Children in War a guide to the provision
of services
Second Edition - 2016
Everett Ressler
Anna Belloncle
Lara Horst EPRbook group
Children in War a guide to the provision of services
Second Edition - 2016
Everett Ressler
Anna Belloncle Lara Horst
PRbook group
Virginia, USA
First Edition
Copyright © 1993
United Nations Children's Fund Programme Publications 3 UN Plaza
New York, N.Y. 10017 USA
Second Edition 2015
Copyright © 2016
EPRbook group Virginia, USA
ISBN: Oh, world be wise The future lies in children’s eyes.
Donna Hoffman
My Children, All Children, Concordia Publishing House, St. Louis, 1975.
Photo Credits
Oh, world be wise...
The future lies in children's eyes.
Contents
Acknowledgements
This book is written first and foremost for all the parents and the children who struggle daily to survive in war.
Introduction
A renewed commitment is needed in 2016 on behalf of children in situations of armed conflict.
[Need an introduction section that introduces the issue and responsive action, setting up the need for this book.
Objective of the book
Armed conflict shows humankind at its very worst and its very bestworst when social intercourse is reduced to purposeful attempts to kill, injure, deprive, disrupt and impose upon; best when against all odds people strive to ensure the well-being of those in need. This book attempts to accentuate the positive. The goals are clear - that children in situations of armed conflict do not lose their lives, that they are afforded their rights as human beings and children, that they receive care and basic essentials for development, that their suffering is minimized and that their emergency needs are met. Meeting this challenge requires commitment, effort and determination. To these ends, this book hopes to make the following contributions:
1. To encourage responders to learn from our shared history. This book attempts to provide responders with a historic overview of the ways in which conflict can impact children as well as how people can act to protect and care for children. People have a tendency to think that their situation is unique; sometimes responders (be they parents and community organizations or UN staff) have not had experience in other situations of armed conflicts or in child protection issues when they are required to develop response action. As a result, they feel as though they need to start from scratch in developing response strategies or, on the other extreme, they implement a standard set of program activities, regardless of whether they are best suited for the situation, simply because they are not aware of alternative actions.
Each conflict is like no other, and all others. For centuries humans have done injury to each other, waged war, massacred civilians, forced children to participate in armed conflict, and starved and pillaged villages and cities. At the same time, humans have gone to extraordinary lengths to protect their families and children, to give them the best they can afford; communities and civil society have created systems and programs
to care for the vulnerable children in their midst; civilians have protested egregious violence against children at national and international levels, often at great risk to their own safety. This book is grounded in the belief that though each context has unique elements which need to be carefully considered, human history essentially repeats itself, for the better and for the worse. Understanding our history, allows for rapid and successful response programming.
2. To encourage a holistic view of response programming. The fields of child protection and humanitarian aid have become increasingly specialized in the last 20 years. Isolated programming strategies are often developed for specific sectors, such as education, child protection, health, water and sanitation. This trend has been encouraged by donors who frequently earmark funding by sector (e.g. girls and sexual violence in armed conflict, health in armed conflict, children with disabilities in armed conflict). As a result, field experience suggests that program interventions are sometimes narrowly conceived; for example, education programs may not take into consideration child nutrition issues. This book attempts to provide a holistic framework for assessing and developing response programs. It encourages responders to consider all issues affecting children and to develop response programs based on children’s needs and in coordination with other actors.
3. To provide all responders with a list of programming options. This book is ultimately intended to be a source of ideas. It is hoped that information about programme innovations around the world will stimulate creative programming - new ways to ensure that food reaches the hungry, that basic services are available in the midst of conflict, that children continue to receive essential vaccinations even when routine services are disrupted, that schooling is provided even when schools are closed, that assistance is available to traumatized children even when trained professionals are few and so forth.
Children in War is intended to be a summary. It is short rather than long, generic rather than specific, practical rather than theoretical. Therefore, while
every effort has been made to ensure that authoritative information is included, this book is intentionally a “broad crush stroke” overview.
Who is this Book Written for?
The book is written for all persons and organizations that act to care for and protect children in situations of armed conflict, referred to as ‘responders’ herein.
In almost all conflict situations adult family members do everything possible to protect and provide for their children; children help each other; community members, committed government personnel and non-governmental organizations (NGO) offer assistance, often a great personal risk. In emergency situations, the primary responders are almost always local professionals (healthcare workers, teachers, etc.), community organizations (churches, mosques, etc.), and a range of non-governmental organizations, both international and national. Even during emergency situations, governments and parents remain the primary duty-bearer for the realization and protection of child rights and, as such, have a unique role to play in response action. At times, local and national systems are not able to provide adequate protection for children. International actors, including NGOs, intergovernmental organizations (such as the United Nations, the European Union) and other governments, often become an important part of protecting children when national actors fail to do so.
Each responder has a unique role to play to the protection and realization of children’s rights in situations of armed conflict. This book is written for all responders, from parents to aid workers to policy makers. Children will only be fully protected if all involved actors work together, building on existing actions and looking for common solutions.
Premises for the Book
First premise. This book is abashedly positive in its assertion that children’ needs can be met, even in the midst of armed conflict. This assertion is rooted in the fact that the deaths of children in situations of armed conflict are largely preventable, as are other violations of their rights. It is not a foregone conclusion that because there is armed conflict, civilians and children need be the victims of its horrors. Protection or victimization is determined by choices and decisions.
Obviously, it is extremely difficult to ensuring the well-being of children in situations in which armed violence is purposeful. Attempted interventions are often dangerous and obstructed at every turn. Still, review of experience confirms that extraordinary actions can protect and provide for children, even in the most difficult situations.
Second premise. Children are rights-holders. Children have the legal right to care and protection and to develop to their fullest potential. Parents and governments are legally responsible, even during situations of armed conflict, to realize and protect these rights. Child protection is not an act of benevolence but a legal and moral obligation.
Third premise. While this book is specifically addressed to children, it is assumed throughout the children’s needs are best served by helping families provide the necessary care and protection children require. Although not addressed in this book, support is often required to help mothers and fathers meet their own needs as well as the needs of their children.
Fourth premise. The support of all parties must be enlisted to ensure the well-being of children in situations of armed conflict. Families are usually primary care-givers for children. To understand the needs of children in situations of armed conflict, one has to understand the factors that enable or obstruct families’ ability to care for them. Families’ ability to function is shaped
by the social, political, cultural, religious, economic, and legal systems that form the web of life’s interactions; all of which are impacted by armed conflict. Obviously, the behavior of combatants is also of critical importance; all conflicting parties must be encouraged to protect children. Government services have a particularly important role in the welfare of children; during emergency situations their provision of essential goods and services is critical. When families are not able to meet basic needs or protect and provide for their children, the intervention of government and other actors is essential.
Fifth premise. If we want better answers, we must ask better questions. A constant search for better understanding of children’s needs and response action is a fundamental prerequisite to the development and maintenance of effective services for children. This book will be successful if it encourages questioning and continuing re-examinations of whether the needs of children in situations of armed conflict are really being met and, if intervention is required, what strategies prove most effective.
Sixth premise. Local problems are probably best solved by local solutions. Each culture, community, family and conflict situation is unique. Therefore, while the topic of children in situations of armed conflict is discussed in general terms, it is assumed that specific programme strategies must be developed for each situation. No attempt is made to offer prescriptive solutions. Nevertheless, while the ‘lessons learned’ in one situation cannot be rigidly prescribed to another, it would be a misconception to assume that every child, family and conflict situations is so different that lessons learned cannot be shared among experiences and cultures. The needs of each child, family, and culture are both unique and similar to the needs of all other children.
Seventh premise. In emergency programming, adaptation and innovation are necessary if services are to be effective. Health, education, social, legal and many other services exist in every country. It is often assumed that routine arrangements and systems provide sufficient response to meet emergency needs. In many conflict situations, however, deaths and suffering of children are more related to inadequate services and mergence programming than to
direct conflict action (e.g. often more children die from dirty drinking water and the lack of vaccinations that are directly killed during armed violence).
Structure of the Book
The book begins with an exploration ‘armed conflict’ and ‘children’, attempting to provide functional definitions that help to facilitate response action. The next chapter, entitled “A Basis for Action”, proposes a conceptual framework for response action. It suggests that ….
The second part of the book looks at issues affecting children in armed conflict (e.g., health, education, detention, recruitment by armed groups) and program options. Each chapter provides the reader with a historic review of the issue and trends in response strategies as well as a description of the legal framework around the issue.
It is important to remember that we tend to atomize complexities into discrete problems that are in reality much more organic than reflected. Different types of “needs” and “categorizes of children” (e.g. displaced children, children with disabilities, girls, etc) are discussed throughout the book. It is useful to remember that all issues are related and tell only a fraction of the full story.
At the end of the book, the authors have included an extensive list of reference materials related to the situation of children in armed conflict These resources are divided into three categories: resources for further study, legal instruments and resources, and programming tools.
Chapter 1 Armed Conflict and Childhood
Theories and assumptions about conflict and childhood drive responsive and protection action for children in situation of armed conflict, though they often go unstated. Throughout history, these theories have changed in reflection of the evolving sociopolitical context in which they were developed. Though it will be impossible to develop a descriptive framework that is able to stand outside of the flow of history, this chapter attempts to propose definitions that will facilitate responsive action. As such, this chapter is addressed to the following questions: What is childhood? What is armed conflict?
Childhood
Different cultures during different periods of history have had different definitions of childhood. Even today, there numerous debates around the definition of child and childhood. Childhood can be defined chronologically or biologically (by age), psychologically (by emotional changes), functionally (marked by physical or social changes), or culturally (as defined in the societal context).
In the international arena, children are primarily described as persons from 0-18 years of age deserving of protection and care because of their intrinsic vulnerability and evolving capacities; “The [UN Convention on the Rights of the Child] defines a 'child' as a person below the age of 18, unless the laws of a particular country set the legal age for adulthood younger. The Committee on the Rights of the Child, the monitoring body for the Convention, has encouraged States to review the age of majority if it is set below 18 and to increase the level of protection for all children under 18.”
Some have argued that the definition of ‘child’ in the UN CRC should be dismissed because it is based exclusively on a modern western concept of
childhood (see Boyden, 1992; Freeman, 1983; Macgillivray, 1992; Lewis, 1996) and because it does not pay sufficient attention to the agency of children. Though it may well have its historical roots predominately in western culture, the wide ratification of the UN CRC illustrates a global acceptance of this definition. This definition, specifically in the context of armed conflict, affords children and youth additional protection and, as such, such be jealousy guarded. While upholding to the international definition, to best enable responsive action it is important that the unique characteristics of childhood are acknowledged:
1. Children are not all alike. Each person’s capacities and actions are defined by a host of factors including genetics, personal history, the family situation, the external environment, and access to material and financial resource. Girls and boys, for example, are impacted by and respond to armed conflict differently. As with other groups of people, we should not assume that all children are the same, with the same capacities, responses, and needs. This means that children will respond to conflict differently and may have different needs.
2. Children have evolving capacities. As recognized by the UN CRC, children have evolving capacities, in accordance with their age. This is uncontested; all cultures throughout history have recognized that a three year old does not have the same capacities and needs as a 16 year old. This book assumes that there are at least three age categories of ‘children’, each with unique characteristics: infants and toddlers (0-3), children (3-13), and youth (13-18).
Perhaps the most controversial group of children is that referred to as ‘youth’. The term often refers to young people between the ages of 13 and 25, though definitions vary widely in different cultures and for males and females.
When community and family systems breakdown youth frequently assume adult-like roles, such as caring for younger children, working, and even engaging actively in the armed conflict. Despite increased responsibilities, they frequently do not receive the respect that adults. Youth are often looking for meaning in their lives; “Failure to provide adolescents with a positive and
productive sense of purpose during the upheaval of armed conflict leaves them despairing and vulnerable to those who would seek to manipulate them, pulling them into the conflict and exploiting and harming them in other ways.”
Youth may seem more like adults, than children: in many ways they can care for themselves, they have more ‘adult’ problems and responses, they do not look so innocent, they have opinions and can be demanding. For this and other reasons, youth are often left out of programming, though research shows that they are in desperate need of increased attention. Youth can characterized by a potentially volatile combination of “audacity and insecurity” (7) . Youth may exhibit self-destructive tendencies (ex. antisocial behavior, truancy, sexual promiscuity, substance abuse, etc), particularly after experiencing trauma, that make protective and response programming difficult. This behavior can be in stark contrast to the image of children as “innocent and vulnerable”, victimized by armed conflict.
3. Childhood needs to be understood its social context. In many countries childhood is determined by social rites or status markers rather than age, events that are frequently disrupted during situations of armed conflict. It is important that responders develop programs that are appropriate to local contexts, paying particular attention to local rites of passage for children and youth.
4. Children are active agents in their own lives. Though the rights of children are almost always grossly violated during situations of armed conflict, it is not useful to see children only to passive victims. Children, of all ages, make decisions in accordance with their evolving capacities which affect how the conflict impacts them. Some children chose or are forced to participate in hostilities. Other children work to provide for their families and care for younger children and their elders. In some case, children and youth participate in political activities which drive both conflict and peace building (i.e. Palestinian youth throwing stones at Israel troops, Afghan girl and school, youth involvement in the arab spring, in chile against pinochet, etc).
