Dilemma of Humanitarian Aids
The humanitarian aid offered to refugees through international aids agencies is meant to provide, food, shelter and legal protection to people fleeing conflicts. However, this aid has often been twisted in the way that it fueled conflict and war. In some context, this is true. Having the international aids agencies take care of the welfare of the country’s refugees; with no worries upon taking care of their own people, the military troops could concentrate on winning the war. Getting the case at Rwanda, the lure of aid has impelled militant troops to create huge refugee populations who spent two years in camps Zaire controlled by Hutu militias.
On other situation, the large numbers of refugees that suffering from starvation and disease make for dramatic media coverage that attract aid dollars from international humanitarian organizations and foreign governments. The aid that reaching the refugees can be skimmed by militants based in the camps where the refugees are gathered, as well as local businesspeople and military and administrative officials of the host government. The camp protected by international sympathy and international laws can be a safe haven for the outlaws and becoming the excellent base for guerrillas.
In this context, controversy arouses. Is the humanitarian aids actually were helping the victims to restore their pre-war life, or indirectly lengthening the time span of war, which consequently leading to more deaths. However, as we human, made out of flesh and blood, seeing people suffering and not offering help is regarded as immoral and inhumane. Again, the controversy remains. In my point of view, the problem has to be tackle by setting priority; and human rights should always be set at the top. Humanitarian aids to the needy would never be in vain although the effectiveness depends greatly on the implementation.
This is further complicated when humanitarian assistance has often been associated to political activities. Despite the humanitarian principles of neutrality and impartiality which is driven solely on the basis of need, it has always influenced by the political considerations of donor governments and the political economy of recipient countries. It is even pathetic knowing that humanitarian aid has never been disbursed solely on the basis of need. The changing role gives rise to the ‘new humanitarianism’ which appears to be increasingly tied to new political objectives. However, this in return, might not be a total bad news. This Recent conflicts in Afghanistan, Serbia and Sierra Leona are the examples of the integration of political objectives attempts at conflict resolution in conjunction with humanitarian aid. For better or for worse, simply lies at two opposite sites of the wall.
Risks Faced by Humanitarian Workers
Humanitarian workers involve in delivering aid in term of material or logistical assistance for humanitarian purposes. The main aim is to save lives, alleviate suffering, and maintain human dignity. Driven by the conscience and passion for human kind, humanitarian workers devoted their energy, time, and sometimes even their life. Though under the protection of legislation under the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the related Protocol of 1977, risks during work is unavoidable.
Attacks on aids workers have occasionally occurred, and became more frequent in the 1990s and 2000s. Afghanistan and Somalia have been reported the highest number of assaults. The recent headline which caught international coverage has reported the incident of Israel attack on Gaza fleet aid. It is believed that the increase of attacks is resulted from the increasing number of humanitarian workers deployed, the increasing unstable working environment, and the erosion of the perception of neutrality and independence.
The recent trends in risks faced by aids workers revealed that most deaths are due to deliberate violence; with one third of deaths occur in the first three months of deployment. Among all, kidnapping in particular is on the rise with the reported figure of 350% increase between 2006 and 2008. Furthermore, since 2006, the growth in the number of incidents outnumbered the growth in the number of humanitarian aid workers.
Political motivations both directly and by association have been found to be the main reason for the attack on humanitarian worker. Sometimes, the organization might be targeted for the actions done, statements made, or simply for the delivery of aid to the undesired population. The perception of being associated with specific governments or armed forces has further increased the threat. Thus, it is of utmost importance for aids workers to be seen and remain separate, independent and neutral politically.
The legal protection on humanitarian workers is contained in the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the related Protocol of 1977. The conventions include the rights of workers to be treated humanely; to have access to food, water, shelter, medical treatment, and communications; to be free from violence to life and person, hostage taking, and humiliating or degrading treatment; and the prohibition against collective punishment or imprisonment. However, the legal rights of aids workers have been occasionally violated and threatened leading to tragedy.
Concerning of the discouraging situation, prompt and effective action should be taken to guarantee the safety and rights of humanitarian workers. Strict punishments should be set on the laws violators. Furthermore, the increase of awareness upon human rights should be strengthened among military troops which lie under the responsibility of governments. Humanitarian organization as well, should be transparent and independence in order to reach mutual trust.
Humanitarian Situation in Gaza
According to the Palestinian figures, the war on Gaza have killed more than 1,300 people, leaving 5,300 injured, and left two-thrid of the Gaza’s 1.5 m residents without power, a third without running water and medical facilities overwhelmed and lacking of basic supplies. It is estimated that Gaza would take three to five years to be rebuilt even under normal conditions, never to said that it is under constant Israeli interception from humanitarian aids.
In actual, even before the outbreak of war, half of the Gaza population is dependent on the United Nation food aid; suffering from famine and lack of basic neccessities. The situation got worse due to the closure action by Israel that drain food and fuel supply in Gaza. Though Israel does claimed to be responsible for speeding up the flow of aid to Gaza, but the actions were in vain as supply is way too far to meet demand.
Aid agencies have to fight for continuous battling in order to meet the urgent needs of Gazans. Among the aspects of consern include food, proper and safe water and sanitation system, fuel and electricity, medical facilities, and shelter. Referring to aids agencies, difficulties in getting humanitarian staff into Gaza were hindering the aid effort. This is shown by the figure that afther ten day of ceasefires, the UN said 30 international aids workers had obtain the permission for entrance but there were another 140 outstanding requests from the Israeli authorities.
