Humanitarian Assistance in Diplomacy -Development and Challenges- Setsuko KAWAHARA Senior Research Fellow, IIPS 1. Origin of Humanitarian Assistance(HA) 1859 the Battle of Solferino in Italy Mr. Henry Dunant (Swiss businessman) Memory of Solferino 1The wounded and sick should be treated humanely. 2Humanitarian workers should be treated as neutral. Red Cross Establishment of a body for humanitarian work in war(icrc, 1863) Establishment of a treaty on the code of conduct in war (The first International Humanitarian Law: Geneva Convention 1864 ) Establishment of national societies of Red Cross around the world Principles of NIHA (Neutral, Independent and Impartial HA) *H A was traditionally provided under conflict situation by Red Cross. 2. Development of Actors, Policy/Guidelines and Coordination mechanism (1) Actors ICRC, National RC, IFRC(federation established after WW1) UN humanitarian agencies established after WW2 (UNICEF, UNHCR, WFP, UNRWA etc.) Donor countries(us, Japan, EU countries etc. ) International NGOs(e.g. Save the Children, Oxfam)
(2) Coordination mechanism Coordination Mechanism citizen/tax payer UN agencies contribution Budget (tax) Governments contribution Red Cross NGOs contract Financial support affected people/government blue line : financial flow, red line : delivery of service 5 (3) Development of policy & UN Humanitarian Reform Code of Conduct for Red Cross and NGOs(1994) Sphere Handbook for all HA actors as a minimum standard(2000) Principles on Good Humanitarian Donorship(2003) Guidelines on the use of military assets in natural disaster ( Oslo Guidelines 1994) Guidelines on the use of military assets in conflict situation(2003) UN Humanitarian Reform(2005) (Cluster mechanism, Central pool fund etc.) 3. Humanitarian Assistance by the GOJ (1) Tools 1 Disaster Relief Team(medical, S&R, experts) 2 Disaster Relief goods(tents, generators, water purifiers etc) 3Financial contribution(yearly contribution & emergency grant aid) (2)History and legal system on deployment of relief team * 1 st case: A Medical team dispatched to Thailand for Cambodia Refugees (1979). various difficulties(decision making, tasks, responsibility etc.)
1987 Law on the dispatch of Japanese Disaster Relief Team (JDR Law) dispatch in case of natural disaster, man-made disaster and conflict MOFA makes a decision and consults with other Ministers. (quick and flexible decision making) Rescue, medical and expert teams can be dispatched. SDF is not in the scope of the law. 1992 Revision of the JDR law Conflict case is excluded from the scope of the law SDF may be dispatched for 1relief activities, 2transportation of JDR personnel. Carrying weapon is prohibited by the Cabinet decision. 1992 PKO Act 1PKO 2election observation 3humanitarian relief operation 3 = S&R, medical, supply of foods, restoration, transportation etc Deployment requires the Cabinet decision 5 principles Use of small arms and weapon is allowed under a strict condition Caused by natural disaster JDR Law HAHHhh H A Caused by conflict PKO Act PKO - PKO Act 4. Use of Military Assets(Japan and other countries) (1)Japan Under the PKO Act = 4 cases 1994 Rwanda refugee relief operation (medical care & water supply) Other cases are transportation (East Timor, Afghan, Iraqi refugees) Under the JDR Law = 13 cases 1998 Honduras Hurricane relief operation (medical care& water supply) Other cases include medical care, transportation, search and rescue.
2010 Haiti Earthquake (M7: 300,000 victims) SDF Medical unit to succeed the civilian medical team SDF airborne troops for transportation of medical team and equipment (between Miami-Port-au-Prince) 2010 Pakistan floods (20 million people affected) SDF heli-lift operation unit SDF naval &air transportation unit for 6 helicopters (2)Other countries Basic process for deployment is almost the same. (Affected country MOFA or aid agency Ministry of Defense) Basic criteria are almost the same. (to respond the need which cannot be met by civilian teams) The same legal & administrative structure for natural disaster & crisis caused by conflict. No legal prohibition on carrying & use of weapons (in principle, unarmed) 1 US : traditionally very active. In emergency, the Commander can start operation without the direction from the Ministry of States (USAID). One objective is to support the security strategy (cooperation with allies etc). SOFA with more than 100 countries. 2 UK: Even if DFID judges it unnecessary from humanitarian perspective, MOFA can make a political/domestic consideration. In the absence of SOFA, MOU should be negotiated. 3 Germany: approval by the Parliament is necessary (in case of emergency, ex post fact consent is allowed.) Only 3 cases in 10 years = most restrained 4 Australia: No specific legal document. last resort, but to be interpreted practically, as no civilian relief unit exists (20 times in 10 years). Focused on Asia and Pacific. Very active CM joint training and exchange of liaisons. Internal conflicts don t decrease Increasing natural disasters more attention to the role of military assets
5. Challenges (1) Deployment in fragile security situation Basic principle is unarmed. Is it feasible? If a natural disaster occurs in a conflict area, how should Japan respond? (2) Shrinking Humanitarian Space Increasing participation by military in humanitarian activities Those activities might be seen as politically motivated. Very difficult to be seen as completely neutral (e.g. Libya crisis ). In the worst case, HA, as a whole, could be seen in such a way. Humanitarian workers(un, Red Cross) are not treated as neutral, even targeted. Increasing attack to HA workers = shrinking humanitarian space Unintended negative impact on the delivery of service 300 250 200 150 100 50 250 200 150 100 50 0 (in million dollars) 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Victims of humanitarian aid workers(institute in UK) (UNDSS)field security budget 3 (3)Review of basic principles on the use of military assets? Even though globally agreed principles exist, policy and practice differ country by country.(nordic, Swiss, US, Australia, Asian countries etc. ) Divergent views on the use of military asset. No consensus. (NGO, UN agencies, Red Cross) The use of Military assets is, in some cases, unavoidable to effectively respond to humanitarian crisis. Coordination and mutual understanding is much more needed. Japan should play an active role both in discussion and operation.