MIHA Module 1 Assignment

Student No: 108049205
Department of Politics
University of York
Electronic Essay Submission Cover Sheet
This cover sheet should be the first page of your essay.
Examination Number: 108049205
Module: 1
Essay Deadline: 6/5/2013
I confirm that I have
- checked that I am submitting the correct and final version of my essay
- formatted my essay in line with departmental guidelines
- conformed with University regulations on academic integrity
- included an accurate word count
- put my examinations number on every page of the essay
- not written my name anywhere in the essay
- saved my essay in pdf format
PLEASE TICK BOX TO CONFIRM √

Securitization of aids in Humanitarian affairs: Provision of aids in Afghanistan
Context
(2001-2005)
Abstract: This paper seeks to outline issues surrounding the politicization and militarization of
aids resulting from the use of comprehensive approaches, and to highlight the new challenges that
this trend poses for civilian populations, non governmental organizations and humanitarian aid
workers. The paper would also want to demarcate between military and humanitarian activities.
Through the examination of the Afghanistan case, it aims to investigate and analyze the impact of
civil-military relations in lieu of the humanitarian principles. The findings would dwell on the
purpose, roles, cooperation of civil-military interventions and consequences upon Afghanistan
after the 11 September. Whether the securitization of aids was the necessary approach and a
peaceful order or dangerous disorder, this study will tell us.
Key Words: Humanitarian aids, securitization of aids, politicization and militarization of aids,
stabilization, coherence and comprehensive approaches.

Humanitarian Aid Context.
Traditionally, effective humanitarian aid is supposed to help save lives, protect human
rights and build livelihoods. Yet in conflicts and politically unstable settings like
Afghanistan and Iraq, lifesaving humanitarian assistance and longer-term efforts to
reduce poverty are hard to achieve as aid is used primarily to pursue donors’ own
narrow political and security objectives. From onset, the concept and context of
humanitarianism was motivated and influenced by volunteering individuals and charity
institutions who provided emergency relief aids and care to victims of wars and
disasters. Later, as the result of increasing political conflicts and natural disasters
happening across the globe, it has made humanitarianism to be motivated by
professionalism being managed by professional and academic institutions. Because of its
broader scope and sophisticated concepts; humanitarian aid had to have in places
internationally acceptable ethical standards and principles to guide both humanitarian
organizations and aid workers during supply of emergency aids or humanitarian
development support, which is why humanitarian aid organizations must get involved
in sensitive interactions with state politics, military, civilian community and donor
governments in order to effectively deliver relief aids and services to particular
countries experiencing or affected by conflicts or disasters of all categories.
This led to emergence of New Wars and Complex emergencies necessitating
humanitarian activities to cover issues of human rights, development and law besides
delivery of assistance. Since the interventions are carried out in situations of armed
conflicts, humanitarianism had to include military components in its work in order to
provide peace and security to aids workers and beneficiary community. The reason the
military component has become part of humanitarian interventions is due to the

complexity of emergencies happening in many places globally characterized by
political divisions, violent conflicts of many forms, ethnic factions, tribal and religious
conflicts and some times breakdown of states drawing the attention and responses of
international community and NGOs. Whenever this happens, it has created automatic
concern and demand for external support to cool down the situation or soliciting
support from international humanitarian organizations to reduce and alleviate human
suffering or provide relief aids and care to victims of conflicts, civil war or disasters.
Therefore the humanitarian interventions of 1990s has given hopes to the international
community to actively respond to global conflicts and disasters because it provides
coordinated approach to crises by involving military, diplomatic relations, humanitarian
aids and development instruments within integrated political framework of host
countries to ensure safety, support and protection to relief workers and established
security to the beneficiary community.
The aftermath of 9/11 has also made the security agenda to triumph over the plights of
vulnerable populations because aid has become a politicized tool to stabilize
Afghanistan and Iraq as fragile states in the name of anti-terrorism, and aid is being
used as a strategy to appease communities and to win “hearts and minds”. Through
comprehensive approaches to stabilization, political, military and development has been
integrated as complimentary instruments which motivated military components be
used as security support to humanitarian assistance for providing security benefits to
populations affected by armed conflicts and peace keeping troops protection. As a
result, humanitarian agencies often find themselves caught up in a situation where they
are struggling to carry out their work according to humanitarian principles of

