What the CBBCs comment actually means

NATO official Mark Sedwill, in an interview for the CBBC program “Growing Up in a Warzone” stated "Here in Kabul and the other big cities (in Afghanistan) actually there are very few of those bombs. The children are probably safer here than they would be in London, New York or Glasgow or many other cities." The comment has caused a stir across the western media and outcries from public councils and humanitarian aid agencies, such as Save the Children.

Mr. Sedwill later tried to diffuse the statement, saying that it was not very well put. And he’s right – it wasn’t. But the essence of what he was trying to say is important. The news often distorts day-to-day life of people living in conflict affected areas. In states affected with armed conflict, not every moment of every day, in every location, is there life threatening danger. Pocketed and fragmented fighting is localised and that often means a good chunk of a state is relatively safe for people to go about their daily routines. What is more, general crime rates can be lower in these areas, as well as the lure of dangerous activities such as drugs and alcohol. Finally, societal bonds are stronger, with a neighbourhood formed to mimic a large family – meaning many people are looking out for your wellbeing, rather than the isolation that is becoming a norm in Western cities. Because of this, it can be argued that if one looks at a child’s access in the city, and the safety net surrounding them – in many cases it may be on par or better than life for a child in some of the West’s more notorious cities. This is a question of physical security.

Indeed, the plight of children in developing areas – particularly in fragile and conflict affected states – fair far worse on a human security level. Save the Children noted that 1 in 4 Afghan children will not live to see their 5th birthday, and UNICEF in 2009 declared it the most dangerous place to be a child. There are greater barriers to life saving health care and nutrition in these areas. Gender equality is at a greater disparity, and so is access to education. But what Sedwill’s statement should have done is allowed us (and kids) to review our perceptions of what safety is and what it can be to others. Moreover, it reminds us all that people around the world are not so different from each other – and face similar problems.

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.

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.

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.