Children and youth should be “understood and engaged as thoughtful, in-
sightful and active agents who shape their own lives and the communities in which they live and work.” What does this mean in practice? It means that it is not sufficient to talk only to parents, teachers, practitioners, and experts about children’s needs and experiences in situations of armed conflict. Children and youth need to be involved in identifying and responding to issues directly affecting them.
5. Children have rights and responsibilities. The UN CRC confirms that children are rights-holders. As such, governments and parents are legally obligated to protect and fulfill their human rights, even during situations of armed conflict. The fact that children are ‘rights-holders’ often causes concern among adult decision-makers because they fear that this will encourage children to behave selfishly and irresponsibly. As is evident in children’s daily life, however, children’s rights are balance with their responsibility to respect the rights of others.
Armed Conflict
The prevalence and brutality of armed conflict has gone in cycles throughout history, depending on global politics and economy, population growth and resource scarcity, historic grievances, new technologies, natural resources, ideological shifts, etc. During all armed conflict, children experience egregious acts of violence, abuse and neglect. At the same time, people go to extraordinary lengths to protect and provide for children.
During the last twenty years, academics and practitioners have tended to focus on the ‘exceptionalim’ of the post-Cold War period, arguing that conflicts have become increasingly violent and destructive. They cite the high number of civilian causalities and the significant involvement of children in combat; reportedly, the number of civilian casualties as increased from 5% in World War I to an estimated 90% today. Conflicts in the second half of the 20th century have primarily been intra-state; practitioners and academics argue that the protection of civilians and peace building is particularly difficult in this context.
Chapter 1 - Armed Conflict and Childhood
Though the recent trends in conflict are of deep concern, the ‘exceptionalist’ position may not be the most constructive framework for designing response action. If the fundamental nature of conflict has changed, it is only logical to assume that the response action of the past is no longer useful. This hypothesis is concerning because it encourages responders to disregard the past and constantly reinvent response action, repeating mistakes and waisting times and resources.
There is an anthropological maxim that holds that each situation is like all others, some others, and no others. This to is true of conflict. The responder must strike a delicate balance between learning from the past, recognizing current trends, and acknowledging and adapting to the unique local context of each conflict.
History of Armed Conflict
There has always been armed conflict. Combatants have used the killing and injury of civilians to intimidate and injure their opponent throughout history. Genghis Khan, the Mongol leader, is infamous for his massacres of civilians. Acts of brutality are well documented in ancient Assyria, Egypt, Greece, Rome, Asia, Africa and the Americas. Towns and fortresses were looted, burned and destroyed during the wars in the Middle Ages in Europe. During the Thirty Years’ War in western Europe (1618-1648) more civilians were killed than soldiers; “some historians estimated that up to half the population of Germany may have perished during the war.”
The conquering and colonization of the West Indies, Africa, south Asia and the Americas by Europeans resulted in the death of an estimated xxx and the enslavement of xxx inhabitants.
World War I, the Russian Revolution and ethnic cleanings of the Kurds in Turkey in the early 20th century resulted in the death and displacement of tens of
thousands of children. Approximately 50 million people died in WWII, including millions of children; there were roughly 33 million civilians causalities, 11 million people are believed to have been killed in concentration camps, and 20 million people were left homeless. In 1945, the US dropped two nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing an estimated 200,000 people.
During the second part of the 20th century, hundreds of thousands of civilians were killed in wars in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. Wars of liberation in Africa and South Asia, were quickly followed by internal armed conflicts fueled by the Cold War, a fight to control natural resources, and ethnic tensions in young states awash with small arms and light weapons struggling to build weak political and economic systems. Cambodia’s civil war (1975 - 1979) left almost 1/4th of the total population dead. An estimated 100,000 people, including children, were killed directly by the conflict and more than one million died from war-related causes (including terrorism). In the Angolan civil war (between 1980 - 1988), water, food and healthcare supplies were destroyed by both sides of the conflict and an estimated 330,000 children died from war related causes.
Some predicted that the end of the Cold War (1989) would bring global peace because democracy and capitalism would remove the underlaying drivers of conflict. This was not the case. In the 1990s there was a wave of intrastate conflicts characterized by brutal massacres in Yugoslavia, Liberia, Somalia, Sierra Leone, the Central African Republic, the DRC, Rwanda and Uganda, and elsewhere. Because they did not conform to expectations, they were labeled the ‘new wars’. Though these ‘new wars’ are classified as internal conflicts, most of them had an international dimension. States external to the conflict provided financial, military or political assistance to one or more of the combatant groups. Refugees, non-state combatants, weapons and ideologies spilled over into neighboring states, in some cases destabilizing entire regions (e.g. In 1994, refugees from Rwanda fled into DRC, Burundi and Uganda; their presence has contributed to armed conflict for the last 20 years).
Unaccompanied children are a particularly vulnerable group that can be found in every conflict: in the Spanish Civil war it was estimated during 1936 that there were 90,000 unaccompanied children; in 1948 during the Greek civil war, roughly 23,000 children were trafficked out of Greece and some 14,500 unaccompanied children were moved for safety reasons inside Greece; between 1970 and 1984, an estimated 22,000 unaccompanied children left Vietnam.
Children and youth have been involved in arm conflict since ancient times and, simultaneously, society has struggled to put age limits on their engagement. In Sparta, ancient Greece, boys began military training between 7 and 10 but they were not allowed to join the military until 20. In the American civil war, both the Union and the Confederate armies required enlistees to be at least 18. However, recruiters had difficulty confirming the age enlistees. Army statisticians estimate that a total of 250,000 - 420,000 soldiers were under the age of 18 when they enlisted (10-20 percent of all of the soldiers). Young girls often acted as couriers during the Algerian rebellion against the French in the 1950s; “like other rebels and spies who were caught, the girls were tortured until they confessed the whereabouts of their leaders.”
Forced population transfers have also been practiced throughout history, including during the Assyrian Empire, during Roman and Arab invasions, during the Christian reconquest in Spain, in France, England, Hungary, Austria, and Portugal during the middle ages, and during the Napoleonic invasions. The Jews, Roma, Huguenot, Tartars, Native Americans, Jesuits, and many others have been subjected to forceful movement.
In almost all conflicts, violence against women and girls tends to increase. In certain conflicts, sexual violence is used systematically as a weapon of war, ethnic cleansing, or genocide. In almost all cases, women and girls are subjected to increased violence in their homes, communities, and places of displacement. A few of the many examples include the following: An estimat-
Introduction
LIVED EXPERIENCE LIVED EXPERIENCE
American Civil War - 1861–1865
From 1854-1929, 250,000 unaccompnied children placed on ‘orphan trains’ detined for families in the Mid-West…
Mixed results: some successfully integrated, others endured hostile environments (i.e exploitation, abuses…)
Chapter 1 - Armed Conflict and Childhood
ed 200,000 south-east Asian women, primarily Korean, were abducted and force to have sex 20 - 30 times a day for Japanese soldiers during WWII. It is estimated that during a nine-month period after Bangladesh declared their independence from Pakistan and the entry of Pakistani troops in 1971, an estimated 200,000 - 400,000 Bengali women (80% of whom were muslim) were raped by soldiers (Makiya, 1993). It is estimated that between 20,000 and 50,000 women were raped in the early 1990s in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Rape was a systematic weapon of the 1994 Rwandan genocide. It is believed that an estimated that between 250,000 - 500,000 women were raped during the war. In 1998, an survey in Sierra Leone found that 66.7% of respondents had been beaten by an intimate partner. In 2010, it was estimated that 40% of women in Eastern DRC had experienced sexual violence.
Recent Trends in Armed Conflict
Though we do not believe that armed conflict today is of such an egregious and exceptional nature as to constitute a break from human history, we do recognize that many of the conflicts in the last 30 years have had similar characteristics which should be recognized and taken into consideration in the development and implementation of response action:
ICRC recently noted the ‘diversity of situations’ in which armed conflicts in currently being waged, “rang[ing] from contexts where the most advanced technology and weapons systems were deployed in asymmetric confrontations, to conflicts characterized by low technology and a high degree of fragmentation of the armed groups involved.”
Weapons are increasingly automated and long range. Condorcet, an 18th-century French philosopher and mathematician, hailed the military use of gunpowder. He reasoned that enabling combatants to fight at greater distances would reduce the number of causalities. Today, the vast majority of civilian causalities are from small arms and light weapons. New technologies (including drones) are having an ever increased impact around the world, both positive and negative; “This new technology, like certain other advances in
military technology can, on the one hand, help belligerents direct their attacks more precisely against military objectives and thus reduce civilian casualties and damage to civilian objects. It may, on the other hand, also increase the opportunities of attacking an adversary and thus put the civilian population and civilian objects at greater corresponding exposure to incidental harm.”
The global trend towards urbanization and increased population density means that conflicts over the last 150 years have been increasingly fought against an high density, urban backdrop. This is one of the reasons that the gross number of civilians that are impacted and killed in armed conflict has steadily increased.
A number of the current conflicts have been on-going for several decades, including in Afghanistan, Colombia, DRC, Israel and OPT, Somalia, and Sudan. Only a few of the recent conflicts have been definitively resolved through a peace negotiation; notably, several conflicts have re-started despite ceasefires and peace agreements.
In the last 30 years there has been an significant increase in the number of internal conflicts, either between two groups of non-state actors or between a government and a non-state actor. However, almost all of the contemporary conflicts have regional, transnational, multinational or bi-national dynamics. These conflicts tend to have high rates of civilian casualties.
The prevalence and availability of SALW, the multitude of non-state armed groups with informal command structures, the role of resources in conflicts, and confusion between criminal groups and non-state armed groups has blurred the line between combatant and non-combatant.
Definition of armed conflict
For the purposes of the humanitarian and the responder, the categorizations of armed conflict are useful in so much as they allow us to better protect and provide for children. To these ends, we will use the definitions of armed con-
flict provided by International Humanitarian Law (IHL). These classifications are important because they determine which legal framework is applicable in a given context. Thus, they will assist responders in identifying appropriate legal remedies and conducting accurate monitoring and advocacy activities. If armed violence does not fall under the classification of an armed conflict, human rights law and national laws still apply.
The term ‘armed conflict’ replaced ‘war’ in the late 20th and early 21st century. This term does not have a standard definition. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) defines it as: “A dispute involving the use of armed force between two or more parties.” IHL distinguishes between International Armed Conflict (IAC) and Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC).
An International Armed Conflict (IAC) occurs when there is a use of armed force between two or more states. An IAC begins at the first use of force. This category of conflict also includes foreign occupation, even when invaders meet no opposition. In the last 50 years, there have only been a few conflicts that fall into this category. Though there is some divergence of opinion, arguably ‘intensity’ and ‘duration’ do not determine that classification of an IAC; this means that the type of violence and how long the violence lasts are not used to determine if two-states are engaged in an IAC.
A Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC) occurs when a state and a nonstate armed group or two (or more) non-state groups are involved in armed hostilities. Two elements are necessary for a conflict to be classified as an NIAC, as per Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions:
1. Involved parties must show a certain degree of internal organization. Jurisprudence suggests that ‘internal organization’ includes “existence of a command structure and disciplinary rules and mechanisms within the armed group, the existence of headquarters, the ability to procure, transport and distribute arms, the group's ability to plan, coordinate and carry out military operations, including troop movements and logistics, its ability
to negotiate and conclude agreements such as cease-fire or peace accords, etc.”
2. The violence must obtain a certain level of intensity. Jurisprudence indicates that the ‘level of intensity’ can be determined by “the number, duration and intensity of individual confrontations, the type of weapons and other military equipment used, the number and calibre of munitions fired, the number of persons and types of forces partaking in the fighting, the number of casualties, the extent of material destruction, and the number of civilians fleeing combat zones.”
NIAC are the most difficult to classify; the lines between criminality and armed conflict are sometimes blurred and states are often hesitant to admit the gravity of internal tensions. Arguably, in recent histories there have been 7 typologies of NIAC:
- Traditional NIACs (as described in Common Article 3) in which governmental armed forces are fighting one or more non-state armed groups in the territory of a specific state;
- An armed conflict in which two or more organized non-state armed groups are engaged in armed hostilities within the boundaries of a single state. This includes ‘failed states’;
- Armed conflicts between a government and one or more organized non-state armed groups that ‘spilled over’ into neighboring countries;
- ‘Multinational NIACs’ have emerged as a recent trend in the last couple of decades. In these conflicts a multinational armed force is fighting with that of a ‘host’ state against one or more non-state armed groups, within its territory;
- Similar to the category described above, in some conflicts UN forces or regional forces (such as the African Union) are sent to support a ‘host’ state against one or more non-state armed groups, within its territory;
- Some argue that there may be a category of ‘cross border’ NIAC in which state forces are engaged in hostilities with a non-state armed group from a neighboring territory that is not controlled or supported by a state (ex. the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah);
- Some argue that a new category of NIAC has emerged in the con-
text of the ‘fight against terrorism’ (i.e. the conflict between Al Qaeda and its ‘affiliates’ and the US across a number of states). However, as of 2011, “ICRC does not share the view that a conflict of global dimensions is or has been taking place. Since the horrific attacks of September 11th 2001 the ICRC has referred to a multifaceted "fight against terrorism". This effort involves a variety of counter-terrorism measures on a spectrum that starts with non-violent responses - such as intelligence gathering, financial sanctions, judicial cooperation and others - and includes the use of force at the other end. As regards the latter, the ICRC has taken a case by case approach to legally analyzing and classifying the various situations of violence that have occurred in the fight against terrorism. Some situations have been classified as an IAC, other contexts have been deemed to be NIACs, while various acts of terrorism taking place in the world have been assessed as being outside any armed conflict. It should be borne in mind that IHL rules governing the use of force and detention for security reasons are less restrictive than the rules applicable outside of armed conflicts governed by other bodies of law.”
