Upload
elfrieda-carson
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
OUTSIDEACTORS
DONORS andMILITARY
Topics Last Week NGOs by Gerry Martone
TOPICS Next week readings Donors (perhaps) Military
Review of earlier discussion of military intervention
Tasks Implementation Alternatives Conclusions
Guest Speaker: Tanya Domi
Remember the 4 themes? WHEN AND HOW TO
INTERVENE? (SOVEREIGNTY IN INTRA-STATE CONFLICTS)
CONTINUUM DEBATE: LINKING RELIEF, REHABILITATION AND DEVELOPMENT
DECLINING RESOURCES, DISPARITIES IN ALLOCATION
MANAGEMENT INTER-ORGANIZATIONAL INTRA-ORGANIZATIONAL
ODA as a Percentage of Government Expenditure
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Aid to Developing Countries in Millions of Dollars
Source: Based on 1998 OECD statistics. World Disasters Report 2000.
Aid to Developing Countries as Percentage of GNP
Source: Based on 1998 OECD statistics. World Disasters Report 2000.
Aid to Developing Countries as Percentage of GNP from 1956 to 1998
Source: Based on 1998 OECD statistics. World Disasters Report 2000.
What is Aid Spent On?
Source: Global Humanitarian Emergencies: Trends and Projections, 1999-2000. National Intelligence Council, August 1999.
How Aid is Given
EU (9.8%)
Multilateral (23.3%)
Bilateral (66.9%)
Bilateral Spending for Emergencies 1998
Source: Based on 1998 OECD statistics. World Disasters Report 2000.
Increase in Emergency Spending in Dollars 1980s - 1990s
0
1
2
3
4
1984-1985
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Billions of Dollars
Source: World Disasters Report, Oxford University Press, 1998
Emergency Relief as Percentage of All Development Assistance
Source: Based on 1998 OECD statistics. World Disasters Report 2000.
Top Donors to Refugee Aid Agencies in Millions of Dollars
United States 444.9Japan 160.1European Commission 138.9Norway 70.3Sweden 68.3Netherlands 60.9Denmark 56.4Germany 52.9Switzerland 49.8Canada 38.8
United Kingdom 36.3
Australia 26.8
Finland 18.0
Adapted from World Refugee Survey 2000, U.S. Committee for Refugees.
Top Donors to Refugee Aid Agencies in US Dollars Per Capita Population
Norway 15.62Denmark 10.63Sweden 7.67Switzerland 7.01 Luxembourg 5.97Netherlands 3.86Finland 3.47United States 1.63Australia 1.41Canada 1.27Japan 1.26Ireland 1.10Belgium 0.89Kuwait 0.71
Adapted from World Refugee Survey 2000, U.S. Committee for Refugees.
Development Assistance as a Percentage of Military Expenditure
0
25
50
75
100
USA UK Germany France Canada Japan Norway Holland Sweden Denmark
Source: Adapted from United Nations Development Program. Human Development Report. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1996.
Pe
rce
nt
of
mili
tary
ex
pen
dit
ure
Percentage of Bilateral Assistance Allocated to Emergencies 1996
0
5
10
15
20
25
AustriaNorwaySwedenFinland
LuxembourgNetherlands
EU
IrelandCanadaItaly
Switzerland
UK USA
GermanyAustraliaDenmarkBelgium
New Zealand
PortugalFranceSpainJapan
Percent
Source: World Disasters Report, Oxford University Press, 1998
Percentage of Foreign Assistance Spent as Emergency Aid, 1999
0
5
10
15
20
25
NorwaySweden
UKCanada
US
DenmarkAustraliaJapan France
Donors: Conclusions ODA has started to increase slightly again in the last
2 years; but it is a small part of:
GNP military spending
Emergency spending seems to be cyclical Multilateral aid is relatively small: Bretton Woods
institutions are doing better than the UN NGOs grew financially in the past decade Also, there are huge disparities in allocation Absorptive capacity can also be a problem
Military Remember the Breakdown of
Distinctions: we discussed the overlap/interdependence among Security, Relief, Rehabilitation, and Development. In addition, we discussed the Continuum Debate.