“humanity, impartiality, independence and neutrality”, the victims’ right to assistance and
risk of harm, attacks and sometimes massacred by the opposing belligerents.
It is against the above background the researcher showed interest to investigate impacts
of the securitization of aids to Afghanistan through the involvement of international
assistance through civil-military cooperation and lessons to learn from. The study
findings covered the themes below:
I. Involvement of International Assistance
Why involvement of international assistance? International assistance focuses on the
questions of when or how military intervention is required to provide security and
safety for humanitarian aids delivery during armed conflicts can achieve humanitarian
benefits. The goal and objective of securitization of aid is to ensure for a safer world
during provision and delivery of humanitarian aids in emergency situations. Since the
11 September 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, the US has widely been seen as
providing global leadership and intellectual innovations in the development and
enforcement of both domestic and international counter-terror regimes (Naz K.
Modirzadeh, Dustin A. Lewis and Claude Bruderlein, 2011: 628). The US has implored
the doctrine of humanitarian interventions as a strategy to invade Afghanistan and Iraq
in the name of human rights protection and humanitarian assistance (Foley, 2008). As
being argued by Foley, the involvement of international assistance in Afghanistan and
Iraq was a result of coherence from human rights and humanitarian interventionists
under the theme, “Political Humanitarianism” implying a comprehensive approach
embracing civil-military relations in the provision of humanitarian aids to populations
in areas of armed conflict.

The Al Qaeda attack of 11 September 2001 against the United States placed Afghanistan
at the centre of international politics. Al Qaeda and the Taliban was defined as war of
terror, all media was used widely to mobilize and enrollment for state government allies
to form the coalition to overthrow the Taliban from Afghanistan and in 2001 they were
ousted out of most parts of the country (Joint Evaluation Report Humanitarian Aids to
Afghanistan, 2001-5:15). It is comparatively true to state that humanitarian interventions
to Afghanistan and Iraq occurred as a result of the concern for humanity aimed at
serving two purposes:
 Manipulation of humanitarian work for political ends, and
 Vehicle to fulfill political agendas of states and international organizations operating
in humanitarian crises with objective to rule over and control state governance and
development affairs (Kellenberger, 2010).
Why the use of security force was necessary? Security force was used to support
and protect relief operations and establishing a broader climate of security for civilian
populations, humanitarian aids workers, foreign troops and state military institutions.
Though the correct interpretation of security and stability means living in a safety and
peaceful environment, this has always been used to satisfy the hidden political agendas
of donor organizations and the state government in Afghanistan. Yet security and
stability is supposed to be promoted through impartial, needs based humanitarian aid,
poverty focused development aid, owned by and responsive to its beneficiaries, and
independent of donors’ immediate military and security objectives (Report by Oxfam,
2011).
By the introduction and use of security force in provision of humanitarian aids to
Afghanistan, the western donor governments focuses on the implementation of

stabilization approach to directly influence the national state infrastructure as a means
of seeking to combat internal insurgencies in spite of weak governance, instability and
poverty threatening their strategic interest for global peace and security. This has
evidently been cited from the result of the incidence of 9/11 attack on the US when
NATO member states joined Americans to fight against terrorism pledging that “an
attack on one ally would be treated as an attack on all” (Survival, 2000-2; Vol. 43).
Therefore the involvement of security force in Afghanistan was the outworking of UN
integration theory for coherence among UN humanitarian organizations, agencies and
states in fragility to achieve peace goals through integration of political and
development objectives (Metcalfe, et al., 2011). And it operated on the premise of
political, humanitarian and development actions through the combination of political,
military and civilian efforts aimed at providing holistic approaches to violent conflicts
by responding to early post conflicts where violence is ongoing (Mcloughlin, C., 2012).
And the integration of comprehensive approach brought on board humanitarian
organizations and military forces where each actor having different mandates; while
humanitarian organizations would seek to provide life-saving assistance to affected
populations based on assessed needs following humanitarian principles of humanity,
neutrality, impartiality and independence, whereas the military actors were deployed
with a political or military objective to provide protection of civilians, NGO staff and the
troops .
What were the consequences of militarized intervention? Although humanitarian aid
should be delivered according to the humanitarian principles of humanity,
independence, impartiality and neutrality based on the needs of crisis-affected
populations; but with the NATO engagement in Afghanistan, the concept of the so-

