Summary:
Nowadays, hygiene, life expectancy, limitation of child mortality, democratization, political representation, literacy, higher education, gender equality, technological development and economic growth have risen over time to the highest levels, world-wide. Respectively, the frequency and destructivity of armed conflicts are at the lowest levels. Despite the improvement of all the above indicators, 1 out of 70 of our fellow humans on the planet is experiencing a humanitarian crisis and urgently needs help and protection.
The global community perceiving the criticalness of the situation, is constantly increasing the available assistance, but needs are not being met and on the other hand they are growing at a faster rate, widening the funding gap. The key factors that influence the shaping of modern humanitarian crises can be summed up in climate change, urbanization combined with rapid global population growth, resource depletion, food insecurity, armed conflicts, pandemics and shrinking biodiversity.
To address the enormous needs of humanitarian crises, a global humanitarian system has been established, either formally organized or spontaneously. Continued efforts to improve the effectiveness of the humanitarian sector have led to the establishment of humanitarian principles. These principles are easily understood in line with current humanitarian law. Moreover, they are a common place for all actors, a source of public awareness and inspiration, a guide and motivation for those who decide to be actively engaged in the specific field, a catalyst for bending the resistances and doubts about recipients of assistance, a guide to prioritizing needs and accelerating the decision-making process.
Among the principles of humanitarian action, the independence and impartiality are dominant. The principle of independence imposes the autonomy of assistance from economic, political, military or other interests and aspirations. The principle of impartiality presupposes the provision of assistance, according to the urgency of necessity and not on the basis of ethnicity, gender, religion and political or other beliefs. The rest of the principles are, according to the UN, humanism and neutrality, while a large number of humanitarian organizations have also adopted the principles of volunteering, unity and universality.
Domestic organizations emerged in the Western world in the early 18th century. Their purpose was to promote issues related to the abolition of slave trade and the prevalence of peace. At the beginning of the 20th century, organizations' actions expanded into social, environmental and humanitarian issues. Additionally, the organizations had begun to organize collectively and to unite their voices. In the middle of the century, they were referred to as Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs).
From their first steps, NGOs became the voice of the weak, while enjoying their autonomy over the official power and the confidence of society. They are funded by major international organizations, governments, the private sector and society, complementing government work at all levels. Their number today is estimated at several hundred millions, but only a few hundred thousands of them receive official funding.
NGOs active in the humanitarian field are called upon, along with the strong foundations of the recent past, to respond to the pressing problems of our times, by adapting their strategy to modern challenges. The global environment is constantly changing and humanitarian action must adapt to the new circumstances. The strengthening of new countries beyond traditional Western powers, the establishment of the central role of politics in humanitarian crises, the reviving of nationalist trends and national sovereignty, along with the new technologies are playing an important role in the global humanitarian effort.
There’ s no doubt that NGOs, in response to their mission and the new challenges, should invest not only in seeking alternative access routes and widening their funding, but also in strengthening their legitimacy and showing the comparative advantage of their free action. In addition, they have the potential to further promote dialogue and collaboration with the scientific community and other humanitarian actors, to create platforms so as to monitor and direct actions, to extend their mediation and catalytic role, to focus on specialized situations, to provide innovation and know-how to other actors, to establish the mission-focused networks and to premium the regional decentralization.
Funding is a major factor for the survival of NGOs, but it also constitutes the driving force for the fulfillment of their mission. Funding mainly comes from the states or large international organizations, but it’s also the result of donations from citizens or private institutions, and from self-financing through investments or business activities. Each source of funding has different expectations, which ultimately affect NGO action.
According to the prevailing trend, donors direct funding to specific projects and NGOs are competing for their take-up. This undeniably creates a high degree of dependency on humanitarian action, due to the effect of the sponsor's goals on it. Dependency is more limited when NGOs submit their action plan and donors subsidize it. In any case, funding that comes from official, international, state or private institutions affects the principle of independence, since these operators are also major political and economic factors of the global environment and thus through financing they seek to serve their own goals, even if in cases these purposes fit the real humanitarian requirement.
NGOs can reinforce the independence of their actions by achieving a clear response to their programs, by creating good reputation, by enhancing their social support, by expanding partnerships with other humanitarian actors and mainly by ensuring alternative or multiple funding sources. Dependence on a source can be limited when there are multiple financiers. Nevertheless, independence in no way implies isolation. The role of NGOs is supportive and complementary. Expanding collaborations, synergies and resources can also indirectly serve the principle of independence.
Obviously, there are many factors that constantly put pressure on the humanitarian aid chain in order to override the principle of impartiality. Thus, the international community considers that any aid, even humanitarian, to organizations that have been described as hostile, must be rejected. In the case of armed conflicts in Afghanistan, following the events of September 11, 2001, as long as the conflicts in Iraq in the years 2016-2017 against extreme Islamic organizations, the humanitarian assistance disregarded the needs of the common enemy and cooperated closely with the military forces, overriding the principle of impartiality. The same was true of the air attacks against Serbia, where aid was given generouly to Kosovo refugees, but the same did not apply to the Serbs who needed it equally.
The principle of impartiality is also unsettled in cases where access is difficult. In many countries, mainly in the African continent, conflicts that arise between many armed groups results in further enhancing the problems and misery of the region. The humanitarian force finds it difficult to find its way out in areas that need help, and thus needs are not met.
The lack of interest or the reduced support of the media and the donors can isolate the remote areas from the aid, on the grounds that the need for assistance is limited. However, the need for assistance in these areas is cumulatively greater than the large disasters, but since resources are limited, great media exposure can affect the distribution of the humanitarian aid. A typical example of the above is Malawi, where the treatment of AIDS absorbs large amounts of funds in such an extent that other emergency needs are neglected.
Restricted resources do not allow assistance to be given to almost half of our fellow human beings, who urgently need humanitarian aid. For the case of these people, the principle of impartiality is not applicable. Particular attention should also be paid in case of religious impartiality in order to avoid the phenomenon of proselytizing.
Humanitarian principles are central to how humanitarian actors establish and maintain access to the affected populations and in most cases they are respected the majority. However, in some cases, due to the difficulties mentioned above, the need to adapt them to a certain extent, depending on the prevailing circumstances, is inevitable. Therefore, it is important that decisions on the type and size of any compromises are made consciously and with consciousness not only of their impact on the mission, but also in the long run.
Any difficulties in applying the principles of the independence and impartiality of humanitarian action are cases of exclusion and do not appear to be due to NGOs, but are a matter of concern for the whole humanitarian field. NGOs have a specific mission and are a form of implementation of these principles. Failures in the implementation of the principles should mainly affect major actors, such as international organizations and states, in order to be properly addressed. There’s no doubt that NGOs have achieved remarkable results in the global humanitarian effort. Their role is vital and is expected to evolve in the future, adapting to changes in the global environment, in order to continue and possibly strengthen its contribution.
