Photo credit: UNICEF / Romenzi

The
purpose
of
this
preconsultation briefing paper is to
stimulate discussions at the World
Humanitarian Summit Regional
Consultation for the Europe and
Others group in Budapest on
February 3 and 4, 2015.
This initial briefing paper has been
prepared by the Regional Steering
Group and will be followed up by a
more detailed background paper
closer to the regional consultation
in Budapest. The discussions are
expected to provide perspectives
and recommendations in the lead up
to the World Humanitarian Summit
in Istanbul in May 2016.

Serving the needs of people in

conflict
Pre-Consultation Briefing Note for the Europe and Others
Group Consultation
An estimated 10.7 million people were displaced by conflict or
persecution in 2013, compared to 7.6 million people displaced in 2012.
Globally, the number of internally displaced people (IDPs) rose from
28.8 million in 2012 to an unprecedented 33.3 million in 2013 and the
number of refugees from 15.4 million to 16.7 million. At 51.2 million,
the total number of people living in forced displacement in 2013 was at
the highest level since the Second World War.
Conflict in the last twenty years has happened also in Europe and
Others Group (EOG) in a range of different contexts, some of which
resulted in protracted or un-resolved conflict with lasting humanitarian
consequences.: political re-organization (whose effects continue to
www.worldhumanitariansummit.org

WORLD HUMANITARIAN SUMMIT

this day) following the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet
Union; armed conflicts in the Western Balkans; the situation in the occupied
Palestinian territory; and more recently the conflict in Syria (which is causing
heavy refugee flows into Turkey among other countries). Additional conflict risks
exist. Moreover, the involvement of many states in the region in the fight against
terrorism/stabilization operations in various contexts represents an important
element of the regional security dimension. In past and current conflict situations
in the region, humanitarian aid for people in conflict has unfortunately been
politicized to some extent, which partly blunted the strong capacity of domestic,
international and regional bodies to deliver aid.
The specificity of stakeholder roles within Europe and Others with regard to serving the people in
need in conflicts can be categorized as follows:

Donorship: numerous donors that provide substantial assistance to humanitarian operations

addressing the populations affected by conflicts are based in EOG.

Hospitality: the region provides refuge/shelter/asylum to many displaced persons who have had
to flee conflicts in their respective countries, including from within the region.

Experience: many international humanitarian organizations have established headquarters in

this region, and have also implemented humanitarian responses to conflicts within the region
and around the world. This includes the United Nations and many of its agencies; the ICRC and
the IFRC, representing the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement; NGOs and their networks.

Affected by Conflict: home to its own history of conflict, the region itself, and thus its people,

governments, organizations have a deep understanding of the role of humanitarian assistance

in times of need.

Normative framework: this region is a birthplace of international humanitarian law and

humanitarian principles that have evolved into a global basis for the principled humanitarian
action.

The discussions at the Regional Consultations around this theme are expected to help all stakeholders to
reflect on their roles and responsibilities in humanitarian action in conflicts, redefine, if necessary, their
approaches. It is hoped that the discussions will provide a strong basis for a universal understanding of
the IHL and the humanitarian principles, and result in the universal implementation of them. Lastly, it
is imperative that humanitarian actors responding in conflict settings collect and share good practice,
as well as examples of where the delicate balance between the principles and other factors has been
lost or misjudged.

Areas for Discussion

Access & Acceptance/Safety of Aid Workers
In contrast to natural disaster situations, conflict implies intentional physical and psychological harm,
restricted access to people in need and a high degree of insecurity to people and communities and
those seeking to offer assistance and protection to them. While recognizing the emerging trends and
imperatives in the international humanitarian context, upholding the humanitarian principles, with
particular emphasis on humanity, impartiality, neutrality, and independence, is critical in guaranteeing
safe access to those in need and in maintaining acceptance, safety and protection of staff and volunteers.
2

www.worldhumanitariansummit.org

WORLD HUMANITARIAN SUMMIT

Assistance and protection activities must be implemented using a context-sensitive do no harm
approach and should attempt to connect communities rather than divide them unintentionally, while
building on existing self-protection and assistance mechanisms.

How can humanitarian workers create/increase their acceptance by the affected population and
armed actors?

What mechanisms can regional organizations offer in safeguarding access?

Recognizing that eliminating security risks for humanitarian workers in conflict is impossible,
how can they be minimized, what are the best practices in this regard?

How well established are existing institutional frameworks and good practices on safe access,

such as the Safer Access Framework? How do they work in practice and what lessons/best
practices can be learnt and shared in the humanitarian sector?