Organized crime has resulted in levels of armed violence in some countries that seem comparable to a NIAC. The objective of the armed violence is not a relevant criteria in the classification. As such, each scenario should be examined as per the two criteria described in Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions: organization of the non-state armed group and intensity of the violence. In accordance with this classification, some cases may indeed fall within the categorization of a NIAC.
The classification of armed conflict is often extremely political. For example, over the last 100 years there have been numerous states have refused to classify armed violence as a NIAC, using the term ‘counter-terrorist’ operations instead (i.e. northern Ireland, latin america?, US, etc). This is not a legal classification of armed violence. It would seem that states assume that recognizing the existence of a NIAC will granting a non-state armed group particular legal status or legitimacy and limit the actions that they are able to take during the conflict (i.e. in regard to detention, use of force, etc). Further to this definition, we encourage responders to analyze conflict through
LIVED EXPERIENCE
The Russian Revolution- 1917 - 1920
• 5 million homeless children in 1920’s
• 1918: Famine - 4,000+ children taken to Siberian summer camps where food was more plentiful.
• Unaccompanied Polish children in Siberia
Chapter 1 - Armed Conflict and Childhood
the ‘family’s perspective’, categorizing conflict by its impact on families and children, rather than by the actions and intentions of combatants. This will hopefully provide responders with an analysis framework that directly facilitates response action.
Analyzing conflict from the Family’s Perspective
Virtually every bookstore contains books about military hardware, battle strategies and war heroes. There are few books, however, that describe the drama and tragedy of how ordinary mothers and fathers under the greatest of difficulties secure food, find protection and provide for their children in the midst of conflict. Life experience in situations of armed conflict can vary wifely:
Some families must survive under heavy shelling and aerial bombardment; people in another community may experience no direct action at all. Families may be forced to cope with disappearance, massacres, torture and repression while families in other places within the same country may continue life routines uninterrupted.
Villages, crops, animals, schools, clinics and infrastructure are purposefully destroyed in some conflicts, while in others the physical damage is light. Sometimes food shortages and the horrors of family are used as weapons, while in other conflicts family food sufficiency is relatively unaffected. Some families experience conflicts as sudden and short interruptions in their lives; others must adapt to a way of life in which armed conflict is at their doorstep for years.
Some families are able to continue life routines in their home village throughout periods of conflict, while other families are forced to abandon home and community. Urban families often have quite different conflict-related experiences than their rural counterparts. Families living in a capital city are often unaware of the full realties of the conflicts occurring far away in rural areas within their own country. Each situation of armed conflict is unique; accordingly, the needs of children
in situations of armed conflict are determined by the peculiar nature of each armed struggle and the cultural, political, social and economic milieux within which it is waged. The nature of conflict is not only nation-specific, but also community-specific.
Towards a Framework for Analyzing Conflict through the Family Perspective
The following factors might be considered when developing an analysis framework from the Family’s Perspective:
1. Personal characteristics of family and child. The composition and situation of the family are a factors determining the degree and manner in which they family is impacted by armed conflict and their level of resilience. Analysis criteria might include the socioeconomic position, the gender composition, the age of children and parents, the family structure (number of children, wives, etc), the geographic location (urban/rural, displaced, etc), and if any of the family members have a physical or mental disability.
2. Types of violence experienced by the family/child: During a conflict, children and families can subjected to several types of violence (sometimes simultaneously), each with unique implications for response programming: intra-familial violence, violence within the community/between community members, violence acted on the community by an outside actor, two outside actors fighting in the vicinity of the community, violence between armed groups in neighboring communities, acts of terrorism, etc.
3. Type of weaponry used and their impact on the family/child: The type of weapons that are being used in the conflict also impact how the violence is experienced by the family. SALW, land mines, booby traps, cluster munitions, ariel bombing, acts of terrorism (suicide bombings, etc), chemical or biological weapons each have unique risks and impacts for families.
4. Intersection of the identify of the combatants and the identity of the family: The degree to which a conflict disrupts the social and cultural frame-
work by directly impacting the identity of the family. For example, one might ask: Does the conflict have particular gender dynamics which will impact the family? Is the family’s identity directly involved in the conflict, as either victims or combatants? Is the community specifically involved in the conflict? Is the ethnic, religious, political, racial, etc identity of the family a particular part of the conflict?
5. Changing roles in the family: Has the conflict forced a change in gender roles in the family? Are children playing a different role in the family? Are they working? Isolated? Caring for other family members?
6. Role are children and families playing in the conflict: Are children and families actively participating in the conflict? Was their recruitment forced or voluntary? Are they being specifically targeted by the conflict? Are they living in an area in which they have a high risk of being unintentional victims?
7. Resources available to the family before and during the conflict: What resources were available to the family before the conflict? How has their access to shelter, water, food nutrition, clothing, health care, education and money been affected by the conflict? Is this access likely to change in the coming months?
8. Social capital available to the family before and during the conflict: A family’s social capital often determines their ability to access resources, services, and to navigate the conflict dynamics successfully. Analytical questions might include, what social and political connects do families have? What is the level of education and professional expertise in the family? What languages do they speak? Are they literate? What opportunities are open to them and are they able to exploit these opportunities or services?
9. Cohesion of the family and community before and during the conflict: There is significant evidence suggesting that children are substantially less vulnerable physically and psychologically if they remain with their family and community. As such, analysis frameworks should consider if families have been able to remain together? If communities have been able to remain together? To what
LIVED
EXPERIENCE
Syrian Conflict - 2012-2015
More than 140,000 people, over 7,000 of them children, have been killed in Syria’s uprising turned-civil war, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.
Chapter 2 - History of Programming for Children in Armed Conflict
degree families and communities were acting as functional units before the conflict? How are they acting during the conflict.
10. Cultural and religious framework in which the family operates: Some cultural and religious frameworks are better able to support families and communities during periods of social upheaval than others. Analysis question might include the ability of the family to make decisions about their well-being, their access to basic rights before and during the conflict, the previous experiences of the family and community, etc. Chapter 2
History of Programming for Children in Armed Conflict
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that every does”
Margaret Mead
Introduction
The world has made great strides during the last 150 years towards improving measures and actions for child protection. Indeed, child rights have been almost unanimously recognized by states. A remarkable international normative framework has developed to protect and realize child rights during times of peace and conflict. And still, despite global action, children are killed, maimed, persecuted, starved, abused, and exploited during armed conflict. Why? We know from past experience, that the vulnerable always suffer disproportionately because protection systems crumble and social norms become fluid. Belligerents almost always put their cause above the individual wellbeing of civilians; it is in the nature of war. Each time, the situation seems unique, extraordinary in its horrors and sacrifices. Each time, responders search for ways to protect and care for children. In almost all cases, responders have limited time and resources and are working in a high-stakes context. Few have the luxury to take an academic approach to the identification of best practices and the formulation of programming. However, there is much to be learned from the our shared history. This book provides responders with programming options, taken from the last 150 years of our collective history. This chapter specifically describes the historic context in which these programs were developed. It is divided into two sections, the development of the normative framework applicable to children in armed conflict and trends in theory and praxis in humanitarian response for children in armed conflict.
Development of the
Chapter 2 - History of Programming for Children in Armed Conflict
Normative Framework
The principle of humanitarianism is founded on the belief that all human beings are of equal moral worth under natural law. In its early conception, this principle was grounded in the spiritual significance of each individual. Aristotle and the Stoics of early Greece, for example, opposed slavery on this basis. Many humanitarian movements throughout history have had religious ties; they were either considered the work of religious institutions or were required of religious followers. During the Enlightenment period in Europe, humanists reinvent principles of humanitarianism, but grounded it in theories of rationalism as opposed to spiritualism. Humanitarian movements successfully advocated against torture in the 18th century. In the 19th century, they fought against slavery, poor labour conditions, working children, the treatment of persons with mental disabilities, among other things.
In the context of armed conflict, the term ‘humanitarian action’ refers to measures that are focused on alleviating suffering for civilians or persons who are no longer participating in armed hostilities. It is defined by International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and emerged in its modern form with the establishment of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Both the ICRC and IHL can be attributed to Henry Dunant, a traveling swiss businessman. In 1859, Dunant witnessed the bloody battle of Lombardy and was horrified by the suffering he saw and the lack of medical assistance provided to the wounded and dying. He wrote a report, entitled ‘A Memory of Solferio’, in which he described the need for a neutral organization focused on providing medical assistance during times of armed conflict, composed of volunteers trained in peacetime. He printed this report and distributed it to the head of every State in Europe. This report ‘stirred the conscience of Europe.’ Dunant established a committee with 4 other swiss citizens which later became the ICRC. It was at the Committee’s bequest that the Swiss government organized an international conference in 1864. The first Geneva Convention was born during this conference; it provided protection for the wounded and sick during armed conflict and established the neutrality of healthcare workers,
LIVED EXPERIENCE
‘ orphans, waifs, seperated children.....’
Under the age of 18 not accompanied by a parent or guardian in law or custom.
Chapter 2 - History of Programming for Children in Armed Conflict
under the emblem of the red cross. The ICRC has remained the guardian of IHL and is mandated to assist victims of international and internal armed conflicts.
The next significant development in the normative framework can be traced to the unique British activist, Eglatyne Jebb. She was charged with ‘aiding the enemy’ by the British government because she organized food shipments for civilians in France, Belgium and Germany during WWI. During her court hearing, she told the judge, “My Lord, I have no enemies below the age of 11”. Jebb was one of the founders of Save the Children. Following WWI, Save the Children UK and Sweden (called Radda Barnen at that time) drafted the first Declaration on the Rights of the Child. This Declaration was adopted by the League of Nations in 1924 and was the first global human rights instrument focused exclusively on children. It stated that children should be given priority in receiving assistance, particularly during emergencies. As Jebb was organizing food shipments, ICRC was becoming increasing vocal in its believe that civilians should be afforded legal protections in times of war. However, The Diplomatic Conference (1929) held at the end of the war focused almost exclusively on prisoners of war because civilian protection was considered too politically sensitive at that time. The conference did, however, recommend that a study be completed in preparation for an international convention for the protection of civilians in armed conflict. ICRC completed the study but could not generate interest; war seemed unlikely in 1934. In 1939 the ICRC and the International Union for Child Welfare prepared the Draft International Convention on the Condition and Protection of Civilians of enemy nationality who are on territory belonging to or occupied by a belligerent. However, they could not continue working on it due to the outbreak of war.
As such, at the outbreak of WWII ICRC did not have a legal instrument to back its negotiations and advocacy regarding civilian protection. Still, they requested repeatedly for the humane treatment of civilians detained by belligerent forces, a requested that was often disregarded. At the end of the war, a
Diplomatic Conference was held (1949), which culminated in the adoption of the four Geneva Conventions. The fourth Convention is addressed specifically to the protection of civilians during interstate armed conflicts and situations of occupation. All four of the conventions have the same Article 3 (called ‘common Article 3’) which extends protection to civilians in intrastate armed conflicts.
As early as 1946, discussions began in the UN on redrafting the Declaration on the Rights of the Child. Initially, the intention was to have the 1924 Declaration reaffirmed by the United Nations, in light of the dissolution of the League of Nations. The process of drafting the new Declaration began in 1948 when the ‘Children’s Charter’ first appeared on the agenda of the UN Social Commission. The Declaration was presented to the UN GA in 1959. This Declaration added to the provisions of the 1924 Declaration in a number of ways, including children’s rights to name and nationality (Principles 3), leisure (Principle 4 and 7) and to have their best interests considered as a priority.
During the 60s, ICRC generated support for two Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions to expand the protections afforded to civilians by the 4th Geneva Convention and Common Article 3. These Protocols were adopted in 1977. Protocol I is addressed to international armed conflict and Protocol II is addressed to non-international armed conflicts.
