Analysis of International Relations Series: Collaboration and Cooperation in Humanitarian Interventions

Foreword

In the realm of International Relations, where conflict, displacement, and natural disasters shape our ever-changing landscape, a nuanced understanding of humanitarian action is paramount. In the series "Analysis of International Relations," the reader will embark on a journey to unravel the multifaceted dimensions of humanitarianism.    

From delving into introductory notions and concepts to dissecting ethical considerations and legal frameworks, this series offers a nuanced understanding of humanitarian interventions. Each article examines key aspects such as the historical evolution of interventions, the role of anthropology in shaping humanitarian practices, and the diverse typologies of approaches to intervention, including sovereigntist, pacifist, and human rights-based perspectives.    

Furthermore, readers will grapple with the ethical dilemmas inherent in humanitarian interventions, exploring questions of impartiality, consent, and the unintended consequences of aid. The legal frameworks underpinning interventions, as well as the roles of international organizations like the United Nations and NATO, are scrutinized to evaluate their effectiveness and challenges in coordinating and implementing humanitarian efforts.    

Historical case studies, including pivotal moments in Bosnia, Rwanda, and Kosovo, provide valuable insights into the successes, failures, and lessons learned from past interventions, shedding light on their impact on international relations. Moreover, readers will confront present and future trends and challenges in humanitarian interventions, from the implications of new technologies to the complexities of climate change and the rise of non-state actors.    

Ultimately, this series aims to equip readers with the analytical skills necessary to navigate the complexities of humanitarian interventions within the broader context of international relations. As we explore the intricacies of global humanitarian action, may these insights inspire thoughtful reflection on the importance of compassion, solidarity, justice, and collective action in the face of adversity.    

This series is divided into eight articles, including:     

1. Introduction to Humanitarian Interventions  

2. Theoretical Perspectives on Humanitarian Interventions  

3. Approaches to Humanitarian Interventions 

4. Legal Frameworks for Humanitarian Interventions    

5. Collaboration and Cooperation in Humanitarian Interventions     

6. Anthropology and Intercultural Aspects of Humanitarian Action

7. Historical Case Studies of Humanitarian Interventions

8. Present and Future Trends and Challenges in Humanitarian Interventions

Collaboration and Cooperation in Humanitarian Interventions

Collaboration and cooperation are essential in humanitarian interventions to tackle the complex challenges posed by crises such as conflicts, natural disasters, and pandemics. However, these efforts are often complicated by the sensitive political environments in which they take place. The need to navigate issues of state sovereignty and political tensions as well as maintain neutrality can make effective coordination difficult, requiring a careful balance between delivering aid and respecting local contexts. Ensuring that diverse humanitarian actors—including governments, international agencies, NGOs, and local communities—work together effectively is crucial. This coordination goes beyond logistical planning, requiring alignment of strategies and priorities to avoid duplication and respect the legal and cultural frameworks of the host country. Ultimately, the success of these interventions hinges on the ability to navigate legal, ethical, and operational complexities while delivering aid in a manner that is both effective and respectful of the affected populations.

Legal Foundations of Effective Coordination

In the realm of humanitarian assistance, the legal foundations that guide action and coordination are rooted in the fundamental principle that the primary responsibility for providing for a population's basic needs lies with the state. This principle is thus a cornerstone of international law and sometimes overrides the concept of state sovereignty, which holds that governments are first and foremost accountable for the welfare of their citizens. As such, in instances where a state is either unwilling or unable to fulfill this duty—due to conflict, natural disasters, political instability, or other crises—the focus shifts to the role of humanitarian organizations. Humanitarian organizations, often working under the most challenging circumstances, step in to provide essential services and support. Their involvement becomes crucial when the state’s capacity to protect and care for its population is compromised. However, the legal framework that governs these interactions is complex and, notably, not uniformly codified. Unlike other areas of international law, there is no single, comprehensive legal instrument that specifically regulates the operations of humanitarian organizations in these contexts. Instead, the actions of these organizations are guided by a patchwork of legal and normative frameworks. International law, including treaties such as the Geneva Conventions, provides a foundation, but these are often supplemented by the domestic laws of the host country and the principle of state consent. This principle of consent underscores the importance of state sovereignty, even in situations where the state is unable to meet its responsibilities. Humanitarian organizations must navigate this delicate balance, ensuring that their interventions are lawful and respectful of the host state’s legal and political framework. 

