to the public (although that does factor in) but because they genuinely believe that they should work for humanitarian causes because they can bring so much exposure.

But do they really need a 2-hour awards show?

This is going to sound whiney - but there are thousands of relif and charities workers globally who toil day in and day out, not just because its their career, but also because they want to work the greater good. There are even more volunteers that do this for free with little thanks. Occasionally they are trown big parties to give thanks and priase where it is due(the organization I work for has quite the star-studded event every year in new york, and regularly has event in which celebrities and people in the know attend)and they are useful tools to draw attention to causes, but if they get too crazy or extravagent they are scoffed at. The money, at least I believe, that goes into these events could and should be better spent on advocacy, campaigning, or back into program coffers so that we're less dependent on pandering to foreign policies of the US and EU, and more focused on exactly what is needed.

I really hope this is a joke.

Changing face of child protection

The UN's SRSG for Children in Armed Conflict released a report on changing affects of armed conflict on children, particularly noting the increase use of sexual violence against children. Topics such as child soldiers and the effect on a child's education wer discussed as well, but this report takes yet another move at highlighting the use of rape as a common tool of warfare - particularly against girls.

The relese date of the report to the General Assembly (August 6) coincided with Hillary Clinton's trip to the Democratic Republic of Congo where rape is endemic. It has been estimated that 3,500 women have been raped in the DRC this year alone. Men and children are not immune from this either. Attrocities are carried out by all sides, leaving the general population with nowhere to turn and few to trust. But will Clinton's outspokeness towards the Congolese government on the topic of sexual violence or papers released by the UN calling on the world to protect children from this form of abuse change anything?

Unlikely.

Rape was first declared a war crime after the Bosnian war in 1996 with the indictment of 8 Bosnian Serb Military Policemen for their connection with the rape of Muslim Bosnian women. It was the first time a sexual assault case was brought to the Hague as a war crime in its own right. Since then, rape has been included in war crime indictments, including that of Omar al Bshir's. This hasn't changed anything, in fact, the widespread use of rape as a weapon or even as a effect of conflict may be increasing.

Many of my female colleagues here in Iraq report that the lawlessness of the past few years has contributed in a rise of violence against women. What is more frightening is the number of deaths of young women due to sexual violence, either from honour killings, suicide or homocide. One former colleague, who splits her time between Mosul and Kirkuk, stated that because of the lack of rule of law men rape and kill women just because they are good looking. Coupled with a sexually repressive society, where shame for sexual violence falls on women and girls, one can only imagine the restrictions now placed on daughters, sisters and wives.

In the report, the UN calls on greater involvement of children in the peacemaking process and more importantly to mainstream child protection into all activities. But more is needed. From a young age education on gender equality is needed, and less separation of the sexes is reqired (I'm not a huge cultural relativist). Young women need to be encouraged into non-traditional roles such as the police force, law making, and even the army - such as in Liberia. Sex education is needed for children and young adults. And finally, and most importantly - gender-based violence programs are needed for everyone - children, adults, front-line workers such as police and health care workers - to remove the stigma of reporting and talking about sexual violence. To stop blaming victims and to empower survivors. This may just put a dent in the problem.

Two Posts in One Day!

I am actually quite busy - but this is cool, and sad, and anger inducing, and just very interesting.

It's an illustration of the world's needs for humanitarian crises in both monetary and human resources

Delayed Doom and Gloom

I may or may not have on here, or amongst friends, predicted that things will intensify in the north. I still hold my ground, although its taking longer than expected. Not to make that sound like I want things to intesify. I'm just mearly stating a fact. The US Army is moving more troops up here to hopefully reduce tensions between the Iraqi Army and the Kurdish Peshmerga, Kurdish leaders have walked away from the governing council in Mosul claiming that the Arab council members are allowing Al Qaeda to flourish, Al Qaeda may be flourishing in Mosul (altough most information has been pointing to a reduction in their presence in the country... however Mosul seems to buck the trand on all accounts), and now there is a severe drought in the north increasing tensions.

Now I'm being told that Aid-Workers' resilience is beng put to the limits the field... Al Humdeliliah Eid is coming! In the mean time... this is the picture I always look at whenever I'm stressed.
Gets me every time.

For more information on this, please refer to people who write better than I do.
- On US Army plans for northern Iraq
- On the problems in Mosul
- On the water shortage
- On Aid workers' mental health

Mixing Aid with Military

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".

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.

"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.

something to think about

- 18 trillion has been given to save ailing financial institutions this year
- 2.8 trillion has been given in foreign aid over the last 50 years

Aid money is drying up, and many countries are not honouring their commitments to humanitarian aid (not that they ever were).

Something to think about.