Public interest in the wellbeing of children during times of armed conflict was heightened by international media coverage in the 60s and 70s. As evidence of the growing concern for children, UNICEF was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1965, in part because of their dedication to aiding children on all sides of conflicts. The UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (art. 23 an 24) and the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (art. 10) passed by the UN GA in 1966 also recognized that children need specific care and are deserving of additional protection. In 1974, the UN GA adopted a Declaration specifically addressed to the protection of women
Chapter 2 - History of Programming for Children in Armed Conflict and children in emergencies and armed conflict . This Declaration “condemns attacks and bombing of civilian populations and prohibits persecution, imprisonment, torture and all forms of degrading violence against women and children.”
The UN International Year of the Child (1979) was a turning point for children internationally; “[it] resulted in increased interest world wide, among aid agencies, welfare and rights practitioners as well as researcher, in learning more about children’s lives and the best ways to working for their welfare.” Increase focused on child rights forced hidden issues into the public eye, issues such as child abuse, neglect, sexual abuse, child prostitution, child pornography, abduction of children, early marriage, and child slavery. Patricia Smkye stated that “the new willingness to face the situation as it is may be one of the biggest achievement of the 1980s.” The combination of public attention and an improved understanding of causes and consequences of rights violations resulted in numerous initiatives that strengthened international and national normative frameworks and laws, programming, and resource allocation. In 1984, ICRC published the first comprehensive analysis of the provisions of IHL that related to the protection of children in situations of armed conflict. In 1986, UNICEF’s Board formally recognized children in situations of armed conflict as particularly vulnerable and in need of extraordinary programming. In 1989, the UN GA adopted the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Notably, 191 countries ratified, acceded to or signed the CRC.
A UN Resolution entitled ‘A World Fit for Children’ (2002) acknowledged that “the 1990s was a decade of great promises and modest achievements for the world’s children.” UNICEF organized the World Summit for Children in 1990. The World Declaration and the Plan of Action adopted during the World Summit for Children was among the most rigorously monitored commitments of the 90s. Simultaneously, Graca Machel’s comprehensive study on the situation of children in armed conflict was completed at the request of the UN Secretary General at the beginning of the 90s. It was the first major
multi-country study which addressed a range of child rights issues (i.e. sexual exploitation, psychosocial needs, violence, injury, etc). This report, presented and accepted by the UN General Assembly in 1996, in many ways set the agenda for the decade which followed.
In 1998, 120 countries adopted the Rome Statute, thereby establishing the International Criminal Court. The ICC is mandated to try perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression. The Rome Statute identified several categories of crimes that are particularly relevant to children, namely genocide through transferring children form one group to another, recruitment of children into armed groups, sexual violence, genocide through preventing births, use of starvation as a weapon of war, attacking schools or hospitals, and attacking humanitarian objects or staff.
The 21st century saw the establishment of extraordinary international mechanisms addressed to children’s welfare in situation of armed conflict. In 2000 the UN General Assembly adopted the Optional Protocol to the CRC on the involvement of children in armed conflict and the Optional Protocol to the CRC on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. The normative framework related to children and juvenile justice during times of armed conflict was strengthened by the adoption of the UN Guidelines on Justice in Matters involving Child Victims and Witnesses of Crime (2005). The Paris Principles, adopted two years later, protect children from being prosecuted for war crimes and crimes against humanity and encouraged states to use alternative forms of justice (non-retributive) to hold children accountable for crimes committed during conflict.
The UN Security Council (SC) passed its first resolution (resolution 1261) specifically focused on children and armed conflict in 1999. The Security Council has since passed several resolutions, including: - UN SC resolution 1379 (2003) calls for the ‘naming and shamming’ of parties that recruit and use children in armed conflict; - UN SC resolution 1539 (2004) urges parties engaged in armed con-
Chapter 2 - History of Programming for Children in Armed Conflict
flict to develop and implement Action Plans to stop the recruitment and use of children in armed conflict. Additionally, it calles on the Secretary General to develop a systematic and comprehensive monitoring and reporting mechanism focused on child rights;
- UN SC Resolution 1612 (2005) calls for the development and implementation of a Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism (MRM) on Children in Armed Conflict, mandated to provide timely and reliable information on six grave child rights violations during situations of armed conflict, namely killing or maiming of children, recruitment or using child soldiers, attacks against schools or hospitals, rape or other grave sexual violence against children, abduction of children, and denial of humanitarian access for children. Resolution 1612, echoing SCR 1539 (2004), calls on belligerent parties to put in place time-bound Action Plans to stop the recruitment and use of children in armed conflict. Finally, this resolution establishes the Security Council Working Group on Children in Armed Conflict (SCWG-CAAC), mandated to review Action Plans and MRM reports. Based on the information it receives, the SCWG-CAAC reports and provides recommendations to the Security Council.
- UN SC resolution 1882 (2009) calls for the ‘naming and shamming’ of parties that commit sexual violence against children and those that kill and maim children with impunity. This resolution also established a link between the UNSCWG-CAAC and the SC’s Sanctions Committees.
The Security Council has recently slowed it’s progress. Notably, Resolution 2068 (2012) was the first SC resolution addressed to children in armed conflict that was not unanimously adopted; Azerbaijan, China, Pakistan and Russia abstained. In July 2013, “the United States refused to hold the annual debate on children and armed conflict during its presidency of the Security Council, reflecting the overall difficulty of negotiating decision on this thematic issue in the current political environment.” A Security Council report released in 2014 argued that “the implementation of the Council’s children and armed conflict agenda, including increased state accountability, is at stake.”
Humanitarian coordination mechanisms were strengthened during the 2000s.
In particular, the UN Cluster approach was adopted in 2005 as part of a larger reform of the UN’s humanitarian response system. The clusters are addressed to food security, health, logistics, nutrition, protection, shelter, water and sanitation and hygiene, camp coordination and camp management, early recovery, education, and emergency telecoms and communication. The cluster systems provides a forum for coordinated action between UN agencies, donors, civil society organization and other stakeholders.
Women and Girls in Armed Conflict
Over the last 25 years there has been a growing awareness that conflict has a unique impact on women and girls, both on an individual and a societal level. In 1985 the UN established the first Working Group focused on refugee women. In 1990, UNHCR adopted the first policy on the protection of refugee women, which became the Guidelines on the Protection of Refugee Women (1991). In the mid-90s UNHCR and other UN agencies began to develop specific guidelines related to reproductive health and protection against Gender Based Violence (GBV) in situations of armed conflict. In 2005, the UN Inter-Agency Standing Committee issued Guidelines for Gender-Based Violence Interventions in Humanitarian Settings, requiring all humanitarian actors to address GBV regardless of their sector.
In 2000 the UN Security Council adopted resolution 1325, the first resolution to link women to the peace and security agenda. This resolution calls for the active participation of women and girls in conflict prevention, conflict resolution, peace building and reconstruction. It acknowledges that women and children are disproportionality affected by armed conflict. These principles have been supported in subsequent resolutions, namely 1820 (2008), 1888 (2009), 1889 (2009), 1960 (2010) and 2106 (2013). One result of this series of resolutions was the appointment of a Special Representative to the Secretary General on Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict.
Trends in Humanitarian Programing
Chapter 2 - History of Programming for Children in Armed Conflict
Since the 70s there has been a gradual shift in humanitarian aid, from a ‘fire-fighting’ approach to a ‘development’ approach. In the past, humanitarian aid was primarily focused on the delivery of life-saving services (medical, shelter, food, sanitation and water). Today’s humanitarian programs are more holistic, taking into consideration psychosocial needs, community engagement and empowerment, and the developmental needs of children - including education and play.
Development programs, and subsequently humanitarian aid programs, became increasingly ‘human rights’ focused during the last 40 years. In the 1960s and 70s, development aid was often delivered to young countries just emerging from colonization; it was driven by old alliances, Cold War geopolitics, an attempt to encourage stabilization and prevent conflict, and, perhaps, a touch of guilt. Until the 1970s, development projects aimed to encourage industrialization and economic growth, with little regard for its impact on the human rights of affected populations. The adoption of the UN Declaration on the Right to Development (1986) is evidence of a significant shift in the international discourse, namely the global acknowledgment of the mutual importance of economic development and human rights. It was not until the 90s that development actors began to systematically integrate ‘human rights’ into development and humanitarian aid programs.
By the end of the 90s, the discourse had moved from ‘linking relief and development strategies’ to assuming that relief and development were on a ‘continuum’. The underlying assumption was that development aid could reduce the impact of natural disasters and the likelihood of armed conflict. Additionally, it was understood that if humanitarian relief was correctly delivered it could protect assets and provide a basis for future development. One of the key elements to this approach is the importance of the active participation of the affected population and their ‘ownership’ of programs. The human rights approach to programming became a central part of the relief-development continuum. The human rights approach frames humanitarian aid in terms
LIVED EXPERIENCE
MIGRANT CRISIS : THOUSANDS OF UNACCOMPANIED CHILDREN ARRIVING IN EUROPE
Salvadorian immigrant Stefany Marjorie, 8, and her sister got stopped by Border Patrol agents this past week in Mission, Texas. GETTY IMAGES
Alone: And worryingly, eight per cent of all children (pictured) - who boarded rickety smugglers boats from war-torn countries like Syria, Libya and Iraq - landed in Italy unaccompanied
Thousands of vulnerable unaccompanied children arriving on Mediterranean rescue boat
Of the tens of thousands of migrants and refugees currently traversing Europe, an estimated 4% to 7% are minors traveling without their parents. (Los Angeles Times, Sept. 15, 2015
Chapter 2 - History of Programming for Children in Armed Conflict
of respecting rights rather than ‘providing handouts’. As such, life saving aid activities (largely logistic in nature) are now seen as a first brief phase in humanitarian aid, which should be replace with longer-term, more holistic programs.
The humanitarian community went through a period of self-doubt and “a deep sense of moral, political and social crisis” in the 1990s. Public criticism soared as a resulted of negative publicity regarding humanitarian operations in Tanzania and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) (with Rwandese refugees), Northern Iraq (with Kurdish refugees), Bosnia and Kosovo. At the same time there was a rise in isolationist foreign policy. International spending on emergency aid, which had risen sharply throughout the 70s and 80s, declined in the 90s. Some began to argue that humanitarian aid was in fact doing more harm then good. Donor agencies, responding to pressure at home, increased demands for concrete proof of the impact of funded programs.
In this climate, UN agencies struggled to acquire adequate financing; they began to redefine and expand their mandates in search of funding and in response to the move towards ‘holistic’ programming. Against this backdrop, there was an explosion of civil society organizations in the 90s. They played a central role in providing services to civilians affected by armed conflict and have also substantially contributed to the development of the international normative framework, particularly related to child rights.
Arguably, the rapid growth of the civil society sector and the scarcity of financial resources had two results: on the positive side, it forced the humanitarian aid community to professionalize. The 90s saw the birth of many university programs specialized in development, human rights, child rights, and humanitarian aid. NGOs and UN agencies strengthened internal resource management systems, accountability structures, monitoring and evaluation and result-driven programing as a result of competition and donor pressure.
However, it may also have had some negative side effects. Time will tell if the
idealism which characterized the humanitarian field was irrevocably wounded during this process. Ironically, the shift towards holistic programming and the professionalization of the sector increased program overheads (staff salaries, housing, security, office costs, etc) and general costs, which fueled public criticism of the sector. Some humanitarian organizations became ‘donor-driven’ in the scramble for funding. The clarity of their mandate disappeared. Coordination became a critical issue during this period.
In response to the tension described above, the humanitarian community began to look for a new paradigm at the end of the 90s. They reconsidered the old notion that development aid could address the root causes of armed conflict and prevent violence and migration. This argument had been popular in the mid-1940s and briefly in the late 70s and early 80s. It was reopened by the former UN Secretary-General, Boutros-Ghali, in his Agenda for Peace (1992) and the Agenda for Development (1994). Humanitarian and development programs widely adopted a ‘conflict-sensitive’ approach, acknowledging that aid can have a significant impact on conflict dynamics and that all attempts should be made to ensure that programming decreases tension and contributes to peace building.
The focus on peace building and conflict-sensitive programming coincided with concerns about refugee movement. Reeling from the refugees which spread across Europe as a result of the war in the former Yugoslavia and the lasting consequences of other large scale protracted refugee crisis across the world, the international community became explicitly concerned with preventing large scale population movements. The new policy focused on repatriation, provision of safe areas and humanitarian aid.
Humanitarian Aid and Security
International humanitarian aid workers have been increasingly targeted by belligerent parties in the last 25 years. Notably, between January 1992 and
Chapter 2 - History of Programming for Children in Armed Conflict
March 2002, 209 UN staff members were killed (111 persons died from gunshot wounds, 52 died as a result of ethnic violence, 28 were killed in airplane accidents, and 16 were killed in bombings or landline explosions), 255 staff members were taken hostage and many others were raped, assaulted or the victim of robbery. In 2003 22 people were killed, including the UN Special Representative in Iraq Sérgio Vieira de Mello, and more than 100 wounded in the bombing of the Canal Hotel in Baghdad. This bombing was specifically targeting the United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq, which had been created 5 days previous. Throughout the 2000s, humanitarian aid workers have been systematically targeted. The Aid Worker Security Database recorded the following trends:
There are a number of factors which may have contributed to this trend:
- Since the US invasion of Afghanistan and the beginning of the international ‘war on terror’ in 2001, there have been a number of conflicts in which one of the belligerent parties has engaged in humanitarian activities (i.e. aid distribution, the construction of bridges and schools, etc) as well as armed violence. In those conflicts, it is difficult to distinguish humanitarian aid workers from military actors.