called “comprehensive approach” was developed, and integration of development and
humanitarian activities with military and diplomatic measures was used as a way of
trying to stabilize armed conflicts (Collinson and Elhwary, 2012). However,
implementing comprehensive approach interventions had some challenges, for example,
the use of humanitarian assistance to achieve broader stabilization objectives to win
hearts and minds led to confusion about humanitarian aid, securitization of aid and
stabilization of aid, citing as example; the provision of health and nutrition services by
Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRT s) there was confusion about whether and to
what degree humanitarian aid agencies were affiliated with the military impacting
negatively on the humanitarian actor’s perceived neutrality, the safety of humanitarian
workers and the capacity of NGOs to address needs, in spite of the shrinking
humanitarian space (Rubenstein, L., 2010).
Firstly, the implications of such confusions have been reported about the insufficient
access to health facilities by Afghans according to the Afghanistan Health Cluster
because health workers and facilities had come under attack following PRTs
engagement (IASC, 2011). Secondly, lack of clear separation between NGO activities
and state actions subjected aid workers to the risks of attack, harm or massacre referred
to as “war against terrorism”, notably in the Helmand province, where security strategies
implemented by states in the name of the fight against terrorism have had an adverse
impacts on the security of aid workers and aid operations (BAAG, 2008). Thirdly, fight
against “terrorism” has also led to a tendency of sanctioning of humanitarian aids
provided in the areas where non-state actors have been designated as terrorist operating
groups. Though many humanitarian organizations inevitably found themselves
working in sensitive areas where they could easily be in contacts with actors that may be

suspected to have terrorist affiliations in Southern Afghanistan, yet most aid activities
were criminalized making the implementation of humanitarian action in such areas had
become incompatible with international humanitarian NGO’s mandate and duty to give
impartial help to affected persons needing assistance, especially in such conflict-affected
contexts where populations are particularly rendered most vulnerable as a result of the
armed conflicts (Collinson and Elhawary, 2012; 10-11).
II. Civil military cooperation
To what extent was the interaction between civilian and military actors? The
insurgencies in Afghanistan and Iraq involved a “comprehensive approach”, utilizing the
full range of civilian and military capabilities to stabilize both countries being termed
the “Solider-diplomat”. The cooperation operated under the leadership of civilian
politicians in carrying out the humanitarian tasks as their leadership provided
supervisory roles and monitoring of humanitarian activities during interventions. This
policy action was taken as a cover to dispel the perceptions of the host populations
being under military occupation, while the civilian leadership adapts to the evolving
situation on the ground, listening and responding to military advice to ensure the
government policies are not compromised by the military for the sake of expediency
(ibid, 63).
The civil-military cooperation used intervention structural approach , so called 3Ds,
“Defense, Diplomacy and Development” as the strategic ways in which the US-led military,
NATO, civilian politicians and humanitarian organizations cooperated to conduct peace
missions and provision of humanitarian aids in Afghanistan and Iraq (Goodhand, J. and
D. Hulme, 1999). Based on their experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq, in 2008 the US
army produced field manual named “FM-3-07, Stability Operations” which provided

