Subscription 790/year or 190/quarter

Assistance goes to war

Western countries are increasingly spending their money on countries where they also fight. In a world where military invasion is renamed humanitarian intervention, where has the humanitarian space become?




(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)

[assistance] It was a cold winter in Afghanistan, according to some the coldest in 30 years. But when the commander of the Norwegian force in Meymaneh, Colonel Lieutenant Espen Arntzen, wanted to donate 10.000 dollars to frozen Afghans, he was criticized by the Foreign Ministry (UD), VG told 20. April. The episode is not unique, the reactions to Arntzen's donor will reflect a debate about the military's role in the humanitarian relief efforts that have taken place in the aid policy environments since 2001.
– We have worked a lot with the division of roles between the civilian and the military in Afghanistan, and we believe Norway has an orderly model. Humanitarian neutrality must be preserved as best as possible, says Halvor Sætre, Deputy Director at the Section for Humanitarian Affairs in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Sætre believes that there is good contact between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defense about this division of roles.
– Humanitarian and military involvement have different starting points. The Armed Forces will work with stabilization, then the civilians will take care of humanitarian aid, there is a large degree of agreement on this, both at the official level and the political level in the two ministries. At the same time, it is clear that there are sometimes situations on the ground in Afghanistan where it is necessary to show discretion, for example if people need emergency aid and there are no civilian organizations present.