- In certain conflicts, the nationality alone of humanitarian aid workers is sufficient to compromise perceptions of their neutrality (ex. Americans working for INGOs in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, etc).
- The increased presence of for-profit organizations in some conflicts can blur the line between humanitarian and belligerent. For example, in the US-Iraq war there were a host of private actors engaged by the US military,
some directly engaged in hostilities and others engaged in ‘humanitarian’ activities focused on ‘wining the hearts and minds’ of the population.
In December 2001, for the first time the General Assembly passed a resolution appointing a full-time security coordinator and professional security officers at UN HQ in New York. Additionally, “the number of field security officers employed worldwide has almost doubled.” Security procedures, including SOPs and staff training, have been institutionalized across UN agencies and most NGOs. Increased security measures, though necessary to protect humanitarians, may have resulted in an increased distance between UN agencies and INGOs and beneficiaries.
Trends in Child-focused Humanitarian Programming
Arguably, the increased focus on children since the 1980s is part of the larger paradigm shifts in the humanitarian community. The 1980s were characterized by a rapid growth of the child rights sector. By the end of the 80s, there was a general global consensus that children have unique needs and are entitled to rights. This not only resulted in the almost global ratification of the UNCRC, it was also evidenced in the vast increase of studies focused on children. Children were recognized during this period as a factor in the development equation, both as beneficiaries and contributors. This shift was accompanied by the growing realization that different categories of people experience conflict and displacement differently. In particular, certain groups were identified as being exceptionally vulnerable and disproportionately suffering the effects of armed conflict. In the mid-1980s, humanitarian programs began to emerge which took into consideration the unique needs and vulnerabilities of women and children, as well as other groups.
The cynical climate of the 90s may have contributed to the rapid growth of the child rights field. Children and child protection became a rallying cry that mobilized common action when many other humanitarian programs were
Chapter 2 - History of Programming for Children in Armed Conflict
under criticism. Humanitarian programs targeting children benefited from the larger shifts in the sector described above, including the human rights approach, ‘holistic’ programs, stronger monitoring and evaluation frameworks, etc.
By the 2000s, the following premises were widely accepted:
- The importance of ‘situation-based analysis’ in program development, ensuring that programs are tailored to the local context and do not cause unintended harm to communities and beneficiaries (called ‘do no harm’ );
- Rights based programming (with particular attention to the 4 guiding principles of the CRC: best interest, non-discrimination, participation, and survival and development), ensuring that rights are central to the design and implementation of the project;
- Participation of beneficiaries in the design and implementation, with particular attention to building on local traditions and efforts through partnerships. The concept of child participation gained traction during the 1980s and has since become a central pillar in program design;
- Importance of programming across sectors (e.g. linking protection programs to education);
- The importance of rigorous, results-based monitoring and evaluation of programs and a focus on ‘best practices’ in project design.
Though these premises have been widely accepted and have become part of the international programming framework, on the ground they are often used in an ad hoc manner. One of the reasons for this is that each requires substantial time, human resources, and a flexibility in the program cycle that can be difficult in an emergency context and under donor regulations.
Building on these principles and best practice, the next chapter seeks to establish a framework for action based on international law, the notion that children should be considered ‘peace zones’, and an Assessment-Action model. Additionally, Chapter 3 will develop particular guidelines for humanitarian action based on best practice and historic experience. Key reference documents
[this needs to be expanded….]
A plethora of standards and operational guidelines were established in the 90s and 00s, the most notable of which are:
- IASC Guidelines on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergency Settings (MHPSS)
- INEE Good Practice Guidelines
- UNICEF Emergency Field Handbook
- UNICEF Core Commitments for Children in Emergencies
- UNHCR, Guidelines on the Protection of Refugee Women (1991).
- UNHCR Sexual Violence Against Refugees: Guidelines on Protection and Response (1995)
- IAWG, Reproductive Health in Refugee Situations
- UNHCR. “How To Guide: Reproductive Health in Refugee Situations, A Community- Based Response on Sexual Violence Against Women.” Ngara, Tanzania: UNHCR, January 1997.
- UNHCR. “How To Guide: Reproductive Health in Refugee Situations, Building a Team Approach to the Prevention and Response to Sexual Violence, Report of a Technical Mission.” Kigoma, Tanzania: UNHCR, 1998.
- UNHCR. “How To Guide: Reproductive Health in Refugee Situations, From Awareness to Action, Pilot Project To Eradicate Female Genital Mutilation.” Hartisheikh, Ethiopia: UNHCR, December 1997.
- UNHCR. “How To Guide: Reproductive Health in Refugee Situations, Sexual and Gender-based Violence Programme in Guinea.” UNHCR, January 2001.
- UNHCR. “How To Guide: Reproductive Health in Refugee Situations, Sexual and Gender-based Violence Programme in Liberia.” UNHCR, January 2001.
- 2003: UNHCR publishes an update to its 1995 Guidelines, entitled Sexual and Gender-based Violence Against Refugees, Returnees and Internally Displaced Persons: Guidelines for Prevention and Response.
- 2005: Guidelines for Gender-based Violence Interventions in Humanitarian Settings are issued in 2005 by a task force of the United Nations Inter-Agency
Standing Committee (IASC).
- GBV AoR (2010) Handbook for Coordinating Gender-based Violence Intervention in Humanitarian Settings
- GBV AoR with UNFPA, a Managing Gender-based Violence Programmes in Emergencies e-learning course and Companion Guide, as well as a Caring for Survivors training manual.
- sphere standards
Chapter 3 The Legal Framework
Même la guerre a des limites (Even war has limites)
ICRC slogan in 1999, to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Geneva Conventions
International humanitarian and human rights law serves as a minimum standard, an ethical reference point, a public conscience. The power of international law is not only based on its legal personality. Humanitarian and human rights principles are a moral code, affirmed by generations across the globe. Fundamental to the protection of civilians during times of armed conflict is the recognition that States are obliged by international law to protect and realize the rights of persons within their jurisdiction. All action addressed to children in armed conflict should be rooted in international law as this is both the legal and moral framework of our time.
The crux of international law is found in the relationship between the duty bearer and the rights holder. It is not enough for children to know that they have rights; “For the system to work, those who have duties and responsibilities have to be able to meet their obligations and those with the rights need to be empowered to be able to claim their rights.” It is important for humanitarian aid workers and responders to know who is legally responsible for child rights so that they can advocate and work with the appropriate parties.
During times of armed conflict, all belligerent parties are duty bearers for the protection of child rights; this means that state and non-state actors must ensure that children are being protected and provided for during armed conflict. Families also have a primary responsibility for protecting children and realizing their rights. Families must ensure that children are clothed, housed, provided timely health care and education, and given time to play. Families
must take decisions that are in the best interest of the their children and allow children to participate in age-appropriate ways in decisions that affect them. Both during times of conflict and during times of peace, the state must relay on secondary duty bearers to fulfill their obligations, such as institutions, schools, and hospitals. It is the state’s responsibility to ensure that these actors are providing the care and protection required by law.
Even in emergency situations traditional legal and moral duty bearers (such as community members and civil society organizations) continue to act as the primary responders. However, their task is complicated by the conflict dynamics: communities are displaced, families flee or become involved in the conflict as victims or belligerents, civil society organizations are unable to meet the growing demand in a hostile environment, states services are not adapted to the emergency context or are not given the resources needed. It is important that outside humanitarian actors understand the local protection fabric, and support local duty bearers. It is only in extreme cases that outside humanitarian actors should begin to replace these duty bearers. Because the nature of external engagement is finite, every effort should be made to go through, build on, and complement local action.
International Law
Specific international treaties have been developed which contribute to defining and protecting children’s rights in armed conflict. There are four relevant bodies of international law:
- International Humanitarian Law (IHL): This body of law is addressed to the methods and means of warfare and the treatment of persons not participating in armed conflict (i.e. civilians) or who are no longer participating in armed conflict (i.e. injured soldiers).
- International Human Rights Law (IHRL): This body of law is addressed to the relationship between a State and persons within its territory. It is not specifically addressed to armed conflict but remains applicable during armed
conflict.
- International Refugee Law (IRL): This body of law is describes the rights and protections of refugees.
- International Criminal Law (ICL): This body of law describes the criminal responsibility of individuals that commit certain types of crimes, including genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes of aggression.
It should be noted that though armed conflict frequently compromises the degree to which the domestic legal system is able to functionally protect children, responders must be familiar with national laws and should base advocacy and programming work on relevant provisions, as possible.
A. International Humanitarian Law
Humanitarian law emanates from the fundamental principles of humanitythat the protection of human beings must take precedence over competing considerations of states or warring parties. Humanitarian law simply attempts to establish a compromise between ‘military necessity’ and humanity. It has two fundamental purposes: to limit the method and means of warfare and to protect people who are not actively engaged in combat. Combatants would always choose to be completely unfettered and to oppose any constraints they believe could affect their objectives. However, unrestrained behavior during armed conflict, as suggested in the Preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, results in “barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind”.
The fact that humanitarian legal principles are often violated in no way diminishes their importance. The very moment when conflicting parties believe it most expedient and justified to disregard or violate them is when there is greatest need to bring the force of these principles to bear. Humanitarian law accepts belligerent parties’ right to kill and wage war, but not their indiscriminate right to kill, maim and cause suffering.
As discussed in Chapter 1, there are two legal regimes covered by Humanitarian Law, one which applies to International Armed Conflict (IAC) and one which applies to Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC). During International Armed Conflicts, civilians and non-combatants are protected by the IV Geneva Convention and Additional Protocol I. During Non-International Armed Conflicts civilians and non-combatants are protected by national laws, Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, and Additional Protocol II.
As with all treaty law, states must ratify a treaty before they are subject to it. Though all most all states have ratified the 4 Geneva Conventions of 1949, Protocol I and II have not been universally ratified. However, there is a growing movement arguing that many of the principles in the IV Geneva Convention and Protocol I should be considered customary international law, and are therefore applicable to situations of internal conflict as well as to inter-state conflict (regardless of ratification).
Geneva Convention IV (1949) was the first treaty that provided specific protection for civilians during International Armed Conflicts. The Convention includes a limited number obligations for belligerent parties directly related to children and pregnant women, such as the free passage of food, clothing and medicine intended for children and pregnant women and special protection for separated and orphaned children. This Convention is primarily focused on providing protection for civilians, rather than establishing limits for the conduct of belligerent groups engaged in conflict.
Protocol I (1977) requires that belligerent parties distinguish between civilian populations and combatants during International Armed Conflicts. Furthermore, it layout specific protections to which victims of armed conflict are entitled and describes the provision of relief services to civilian populations. In particular, it provides protection for humanitarian workers delivering assistance to civilians. Additionally, Protocol I provides special protection for women, children, refugees, and stateless persons. Protocol I sets limits on ‘unacceptable’ weapons, notably prohibiting weapons that cause unnecesChapter 3 - The Legal Framework
sary or long-term suffering. It also prohibits attacks on cultural sites.
Common Article 3 of the Geneva conventions (1949) establishes obligations towards noncombatants during Non-International Armed Conflict and is applicable to state and non-state actors engaged in armed conflict. It requires that civilians and persons who are not engaged in armed conflict be treated humanely. Common Article 3 prohibits “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture”; “hostage-taking; outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment”; and “the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court...”
Some of the actions prohibited in Common Article 3 are considered international crimes (i.e. torture) and thus require either prosecution or extradition for prosecution.
Protocol II (1977) also describes protections for civilians during Non-International Armed Conflicts. As such, it expands the protections described in Common Article 3. Among other things, Protocol II prohibits violence to life, health, well-being, murder, torture, mutilation, corporal punishment, collective punishment, hostage-taking terrorism, rape, forced prostitution, indecent assault, slavery, and looting. It provides specific provisions for person detained during the conflict. Though Protocol II does not specifically identify ‘grave breaches’ of international law, the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda found that certain violations of Protocol II do constitute international crimes.
There is a growing criticism of Humanitarian law. Among other things, critics argue:
- Conflicts today are largely internal, and as such, subject to fewer treaty rules then International Armed Conflicts,
- The recent phenomena of ‘global terrorism’ requires a unique response that was not foreseen by international law,
- The long range weapons and drones have fundamentally altered rules of proportionality.
The authors of this book firmly believe that Humanitarian law remains a suitable framework for regulating belligerent parties engaged in armed conflict. In almost all cases, problems arise in the application of the existing legal framework, rather than from inadequacies in the framework; “one can say with some certainty that if all the parties concerned showed perfect regard for humanitarian law, most o the humanitarian issues before us would not exist.” In that case that a gap does arise, “all attempts to strengthen humanitarian law should… building the existing legal framework” , rather than creating new rules.
