Sustainable development blog : ecology and humanitarian aid

Humanitarian development isn’t for the lighthearted.

Every type of job is based on specific rules of conduct and in international development adherence to strong values and commitments leads not only to acceptance, but also to easy interaction and partial inclusion in the local culture. In order to create closeness and a relationship based on understanding, it is vital to respect local practices and uphold the rules of neutrality.

During a meeting, if everyone around you sits on the floor, sit with them. Imagine yourself conducting an interview in the impoverished home of a Palestinian family in the refugee camp of Jerash, Jordan, where lots of refugees still come pouring in: a family welcomes you warmly, offers you tea, and asks you to sit with them down on the floor. Are you going to ask if the water used was boiled for 20 minutes? Are you going to ask if the floor is clean or cold? Having attitude that freely embraces new opportunities of learning about others will both solidify intercultural ties and strengthen dialogue and trust between the local and international community. Empathy is most easily manifested in small gestures, small courtesies, and a warm smile.

This is why when a flagrant violation of the code of conduct occurs, the damage done is irreversible.  Once a small part of the international community is tainted, it risks dragging down other humanitarian actors in a whirlwind of negative consequences, including the loss of credibility. The case could be made for Zoe’s Ark, a French NGO involved in the ‘kidnapping’ of 103 children found on a plane in Abéché, Chad, about to take off to Paris. Contrary to what NGO members had declared, the children were not malnourished orphans from Darfur who would have perished without the help of treatments only available in the West. In addition, each Chadian family whose child was on board had paid between $2800 and $8400, tolet their children be adopted by French families—again, a major violation of Chadian law, which bans adoption. As indisputable evidence proved their guilt, the 6 aid workers involved in the kidnapping were incarcerated and condemned to 8 years of hard labor. Thanks to the intervention of the French state, the prisoners were transferred to their home countries where they continued to serve their sentences until March 2008, when the President of Chad pardoned all 6 and they were set free.

© Thomas Mukoya / Reuters

Sure, an unknown NGO can work its way around the system without obscuring the activities of other members of the international aid community. Yet what if major reputable aid structures, such as the UN, succumb to similar crimes? To what extent does the undignified or even abhorrent attitude of an actor change the perception of the local community of intervention, of beneficiaries, of the civil society, of human rights activists, of the entire population of a country? Even in the case of a minor player like Zoe’s Ark, the kidnapping incident made giants like UNICEF tremble and strongly deny any connections with the 6 inculpated aid workers. On a social and national level, it started a war which traumatized the people of Chad to the extent that often even today, when children hear airplanes, they run away to hide, afraid bombs might be dropping over their heads. WFP’s mission in Somalia is also a clear case at hand. Including a large number of weapons on a bill of quantities for a food distribution program might be the most unethical thing, but offering $160 million transport contracts to local warlords who overtly divert food aid from the malnourished is still a far cry from fair. There are several NGOs rumored to have started their missions in Afghanistan by smuggling guns for the mujahedeens during the 2001 reign of the Taliban. The list can continue, and often, the greater the player, the greater the violations. But while consequences for international expats remain bearable, whether they amount to several years in prison or/and a heavy fine, the consequences for local populations and especially for vulnerable groups might be much more than what our beneficiaries can bear.