This study analyzes over 100 camps for Haiti’s internally displaced persons (IDPs), a random sample of one in eight of the 861 in the Port-au-Prince metropolitan area. Despite the billions in aid pledged to Haiti, most of the estimated 1.5 million IDPs are living in substandard conditions. For example, seven months following the earthquake, 40 percent of IDP camps did not have access to water, and 30 percent did not have toilets of any kind. Only a fifth of camps have education, health care, or psycho-social facilities on site. Services in the camps vary quite significantly according to a range of factors. Camps in Cité Soleil have almost no services, while those in Pétion-Ville are better managed. Smaller camps, with 100 or fewer families, have demonstrably fewer services. Camps situated on private land – 71 percent of the sample – are significantly worse off than those on public land. These conditions were prime breeding ground for the cholera epidemic, which as of the submission of the article claimed more than 1,700 lives. This article ends with recommendations to improve the quality of life within the camps.
Shrinking humanitarian space describes the situation where the changing nature of armed conflict and the geopolitical shifts, particularly since 9/11, combine to inhibit the provision of humanitarian assistance. By conflating unproven assumptions about unrelated challenges under this single heading, humanitarian organizations have generated an unnecessarily gloomy outlook on future prospects for their security and access. There is no conclusive evidence that humanitarian space is declining over time; the blurring of boundaries between humanitarianism and other international responses to conflict often does more good than harm; and in seeking to maximize security and access, emphasis should be focused on practical strategies rather than simply on the reassertion of traditional humanitarian principles.
Religious organizations are increasingly visible in development and humanitarian aid, something which has been reflected in the emergence of a new strand of research, focusing on these organizations and their involvement in the provision of development and humanitarian aid. However, most of this literature centers on individual organizations, and there is a lack of systematic information about larger numbers of organizations: What distinguishes them from other organizations? What characterises them as a group? And does it even make sense to consider them as a group?
Juvenile justice is a fundamental component of criminal justice systems and a critical element of successful international development models. The Convention on the Rights of the Child establishes international standards for the treatment of children, including children in contact with law. This mandate is supplemented by juvenile justice provisions in signatory states around the globe. In post-conflict societies, however, juvenile justice efforts must often compete for scarce government resources. In Iraq in particular, the development of the juvenile justice system has encountered systemic challenges as the country has transitioned from continuous conflict and totalitarian rule to democracy and the rule of law. Based in part on the author’s first hand experience working with juvenile justice institutions in Baghdad, this article examines the state of Iraqi juvenile justice, past and present, and offers a strategy for the future of juvenile justice administration in Iraq.
The present article takes a critical look at the new humanitarian ideal and attempts to outline some of the predicaments the ‘new humanitarianism’ rhetoric is facing today. The first part of this paper gives a brief overview of classic and new humanitarianism, humanitarian practice and theory. The second part of the article takes Rwanda as a case study and examines some possible reasons for non-intervention by the international community during the unfolding tragedy in Rwanda in the spring and early summer of 1994. More precisely, it will explore three main views: indifference to what was happening in Rwanda; the psychological phenomenon of diffusion of responsibility and the slippery slope argument. The aim of this paper is to illustrate the pitfalls of humanitarianism, in a changing world, as well as encourage a re-conceptualization of humanitarianism, and of some of those indeterminate rules and ‘slippery’ concepts it is working with.
This articles presents the current universalism vs cultural relativism debate of children’s rights applied to the issue of child soldiers’ disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) programs. Following a brief description of both perspectives and of the most common DDR programs, we present what each perspective identifies in the literature as being the main problems and best practices of DDR programs and how these widely differing problems and best practices reflect the current impasse of the larger philosophical debate. In an effort to move away from this impasse in a pragmatic manner, we recommend the development of programming by a multidisciplinary team of experts who can come to paint a multifaceted and grounded understanding of the conflict and the environment into which the child soldier must reintegrate, thereby creating programming that is both respectful of fundamental human rights and adaptable to the complex reality of each individual child soldier.
Mediation of peace agreements bringing an end to armed conflict has become increasingly popular since the end of the Cold War. In the context of armed conflict, mediation has been undertaken by states, non-governmental organisations, regional and international organisations, and even individuals. Until recently, international peace mediation was undertaken on an ad hoc basis and in the absence of formal guidelines. Recently, however, various attempts have been made to formalise and professionalise international peace mediation to a certain extent. The UN and EU have set up offices dedicated to mediation, non-governmental organisations have been branded as ‘mediation experts’ and have led and supported mediation processes in conflict zones and numerous sets of guidelines, seeking to guide and regulate mediators have been created. This paper analyses the theory and practice of international peace mediation, with a special focus on the codes of conduct which seek to direct these mediators.
The study reveals that hunger is as much the result of poor or weak governance precipitating economic downturn as that of episodic natural or manmade events causing individual and community crises. Effective governance provides an enabling environment which facilitates effective institutional capacity, and the policies and legislative measures needed to pave the way so that individuals, households and communities acquire the sustained ability to reduce hunger. Action by a government to genuinely engage in anti-hunger action fuels the shared views and determination of its citizens to enhance the quality of their lives. This can be accomplished by leveraging physical, social and intellectual resources towards nation building. Humanitarian organisations must now build on their experience and expertise to forge a coalition with their national and international partners in order to strengthen the capacity of national systems for greater accountability to guarantee hunger solutions for their citizens.
This article analyses the case of the steering committees established by the Italian NGO INTERSOS in Lebanon following 2006 war between Israel and Hizbullah. They are proposed here as an example of transformative humanitarianism which is able to fully respect the principles of neutrality, impartiality and independence, acting at the same time as a mean to strengthen state’s authority, and to reinforce the linkages between the central government and the local civil society. Obviously the experience which will be described in this article is deeply rooted in the context of Lebanon, however some relevant features could prove extremely useful in other areas of intervention.
The forced displacement of 2.2 million persons during the 1992-1995 war in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) was not a by-product of war but served the purpose of ethnic cleansing. An important aspect of redress for forced migration and displacement is the right of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) to freely choose among three durable solutions: repatriation/return, integration, and resettlement. In the context of post-Dayton BiH, this right has been an artificial one as it has been exercised in a political environment that prioritises return. The goal of reversing ethnic cleansing through return has dominated what should be a neutral humanitarian process focused on the needs of individual refugees and IDPs. Weak conditions for sustainable return combined with the absence of alternatives to return have left many Bosnians without access to any durable solution. There is an urgent need to depoliticize the humanitarian space and to provide refugees, IDPs and returnees with genuine options.