What role could institutional donors play in ensuring safe access and the safety of humanitarian
actors?

Challenges to Aid Effectiveness in Conflict Settings

While aid effectiveness is itself a theme of the regional consultations and the World Humanitarian
Summit as a whole, there are specific challenges to effectiveness within conflict settings. The EOG region
is host to affected states, donor governments and military actors, whose actions must be guided either
by the humanitarian principles or international guidelines, including on civil-military coordination. It is
critical in conflict settings that mandates of different actors and stakeholders, especially external ones,
are clear to all parties.
Politicization of aid is a risk also within this region. Principled action and adherence to the Good
Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) principles should be the starting point. When humanitarian objectives
are subordinated to political, military or security objectives, politicization endangers the lives and work
of humanitarians as they risk being perceived as an extension of donor countries foreign policy. Their
neutrality is compromised when aid is contingent on political decisions, when funding is restricted, and
when access to crisis-affected regions is not secure.

What can be done to ensure that humanitarian assistance and the agencies that implement it are
not subordinated to political objectives?

How can donors ensure that the needs of populations remain at the center of their approach?,
How do we ensure that the level of civil military coordination and/or cooperation is appropriate
to the context? And well-understood by all?

When there is a multiplicity of actors, beyond humanitarian, how do we operate? What are roles
and responsibilities of all actors?

Accountability to Affected People in Conflict

The approach to Accountability to Affected People (AAP) cannot be limited to the parameters of the
response origin, be it conflict or a disaster stemming from natural hazards. It is worth noting that AAP
in conflict settings does bring specific challenges and requires different conceptual approaches and
operational models.
All actors in the humanitarian system have distinct accountabilities, especially towards the people
3

www.worldhumanitariansummit.org

WORLD HUMANITARIAN SUMMIT

affected by humanitarian crises. As further elaborated below, States have the fundamental responsibility
to protect people on their territories as well as to facilitate humanitarian actors access to affected
people. Humanitarian actors are accountable to affected people through ensuring needs and priorities
of affected people are fully reflected in program assessment, design, decision-making, implementation,
and monitoring. Likewise, donors are accountable to affected people through that adequate and
unrestricted resources are made available to ensure the protection and needs of affected people are
met.
Not prioritized as lifesaving, AAP is often not done. Excuses are many: time constraints; bureaucratic
impediments; lack of incentives; funding, security and political constraints; differences of cultural and
social values. The proof of its importance is clear though, post-implementation evaluations consistently
show that assistance would have been more effective had humanitarian actors listened and responded
to affected people better. Beyond programming, providing affected people an opportunity to voice their
opinions and provide feedback enhances their sense of well-being and can help them adapt to the
challenges they face. Participation is a form of engaging affected people in operations, is identified as
an essential foundation of peoples right to life with dignity.
The contribution of different stakeholders, including affected people themselves, is important in defining
not only the advantages of AAP in conflicts, but the challenges to its success and possible solutions. The
WHS provides an opportunity to reconsider and define roles and responsibilities to ensure the voices of
the affected people are heard.

How do we ensure that population groups directly affected by a conflict are involved in the
planning, implementation and evaluation of humanitarian operations?

Should efforts be made to organize a collective representation on the part of affected population
groups, thus enabling them to engage in dialogue with humanitarian organizations?

Should the involvement of affected populations become an obligation for the humanitarian
organizations?

Are the IASC commitments to AAP taken into proper consideration in program design and
implementation? Are these commitments sufficient?

What kind of remote AAP tools can be used in areas where there is little or no access?
Does the Good Enough Guide provide enough guidance for all humanitarian actors responding
in conflicts?

How can humanitarian actors balance the various accountabilities they bear to ensure that
sufficient prioritization is given to accountability to affected peoples?

What role and responsibilities do donors bear in promoting AAP within programs addressing the
needs of people affected by conflicts?