B. International Human Rights Law
International Human Rights Law was developed in the aftermath of World War II to ensure that governments provide minimum rights and protections for people within their borders. Human rights are believed to be a fundamental birth-right of all persons. All rights are considered of equal value, whether political, civil, economic, social or cultural.
At the heart of International Human Rights Law is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), unanimously adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights describes both civil and political rights (i.e. right to freedom of expression, assembly association, religion, fair trial, movement, torture, arbitrary arrest, slavery) as well as economic, social and cultural rights (i.e. education, housing, social security, work, form labour unions, medical care, vacation and leisure time).
Following the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the governments around the world adopted two treaties which provide the foundation for human rights law, namely the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966). These describe the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of all people, including children, during times of armed conflict and peace. Some of the rights described in these conventions can be temporarily suspended during times of ‘public emergency’(i.e. freedom of assembly and association).
There was a global recognition that certain groups of people were particularly vulnerable and in need of additional protection. As such, specific human rights treaties have been developed for children, women, persons with disabilities, among others, including:
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) provides comprehensive protection for child rights. It includes civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. There are only a few Articles in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which are directly addressed to armed conflict . However, like all human rights treaties, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child should be implemented in full during situations of armed conflict, as in times of peace. Notably, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child does not allow for derogations in a time of ‘public emergency’. In reality, state parties often have difficulty implementing this treaty in full during armed conflict. Children in situations of armed conflict are also protected by the following human rights treaties:
- Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (2000)
- Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography (2000)
- Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a Communications Procedure (2014)
- Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (1979) CEDAW does not specifically address situations of armed conflict. However, UN SC resolution 1325, 1820 and 1889, which are related to the situation of women in armed conflict, are based on the principles in CEDAW.
- Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948)
- Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984)
- International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance (2006)
- International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination (1965)
- International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (1973)
- International Labour Organization Convention 182 regarding the Worst Forms of Child Labour
- Convention Against Torture and Other, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984)
- Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006)
Humanitarian and Human Rights law have the same objective. In general they are complementary, though they have a different scope of application: Human Rights law is applicable at all times and Humanitarian law is applicable only during times of armed conflict. There are, however, several importance differences between the two bodies of law:
1. Human Rights law is only binding on state parties, where as Humanitarian law applies to both state and non-state actors;
2. Human Rights law is specifically concerned with the relationship between the state and persons on its territory and/or under its jurisdiction. As such, it is largely limited in its territorial application. Humanitarian law does not have a territorial limit, per say.
3. Certain provisions of Human Rights law can be derogated from during times of emergency. Humanitarian law can never be derogated from.
C. International Refugee Law
International Refugee Law is founded on the UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (1951). This convention defines a refugee as anyone who “owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country…” The 1951 Convention established the principles of nonrefoulement. This principle prohibits states from expelling or returning a “refugee in any manner whatsoever to the
frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.” Once refugee status has been granted, the state has several obligations, including protecting refugees’ right to non-discrimination, freedom of religion, association, access to justice, work, housing, education, relief, and social security.
In general, the 1951 Refugee Convention does not distinguish between children and adults. As such, children are entitled to the same rights and protections as adults under this Convention. The specific protections related directly to children include: parents should have the freedom to provide their children with the religious education of their choosing; and refugee children should be provided with free and compulsory primary education.
Since the end of the Cold War, there has been a marked increase in the number of internal conflicts which have resulted in significant internal displacement. Formally, Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) are not covered by the 1951 Convention or UNHCR’s original mandate because they have not crossed an international border. However, for many situations UNHCR has extended its mandate to care for Internally Displaced Persons. National law and Human Rights law provide Internally Displaced Persons with rights during armed conflict. Additionally, Francis Deng, the former UN Special Representative for Internally Displaced Persons, introduced 30 Guiding Principles for the Treatment of IDPs to the UN Human Rights Commission. They were accepted by the UN Human Rights Council and have been widely recognized.
D. International Customary Law
Customary law is a fundamental component of international law and is applicable during times of armed conflict. The Statute of the International Court of Justice defines customary international law as “a general practice accepted by law”. The International Court of Justice found that the determination of
customary law required two elements: state practice and a belief that such practice is required, prohibited or allowed as a matter of law. Arguably, Common Article 3 is “recognized within customary law as the absolute minimum of humanitarian treatment applicable during armed conflict of any qualification.” Customary Law applies to all states, regardless of the treaties they have ratified. For example, the principles that children should be protected from racial discrimination, slavery, and torture are considered customary law.
Jus cogens is a special type of international customary law. It holds that there are certain norms, such as freedom from slavery, torture or genocide, from which no derogation is permitted. These norms cannot be modified by treaty-law.
Customary law is of particular importance because it significantly contributes to the principle of ‘universal jurisdiction’, meaning that people can be tried in any national criminal court for their crimes (such as torture or crimes against humanity), irrespective of where the crime was committed, the accused’s nationality or residency. Crimes that can be prosecuted under universal jurisdiction are so egregious that they are believed to constitute a crime against all people.
E. International Criminal Law
The Rome Statute (1998) gives the International Criminal Court the jurisdiction to try cases of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression. The state has the primary responsibility to prosecute crimes under international law. It is only in cases in which a State has chosen not to proceed, are inactive, or are clearly unable or unwilling to purse a case that the International Criminal Court can exercise its jurisdiction. The International Criminal Court can only judge a person who is a national of a State that is party to the Rome Statute, who committed a crime in a country that is party to the Rome Statute, or when the UN Security Council called for an investigation. After considerable debate, the International Criminal Court limited its
jurisdiction to persons over that age of 18 when they committed the alleged crime. The International Criminal Court has laid out specific rules related to the safety and well-being of child victims and witness during investigation and prosecution.
Conclusion
International law should be a moral road map and a practical framework for belligerent parties and humanitarians alike. That humankind was able to agree to a common code of behavior is phenomenal, unique in history. The power of this code remains limited to its application. It is only by understanding it, living by it, using it, and advocating for compliance to it that we can together bring about a world governed by principles of humanity and rights. To these ends, basing response programs on the tenants described therein and pushing for global compliance is not only a practical grounds of which to build response action, it is also a means to give power to the law.
Chapter 4
Guiding Principles for Programming
Children have unique needs and vulnerabilities during times of armed conflict that require extraordinary action from caretakers and responders. It is our moral obligation to ensure that actions taken for children are developed and implemented to the highest standard possible. To these ends, this chapter attempts to summarize key programming principles that have proven to be beneficial, namely: children as peace zones, rights based programming, community based programming, holistic programing, and collaboration.
Children as Peace Zones
International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law codify the globally recognized principle that children are to be protected from harm and provided essential services and opportunities during times of peace and conflict. The concept of ‘children as zones of peace’ emerged in the 1980s in attempt to apply humanitarian principles to child protection during armed conflict. This concept argues that children should not be engaged in armed conflict, either as victims or as a combatants. During armed conflict, children’s rights should be protected and essential services should be provided to them to ensure their survival and well-being. ‘Children as zones of peace’ is based on the belief that the protection and well-being of children is everyone’s responsibility - families, combatants on all sides, government services, NGOs and international agencies. To ensure that children’s needs are met, collaboration and coordination are essential. Though this concept has become less popular in the last 15 years,‘Children as Zones of Peace’, as well as the related concepts such as ‘Schools as Zones of Peace’, ‘Corridors of peace’, and ‘days of tranquility’ serve as a model for humanitarian action.
The idea that there should be spacial or temporal limits to armed conflict has a long history. In the 11th and 12th centuries in some European countries the
LIVED EXPERIENCE
MIGRANT CRISIS : THOUSANDS OF UNACCOMPANIED CHILDREN ARRIVING IN EUROPE
Salvadorian immigrant Stefany Marjorie, 8, and her sister got stopped by Border Patrol agents this past week in Mission, Texas. GETTY IMAGES
Alone: And worryingly, eight per cent of all children (pictured) - who boarded rickety smugglers boats from war-torn countries like Syria, Libya and Iraq - landed in Italy unaccompanied
Thousands of vulnerable unaccompanied children arriving on Mediterranean rescue boat
Of the tens of thousands of migrants and refugees currently traversing Europe, an estimated 4% to 7% are minors traveling without their parents. (Los Angeles Times, Sept. 15, 2015
church organized a ‘truce of God’ for several days each week (often Thursday to Sunday) to allow people to work in their fields, go to market, etc. Belligerent parties and combatants were threatened with excommunication if they broke the truce. The Hebrews, the Polynesians and the ancient Egyptians all respected the idea of a physical ‘sanctuary’ from violence in which people could seek refuge from danger. Since its establishment, the International Committee for the Red Cross has remained dedicated to carving out a neutral space for humanitarian aid during times of armed conflict.
Implicit in the concept of children as a zone of peace is belief that protection and aid should be provided to children on all sides of every conflict - children of neutral families, soldiers’ families, rebels’ families. There is a long tradition of humanitarian agencies remaining neutral and crossing conflict lines to ensure services to all children, as exemplified by the work of the Red Cross, Save the Children Fund during the Russian Revolution, the Belgium Relief Commission during World War I and the cross-border efforts of the Quakers during the Spanish Civil War. UNICEF has been able to provide services to children on all sides in many conflicts, including in occupied Germany, the Nigerian civil war, the Vietnam war, Cambodia, Lebanon, Central America and Uganda.
In the early 2000s ‘Children as zones of peace’ became a rallying cry of civil society in Nepal. Several major political parties publicly declared children as zones of peace. Civil society organizations used this concept to push state and non-state actors to take the necessary actions to protect and realize child rights, even in the midst of conflict.
Save the Children Nepal developed the concept of ‘Schools as Zones of Peace’ (SZOP), a spin-off of the ‘Children as zones of peace’ movement. Programs based on this theory attempt to ensure access to violence-free schools during and after armed conflict. Home, school, and community are understood to be fundamentally interdependent in the realization of this objective. Children are mobilized and empowered to be agents of peace. ‘Schools as
Zones of Peace’ were also implemented in Afghanistan and India, among other places.
The concept of ‘Children as zones of peace’ has been tangibly translated into:
• ‘Days of tranquility’ - periods of time during which belligerent parties agree to arrest violence to allow for humanitarian action, such as the immunization of children; and
• ‘Corridors of peace’ - zones which are temporarily or permanently selected to remain conflict-free, providing a space in which humanitarian goods and services can be provided to civilians and non-combatants.
For example, for several years in the mid-80s the Catholic Church and the Red Cross succeeding in organizing ‘days of tranquility’ each year during which belligerent parties ceased fighting to allow for the immunization of children in El Salvador. In mid-1989, UNICEF and the UN Secretary General succeed in establishing a humanitarian corridor in Sudan, temporarily staving off the conflict-induced famine that had killed 25,000 people the previous year. Similarly, UNICEF has negotiated ‘days of tranquility’ and ‘corridors of peace’ in several conflicts, including Afghanistan, Angola, the DRC, Sri Lanka, Sudan and Somalia.
Rights Based Programming
Human rights of children in situations of armed conflict are affected by the every day decisions made by humanitarians. For example, decisions about how emergency food distribution is organized, where the latrines are built, and who has access to schools have a very real and immediate impact on the rights and needs of child in conflict situations. For this reason, it is fundamental that all programming should be undertaken with a human rights approach.
The rights based approach to programming integrates principles of human right law into program design, implementation and monitoring. It is a shift away from the charity approach to humanitarian and development aid which has traditionally seen the beneficiary as a passive victim. The rights based
Chapter 4 - Guiding Principles for Programming
approach approach links principles related to rights, accountability, participation, empowerment, non-discrimination and vulnerability to programming. Rights based programming focuses on helping duty-bearers fulfill their obligation to respect, protect, and fulfill child rights and the capacity of rights-holders to claim their rights. The human rights based approach places equal emphasis on the process by which the program results were achieved and the program outputs. As such, participation, local ownership, capacity development and sustainability are essential. It should be noted that Save the Children developed Child Rights Programming, an adaptation of the larger rights based programming movement.
Fundamental to rights based programming for children, the Convention on the Rights of the Child identifies four guiding principles which are understood to be fundamental to the realization and protection of all child rights As such, they are also a framework for all action for children during situations of armed conflict. These principles are - the best interest of the child, child participation, non-discrimination, and survival and development. The diagram below illustrates their interdependence:
A. Best Interests of the Child
The ‘best interest’ principle arises from Article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which reads “In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration”. The first and foremost consideration of any and all action taken on behalf of children should be the best interest of the child. The ability to design programs on the basis of ‘best interest’ is largely dependent on responders’ access to information. As the principle touches every aspect of a child’s life, responders need to have a holistic understanding of the child and his context. Adults often act on the basis of what they believe to be in the best interest of children. Sometimes, they can do damage to the child and still believe that their action is in their interest. Basing Best Interest Determination (BID) on child rights and ensuring that a group of people are involved in the process (including experts, children and family/community members) can help to minimize this risk. Child participation is a fundamental element of this process.
