Home
Multilateral diplomacy and humanitarian coordination: extract from ICRC Annual Report 2009
19-05-2010 Annual Report
International fora are an essential platform for the ICRC to facilitate its field operations, to defend and promote its impartial, neutral, independent and strictly humanitarian action, and to guard against the use of humanitarian activities for military or political ends. Multilateral and bilateral contacts also aim to promote knowledge, understanding and – whenever appropriate – development of IHL, to monitor political trends and influence the humanitarian debate by sharing the ICRC’s position on issues of humanitarian concern, and to raise awareness of the plight of those affected by armed conflicts and other situations of violence.
The ICRC forges and maintains close relations with a wide range of intergovernmental organizations, among others the UN, the African Union, the Council of Europe, the League of Arab States, the Organization of American States, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. It does this from its headquarters in Geneva and from its delegations covering countries that are major global diplomatic players and where such organizations sit, essentially in Addis Ababa (Ethiopia), Brussels (Belgium), Cairo (Egypt), Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia), Moscow (Russian Federation), New York and Washington (United States of America). In particular, the ICRC follows the work of UN bodies in Geneva and New York. It also has regular exchanges with the various UN and non-UN humanitarian agencies, in particular through the IASC, as well as NGOs and their umbrella organizations, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and similar bodies, and private business companies and their industry associations.
The Multilateral Diplomacy and Humanitarian Coordination Unit acts as the focal point for relations between the ICRC and these organizations, aiming to foster an environment in which ICRC operations can be carried out effectively and are adequately resourced. The results of this long-term engagement can often only be measured over time, for instance in terms of references to IHL made in resolutions and key guidance documents, and of support mobilized for ICRC efforts to obtain access t o conflict victims.
In 2009, the political rift deepened between traditional donor States, which advocated an increased integration of political, military, development and humanitarian resources into crisis response, and the States primarily concerned by these crises, which favoured national or regional responses. This was of direct concern to the ICRC as it affected the space for neutral, impartial and independent humanitarian action.
With the creation of the International Cooperation and Humanitarian Affairs Department, the OIC is at the forefront in promoting regional response systems and engages in substantive dialogue with the ICRC regarding coordination on humanitarian issues. The ICRC participates as an observer in OIC high-level meetings, including in 2009 the 36th Session of the Council of Foreign Ministers in Damascus (Syrian Arab Republic).
Similar efforts are made with the Non-Aligned Movement and ASEAN, which adopted the ASEAN Blueprints and created the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights in 2009. A dialogue was established with the Commission’s new unit for Disaster Management and Response and its Permanent Council. In Latin America, the ICRC reviewed its multilateral diplomacy approach, taking account of emerging sub-regional organizations.
In Europe, the parties to the conflict in Georgia and the co-chairs of the Geneva Talks (OSCE, EU, UN) responded to the ICRC’s plea to avoid politicizing humanitarian issues (e.g. the question of missing persons) and the organization’s views were reflected in the Council of Europe’s reports.
These multilateral fora facilitated a more substantive exchange at operational level and enabled IHL issues to be addressed by national parliaments. Parliamentarians working on the complex issue of missing persons and their families can now draw on a manual jointly produced by the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the ICRC. The CSTO and the ICRC signed a memorandum of intent, aimed at consolidating institutional relations and facilitating the ICRC’s contact with the authorities and armed forces of all member States.
The UN regularly consulted the ICRC, which closely observed the UN reform process and its implementation and followed issues and decisions discussed in UN fora, both in New York and Geneva. Member States were successfully lobbied to incorporate provisions on protection and assistance for conflict victims into multilateral decisions and national positions. The ICRC reminded States of their obligations under IHL, helped clarify such obligations as well as the rights of persons protected under IHL, contributed to safeguarding impartiality and neutrality of humanitarian action and its independence from political and military objectives, and prevented IHL from being
undermined by trends in international law.
The process initiated by the IASC on humanitarian principles and space, and a similar initiative driven by the NGO consortium ICVA, both benefited from ICRC expertise. With World Vision, the ICRC co-led the revision of a position paper on humanitarian civil-military coordination that was issued by the Steering Committee for Humanitarian Response and is to serve as a reference for humanitarian organizations.
The ICRC followed the work of the Human Rights Council, whose Advisory Committee took up the ICRC’s IHL-related input, and its Universal Periodic Review. Close links were maintained with the Humanitarian Liaison Working Group, a forum for representatives of major donor countries and humanitarian agencies in Geneva. Some 50 future UN diplomats attended an IHL workshop organized by the I CRC and the Geneva Academy on IHL in Geneva.
The ICRC actively promoted understanding of and support for its mandate and work in public discussions on issues relevant to its activities.
Given the scale and complexity of needs arising from crises and the growing number of relief organizations, the ICRC continued to consult and coordinate with other humanitarian players, both at headquarters and in the field, and provided its own field delegations with guidance and support regarding humanitarian coordination. In Iraq and more recently in Pakistan, full-time positions were created for delegates to liaise with other assistance providers, particularly the UN bodies.
The ICRC continued to attend meetings and working groups of the IASC in its capacity as standing invitee, and its active contributions to those deliberations enhanced understanding of neutral, impartial and independent humanitarian action and the Movement’s independence. This was reflected in IASC decision-making. ICRC delegates cooperated with UN staff to develop Common Humanitarian Action Plans. All UN-led appeals were reviewed to ensure correct mention of the Movement’s operations. OCHA acknowledged the ICRC’s contribution to coordination mechanisms.
The ICRC maintained close bilateral operational and institutional relations with various UN and other humanitarian agencies (IOM, OHCHR, UNHCR, UNICEF, WFP). This provided opportunities to learn about the approaches, working methods, strengths and constraints of others, and on this basis to reinforce coordination and cooperation. Top-level meetings with UNHCR, WFP and MSF facilitated coordination at field level, as shown by the mutual commitment made by UNHCR and the ICRC to ensure complementarity.
The major NGOs, both bilaterally and through NGO consortia, sought out the ICRC’s opinions. The ICRC has observer status with the ICVA and participates in the Global Humanitarian Platform. It is a full member of the Steering Committee for Humanitarian Response, whose input it used in an internal review process on ICRC accountability towards its beneficiaries.
Businesses operating in conflict zones can influence the course of conflicts. The ICRC gained a better understanding of this phenomenon by participating in various initiatives and processes. The UN Global Compact, the OECD, the UN Special Representative on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights process and various sectoral initiatives all drew on the ICRC’s expertise.
-
Share
|
Back to top
