ODI/Stimson Center Report: UN integrated missions present renewed challenges to humanitarian action

A recent report published by the UK Overseas Development Institute and the US Stimson Center assesses the impact of integrated missions on humanitarian response in conflict-affected regions. While integration of UN missions remains a polarizing issue, according to the report, such an approach is expected to remain an enduring operating procedure for the UN as a whole that will impact upon the doctrine and professional standards of humanitarian agencies for the years to come.

Through the integration of political, peacekeeping, and humanitarian objectives, the UN is mandated to support national and regional political processes aimed at promoting and maintaining peace and security, while also providing emergency relief assistance to populations in need. Humanitarian assistance, as recognized under international humanitarian law, must be provided in accordance with the principles of independence, neutrality, and impartiality. As a result, the amalgam of humanitarian activities with political and security agendas is often perceived among humanitarian professionals as a major threat to their modus operandi and the distinctiveness of the “humanitarian space”. Many believe that the integration of security, political, and humanitarian objectives may confuse parties to armed conflicts and endanger humanitarian access to vulnerable groups. Interestingly, the ODI/Stimson report observes that there is no concluding evidence that integrated missions have caused greater insecurity among humanitarian workers.

Moving forward, the ODI/Stimson report recommends the implementation of a pragmatic approach at the field level to ensure greater cooperation and clarity on the distinct missions of UN agencies operating in the same environment, particularly in light of differing perspectives regarding direct engagement with non-state armed groups. Given that pressure toward greater integration has become a common feature of UN mandates, humanitarian professionals must therefore reach a new consensus among themselves on how to cooperate with colleagues from the security and political mediation sectors on a case-by-case basis. With respect to the risks faced by humanitarian professionals working within an integrated mission framework, further research is required to assess the nature and level of associated risks to their operational access.

For further reading, refer to:

HPN: Humanitarian action in Afghanistan: an uphill battle

MSF Special Report: Afghanistan: A Return to Humanitarian Action

Guardian: UN urged to draw a line between humanitarian and military work

HPG/ODI/Stimson Center: The Search for Coherence: UN Integrated Missions and Humanitarian Space: Roundtable Summary

Oxfam International: OI Policy Compendium Note on UN Integrated Missions and Humanitarian Assistance

International Islamic charities facing increased restrictions under counter-terrorism regulations in Israel, UK, and US for their activities in Gaza.

International Islamic charities facing increased restrictions under counter-terrorism regulations in Israel, UK, and US for their activities in Gaza.

According to a recent article published on IRIN News, Islamic charities in Gaza are challenged by both Israeli bureaucracy and no-contact policies of Western donors toward Hamas, a branded terror organization under both US and UK laws, which controls the Gaza Strip.

Following the decision of US Supreme Court in the Holder vs. Humanitarian Law Project in June 2010, the US government, in particular USAID, has imposed additional restrictions on grantees working in the Gaza Strip, which limits or even prohibits contact with Hamas representatives. In addition, the Office for Foreign Asset Control at the US Department of the Treasury (OFAC), has been monitoring all potential ways in which funds can find their way toward Hamas, as a designated foreign terrorist organization. Such measures have in effect stifled interaction with the authorities in control of Gaza and have arguably hindered humanitarian programs in favor of vulnerable groups in the Strip.

Such situations appear to contravene with basic international humanitarian law, which calls for unimpeded access to civilian populations affected by the conflict. Israel and all the contracting parties to the Geneva Conventions are required to facilitate access to the population in need in the Gaza Strip.

Such tensions between emerging counter-terrorism regulations and traditional humanitarian law precepts have become apparent in the cases of Somalia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan over the coming years, essentially conditioning financial assistance to life-saving programs that satisfy growing security and political requirements.

The future of neutral and independent humanitarian assistance in regions controlled by armed groups designated as terrorist organizations will require common efforts to delineate a new balance between humanitarian imperative and national security priorities. 

For more information on these deliberations, please visit www.hpcrresearch.org/research/criminalizing-humanitarian-engagement.

Yemen: Lack of data hampers emergency food aid, according to UNICEF

According to Geert Cappelaere, head of the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) in Yemen, donors are insisting to receive convincing evidence before proceeding with their assistance toward emergency food aid. Yet, for UNICEF, dealing with malnutrition is a priority.  "Why do you want children to die first before you’re going to give any credibility to a disaster looming here in Yemen?” Said Cappelaere.


With the increasing pressure for accountability, aid agencies are often confronted with the programmatic dilemma of providing quantifiable evidence of malnutrition in situations where access to the field - and even more data, is made difficult by the circumstances of the conflict.


See: IRIN News
See: Malnutrition in Yemen: Developing an Urgent and Effective Response