policy guidelines to direct the coherence of actors within the cooperation about the roles
of military as being for defense, diplomacy and development aid. The guidelines also
spelled out the areas of US-led military and NATO-led Provincial Reconstruction Teams
involvement to cover emergency provision of essential services as well, where necessary
to oversee the political responsibilities of the transition of governance into civil authority
(IRIN, 2009). The civil military cooperation established in Afghanistan (CIMIC) played
a central role in the coalition efforts to win the hearts and minds of the local populations.
Importance of CIMIC was demonstrated by the formation of Joint Civil Military
Operations Task Force (CJMOTF) composed from the several humanitarian agencies
who participated in the Coalition Governing Council organized and hosted by US
Central Command at Tampa, Florida to be the overall overseer of CIMIC operations on
the ground. Several Coalition Humanitarian Cells (CHLCS) in key urban centers across
the country were set up to perform the specified roles:
 To win the hearts and minds among the Afghan populations,
 To secure support of the local communities by showing the benign face of the
Coalition,
 To jumpstart the reconstruction efforts,
 To gain positive publicity for the war efforts in the United States (Sedra, 2004:5).
For the interaction and dialogue between international military and peacekeeping forces
and the humanitarian community to be effective every actor was expected to hold out
the possibility for better protection outcomes for affected populations; meaning, in a
situation in which these groups operated are increasingly complex, and the threats to
civilians bears multiple and dynamic impacts, ranging from deliberate killing, attacks
against civilian targets such as schools and clinics, rape of women and girls, recruitment

of child soldiers and a failure of accountability for perpetrators and support for victims
(UN Report, 2012).
What role did each actor play? The relationship between the military and
humanitarian actors in times of armed conflict provides distinctive roles, which roles are
based on humanitarian and political aspects of the relationship, the cultural differences
between the humanitarian and military worlds and persistent issues that the two groups
must resolve at the field level. These roles interfaced through coordination domain to
avoid duplication of efforts, the sensitivities of exchanging security information, or the
basic “reach out” efforts to overcome the challenges of both actors that share the same
working environment (ICRC, 2004).
The actors had to work through relationship referred to as “Civil-military cooperation”
(CIMIC) and “Civil affairs” (CA), the names used by NATO and the United States
Armed Forces (USAF), respectively, to describe those non-combat functions of their
armed forces that deal with civilian functions, or involve armed forces taking on tasks
typically performed by civilian authorities, NGOs or international humanitarian
organizations (Meinrad Studer, 2001, pp. 391-392). Two major approaches have become
prominent driving factors during the implementation of the cooperative and integrated
efforts of achieving securitization and stabilization objectives of the participating
humanitarian actors and they are:
 NATO Comprehensive Approach which embraced the cooperation and coordination
among all actors to include host governments, international non governmental
organizations, states, agencies, NGOs and private sector,
 UN Integrated Approach which involved civil institutions of politicians, NGOs,
agencies, host government and local leaders, and military institutions consisting of

military force of the host government and external military force from member states
(MIHA I: 78-79).
It is therefore indicative to confirm that the cooperation between the civil and military in
fragile states of Afghanistan and Iraq was expected to address three keys issues:
 Human rights abuses on the civilian populations,
 Mitigation or reductions of threats and vulnerabilities of civilian populations, and
 In longer term, building a protective environment, including strengthening the
capacities of the host states and local communities (ibid).
What was the impact of the cooperation? The protection of civilians is the most
important component of international stabilization strategies, such as in Afghanistan,
the concept of human security underpins many stabilization approaches, and
stabilization interventions commonly seek to reduce violence and instability, including
in those forms which impact civilian populations (HPG and UNHCR, 2010). It is
imperative to take note that, it was the result of the attack of 9/11 on the United States
which has brought western powers into confrontational war with the Jihadist insurgents
in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Somalia (HPG Policy Brief 48:3). Greater funding
was channelled to humanitarian organizations working in fragile states like Afghanistan
and Iraq with donors’ focus drawn primarily onto early recovery, reconstruction and
development aid programmes other than funding needs based humanitarian assistance.
Even the troops and military actors on the ground have been engaged heavily on direct
delivery of relief and reconstruction activities to legitimize their presence while civil
military coordination increased as well dominated politicized and militarized aid
delivery referred to as “forcible humanitarian interventions”, a guise to provide defense of

