COMMENTARY
Aid quality is one thing, the blurring of civil and military goals another
Autumn 2008
François Grünewald is right to applaud the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid. But with the whole principle of independent and impartial humanitarian action now under serious threat, it is essential that people should understand the true nature of this agreement and recognise that its policies have yet to be translated into action on the ground. Just as the creation of the Consensus was a welcome step in the right direction, it is up to the NGO to play an active role in its implementation and ensure that all EU member states and DG-ECHO itself adhere to their policy commitments.
First, we need to be clear about how the Consensus can be used to improve programme quality and protect humanitarian principles. Grunewald’s article fails to describe the reach of the Consensus adequately; although it may have been the brainchild of DG-ECHO, the final agreement binds the whole of the European Commission and all EU governments. As is well known, the EU’s collective budget for humanitarian aid is the largest in the world, and the EU has both an opportunity and a responsibility to make sure that Europe provides high quality humanitarian assistance. And now the Consensus is in place, Europe has more than an agreed set of principles and objectives; it also has an action plan. This should be a cause for excitement and optimism in the humanitarian aid sector.
Yet the current threat to impartial and independent humanitarian action must not be underestimated. Military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq increasingly include “hearts and minds” activities which are designed to look like humanitarian assistance. The move towards integrated United Nations missions leads to expectations at UN coordination meetings that humanitarian actors and military personnel will collaborate. The result is that line between military action and impartial civilian aid has now become blurred; so much so that the emblem of the International Committee of the Red Cross was misused during the recent release of hostage Ingrid Betancourt by the Colombian military. This disturbing trend directly affects the ability of NGOs to provide aid, with access to humanitarian situations being reduced, increased scepticism within certain governments about NGO work and aid workers being targeted more frequently by violent factions.
These circumstances make it all the more important that NGOs should adhere strictly to their humanitarian principles, because they are our bedrock. This may not always lead to better programming, as Grunewald states, but these principles are essential for us even to begin the process. My organisation, Trócaire, certainly believes that respect for humanitarian principles is the foundation for quality in the humanitarian sector. These principles guide us at every level: Donors ensure that funding is provided on the basis of need and need alone; practitioners make certain that programmes are designed and implemented in accordance with these principles. Humanitarian principles also enable us to be fully transparent with the communities we seek to assist. The European Consensus clearly recognises the fundamental importance of the humanitarian principles and international humanitarian law. As long as Europe adopts the commitments contained in the Consensus and applies them in the field, this agreement can help to reduce the pressures on neutral and independent humanitarian actors.
Is the European Consensus a source of hope for better quality humanitarian programmes in future? Not by itself, but it is one of the many tools now available. More important, it represents a top-level pledge to protect humanitarian principles across Europe. It is now up to NGOs to transform this “source of hope” into positive results on the ground. Over the next year or two, NGOs must monitor implementation of the Consensus, working as individual organisations and together in established networks in Brussels and in member states. Our task is to hold the EU Commission and the member governments to their word.