Humanitarian Principles and IHL

The specific nature and characteristics of armed conflicts, notably high levels of violence and political
polarization, generates particular humanitarian needs and constraints. This requires humanitarian
organizations to tailor their response strategies to increase their acceptance, security and access to
people and communities in need. These situations require from States a strict adherence to international
humanitarian law (IHL) and the adherence by humanitarian actors to the humanitarian principles.
4

www.worldhumanitariansummit.org

WORLD HUMANITARIAN SUMMIT

All States in the region are party to the Geneva Conventions, a key instrument of IHL, and have
humanitarian obligations in that respect. In addition, the region is a birthplace of the IHL and the
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. The idea of neutral and impartial assistance
and protection to all in need offered to the world 150 years ago as the First Geneva Convention and the
Fundamental Principles adopted exactly 50 years ago have become a universal basis of humanitarian
work around the world today and a foundation of the contemporary global humanitarian system.
The IHL, the primary legal framework in conflict, includes the universally ratified 1949 Geneva
Conventions (196 State parties) and their two 1977 Additional Protocols (with respectively 174 and
167 State parties). States are central to humanitarian response in conflicts. They have the primary
responsibility to respect and to ensure respect of international humanitarian law (art. 1 common
to the 4 Geneva Conventions), including to respond to the needs of victims of armed conflicts. When
unable to do so themselves, States must consent to offers of services from humanitarian organizations
and facilitate relief that is humanitarian and impartial in character and conducted without adverse
distinction (art. 70 API and 18 APII).
The essence of the humanitarian principles - humanity, neutrality, impartiality, independence - is
that humanitarian action must be carried out based on the needs of affected people without any
discrimination, and on remaining neutral towards and independent of any party or objective other than
the humanitarian imperative in order to gain acceptance and, eventually, safe access. This is important
to emphasize as the debate on the humanitarian principles has become entangled with the debate
on the UN integration, UN peace-keeping and peace enforcement missions, as well as the increasing
complexity of the political environment including the politicization of humanitarian aid and re-emergence
of strong emphasis on national sovereignty in humanitarian emergencies.

What is our understanding of the humanitarian and impartial character of aid as enshrined in
IHL? Does it imply the concepts of neutrality and independence?

Can you provide examples of the universal character of the humanitarian principles?
How can respect for IHL and humanitarian principles be increased? What is the role of donor
governments in that respect?

Can you give examples proving that adherence to the humanitarian principles is a solution to
more efficient humanitarian action in the increasingly complex conflict environment?

Humanitarian partnerships and neutrality: how does it work?

How can IHL inform antiterrorist measures that are undertaken as part of law enforcement?
Protection
Ensuring that a persons fundamental rights are met and basic needs are fulfilled, protection goes
beyond upholding legal rights to include life-saving and essential assistance so as to enable affected
people to live a life in safety and dignity. Protection of all persons affected and at risk, as a binding
legal framework, must inform humanitarian decision-making and response, including engagement
with States and non-State parties to the conflict. Protection must be central to all stages of response,
including within preparedness efforts, immediate and life-saving activities, and the longer-term
response programming. These efforts should continue after the conflict, until the needs end.
To ensure the protection of people in conflict, the humanitarian system must:
Affirm the universality of the humanitarian principles by drawing out relevant traditions,
5

www.worldhumanitariansummit.org

WORLD HUMANITARIAN SUMMIT

practices and beliefs across cultures and societies.

Emphasize access of humanitarian actors to conflict/disaster affected populations, in line

with the humanitarian principles.

Request all actors to ensure the safety and security of humanitarian aid workers and assets.
Emphasize community-based protection and empowerment policies as a means to respond
effectively to humanitarian crises.

Promote adherence to the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, and encourage

States to consider adopting regional instruments (e.g. Kampala Convention) and national
legislation and/or administrative provisions

What forms of complementary protection could be provided to ensure the respect of the
fundamental rights of people in conflict?

What are the obligations of state and non-state actors in ensuring the protection of people in
conflict?

Are there limits to the needs of people in conflict?

What should be the key factors to inform humanitarian decision-making and response?
How can communities be mobilized and empowered to respond to humanitarian crisis?

Some of the issues likely to be explored in greater depth in the Europe and Others
consultation include:
1. How and under what conditions can there be more coherent and longer-term planning,
investment, and joint action among humanitarian, development and peacebuilding actors to
meet peoples needs in protracted conflict situations?
2. Given that humanitarians usually have little direct influence over the degree to which parties to
conflict respect international humanitarian law, what new ideas could work in ensuring affected
peoples safe access to humanitarian relief and the safety of humanitarian actors?
3. People in conflicts repeatedly rank security among their three main concerns (and for a majority,
it is the highest concern). How should humanitarian actors, including donors, contribute to
better protection?
4. Participants to the WHS regional consultation for Eastern and Southern Africa recommended
convening an international dialogue on [the negative impact of counter-terrorism legislation
on humanitarian action] to remove barriers for the receipt of funds by particularly faith-based
organizations and the transfer of remittances to specific countries. How could this be best
pursued?
5. What kind of dialogue (if any) with parties to a conflict should humanitarians engage in?

www.worldhumanitariansummit.org