Coordination is therefore a critical aspect of humanitarian operations. In this article, coordination is understood as the structured approach to organizing and managing humanitarian efforts to respond effectively to the needs of those affected by crises. Effective coordination among humanitarian actors and with the host state is essential to ensure that assistance reaches those who need it most without unnecessary duplication of efforts. Coordination involves not only logistical and operational planning but also the harmonization of strategies and priorities among diverse actors, each with its own mandates and objectives. The necessity for such coordination extends to the relationships between different humanitarian organizations themselves. In complex emergencies, where multiple agencies may be operating simultaneously, collaboration and clear communication are vital. This ensures that resources are used efficiently, that gaps in assistance are identified and filled, and that the response is coherent and comprehensive. 

Figure 1. All at War (Shanneik, 2018).

The Guiding Principles of Effective Coordination

In times of crisis—be it due to conflict, natural disasters, or other emergencies—effective coordination strategies and policies should be based on three key principles (World Economic Forum & UN OCHA, 2007):

1. Humanity: This principle emphasizes addressing human suffering wherever it occurs. It highlights the need to prioritize the most vulnerable populations, such as children, women, and the elderly. The goal is to ensure that all individuals affected by crises have their dignity and rights respected and protected.

2. Neutrality: This principle is essential for maintaining the integrity and safety of humanitarian operations. It requires that aid be provided without taking sides in conflicts or engaging in political, religious, or ideological disputes. By remaining neutral, humanitarian organizations can operate in conflict zones and deliver aid effectively without becoming involved in the underlying issues.

3. Impartiality: This principle ensures that humanitarian assistance is given based solely on need. Aid must be needs-based, addressing the most urgent and severe cases first, and non-discriminatory, meaning it must be accessible to all individuals regardless of their ethnicity, gender, nationality, political opinions, race, or religion.
   

The Legal Protection of the Right to Life

Building on the themes discussed in the previous article, it is crucial to explore how International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL) impose essential obligations on states regarding the right to life, particularly in the context of crises and natural disasters. As outlined in the previous discussion, IHL and IHRL mandate that states respect and ensure respect for the right to life for all individuals within their jurisdiction (Harvey, 2013). This obligation comprises two key dimensions:

1. Refraining from Violations: States are required to avoid actions or policies that could lead to unlawful loss of life. This principle necessitates that states do not engage in practices or adopt measures that directly threaten the lives of individuals under their jurisdiction (Harvey, 2013). For example, during armed conflicts or emergencies, states must ensure their actions comply with these legal norms to prevent extrajudicial killings or other violations of the right to life.

2. Proactive Measures: Beyond avoiding harm, states are obligated to take positive actions to safeguard the right to life. This includes ensuring that essential goods and services, such as food, water, and medical care, are provided to those in need (Harvey, 2013). When states are unable to meet these needs due to limitations such as resource constraints, they are required to facilitate and permit the intervention of third parties, including international organizations and NGOs, to provide necessary relief (Harvey, 2013). This approach ensures that the fundamental right to life is upheld even when state capacities are insufficient.

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 46/182 reinforces the principle that states bear primary responsibility for the care and protection of victims of natural disasters and emergencies within their territories (Harvey, 2013). This resolution establishes that the affected state should spearhead response efforts, ensuring timely assistance and support for recovery. Similarly, the Sphere Project guidelines and Humanitarian Charter emphasize the central role of the state in providing aid and safeguarding security. The Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015 further underscores that disaster risk reduction (DRR) must be prioritized at national and local levels, affirming that states have the primary responsibility for effective DRR measures (Harvey, 2013).

