Reasons for and against Humanitarian Intervention - Essay Example

Humanitarian Intervention Humanitarian Intervention Internal conflicts have become very common especially in the developing world. The conflicts have had deadly impacts on the civilians. Post-cold war conflicts have resulted into millions of casualties. The majority of the casualties are civilians. Recently, there has been a conflict in the Middle East mostly caused by ISIS, a militant Jihadist group. There has also been a series of internal conflicts in the north of Africa and parts of Sub-Saharan Africa. The main aim of current conflicts is destruction of ethnic groups and civilians but not the armies. The conflicts in those areas have been necessitating a lot of humanitarian reliefs. It is because most of the places had been left dilapidated; thus relief efforts were very critical.1 Development assistance for rebuilding was also vital because it is through the development assistance that the future conflicts in the regions can be avoided. Thus, the humanitarian aid is vital because the internal conflicts directly and indirectly affect civilians in an adverse way. The conflicts have been creating extensive emergencies that required only humanitarian assistance to save the life. Humanitarian assistance’s main aim is to prevent human casualties. It also ensures that availability and access to the basics of survival. The main basics of survival offered through humanitarian assistance include sanitation, water, shelter, food, and healthcare. The main priority of humanitarian assistance is to assist people relocated or displaces as a result of the armed conflict.2 It also prioritizes in supporting relief work, prevent the further spread of conflict and then prepare for the rehabilitation of the area and its people. The essay will discuss the role of powerful countries in humanitarian intervention and will find out if the powerful countries only intervene to satisfy their interests. The Middle East poses one of the best examples of this scenario. It has been reported that ISIS has been benefitting from the humanitarian assistance provided by the United States. It is reported that ISIS is not only benefitting from the foodstuffs but also medical supplies. Members of ISIS are also reported to be benefitting from medical clinics offered by the United States. The distribution networks of actors from the United States are secretly paying taxes to ISIS and even putting ISIS members on their payrolls. Truckloads of western and US aid has been getting itself into the ISIS territory and thus assisting the jihadists to rebuild their terror-inspiring caliphate. ISIS is the same militant group that the US is fighting in Iraq and Syria. The aid that mainly gets into the ISIS territory is mainly food and medical equipment meant for the displaced populations in Iraq and Syria. The aid is specifically meant for people displaced from towns and all the hungry civilians. The U.S. Agency for International Development, the European donors, as well as the United Nations, remain the major funding sources for the humanitarian assistance. Washington and European donors have to devise a better method of ensuring that only the deserving people get the assistance and that ISIS does not get further empowerment. Stopping aid would hurt innocent civilians and also the interests of the US and European Union in the area.3 Stopping the humanitarian aid in the area can also be applied as a tool for propaganda purposes by the ISIS, who would most likely blame the west for its problems like hardships. Powerful countries carry out humanitarian assistance using four main actors. It carries out through Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs), unilateral assistance, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and through the military. Most of the funding for humanitarian assistance comes from powerful foreign governments. The funds are then channelled to the main actors that can implement the program. Most of the actors work in tandem with the terms set by their master foreign governments. Effective leadership and coordination of the humanitarian assistance is crucial to the powerful countries funding the program.4 The powerful countries have interests than range from the economic perspective to political and social. The main obstacles to humanitarian assistance include effectiveness, efficiency and the very complex economic, social and political effects that are enforced and monitored by the powerful countries funding the programs. It is very clear nowadays that the assistance is not a panacea because of the conditions of those funding the assistance. The powerful countries externally control the activities of the humanitarian assistance. Though the funding has had self-interests from those funding the programs, a timely and effective humanitarian assistance program can save many lives in the affected areas. Most of the places where there are conflicts are very remote and difficult to undertake the process.5 Infrastructure is poor making the places inaccessible and it is only through effective coordination that the program can succeed in saving civilian lives. The powerful countries have been applying the humanitarian alibi in trying to solve the humanitarian crisis especially in the Sub-Saharan Africa. Humanitarian alibi refers to the misuse of humanitarian workers. Powerful governments propagate the idea with the intention of doing as little as possible especially in regions viewed as economically uncompromising.6 Humanitarian assistance will always give the appearance that the international community and most notably the powerful nations are doing something. In real sense, the humanitarian assistance given to the conflicting civilians without a political assistance is of no importance. A political solution is what most people will always need to end the conflict. In the Sub-Saharan Africa notably Sudan, there has been a feeling that the humanitarian relief efforts offered by the powerful nations like the United States and China have been referred to an excuse to do nothing. There is a feeling that the West does not have great interest in political intervention to assist in ending the conflict that has been there for many years. In most regions especially in the Middle East and Africa, humanitarian assistance has been conducted in a way that ensures only non-combatants are fed, receive shelter, and live healthily. Giving them such assistance does not alleviate them from violence.7 In fact, it can result to the "specter of the well-fed dead." Protection of civilians only, without giving any assistance to the combatants can be a source of a mistaken sense of protection and security carried out by the international community and can result into grave consequences. The manner at which the international community would want to solve the humanitarian crisis by providing humanitarian assistance while achieving their interests can prolong the conflict. The prolonged conflict will then undermine the main goal of saving lives. For the fighting factions, assistance can turn out to be a resource of further grievances, hence the need to fight again for the recourses. On the same note, one faction can decide to impose taxes on the aids and grants. The proceeds will go into the acquiring of more firearms that escalate the conflict further.8 The portion can also go to the fighting faction which can sell the aid portion for resources to acquire firearms. As much as a humanitarian assistance has some shortcomings, it should be continued because its advantages are core and supersede the disadvantages. Humanitarian assistance is designated to save lives of civilians who are mainly vulnerable. It helps to protect and maintain human dignity and aid in alleviating suffering. Humanitarian assistance helps in strengthening preparedness and preventing man-made crisis and natural disasters. Additionally, the humanitarian assistance obtains its guidelines from principles to respect humanity. Humanity remains one of its core principles that help to alleviate suffering and save human lives. Additionally, it is guided by the principle of impartiality which means that the action will only be taken on the basis of need. Discrimination within or between the affected groups is absent among the affected factions. The neutrality principle also guides humanitarian assistance. The principle states that no faction will be favoured when there is an armed conflict or any other dispute that will require humanitarian assistance. The principle of independence also guides humanitarian assistance. It refers to the autonomy of the objectives of humanity from economic, political, military or any other objectives exercised by the actor about the location where there is the implementation of the humanitarian action. Bibliography Barkely, Russell L. AFRICOM Security, Development, and Humanitarian Functions. New York: Nova Science Publishers, 2009. Bass, Gary Jonathan. Freedoms Battle: The Origins of Humanitarian Intervention. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2008. Cahill, Kevin M. The Pulse of Humanitarian Assistance. Top of FormBottom of FormDavid, Wilfred L. The Humanitarian Development Paradigm: Search for Global Justice. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 2004. Foreign Humanitarian Assistance. Washington, D.C.: Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2009. Heyse, Liesbet. Choosing the Lesser Evil Understanding Decision Making in Humanitarian Aid NGOs. Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2006. Nardin, Terry. Humanitarian Intervention. New York: New York University Press, 2006. Polman, Linda, and Liz Waters. The Crisis Caravan: Whats Wrong with Humanitarian Aid? New York: Metropolitan Books, 2010. Read More