Remember discussion on types of intervention
TYPES OF INTERVENTIONSMilitary Security
Council decision
Department of Peace-keeping Operations (DPKO)
all other organizations
++ Legal (Moral)
Military Civilian (UN mainly)
Secretary General initiative
Department of Political Affairs (DPA)
all other organizations
++ Moral (Legal)
Civilian (NGO mainly)
no central decision (state sovereignty)
all organi-zations (but not SC or SG)
++ Moral (- Legal)
MILITARY INTERVENTION
Double nature of the military: due to its power and technology, it is a decisive threat to life & order, and the instrument to protect both
When to use force? Non-intervention is the norm to contain
powerful states and protect sovereignty
MILITARY INTERVENTION
One big exception (allow use of force): Genocide (but no force used to stop Rwandan
genocide) Human Rights abuses? Cross-border impact
Hehir (chapter 2) wants to broaden the possibilities for intervention in case of human rights abuse in failed states
MILITARY INTERVENTION If one uses force, distinguish:
jus ad bellum (defining the conditions under which force can be used)
jus in bello (defining how force is to be legitimately employed)
The latter will get (a bit) more attention today
Normally, the Security Council decides, one big exception: NATO action in Serbia/Kosovo
MILITARY INTERVENTION Different types of military intervention:
preventive measures peacekeeping
1st generation: separating warring groups 2nd generation: peace-building with an essential security
component (incl. facilitation and protection of humanitarian assistance)
peace-building peace-making peace enforcement: actual use of force to end conflict
and/or to protect minorities, such as the Kurds and the no-fly zone, (it can include the facilitation and protection of humanitarian relief).
MILITARY INTERVENTION Differentiate actual use of force from facilitating &
protecting peace accords and hum. relief! In all but peace-enforcement consent of the parties
is crucial Peace enforcement has been the least successful
in practice, e.g., Somalia. It can also compromise impartiality/neutrality of humanitarian organizations
threat of force (deterrence) does not function as in inter-state conflict. It is more limited, because factions are already fighting. After Somalia and Rwanda, most thugs don’t have a high opinion of peacekeeping forces.
TASKS (facilitation & protection) The release and transfer of prisoners (military
can take care of security and logistics) Logistics (as with natural disasters, e.g., food
transport, infrastructure (tents, bridges, simple buildings, heavy equipment))
Search for missing persons Mine awareness Civilian-Military Cooperation (CIMIC), e.g.,
information exchange, security meetings
TASKS (facilitation & protection) NGOs & military can train each other on
operations, on rebuilding, on international humanitarian law, etc.
Security/Protection is a hot issue. Generally, NGOs like to remain independent (see Tauxe on ICRC)
Implementation: Mandate of the Military
Under which Security Council resolution? What are the exact contents (tasks, enforcement, duration)?
Which countries contribute? What can they contribute (equipment, quality of manpower, etc.)
Who leads the force? quality of the commander of the forces; quality of the Special Representative of the Secretary
General & UN HQs’ support; Do donor countries support the SRSG and
commander?
(Do we need African operations led by Africans?)
Implementation: Cooperation of the Military, Civilians (NGOs)
Protection (security of the NGOs) by the military in Somalia actually led to more violence. This highlights some possible military shortcomings: mission creep (from security role to political, enforcing
role); Generally, weapons reinforce language of war; Military are not a democratic institution. This leads to
cultural differences: not participatory role of hierarchy/ centralization (vs. decentralization &
field initiative in most NGOs) different meaning of protection (security vs. int. refugee
law)
Alternatives1.Humanitarian action alone (the other two types).
Sometimes this has been more effective, sometimes this was an excuse for international political inaction. Central question: are the root causes tackled?
2.Development cooperation (same question)
3.Sanctions (blunt instrument) & Conditionality
4. Denunciations
5. Denial of diplomatic privileges
4. Let them fight it out the end of the war hurting stalemate/ripeness of conflict can imply genocide?
Conclusions Comparing the three types of intervention, there
are more civilian missions and NGO activities than military interventions
Peace enforcement only in rare cases & it can compromise humanitarian actors
Military/UN/NGO relationship is here to stay, but it is often an uneasy relationship
Different perception of mandates; how do Military perceive their mandate and how do NGOs perceive their mandate? In principle, the mandates can be complementary & none of the authors in Moore wants to completely abolish the use of force
Conclusions Define what you mean by use of force
(enforcement or facilitation and protection) Check alternatives, but these also have their
problems. Central question is and remains are the root causes being tackled!
Conclusions More intra-state conflicts have led to a broader
interpretation of security: aids, underdevelopment, civil wars (terrorism), etc. are now increasingly seen as international security threats
However, the preference is to delineate the respective roles and tasks of humanitarian and military actors better (whereas in the areas of relief, rehabilitation, and development the tendency is towards more complete forms of reintegration)
TOPICS Next week readings Donors (perhaps) Military
Review of earlier discussion of military intervention
Tasks Other roles of the military Interaction with NGOs Conclusions
Guest Speaker: Tanya Domi