Disasters occur all the time in many different places all over the world. How rich or poor a country is does not affect how many disasters occur (Stromberg 2007) . However, there are many other factors that do affect how a country is able to manage the disaster. There are also many factors that can cause a disaster to be worse. These things can make a disasters more complex and are considered complex humanitarian emergencies. United Nations defines a CHEs as “a humanitarian crisis in a country, region, or society where there is total or considerable breakdown of authority resulting from internal or external conflict and which requires an international response that goes beyond the mandate or capacity of any single and/or ongoing UN country program.” Basically, they are acute emergencies in regions with ongoing emergencies. When these emergencies occur a state's sovereignty is ignored and other countries and NGOs intervene for the sake of the people living there.
The conflict and instability in these counties are made worse by famine, drought, and other natural disasters. For example the country, Yemen, has been plagued by instability for years. There is also scarce resources and droughts throughout the country. The combination of these problems along with rise of conflict in the region and the amount of displaced peoples, makes this a complex humanitarian emergency.
The UN created a protocol for these kinds of emergencies. It starts with an assessment of what is needed and ends with helping coordinate aid groups. However, there are limited resources and only so much can be done. These emergencies occur in many different regions at the same time. This makes it hard to give full attention and resources to each emergency. Also, these emergencies are usually ongoing. It seems like the problems in these regions never becomes resolved and most of people in the regions have no choice but to flee. The UN and NGOs do what they can to try to resolve CHEs but sometimes the conflict is so bad in areas aid does not reach the people in need. Aid workers have been kicked out of countries while trying to help. Aid workers do not want to make situations worse in the country and states do not want to send the wrong messages.
Because there are so many complex humanitarian emergencies, decisions have to be made about which crises will receive the most aid and attention. How is this decided if regions have the equal amount of need? Is the help giving decided by public? Do the protocols in place even make a difference in these regions?
Hi Sydney! I appreciate your recognition of the interconnectedness of state sovereignty and the quest for power, government instability, and environmental disasters. When you mentioned the UN's involvement and humanitarian interests, you made me think of Enia's article about the 2004 tsunami and its impact on Sri Lanka versus Indonesia. Enia reflected on the negative consequences that relief after a disaster's occurrence could have on the suffering country's political and social framework. For example, because of the rising legitimacy of Sri Lanka's Tamil Tigers, the insurgent group began to communicate and cooperate with the United Nations. Sometimes involvement and humanitarian aid can make situations worse, depending on how the NGOs and organizations approach the issue. I agree that thorough assessments are necessary before aid is granted. However, other states and organizations must be aware of how they choose to provide aid (humanitarian vs. military...) and the possible consequences of their involvement.
ReplyDelete