Despite these principles, the practical application of these responsibilities often reveals challenges. The protection of civilians remains fundamentally a governmental responsibility, reflecting the state’s sovereignty over its territory and population (Harvey, 2013). However, international humanitarian responses have sometimes struggled to align with these responsibilities. For instance, the responses to the 2010 earthquake in Haiti and the 2010 floods in Pakistan showcased difficulties in coordinating with national authorities (Harvey, 2013). In these instances, international actors frequently assumed a predominant role, sometimes overshadowing or replacing state leadership rather than supporting it. These challenges highlight the need for a balanced approach where international assistance complements rather than overrides national efforts. Effective collaboration between international humanitarian actors and state authorities is essential to upholding state responsibilities while ensuring that humanitarian needs are met. The ongoing difficulties in integrating international aid with state responsibilities emphasize the necessity for improved coordination mechanisms to align humanitarian efforts with legal obligations and support the fundamental right to life during crises (Harvey, 2013).

Figure 2. The Search (Michele Alborg, 2022).

Approaches

In humanitarian emergencies, the escalating needs and inherent complexities often demand operational and strategic coordination (ATHA, 2008). Operational coordination focuses on the logistical aspects of the response, such as organizing resources, managing the delivery of aid, and ensuring that different sectors work together smoothly (ATHA, 2008). Strategic coordination, on the other hand, deals with broader issues like negotiating access to affected areas, advocating for the respect of humanitarian laws and principles, and liaising with key stakeholders such as governments, other organizations, and community leaders (ATHA, 2008). In this context, three basic types of coordination can be employed, each offering different benefits and challenges:

1. Coordination by Command: This approach involves strong leadership and centralized authority, where decisions are made by a leader or a small group and followed by others. It is a top-down method that facilitates coordination through clear directives and authoritative control (ATHA, 2008).

2. Coordination by Consensus: Here, the focus is on collective decision-making, where leadership guides discussions to build agreement among all parties involved. Instead of relying on authority, this approach seeks to achieve coordination by reaching a consensus and aligning the objectives of all actors (ATHA, 2008).

3. Coordination by Default: This is a more informal approach where coordination happens naturally based on the specific context of the situation. There is no centralized authority or formal structure; instead, coordination activities take place as needed, often in an ad hoc manner, driven by what is practical and useful at the moment (ATHA, 2008).

Partnerships

As illustrated above, humanitarian crises may prompt demand for diverse coordination, most often exemplified through (ad hoc) partnerships involving governments, international organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and local communities. These collaborations leverage the unique strengths of each partner, such as resources, expertise, and local knowledge, to deliver timely and effective aid. These partnerships enhance the overall response by working together, ensuring that assistance reaches those in need efficiently and comprehensively.

Between Humanitarian Actors and Private Sector Companies

Partnerships between humanitarian actors and private sector companies are essential for effectively addressing humanitarian crises. These collaborations should leverage the strengths of both sectors, with the private sector providing expertise, resources, and networks while ensuring that efforts are needs-driven, culturally respectful, and flexible enough to adapt to changing circumstances. Both parties must adhere to established humanitarian standards and codes of conduct, engage with governments when appropriate, and work to build local capacity without undermining existing structures. Clear distinctions should be maintained between humanitarian and commercial activities, with transparent public relations and rigorous monitoring and evaluation processes in place to ensure the effectiveness and integrity of their efforts. Long-term, predictable partnerships are recommended to preemptively address risks and support sustainable, high-quality assistance to those in need (World Economic Forum & UN OCHA, 2007).

Figure 3. Bijkomende schade Painting (Victor van de Lande, 2016).