populations at risk including protecting civilians and responding to their life saving
needs (Wheeler, 2002).
The interface of the civil and military cooperation has been used as strategic tool for
achieving global dominance of developing countries by the western powers in
countering insurgency through political and militarized structures as we can follow
from the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, humanitarian assistance and reconstruction
has increasingly been seen as a key means by which to consolidate a new government
and improve overall stability in a post conflict context (The London Conference on
Afghanistan, “The Afghanistan Compact”, Jan. 2006). The involvement of high profiled
military in the bundles of reconstruction and security functions in Afghanistan or Iraq
posed insecurity limits and threats to the populations living within areas of conflicts,
relief aids workers and development actors which impact backfired with consequences
detrimental to both humanitarian and stability goals, the same paper argued. Many
humanitarian agencies suffered security risks from the insurgents by having their aids
workers killed and forcing many humanitarian organizations to spent bigger percentage
of aid funds to financing security efforts to protect populations and agencies staff
working in areas of conflicts other than using the funds on the planned interventions
while other agencies withdrew from Afghanistan following the targeted murder of their
staff (Fabrice Weissman, MSF, 'Military Humanitarianism: a Deadly Confusion', 16
Dec. 2004).
III. What lessons can be learned? Looking backward to move forward.
What are the positive lessons from the humanitarian militarized intervention? The
events of 9/11 reinforced the national and international responsibilities of humanitarian
actors to rethink about the stability and security of populations, aids workers and

humanitarian organization staff trapped in areas of armed conflicts because the
situations had presented them with both the threats of global instability and insecurity
and opportunity for eliminating and containing identified sources of instability and
terrorists groups of global instability and insecurity in Afghanistan and Iraq; pre
empting cooperative and coordinated efforts of humanitarian organizations, agencies
and states by joining the comprehensive network of international humanitarian actors to
ensure global governance and expansion of capitalist development through political and
social conditions necessary for recovery, reconstruction, development aid and peace
building (ibid). The stabilization strategy has been used as force multipliers to
supplement military interventions aimed at winning the hearts and minds of
populations as well as bridging the gap between the government and the people in
Afghanistan; through the relationships among military institutions, civil organizations
and state governments to achieve the political and military objectives. The donors used
civil military interactions to as strategy to manipulating and influencing humanitarian
activities and state governance (Barakat, et al., 2010).
The cooperation and integration of political and military components in humanitarian
interventions was brought on board and endorsed by international organizations,
individual state agencies, NGOs, private sector and host government to ensure good
governance, rule of law and local ownership through collective efforts in order to
achieve stability and security of populations and peacekeeping troops within fragile
states (Metcalfe, et al., 2011).
What are the key issues brought about by securitization of humanitarian intervention?
The comprehensive approach in the context of Afghanistan has been used as a cross
ministerial interagency approach in fighting the insurgency. This approach embraces a

variety of measures including political, economic and development strands as
comprehensive strategy in state building. The goal and objective of the comprehensive
approach is to involve all elements of power: military, diplomatic and economic efforts
of all parties of humanitarian organizations, civilian politicians, international agencies,
host government and donor countries to help in developing the capacity of the Afghans
in ensuring good governance, rule of law, stability and security of civilian populations,
aids workers and peace troops (Metcalfe, et al., 2011). The stabilization approaches in
post 9/11 reinforced close relationship between UN and NATO as well raised platform
to:
 Address poverty in early conflict cycle by tackling issues of instability and insecurity
comprehensively,
 Ensure for peace and safety of civilian populations and humanitarian aids workers
in fragile states like Afghanistan and Iraq,
 Coherently integrate humanitarian, development, political and military
interventions in aids operations (Collinson, et al., 2010).
Humanitarian interventions have been influenced by political ideology even in
circumstances when something seemingly non political is demonstrated in giving out
relief aids to war victims; elements of domination and control on host government
structures has come into play, especially when there is no balance in relationship
between political and humanitarian interventions or lack of clear distinction of
relationship between military and civilian humanitarian actors, the result has always
been wastage of lives and resources in spite of all efforts invested to address the
humanitarian crises (Pierre Perin, 1998). This has been evidently true about the
involvement of politicization and militarization of humanitarian aids in Afghanistan