The following should be considered during the determination of best interest :
• Family and community: In almost all cases, it is in the best interest of the child to remain with their family and community . Every effort should be made to ensure that families and communities stay together. Rapid support to families and communities is essential to prevent families from breaking up;
• The wishes of the child: Children have the right to participate in decision that affect them, in accordance with their age and maturity;
• The wishes of the parents (if they can be determined): Parents are a primary duty-bearer for child rights. As such, it is critically important that they are involved in decisions affecting their child, as possible.
• The emotional and psychological needs of the child: Special attention should be paid to the emotional and psychological impact of actions on children;
• The past history of the child: Actions should be taken in consideration with the particular needs and experiences of each child;
• The need to protect the child’s legal rights: Programs must be designed to protect and enable the realization of children’s rights;
• The child’s or the family’s affiliation with a religious, ethnic, or political group: Children have the rights to participate in cultural life. As such, it is essential that programs design takes into consideration, for example, cultural, linguistic, and religious rites and traditions.
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child has set out specific procedural regulations concerning the determination of best interest for particular issues, including adoptions (Article 21), separating children from their parents against their will and decisions regarding custody (Article 9). In General Comment No.6, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child also established that decisions regarding the repatriation and resettlement of unaccompanied and separated children should be subject to strict regulations based on the ‘best interest’ principle.
B. Participation
Article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child reads, “States Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child.” In situations of armed conflict, family survival strategies are frequently contingent on children’s ability to fill in the gaps when other systems fail. As such, in many situations children are already participating in family and individual decisions that affect them. Responders must ensure that they understand and support appropriate participation where it is happening and encourage participation where it is not happening.
Meaningful child participation is believed to:
- Ensure that responders and caregivers understand the needs and concern of children and design programs accordingly;
- Encourage children to constructively engage in activities that positively contribute to their own and their community’s future;
- Reduce risk, as it provides children with information, critical thinking skills, and recourse options which enable them to make informed decisions;
- Enhance growth and development because it encourages children to proactively engage in problem-solving and demands commitment;
- Change how communities function and challenge traditional roles of children in society.
The notion of participation in development programming emerged in the 1970s. Until the early 1990s, participation in programming was limited to development projects targeting adults. Since then, there has been a growing interest in community participation in humanitarian programming and children’s age-appropriate participation in projects that affect them. The codification of children’s right to participation in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child has significantly strengthened participatory approaches to humanitarian and development programming. Child participation in programming is driven by the belief that children are “individuals with rights and responsibilities of their own; playing an active role in the lives of their families, communities and societies; and having interests, views and priorities which may differ from those of the adults with whom they interact”.
Children’s right to participation is linked to their right to education and information as these are fundamental to critical thinking and informed decision-making. It is also linked to children’s right to freedom of expression, thought, conscience, religion, association, and peaceful assembly as these are means by which they are able to give voice to their opinion. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child describes several types of child participation:
- social participation in the family (Art 7.1 and 10)
- participation in community life (Art 15 and 17)
- participation of those with special needs, such as children with disabilities (Art 23)
- participation that allows adults to make better informed decisions
Chapter 4 - Guiding Principles for Programming regarding children
- participation that helps children survive and develop to their fullest potential
- freedom of expression (Article 13)
- freedom of thought, conscience, religion (Article 14)
- freedom of association (article 15)
- right to privacy (Article 16)
- access to appropriate information (Article 17)
A word of warning - In emergency contexts, forced child participation can be dangerous and must be handled with extreme care. Safe and effective participation requires proactive efforts to identify and minimize any possible hazards. Child participation often requires a high degree of flexibility from adult programmers in regards to timing, processes and outcomes. This is not always possible in high-stress environments or under donor regulations. It is important the programmers think carefully through the long-term impact of participation on children (what will happen when the project ends? What will happen when the child goes home at the end of the day? etc). Additionally, it is important that careful attention is paid to the response of adults around the child. Finally, projects that involved children but are not able to meet the desired outcomes can have an adverse affect on engaged children, making them feel powerless and demoralized. All decisions affecting children, including decisions related to their participation, should be take in consideration of their best interests.
C. Non-discrimination
Article 2 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child reads, “The state parties to the present Convention shall respect and ensure the rights set forth in the Convention to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child’s or his or her parent’s or legal guardian’s race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status.” The principle of non-discrimination is fundamental to human rights and is found in all human
rights treaties. UN Convention on the Rights of the Child obliges state parties to provide all children with equal rights and opportunities. UNICEF specifics that “the term ‘discrimination’ refers to any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, color, religion, ethnicity, gender, disability or other characteristic that impairs the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of rights.”
Humanitarian aid is deeply rooted in the principle of non-discrimination. The Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs) in Disaster Relief states that “[Humanitarian] aid [should be] given regardless of the race, creed or nationality of the recipients and without adverse distinction of any kind,”. Rather, aid priorities should be based on need. All effort should be made to provide all children with services and relief, with a specific focus on the most marginalized and vulnerable children. Each program should be carefully developed to ensure that it does not discriminate against any group in particular and that it works to counter existing formal and informal systems of discrimination. To ensure that programs address discrimination, responders need to have a comprehensive understanding of local systems that perpetuate discrimination. They also need to be aware of their own stereotypes and preconceived notions that may unintentionally result in discrimination.
D. Survival and development
Article 6 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child reads, “1. States Parties recognize that every child has the inherent right to life. 2. States Parties shall ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child.” This right not only protects a child’s right to life, it also provides children with the right to physical, mental, cultural, spiritual, moral and social development.
Integrating children’s right to survival and development into programming requires:
- A comprehensive approach to child development which takes into
Chapter 4 - Guiding Principles for Programming
LIVED EXPERIENCE
consideration emotional, moral and spiritual growth as well as physical health;
- Attention and consideration of the evolving capacities of children;
- Consideration of global technological advancements and their impact on childhood;
- Recognition that children develop in the context of their family and community;
- Attention to the micro and macro local, national and international political, economic, and social dynamics which impact child survival and development;
- Allowing child to participate, in accordance with their age and maturity;
- Careful attention to the situation of marginalized or exceptionally vulnerable children;
- Regular impact monitoring to better understand what actions are working and which are not.
Community-Based Programming
Community based approaches to programming can be particularly helpful for children affected by armed conflict. Such programs can help communities regain control over their lives, encourage the development of social services (schools, clinics, etc), assist communities in restoring or building support structures and protection mechanisms, and encourage people to take proactive positive steps to reduce stress factors affecting their family.
Parents and local communities are important duty bearers for child rights, even during situations of armed conflict. Humanitarian aid workers and responders should, to the extent possible, support and assist these duty bearers in realizing their obligations towards children. Most communities have functional, traditional ways of coping with difficulty. To the extent possible, responders should reinforce these traditional coping mechanisms and not attempt to replace them. For example, in many cultures there are local systems for caring for separated children, including the involvement of relatives, family friends, and clan members. In such contexts, aid should be given to families
caring for separated children to ensure that they are not forced by poverty to abandon or send away these children.
In times of conflict, people may need external assistance to meet basic needs. This does not mean that they passive recipients with no agency, opinions, or solutions. It means that they have been forced by circumstances into an exceptionally vulnerable situation. Aid recipients have skills and information that can be of practical benefit. As such, aid recipients should not be considered ‘objects of charity’ but active participants.
If responders, both international and national, do not take time to fully understand and build on the needs, opportunities and threats facing the recipient community, aid can have lasting negative consequences. For example, if a food aid program is not carefully developed and implemented, it can undermine local production and markets. There is also a risk that if aid recipients are not engaged in decisions that affect them they can become dependent on aid and despondent. Finally, without community involvement, it is difficult to ensure the accountability of humanitarian aid workers. In a context in which aid workers can have a monopoly on the provision of life saving assistance, power dynamics between the recipient and the aid worker are highly sensitive and can become destructive. Accountability mechanisms are essential to balance power and to encourage communication.
Holistic and Comprehensive Programming
A comprehensive approach to needs and rights violation is essential; one right affects all others. In all stages of an emergency, the needs of affected children and their families must be considered comprehensively. Sector-specific programs should be developed within a multi-sector framework.
Remain conscious of the long-term impact of actions and the global objectives of intervention. Humanitarian aid can strengthen local systems, result in longterm improvements in infrastructure and social systems, and reduce the risk of conflict.
All interventions should be developed and implemented with an attention to the potential impact on the conflict. To the extent possible, humanitarian aid should contribute to peace building and conflict prevention. This requires that humanitarians acknowledge and understand the link between protection and humanitarian assistance.
Coordination and Collaboration
Coordination between responders, from local communities to UN agencies, is fundamental to ensuring that all children are protected and provided for during situations of armed conflict. Coordination reduces the risk of program overlap and ensures that groups of people or geographic areas are not sidelined. This requires coordination between involved actors in specific sectors (i.e health, water, child protection, eduction) as well as coordination across sectors.
Brofendrenner and Garbarino developed a framework for understanding the ‘ecology of human developed’ which takes a holistic approach to the interconnected layers of actors and relationships which influence a child’s well-being. These layers range from the immediate family to the state, as depicted in the diagram below:
It should be assumed that all of the stakeholders identified in this diagram need to be equally engaged, committed, and coordinated. As such, interventions should be developed and coordinated at each level for the protection and well-being of the child.
The following principles are fundamental in developing healthy collaboration and coordination between responders:
- Transparency;
- Shared goals: halting violations and seeking remedies;
- Guidance provided by local partners;
- Open communication;
- Equality and mutual respect in identifying problems and generating solutions;
- Adequate training for all partners involved.
Humanitarian Ethics
In 2013, ICRC published a set of professional standards for actors carrying out protection work in situations of armed conflict. Among those, are the principles listed below:
1. Humanity: The right of all people to be treated humanely should be central to all response action. As such, priority should be given to “life and health, alleviating suffering, and ensuring respect for the rights, dignity and mental and physical integrity of all individuals in situations of risk.”
2. Impartiality: Prioritization of protection programs and humanitarian aid should be made on the basis of need, based on objective criteria. Humanitarian aid should be provided to civilians, families, and children on all sides of the conflict.
3. Non-discrimination: Responders should ensure that their programs in no way, directly or indirectly, discriminate against specific groups of people on
the basis of race, color, sex, age, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, disability, health, sexual orientation or any other status.
4. ‘Do no harm’: Responders must pay careful attention to the unintended side affects of aid programs, particularly in regard to how they affect the security of children and their families, how they impact the conflict dynamics, how they interact with vulnerability and their impact on social, political, and economic power dynamics.
Resources
The Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and Non- Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in Disaster Relief, prepared by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the ICRC, is widely recognized as an exemplary statement on humanitarian principles. It is available in Annex 1. [Available at https://www. icrc.org/eng/assets/files/publications/icrc-002-1067.pdf]
The Professional Standards for Protection Work Carried out by Humanitarian and Human Rights actors in Armed Conflict and Other Situations of Violence (2013) was published by the ICRC. It lays of guidelines for responders engaged in protection work in situations of armed conflict. [Available at: https:// www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/icrc-002-0999.pdf]
The Sphere Handbook: Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response was developed through wide collaboration of humanitarian actors. It is widely accepted as minimum standards for humanitarian response. [Available at: http://www.sphereproject.org/handbook/]
Save the Children developed an approach to programming focused on child rights, described in Child Rights Programming: How to Apply Rights-Based Approaches to Programming - A Handbook for International Save the Children Alliance Members (2005). [Available at http://resourcecentre.savethechildren. se/sites/default/files/documents/2658.pdf]
Chapter 5
A Basis for Action
Assessment-Action Framework
Assessing and responding to the needs of children in armed conflicts is difficult. The number of children in a conflict area is often large, sometimes in the hundreds of thousands, even millions. Children live over wide geographic areas, and those most in need are often least accessible. In some conflicts, the embattled population is clearly identifiable, but in many conflicts the distinguishing feature of the affected population may be the existence of a pervasive fear and the quiet adjustments families are forced to make in living with that fear. An absent limb or the wounds of torture are obvious indicators, but the impact of conflict on the lives of children can also manifest itself in more subtle injuries.
A fundamental premise of this book is that the needs of children in situations of armed conflict are best served if interventions are focused on the specific ways in which conflict affects their well-being. If children are dying because they are being targeted by combatants, intervention is required to ensure life. If children are falling ill, the appropriate intervention is whatever preventive and response measures will ensure health. If children are being tortured, arbitrarily detained or forced to be combatants, still different interventions are required.
Program Goals
To work on behalf of children in situations of armed conflict is to counter, prevent and mitigate the impact of conflict. To achieve these goals, clear objectives need to be established. The following programming goals are suggested
to provide an overarching and comprehensive framework:
Peace/Conflict
That peaceful means be found to resolve disputes and avoid conflict; when conflict does occur, that every effort be made to bring it to a peaceful end.
Life/Death
That in situations of armed conflict the lives of civilians, particularly children, be spared; when deaths occur, that the wellbeing of surviving family members be assured.
Health/Illness
That in situations of armed conflict civilians, particularly children, be spared injury, illness, malnutrition and disability; when so affected, that timely and effective remedial assistance be made available to assure their full recovery.