Between States and NGOs

In humanitarian relief operations, the collaboration between governments and NGOs is crucial to ensuring an effective response to crises. While international law and UN commitments affirm that coordination of humanitarian assistance should be government-led, emphasizing that the state has the primary responsibility for initiating, organizing, coordinating, and implementing aid within its borders—in practice, this ideal is often not achieved. Government leadership in humanitarian coordination is frequently marginalized, leading to dysfunctional relationships between governments and NGOs. effectively (ICVA Humanitarian Learning, 2021). Several factors contribute to this issue. These challenges often include, but are not limited to (Fathalikhani et al., 2019):

• Limited Capacity: Governments, especially in developing countries, may not have the logistical, technical, or administrative capacity to respond effectively to large-scale or complex emergencies.

• Budget Constraints: Financial limitations often hinder the ability of governments to fund extensive relief operations, which can be costly and resource-intensive.

• Lack of Specialized Expertise: Disaster relief requires specific expertise in areas like logistics, medical care, water, sanitation, and shelter, which many governments may not possess internally.
  

All these factors contribute to a scenario where, despite the legal and normative framework advocating for government-led coordination, the reality on the ground often falls short. Given these limitations, governments must collaborate with NGOs, which often bring the necessary expertise, resources, and on-the-ground experience needed for effective crisis response (Fathalikhani et al., 2019). NGOs, both international and local, have a wealth of knowledge in handling emergencies and can provide critical support in areas where the government may fall short.

Between NGOs

Hence, NGOs play a critical role in the global humanitarian landscape by engaging with international coordination mechanisms like the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC), where they can influence policy and decision-making processes. NGOs often participate through consortia such as the International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA), the Steering Committee for Humanitarian Response (SCHR), and InterAction, which represent them within key IASC bodies. This involvement gives NGOs access to vital information and a platform to shape global humanitarian strategies. Additionally, NGOs can directly contribute to IASC Task Teams and Reference Groups, which focus on specific thematic areas, offering their expertise and ensuring that the policies developed are informed by on-the-ground realities. They also engage with global clusters, sector-specific groups that coordinate efforts in areas like health and food security, allowing them to contribute their technical knowledge and field experience. This active participation ensures that local voices, often the first responders in emergencies, are represented in global decision-making, leading to more effective, inclusive, and context-sensitive humanitarian responses (ICVA Humanitarian Learning, 2017).

Figure 4. Parnassus, a copy after Mantegna Painting (Alex Schaefer, n.d.)

Key Actors and Networks

To facilitate the above partnerships and formalize effective approaches, three primary networks play crucial roles in the coordination of humanitarian efforts, as identified in a review commissioned by the United Nations Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC) and Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs. Together, these three networks represent the primary groups involved in global humanitarian coordination. Each has its own mechanisms for collaboration and plays a distinct role in ensuring that aid is delivered efficiently and effectively during crises.

United Nations Network

This network consists of various United Nations (UN) agencies involved in humanitarian work. The coordination within this network is managed by the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC), which is the head of OCHA and, as such, is responsible for the oversight of all emergencies requiring United Nations humanitarian assistance. The ERC acts as the focal point for governmental, intergovernmental, and non-governmental relief activities (ICVA Humanitarian Learning, 2017). Further, the following entities work together to provide leadership, set policies, and ensure that humanitarian efforts are well-coordinated within the UN system:

• Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC):  A forum that brings together key UN and non-UN humanitarian partners to coordinate responses to emergencies.

• United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA):  The UN body is specifically tasked with coordinating international humanitarian responses to crises.

• Humanitarian Coordinators (HCs):  Officials appointed at the country level to coordinate the efforts of all humanitarian actors in the field, ensuring a coherent response.
  

Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement Network

This network includes organizations associated with the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, specifically (ATHA, 2008) the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), which focuses on protecting and assisting victims of armed conflict and other situations of violence; the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), which coordinates and directs international assistance following natural and man-made disasters; and the National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, which operate in individual countries, providing local humanitarian assistance.

Coordination within this network is guided by the Seville Agreement, which clarifies the roles and responsibilities of the different components of the Movement, ensuring that their efforts are complementary and not duplicative (ATHA, 2008).

Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) Network

This network consists of various NGOs that are linked through three main consortia (ATHA, 2008), the InterAction, the International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA), and the Steering Committee for Humanitarian Response (SCHR). While InterAction is an alliance of U.S.-based international NGOs that focus on humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, and sustainable development, ICVA represents a global network of NGOs that advocates for improved humanitarian response, and SCHR is a group of large international NGOs and the Red Cross/Red Crescent that coordinates to improve the effectiveness of humanitarian action.

Additionally, the Inter-Agency Working Group (IWG), established in April 2003, has significantly advanced humanitarian efforts through collaboration, culminating in the Emergency Capacity Building Project (ECB) in 2005. This project focuses on thematic coordination among large international NGOs and has been supported by major funders like the Gates Foundation and Microsoft Corporation (Janz, Soi, & Russell, 2009). The IAWG aims to address four key areas of capacity gaps—staff skills, accountability, risk reduction, and information technology—by developing and sharing tools and training among seven participating agencies, including Oxfam-GB and Save the Children-US (Janz, Soi, & Russell, 2009).

Figure 5. The Sisters (Shanneik, 2018).

Mechanisms

Finally, a variety of mechanisms have also been established to improve and enhance the above coordination mechanisms and -realities within the humanitarian sector (ATHA, 2008). One notable mechanism is the Global Humanitarian Platform (GHP), which serves as a forum to unite the three main networks in humanitarian work: non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, and the United Nations. The GHP operates on the principle that no single humanitarian organization can address all needs alone, making collaboration essential. It aims to facilitate better coordination and maximize the complementary strengths of these diverse organizations (ATHA, 2008). The Global Humanitarian Platform (GHP) developed the Principles of Partnership (PoP) to address core elements necessary for effective humanitarian collaborations, including equality, transparency, results orientation, responsibility, and complementarity (Janz, Soi, & Russell, 2009). Adopted by the Inter-Agency Working Group (IWG) in July 2007, these principles aimed to standardize and enhance the efficacy of humanitarian partnerships by embedding these values within participating organizations. While the PoP established essential guidelines, it did not provide specific mechanisms for how to implement these principles in practice. To address this, the 12 Dynamics of Collaboration and Partnership were introduced, building on the PoP foundation to offer practical strategies derived from extensive field experience (Janz, Soi, & Russell, 2009).

The 12 Dynamics highlight critical aspects of successful partnerships, such as prioritizing trust, sharing risks and costs, and developing a shared vision. Trust emerged as a pivotal factor in effective collaboration, facilitating timely and coordinated responses in humanitarian settings. Shared vision and alignment on common goals were shown to enhance the impact of partnerships by focusing efforts and resources on mutually beneficial outcomes. Additionally, acknowledging and managing time and transaction costs was crucial for sustaining collaborative initiatives. These dynamics underscore the importance of structured engagement, shared leadership, and a commitment to continuous learning and adaptation, which collectively contribute to more effective humanitarian action (Janz, Soi, & Russell, 2009).

The Cluster Approach, endorsed by the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) in 2005, was developed to address gaps in humanitarian responses and enhance the quality and effectiveness of aid by ensuring global capacity, predictable leadership, and accountability (ICVA Humanitarian Learning, 2017). This approach facilitates strategic coordination and prioritization at the field level, fostering partnerships among UN agencies, the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, international organizations, and NGOs (ICVA Humanitarian Learning, 2017). There are 11 global clusters, which can be activated nationally by the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC). They operate on two levels: globally, focusing on preparedness, standards, and capacity-building; and at the country level, coordinating key actors to ensure a coherent and effective response, including better assessment, planning, and monitoring of aid efforts (ICVA Humanitarian Learning, 2017).

Funding resources are also critical for effective coordination. Mechanisms like the Common Fund streamline the planning, prioritization, and coordination of humanitarian responses by providing predictable and flexible funding (ATHA, 2008). This helps ensure that resources are allocated efficiently and according to identified needs. Additionally, professional tools have been developed to support coordination efforts. One such tool is the Diagnostic Tool, designed to help UN Humanitarian Country Teams assess what support is needed for implementing the Cluster Approach and to establish benchmarks for measuring progress (ATHA, 2008). This tool, along with others, assists in creating effective coordination strategies by providing detailed considerations and support for improving response efforts.