In terms of food, it is reported that there were warning of malnutrtion in Gaza even the Israeli assault due to low access and affordability of portein sources such as dairy, meat and vegetable products. Situation got worse as war start, where security hampered the distribution of food. It has been reported that two week after ceased fire, the food proces had doubled or tripled before fighting. Whereas for water and sanitation, situation is no better. Water and sewage system was below expectation before the fight. The fight has damaged water pipes and pipes, rendering half a million of Gaza people without paip water supply.
Two-third of gazans live with no fuel and electricity power as well at the height of the crisis. War has led to power plant the strip’s only power plant shut down. Even now, after cease fire, the power supply facilities have been badly damaged which required huge fund for restoring. The fight also rendered 55,000 people homeless, sheltering at the UN-run school. More than half of the people were forced to displace from their homes. Survey by local and international NGOs have found that even after the week of ceasefire, 66,000 people is still homeless. Not to mention medical facilities, World Heath Organization reported eight hospitals and twenty six primaary health care clinics were damages during the fight and more than 50% of people faced difficulties accessing basic medicines just after ceasefire.
Looking into the situation in Gaza, the war has incurred massive and irreversible destruction to the society and people. Worse thing worst is the interception of Israeli which hampered the reconstruction process. This is unacceptable for the guity party to stop others to undo the wrong-doing and exceptionally unreasonable for defying the human rights of victims.
Humanitarianism in Crisis : Gaza
Shocking headline: Israel attacks Gaza aid fleet! Israeli forces have attacked a flotilla of aid-carrying ships with the aim to break the country’s siege on Gaza. Israeli radio reported that more than 19 people were killed and dozens injured when troops intercepted the convoy of ships dubbed the Freedom Flotilla in international waters, 65 km off he Gaza coast. The armed Israeli soldiers with live ammunition boarded the ship and helicopters flying overhead. The Israeli military said four soldiers had been wounded claiming that the troops opened fire after demonstrators onboard attacked the IDF Naval personnel with live fire and light weaponry including knives and clubs. However, Free Gaza Movement, the organizers of flotilla said the troops opened fire as soon as they stormed the ships.
The news has caught the attention of media and people all around the world. Once again, human rights are violated. The convoy came from the UK, Ireland, Algeria, Kuwait, Greece and Turkey, and was comprised of about 700 people from 50 nationalities of pro-Palestinian activists, including a Nobel laureate and several European legislators. It surprises many in the international community to learn what could led to this kind of confrontation, as all the images being shown from the activists on board those ships clearly that they were civilians and peaceful in nature, with medical support on board.
The bloody raid prompted a chorus of furious condemnation from around the world. Followed by the official declaration of a three-day state of mourning over the deaths from the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas; thousands of Turkish protesters tried to storm the Israeli consulate in Istanbul soon after the news of operation broke. The Turkish foreign ministry said in a statement that “(the incident) is unacceptable… Israel will have to endure the consequences of this behavior”. Turkey, Spain, Greece, Denmark and Sweden have all summoned the Israeli ambassador’s in their respective countries to protest against the deadly assault.
Humanitarian aids with the mission to provide food, clothing, medicine, and shelter to aid the victims are facing an ever-growing tensions and challenges. The rights and safety of humanitarian workers are threatened. This phenomenon is discouraging and yet pathetic. Ironic it seems when the humanitarian workers offered help out of good deed to improve conditions of the disastrous and problematic areas being harmed in return. Justice should be restored, but at first, the root cause of the problem should be tackled.
Reviewing back to the cases of attacks, aid workers are targeted of at least some political motivations both directly and by association. Sometimes, the humanitarian organization may be targeted for action that has done or a statement made, or simply by offering aids to the undesired group. Despite all of the political reasons, a clear line should be drawn. Strict action should be taken against the group of people that lack of conscience. Rude to say so but the violence actions only depict the act of uncivilized barbarian.
Humanitarianism: Charity or Obligation
There has been a controversial debate upon the issue; either humanitarian aid is an act of charity or a legally agreed obligation. What would you think? Is humanitarianism a move from the sentimental and sympathy, or a political and empowering ideology of rights and duties? In my point of view, it should be an obligation.
Seeing human rights as the appropriate basis of humanitarianism, it is the responsibility of every citizen to honor the rights of the less fortunate. The grounding of rights, duties and laws should provide an integrated moral, political and legal framework to affirm universal human values. Of course, in terms of rights, it follows through the hierarchy, where the basic rights are being granted the priority. As humanitarian aid involves crossing a boundary to offer help for people in need, in which the boundary can be economic, politic, cultural, ethic or psycho-social mandated, risks are unavoidable for both service provider and beneficiary. In this case, the understanding of human rights is mandated.
Within this approach, humanitarianism would lie in the international humanitarian and human rights law. The clearly stated and enforced laws state the duties of all parties, including donors, intermediaries and receivers. Human-rights law is primarily a code of behavior for good governance in peacetime, rather than for the conduct of war. Under this rigid and well-defined framework, the rights of all parties could be protected. It is believed that gathering communities around these legal instruments is potentially much more powerful than relying on the tradition principles of humanity, impartiality and neutrality.
Furthermore, it seems evident that humanitarian organizations should be organized around a moral and legal framework under human rights law. After all, the purpose of this is to build a better world. As proposed in the realm of actions, both materially and morally possible yield obligated actions. Which again justify that humanitarianism is an obligation rather than charity.
However, argument from the other side arises, that if humanitarianism is regarded as obligation, it conflicts with the universal right to relief aid, and can mean that it becomes morally justifiable to leave individuals without aid for political reasons. Besides, this could violate the underlying principle of neutrality. Furthermore, this approach might be regarded and being manipulated as another form of colonization.