Unclear fronts

When the Americans launched Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in October 2001, the battle to win the Afghan "hearts and minds" was part of the strategy from the first moment. The international coalition that followed followed with packed lunches and development to the mountains. The aid was part of the military strategy.
Soon, the international forces created what has become known as the Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT). Today there are 25 PRTs in Afghanistan, and a similar number in Iraq. One of the teams in Afghanistan is Norwegian.
But these teams are contentious. The PRT teams' primary task was to stabilize area by area, also by operating traditional emergency and development assistance, such as distributing food and building schools.
Several international organizations, including the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, have been very critical of this practice, which they believe blurs the boundaries between military presence and humanitarian aid. This means that humanitarian organizations can be perceived as a party to a conflict. This has made it particularly difficult in Iraq, where attacks on organizations, and the UN, have led to the withdrawal of most international aid workers and the partial operation of local staff. The so-called neutral, humanitarian space has been closed.
– Humanitarian work has become more dangerous after 11 Sept. 2001, and more and more aid workers are attacked because they are perceived as part of an "occupying force". This means that the civilian organizations need to emphasize that they are not part of the military effort. Discussion about role clarification between civilian and military actors is nothing new, among other things, there were similar dilemmas in the Balkans, but this has become even clearer and even more sensitive due to the sharpened lines of conflict after 2001, says Deputy Director Sætre.
The Norwegian PRT in Meymaneh's main task is to support local authorities and facilitate development. However, not all countries participating in the ISAF forces in Afghanistan have an equally clear distinction
– While we on the Norwegian side assume a clear distinction between humanitarian, developmental and military tasks, there are other nations that follow other guidelines for how development and reconstruction can be taken care of. Norway channels significant aid funds through the UN, NGOs and the Afghan authorities, and does not use military personnel for this type of task in PRT. Other nations use military personnel to carry out some reconstruction tasks. It is a recognized problem within NATO that there has been too great a gap between the practice in the various PRTs, says State Secretary in the Ministry of Defense Espen Barth Eide.
This is the reason why the Armed Forces has been given rules to follow in Afghanistan, to prevent them from mixing military and humanitarian tasks. According to the former commander of the Norwegian forces in the Fayyrab province in Afghanistan, Jørn Erik Berntsen, the Norwegian PRT has now stopped performing development tasks. State Secretary Barth Eide believes that the Norwegian forces are aware of their tasks.
Humanitarian rooms
– From the Norwegian side, we strive to have a holistic approach to our efforts, which means that the overall effort is coordinated with a view to achieving as much synergy as possible, and that this in turn is well integrated into an overall national political strategy defined by the Afghans themselves. There is no isolated military solution to the challenges in Afghanistan, but the military presence is necessary to create a sufficient degree of stability for the other parts of the operation to succeed. At the same time as we strive for the greatest possible synergy at the strategic level, we have a clear policy for clear dividing lines between humanitarian, developmental and military roles in the field. Norway is among the countries that are most clear on this in ISAF, he explains.
From the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Norad it is stated that the Norwegian
The PRT will only drive security and stability, while the Norwegian civilian contribution will drive development.
– We see a need to distinguish between what is security and development. It is not enough to develop the country under military protection. I have great respect for the job the military does, but we can not drive the same trucks, emphasizes director of Norad Poul Engberg-Pedersen.
Maintaining a humanitarian space is also important for voluntary organizations, such as the Norwegian Refugee Council.
– We as aid workers should be able to do our work without being perceived as wearing "green uniforms". Aid organizations and the military have different competencies, says Lisbeth Pilegaard, section chief at the foreign department. NRC has been in Afghanistan longer than the Norwegian military forces and emphasizes that they try to keep the military forces at a distance from the projects they themselves run.
– Sometimes you experience political pressure, the military is there and wants to use civilian aid organizations. We've had some debate. The defense does not always see the problem. Some leaders think we are all there for the same cause, but we are not, says Pilegaard.
– The basic thing is that the aid organizations must not be seen as a warring party, we want separation, and for example do not want a military escort. We have announced that it will be detrimental if the military shows up on our projects. In other areas, schools have been attacked because they were supported by ISAF, says Pilegaard.
Alexander Harang, leader of Fredslaget and author of a new report on security and development, Security for whom? Human security and peace activism for the environment and development, believes the mix between military and humanitarian contributions is still used in the rhetoric.
– The Armed Forces is constantly talking about increasing humanitarian efforts, it is part of the strategy. They run development projects such as building roads and the like, other actors become very dependent on military logistics. The UN is also dependent on, for example, cooperation with the military when it comes to air transport and such, says Harang.
Harang's points are underlined by the stories the Armed Forces themselves post on the internet from the Afghanistan contingent's work. The work of Norwegian voluntary organizations in the same breath as the military contribution is also mentioned here. It is unfortunate, says Harang, who fears that voluntary organizations will be too closely linked to the military. He also fears that the organizations are too closely linked to the forces purely operationally.
– The major Norwegian players are clearly dependent on military protection, this makes them closely intertwined with the Norwegian forces. Another problem is information sharing. The aid workers form a large network of "listening posts", the pressure to share the information you receive is very great. But where is the limit to espionage for one party? Harang asks.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs believes that the guidelines for military and civilian cooperation are clear, this is also something that is discussed with those who are going out.
– There is a close dialogue between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It is also important to have a dialogue with those who are going out from the Armed Forces' side in order to create a mutual understanding. This is discussed every day in the field. There is also extensive contact with the voluntary organizations, says Sætre.
Alternative development strategies
Harang can understand that it is difficult to conduct aid in areas of conflict, but he believes it must be possible to do so without relying on the military. As an example, he cites the Afghanistan Committee, which has been far more critical of the Norwegian military presence than the other organizations and which has been in the country for over 20 years.
– They operated under the Taliban and now operate under Karzai. It shows how much trust they have in the local population, they are locally rooted. They also risk less if the Western military strategy fails. And they can openly criticize the military presence. In 2007, when there was a large margin of error in bombing in Afghanistan, and many civilians died, AIN went out and criticized this after receiving strong reactions to the bombing on the ground. It is worth noting that neither Norwegian Church Aid nor NRC did the same.
Harang also calls for a debate on how aid organizations are affected organisationally and culturally by the military.
– There is also a cultural militarization. For example, NRC trains personnel with the military. The closer you are to the military, the harder it is to be independent.
Norad and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs also believe that the way to become more independent of the military forces is through a better Afghan apparatus on the ground.
– The government has said that there should be a balance between what is given by military contributions and what is set aside for development, good governance and the like. If we are to conduct effective aid, we cannot do it under military protection, says the Norad director. He believes that the best way to go is to connect more strongly with local actors, the buzzword here is "Afghanis"
– We must provide assistance, we must be able to reach those who need it without risking lives and limbs, says Engberg-Perdersen.

You may also like