which did not yield positive impacts as a result from the militarized aid approach aimed
at winning the loyalty of Afghans through provision of aid. All the efforts was directed
to use aid as “Weapons System” to generate quick results, have achieved very little
lasting results since the military intervention was not directed towards alleviating the
poverty caused by the armed conflicts in the country but larger percentage of donor
funds was used to maintain the military legitimate presence in this war dominated
fragile state which had been under armed conflict for nearly the last 30 years. Very little
attention was given to address the underlying causes of poverty and repair of
destructions brought about by armed conflict including the resultant disorder in the
entire country.
How relevant is militarized humanitarian interventions today? Securitization of
humanitarian aids is joint operations involving combination of civil and military
interventions with the goal and objective of providing security and safety to the
populations caught up in the humanitarian traps, humanitarian aid workers, agencies
staff and peace keeping troops against trans-national and domestic threats through short
term security promotion (Barakat, 2010). Which means securitization of humanitarian
aids is primarily the innovation of stabilization entailing cooperation and integration
approaches of civil-military interventions during the provision and delivery of
humanitarian aids to populations in situations of humanitarian emergencies.
And securitization of humanitarian aids is useful, relevant and applicable during
humanitarian emergencies today due to:
 Ongoing insurgency in the country within the fragile states with example being
Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Somalia,

 Instability and insecurity threatening the lives of civilian populations, aids workers
and peace keeping troops in fragile states,
 Weak governance, poverty and under development brought about as a result of
insurgencies in the host state,
 Ongoing occurrence of insurgencies posing as global threat to peace, stability and
security for all,
 Fragile states hosting and sponsoring Taliban militias or terrorist groups like Al
Qaeda in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan and Al Sabaab in Somalia.
Therefore securitization of aids has become part and parcel of stabilization operations
which is always short term interventions connected to liberal peace building initiatives
to more transformative agendas linked to power holding elites designed to promote
conditions for meaningful security and development after a political settlement in the
states affected by fragility.
III. Conclusion.
According to the above study findings, securitization of aids has become the ideal
protection necessity in exceptional cases of humanitarian emergencies where civilian
populations and aid workers need physical protection and when innocent people are
being killed or driven away from their homes of origin in great numbers by local militias
and insurgents. The research student do contend to the policy of integration and
cooperation which advocates for facilitation of humanitarian action through
participation of national and international actors in order to effectively achieve the goal
of saving lives, protecting human rights and building sustainable livelihoods of
populations in countries of armed conflict and political instability due to continued
humanitarian emergencies. Which means for humanitarian action to effectively achieve

the intention to provide humanitarian assistance to populations affected by armed
conflict, insurgency and political instability in countries within the regions being
declared by UN Security Council as states in fragility, the principle of securitization of
aids through external military engagement, referred to as “security force” becomes
paramount.
From the study research, it is implicitly true that security force used in Afghanistan was
commendable efforts to support and protect relief operations and civilian populations,
humanitarian aids workers, foreign troops and state military institutions to ensure
effective delivery and receipt of humanitarian aids. However, the study also learned of
the unbecoming side of the securitization of aids in conflict zones where security force is
involved in the provision of aids during emergencies and state of fragility like
Afghanistan which puts the civilian populations, aids workers, foreign troops and
government military institutions to risks from the attacks of the belligerents which often
times forced many international organizations to withdraw prematurely. Another
blurring side about the securitization of aids in Afghanistan was the incidence of the
confusion to distinguish whether humanitarian aid agencies was affiliated to military
institutions because of the high risks and frequency of attacks from the belligerents
threatening the safety of civilian populations and aids workers as a result from the
involvement of the Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) in the provision of health
and nutrition services in Helmond province.
The study also realized the complexity of humanitarian emergencies warranting for the
inception of new humanitarian action strategy used to guide humanitarian operations in
Afghanistan referred to as “Comprehensive Approach” involving all actors to include
civilian politicians, military institutions, international organizations, aids agencies,

