Journal Article > CommentaryFull Text
Rev Int Croix Rouge. 2021 October 13; Volume First View; 1-16.; DOI:10.1017/S1816383121000266
Marin AP, Ali R
Rev Int Croix Rouge. 2021 October 13; Volume First View; 1-16.; DOI:10.1017/S1816383121000266
In certain contexts associated with counterterrorism, some governments and military forces have stigmatized civilians, not because of the acts they perform but rather from loose associations with groups perceived as “terrorists”, based on geographical proximity or common social, ethnic and religious backgrounds. Access to humanitarian assistance has been affected by this stigmatization, and in specific geographical areas it has been blocked, restricted, made conditional or undermined. This article draws on recent literature and examples to argue that certain counterterrorism frameworks and practices have inhibited the impartial delivery of aid to all affected populations.
Journal Article > ReviewFull Text
Rev Int Croix Rouge. 2024 March 25; Online ahead of print; 1-30.; DOI:10.1017/S1816383124000092
DuBois M, Healy S
Rev Int Croix Rouge. 2024 March 25; Online ahead of print; 1-30.; DOI:10.1017/S1816383124000092
One of the four core humanitarian principles, impartiality's substantive ethical and deeply operational nature directs aid agencies to seek and deliver aid on the basis of non-discrimination and in proportion to the needs of crisis-affected people. Designed to operationalize the principle of humanity, impartiality is challenged by a plethora of external factors, such as the instrumentalization of aid, bureaucratic restriction, obstruction by States or non-State armed groups, and insecurity. Less visible and less examined are factors internal to aid agencies or the sector as a whole. Based on a desk review of the literature and the authors’ experience working with Médecins Sans Frontières, this article explores shortcomings in how the humanitarian sector understands and operationalizes impartiality, placing the focus on these internal factors.
Beginning with the definition of impartiality, the article focuses on inadequacies in the practice of impartiality's twin pillars: non-discrimination and proportionality in the delivery of aid. Key conclusions include the necessity of an active rather than passive approach to non-discrimination, and the need for greater commitment to proportionality. In extending this analysis, the article looks more deeply at how aid organizations approach the humanitarian principles, identifying shortcomings in the way that the sector operationalizes, engages with and evaluates those principles. Given the sector's limited inclusion of or accountability towards people in crisis, its exercise of impartiality seems particularly problematic in relation to its power to decide the who and what of aid delivery, and to define the needs which it will consider humanitarian.
The objective of this article is to reset humanitarians’ conceptual and operational understanding of impartiality in order to better reflect and protect humanity in humanitarian praxis, and to help humanitarians navigate the emergent challenges and critical discussions on humanitarian action's position in respect to climate change, triple-nexus programming, or simply a future where staggering levels of urgent needs vastly outstrip humanitarian resources.
Beginning with the definition of impartiality, the article focuses on inadequacies in the practice of impartiality's twin pillars: non-discrimination and proportionality in the delivery of aid. Key conclusions include the necessity of an active rather than passive approach to non-discrimination, and the need for greater commitment to proportionality. In extending this analysis, the article looks more deeply at how aid organizations approach the humanitarian principles, identifying shortcomings in the way that the sector operationalizes, engages with and evaluates those principles. Given the sector's limited inclusion of or accountability towards people in crisis, its exercise of impartiality seems particularly problematic in relation to its power to decide the who and what of aid delivery, and to define the needs which it will consider humanitarian.
The objective of this article is to reset humanitarians’ conceptual and operational understanding of impartiality in order to better reflect and protect humanity in humanitarian praxis, and to help humanitarians navigate the emergent challenges and critical discussions on humanitarian action's position in respect to climate change, triple-nexus programming, or simply a future where staggering levels of urgent needs vastly outstrip humanitarian resources.
Journal Article > CommentaryAbstract
Rev Int Croix Rouge. 2015 March 4; Volume 96; DOI:10.1017/S1816383115000065
Hofman M, Perache AH
Rev Int Croix Rouge. 2015 March 4; Volume 96; DOI:10.1017/S1816383115000065
Journal Article > CommentaryAbstract
Rev Int Croix Rouge. 2013 September 12; Volume 94 (Issue 887); DOI:10.1017/S1816383113000374
Calain P
Rev Int Croix Rouge. 2013 September 12; Volume 94 (Issue 887); DOI:10.1017/S1816383113000374
Journal Article > CommentaryAbstract
Rev Int Croix Rouge. 2014 June 11; Volume 95; DOI:10.1017/S1816383114000186
SaDa C, Duroch F, Taithe B
Rev Int Croix Rouge. 2014 June 11; Volume 95; DOI:10.1017/S1816383114000186
The aim of this article is to carry out a preliminary analysis of issues relating to the types of violence that are directed against humanitarian medical missions. Starting from the observation that violence can cause some degree of disruption for a medical organisation such as Médecins Sans Frontières, despite its wide experience which has brought it much wisdom and generated numerous and sporadic responses to such events, the article offers a more subtle analysis of terms and of situations of violence so as to contribute to the establishment of a research project and, in a second phase, to an awareness-raising campaign focusing on these complex phenomena.
Journal Article > ReviewAbstract
Rev Int Croix Rouge. 2015 March 30; Volume 96 (Issue 894); DOI:10.1017/S1816383115000107
Duroch F, Schulte-Hillen C
Rev Int Croix Rouge. 2015 March 30; Volume 96 (Issue 894); DOI:10.1017/S1816383115000107
Over the past ten years, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) has provided medical care to almost 118,000 victims of sexual violence. Integrating related care into MSF general assistance to populations affected by crisis and conflicts has presented a considerable institutional struggle and continues to be a challenge. Tensions regarding the role of MSF in providing care to victims of sexual violence and when facing the multiple challenges inherent in dealing with this crime persist. An overview of MSF’s experience and related reflection aims to share with the reader, on the one hand,the complexity of the issue, and on the other, the need to continue fighting for the provision of adequate medical care for victims of sexual violence,which despite the limitations is feasible.