Figure 6. A-social #1 (Sonny Insinna, n.d.)

Conclusion

Despite sharing the common goal of alleviating human suffering and saving lives, the various actors involved in humanitarian emergencies often have differing interests and roles, which can complicate coordination efforts. Donors, for instance, may have specific priorities or political considerations that influence their funding decisions (ATHA, 2008). Host authorities are responsible for maintaining sovereignty and public order, which may lead them to impose certain restrictions or conditions on humanitarian activities (ATHA, 2008). Intergovernmental agencies, such as the United Nations, often play a central role in coordinating international responses but must navigate the interests of member states and other stakeholders (ATHA, 2008). Non-governmental organizations (NGOs), both international and local, are typically on the front lines of delivering aid, but they operate under different mandates, with varying levels of resources and capabilities (ATHA, 2008). Local populations, who are the recipients of aid, also have their own needs, preferences, and cultural considerations that must be respected and incorporated into the response efforts (ATHA, 2008). The diverse interests and roles of these actors mean that coordination is not just a logistical challenge but also a diplomatic and strategic one. Effective coordination requires open communication, mutual respect, and often the negotiation of compromises between competing priorities. It also involves building trust among all stakeholders, which is crucial for ensuring that coordination mechanisms are both inclusive and effective (ATHA, 2008).

This article delved into the intricate web of coordination required in humanitarian interventions, implying that effective interventions are deeply rooted in a dynamic interplay of legal principles, ethical considerations, and operational strategies. At its core, the success of humanitarian efforts hinges on more than just logistical efficiency—it demands a nuanced understanding of the legal and ethical frameworks that govern international assistance and a commitment to navigating the complex relationships among various actors involved. In essence, the complexities of humanitarian interventions necessitate a sophisticated approach to coordination and collaboration. Understanding and addressing these complexities, while upholding core humanitarian principles, are key to improving the effectiveness and equity of aid efforts in an increasingly interconnected and challenging global landscape.

Humanitarian interventions, while well-intentioned, can sometimes overlook or misinterpret the cultural contexts of the communities they aim to assist. This disconnect can lead to unintended consequences, such as resistance from local populations or ineffective aid distribution. Anthropology emphasizes understanding human behavior within cultural contexts and offers valuable tools and perspectives for addressing these issues. The forthcoming installment of the "Analysis of International Relations" series will delve into how anthropological approaches can be integrated into humanitarian interventions to improve their effectiveness and respect for local cultures.

Bibliographical References

ATHA: Humanitarian Coordination: An Overview. (2021). Harvard.edu. https://hhi.harvard.edu/publications/atha-humanitarian-coordination-overview

Fathalikhani, S., Hafezalkotob, A., & Soltani, R. (2019). Government intervention on cooperation, competition, and coopetition of humanitarian supply chains. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 69, 100715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2019.05.006

Harvey, P. (2013a). International humanitarian actors and governments in areas of conflict: challenges, obligations, and opportunities. Disasters, 37, S151–S170. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12019

ICVA Humanitarian Learning. (2017, July 17). The IASC and the global humanitarian coordination architecture: How can NGOs engage? - World. ReliefWeb. https://reliefweb.int/report/world/iasc-and-global-humanitarian-coordination-architecture-how-can-ngos-engage

ICVA Humanitarian Learning. (2021, August 30). ICVA-Topic Six – Briefing Paper on NGOs in Government-led and Refugee Coordination contexts. ICVA. https://www.icvanetwork.org/resource/topic-six-briefing-paper-on-ngos-in-government-led-and-refugee-coordination-contexts/

Janz, M. R., Soi, N., & Russell, R. (2009, December 16). Collaboration and partnership in humanitarian action. Humanitarian Practice Network. https://odihpn.org/publication/collaboration-and-partnership-in-humanitarian-action/

Visual Sources