NGOs and host government structures in carrying out the humanitarian tasks. The
cooperation between civilian and military interactions was aimed at providing
comprehensive humanitarian interventions expected to provide safety, protection and
welfare of all stakeholders on board due to the presence of armed conflict, insurgency,
instability and fragility such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Pakistan and Syria to
mention but a few.
The interface of actors within the cooperation involving the civil and military
relationship underpinned distinguished roles in the implementation of humanitarian
action; to civilian political leaders, they supervise and monitor humanitarian activities
within their areas of jurisdiction while to the military force, they guide humanitarian
operations as well provide security services to civilian populations, aids workers, field
military personnel, and government military institutions in fragile states. The impact of
the civil and military cooperation entails greater funding being channelled through
military structures with the aim to reduce violence and instability by primarily focusing
on early recovery, reconstruction and development aids programmes other than funding
needs based humanitarian assistance pre-empting direct engagement of troops and
military actors on the delivery of relief and reconstruction activities to legitimatize
military presence in Afghanistan.
The study report also identified some valuable lessons any humanitarian practitioners
and policy makers would want to learn about the involvement of military force today in
the humanitarian interventions during humanitarian emergencies to take note that:
 The concept about the use of military force on the team of humanitarian actors
stemmed from the incidence of the September 9/11 on the USA attack by Taliban
terrorists who are regarded and treated by all humanitarian actors as the potential

threat to global peace, national and regional stability,
 Involvement of military force on the team of humanitarian actors supports
comprehensive efforts of international humanitarian organizations to contain and
eliminate any identified sources of instability and terrorist groupings which threaten
global peace, security and stability of any states across the world,
 Bringing military force on the team of humanitarian actors incorporated militarized
ideology into political objectives with cross cutting goal to ensure good governance,
rule of law and influencing local ownership of humanitarian interventions through
collective efforts of military institutions, civil society organizations and state
government structures to foster and forge the stability and security for civilian
populations, aids workers, national and foreign troops and host governments in
fragile states like Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Somalia,
 Inclusion of military force in humanitarian interventions is cross ministerial
interagency approach with the objective to overpower and overthrow the fighting
insurgents in the states of fragility, which approach involves engagement of political,
economic and development strands through power influence of all humanitarian
actors there in.
The study finally agreed to the fact that securitization of humanitarian aids serves the
primary objective of involving the presence of military force during humanitarian
emergencies which has become international policy framework adopted and subscribed
to by international organizations and agencies focusing on stabilization as new strategy
to govern and guide operations of humanitarian interventions in countries where there
is humanitarian crises to ensure peace, safety, stability and protection for all
humanitarian actors (civilian populations, aids workers, national government

institutions and foreign military personnel), good governance, rule of law and
observation of human rights and provision of security support during implementation
of development activities aimed at building livelihoods of citizens affected by armed
conflict and insurgencies.

Key Reference
1. Naz K. Moderzadeh, Dustin A. Lewis and Claude Burderlein, Humanitarian
engagement under counter-terrorism: a conflict of norms and policy landscape (Vol. 93: 883,
2011)
2. Coner Foley, The Thin Blue Line: How Humanitarianism Went to War (London: Version,
2008).
3. Joint Evaluation Report Humanitarian Aids to Afghanistan, 2001-5:15
4. Mcloughlin, C., 2012 Topic Guide on Fragile States (Governance and Social
Development Resource Centre, University of Birmingham, UK).
5. Sarah Collinson and Samir Elhawary, Humanitarian space: a review of trends and issues,
(HPG Report 32, April 2012).
6. Conor Foley, Humanitarian engagement under counter terrorism (Claude Bruderlein,
2011).
7. Jonathan Goodhand, Aiding violence or building peace? The role of international aid in
Afghanistan (Third World Quarterly, Vol. 23: No 5, pp 837–859, 2002).
8. Meinrad Studer, The ICRC and civil-military relations in armed conflict (Page 391-
392, 2001).
9. Victoria Metcalfe, Simone Haysom and Stuart Gordon, Trends and challenges in
humanitarian civil military coordination: a review of literature (HPG Working Paper,
2012).

MIHA Module 1 Assignment

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (12)

Semelhante a MIHA Module 1 Assignment

Semelhante a MIHA Module 1 Assignment (20)

Mais de Lawnsome Etum Akezi

Mais de Lawnsome Etum Akezi (9)

MIHA Module 1 Assignment