Protection/Abuse
That in situations of armed conflict civilians, particularly children, be protected from torture, abuse, arbitrarily imprisonment and recruitment; when so affected, that they achieve full recovery and well-being
Family unity/Separation
That in situations of armed conflict children remain in the care of their families; when separated that they be reunited, if it isn the children’s interest; when that is not possible, that their well-being be assured through suitable alternatives.
Psychosocial distress
The in situations of armed conflict children be protected form psychological harm; when so distressed, that timely and effective assistance be provided to ensure their mental health and well-being.
Settledness/Displacement
Chapter 5 - A Basis for Action Assessment Action Framework
That in situations of armed conflict civilians, particularly children, not be displaced; when displaced, that their health and well-being be assured and that they have the opportunity to reestablish their lives in the shortest possible time.
Sufficiency/Poverty
That in situations of armed conflict families, in the interest of children, be able to provide for the essential needs of their members; when families are unable to fulfill this obligation, that arrangements be made to provide such assistance as will facilitate their ability to do so.
Education/education disruption
That in situations of armed conflict all children continue to receive formal education; when school is disrupted or nonexistent, that regular or alternative services be initiated.
Healthy/Unhealthy social, cultural milieu
That in situations of armed conflict every effort be made to maintain healthy social and cultural milieux in which civilians, particularly children, can live and develop; when such is threatened, that measure be taken to restore or contribute to such.
It is not assumed that every agency and concerned party must monitor and respond to every category. But it is assumed that global assessment and comprehensive action are important and that coordinated efforts are required to provide effective and complementary services. Evidence that the needs of children in any of these 10 categories are not satisfactorily met should be the stimulus for appropriate interventions. While this seems obvious, experience confirms that in many conflict situations interventions are narrowly conceived and implemented. Children may be dying from diarrhea caused by bad water, for example, in the presence of agency personnel who limit their role only to the provision of food.
Action-Assessment Framework
Emergency contexts change rapidly. Aid programmes need to be able to meet the evolving needs of children and their families. To be able to do so, programs must be grounded in context assessments that include a focus on cultural and social dynamics before the conflict and their evolution during the emergency, with specific focus on gender dynamics, changes in the family, and particularly vulnerable groups. They should also be based on regular monitoring and data collection (participatory, if possible) to ensure that evolving needs are identified quickly. Finally, they need to draw on and complement local resources, materials and methods to ensure that programs are context appropriate and sustainable. To these ends, responders should base programs on a comprehensive assessment framework which not only monitors the rights of children but also reflects the stages of an humanitarian response action in an emergency - prevention and mitigation, preparedness, emergency response and rehabilitation and recovery.
The authors of this book propose the following action-assessment framework:
First, facts. Who are the children affected? What are their characteristics? What are the causes of the difficulty? What is being done to assist them?
Second, risk group. Which children are likely to be affected? Risk and vulnerability are forward-looking concerns that attempt to determine which children might be helped by preventive intervention. Also, knowing which children are at risk is important in planning emergency services.
Third, prevention and mitigation. What measures would prevent the negative impact from happening? If children are losing their lives, what measures might be taken to prevent these deaths? If an event cannot be prevented, what pre-incident measures will reduce the impact of the crisis event? For example, if an armed fighting incident cannot be prevented in a community, what measure can a family take to protect children during fighting?
Fourth, emergency response. What emergency response is required if the neg-
Chapter 5 - A Basis for Action Assessment
ative impact occurs? First-aid is an obvious example of an emergency response to injury. Emergency response to all other impacts must also be considered and planned.
Fifth, preparedness for emergency response. Experience confirms that emergency actions are likely to be more effective if preparations are made for their implementation. Often, preparedness is based on lessons-learned from initial emergency response action. As such, preparedness should be a continual, dynamic process before, during and after the emergency, preparing for the evolution of needs at each stage. What preparedness measures would ensure maximum effectiveness of each emergency action?
Sixth, rehabilitation and recovery. What short-term measures are required for rehabilitation and longer-term measures for full recovery from each impact?
One clarification deserves emphasis. As discussed in previous chapters, the goal of all efforts is not simply to provide goods and services but to increase local capacity and reduce vulnerability. As such, the first goal is to help families protect and care for their own children and to help local services provide the required intervention.
Assessment-Action Framework
Assessment Ethics
It is essential that assessments and research be structured and undertaken with careful attention to ethical and security concerns. These concerns are particularly important in situations where violence, instability, and trauma increase the risks and vulnerability of research participants, particularly children. Researchers must ensure that measures are in place to minimize potential risks and that all involved persons are fully aware of the implications of their participation. Research can be an empowering process for participants, if well conceived and thoughtfully implemented.
Informed consent is central to ethical research. Though widely acknowledged as fundamental, in practice it can be difficult to achieve with children; “even adults in many communities may struggle to grasp the full implications of their involvement in a proposed project of enquiry.” Adult/child power dynamics may make it difficult for a child to refuse to participate. They make think that they will be punished or that their families will not have access to relief services if they do not participate. Researchers should pay specific attention to the body language of the child, looking for signs of discontent or unease.
Researchers’ proximity to the interviewee might result in confusion regarding the formality of the data collection process. If the researcher is a member of the community or if they build a strong rapport with interviewees, participants can mistake an interview for an informal chat and feel betrayed by the subsequent use of data, even if they gave their ‘consent’ at the beginning of the process. However, if the research team is external, they may not always be able to foresee all possible risks of involvement. Researchers should encourage the research participants to identify and discuss with them possible implications of being involved in the research and to clearly explain what risks
can be mitigated and which can not be.
Particularly attention should be paid to explaining the publication process; what will be published and how will sources be identified? How much control or review will the research participants have in the publication process?
Talking to traumatized children and their communities. Research offers children and adults the opportunity to speak about painful experiences, present difficulties or acute needs. As such, children and their families are often eager to participate. However, it is critically important that research methodology, tools and questions are designed to minimize distress, that researchers are trained to understand the signs of distress, and that researchers know how to respond if an interviewee does become distressed.
There are a number of research tools that can be used that may minimize the possible negative side affects of interviewing persons with trauma and can even be empowering. Ennew and Plateau note that “it is not ethical to ask children direct questions about painful experiences, using poorly-designed research tools (particularly questionnaire and interviews) and without their informed consent.” Responders are morally obligated to pay careful attention to how research tools and processes are developed and the affect that they might have.
Understanding the role of the researcher. Clarity about the role of the researcher is extremely important. Children, particularly those who are vulnerable, can quickly feel attached to researchers because they share intimate information with them and can subsequently feel abandoned when the research is completed, mistaking a temporary relationship for a long-term relationship and falsely raising hopes and expectations. Both for the protection of the child and their families, the researcher should maintain some emotional distance from the research participants and remain in their prescribed role.
Developing a referral system. It is essential that the research team develop
Chapter 5 - A Basis for Action Assessment
a referral system prior to beginning research, if at all possible. This means that they need to identify resource persons and organization that will be able to provide additional support to research participants should acute need arise. For example, if a child exhibits acute trauma during research or states that their life or physical well-being are in immediate risk, the research team should be able to refer the participant to a safe and qualified support system.
Confidentiality and anonymity are critical concerns in sensitive data collection, particularly with children. Every effort should be made to consider how the identity of the interviewee can be protected during data collection, data storage and analysis, and reporting. In the current age of technology, this is particularly challenging. At the least, all data should be coded and personal information (i.e. names and addresses) should be held in a separate location as the interview data. Notes, data analysis, lists of interviewees, etc should be held in a location that can not be accessed by unauthorized persons.
Attention should be paid to how the research describes children and their communities. Humanitarian organizations have a tendency to stress aspects of victimization in an attempt to advocate for change or funding. Hart and Bex remind us that “the presentation of young people as “damaged” or “traumatized” as a result of exposure to conflict may play into stereotypes that are profoundly disempowering and that undermine the ways in which they cope with extreme adversity.”
Coordinating research. Responders should make all efforts to coordinate research, assessments, and monitoring. In some circumstances, such as in refugee camps, multiple NGOs and UN agencies undertake ‘needs assessments’ at the same time. Children and adults can become frustrated by the process. They sometimes feel like they are repeatedly asked to provide information, sometimes at risk to their own security, but with little result.
Assessment Tools
Research tools should be carefully crafted to cause the least suffering, to be
culturally appropriate and to be tailored to the age and maturity of research participants. During the design of the research project or assessment, attention should be paid to the ways that children and their communities commonly express themselves in their every day lives.
Hart and Bex identify 4 categories of research tools that may be useful in situations of armed conflict:
1. PRA and PRA-related tools (“participatory rural appraisal” or sometimes “participatory rapid assessment”): These tools engage participants in the design of the research process and tools, including the identification of outputs. Research tools often include social maps, timelines, seasonal calendars, daily activity profiles and Venn diagrams.
2. Audio-visual tools: These tools include the use of photography and videos, story-telling, drama, art, diaries and songs. These tools can be particularly useful in violence research because they allow children to project their experience outside of themselves and to discuss it in the third person, which may reduce the risk of re-traumatization. These tools can be used with very young children (3 year-olds) as well as youth. Careful attention should be paid to cultural dynamics regarding the use of these mediums.
3. Quantitative tools: Quantitate tools, such as surveys and questionnaires, allow for a much wider sample and are thus easier to draw generalizations from. However, they do not capture the nuance of experience. One way to mitigate the risk of ‘flat’ research is to involve children and their communities in developing, administering, and analyzing the questionnaires. This will help to ensure that tools are context appropriate and will allow participants to explain nuances that might otherwise be missed.
4. “Anthropological” tools: These tools are derived from the field of anthropology and include ‘observation’ and oral testimonies.
To ensure that programs are tailed to actual needs, it is essential that collected data is correctly interpreted and validated. There are several ways to verify and validate research, including:
1. Methods triangulation: Comparing data collected through various
Chapter 5 - A Basis for Action Assessment
research methods and tools (including both quantitative and qualitative, if possible);
2. Triangulation of sources: Comparing data collected from different sources, using the same research methodology;
3. Analyst triangulation: Asking multiple analysts to analyze the same data set and compare interpretations;
4. Theory/perspective triangulation: Using several data analysis frameworks to interpret data and comparing results.
TEXT BOX
Questions to Guide the Development of Research Tools
Some questions to consider in the development of a research, assessment or monitoring methodology:
Insider/outside dynamics - Are the researchers outsiders? How will this affect the social and political dynamics of the situation? Will their presence and their contact with affected children and families put research participants at undo risk? Are the researchers insiders? Are they perceived as neutral in the conflict? Will their contact with the community put participants at undo risk? Will their identity affect their ability to neutrally analyze data? Will it affect how the research is seen by other actors?
Gender dynamics - What are the implications if the researchers are female? Male? How will this affect their access to information, their perceived neutrality, and their security during data collection? How will it affect the security of research participants?
Local concerns - Are there local concerns about involving children in research? Are there concerns about the research process more generally? Are there subjects that are being researched that participants may find inappropriate to talk about? How can these subjects be addressed in a culturally appropriate manner? How will participation in the research be perceived by the
community?
Location - Where is the research being conducted? Is the location safe? Who will be able to overhear the interview? How does this affect the safety of the research participant and the research team? How does this affect the quality of the research and the integrity of the results?
Emotional well-being of the participant - How is the research likely to impact the participant? Does it include questions that may cause retraumatization? How can the research process contribute to empowerment and healing? Is the research team adequately trained in interviewing traumatized persons (specifically children)? [Guidelines for interviewing traumatized children are available in xxx.]
Benefits and risks for research participants - Do involved children and their communities understand what they will gain/risk by being involved in the research? Will the research help the participants directly? Does the research process promise more than it deliver? What happens after the research project ends? Are participants aware that the project is finite?
Referral - What happens if real and immediate problems are identified during the research process (i.e. a child expresses concern that they will be kidnapped or killed when they return home; a child exhibits signs of acute trauma)? Is there a referral mechanism that allows the research team to put research participants in touch with service providers? Is there a physiologist in the research team that is able to follow up with the interviewee? If not, is the research participant aware that they will not be supported in any direct way through the research?
Support for the researcher - Has adequate attention been paid to the security of the research team? Do they have a means of establishing communication at all times should they feel at-risk? Has adequate attention been paid to the psychological impact of conducting research regarding violence, abuse, and
armed conflict?
Research tools and methodology - Are the research tools and methodology age and gender appropriate? Are they culturally appropriate? Are they context specific? Have they been reviewed or developed by the local population?
Adult/Child dynamics - Has any attempt been made to consider the adult/child dynamic in the specific context and the impact that it will have on the data collection process and outcome? What steps have been made to mitigate negative dynamics and enhance positive dynamics?
Research code of conduct and training - Have the researchers been trained in conducting sensitive data collection? Is there a research code of conduct in place that specifically prohibits manipulation or exploitation of any kind?
Research sampling and triangulation - How have the research participants been selected? Do they represent the population? Can research findings be honestly generalized to the population as a whole? Have all attempts been made to ensure that vulnerable groups have been included in the research?
Confidentiality and anonymity - What systems are in place to protect the confidentiality of research participants during data collection, data storage and analysis, and reporting? Is there a coding system to protect the names and addresses of interviewees (particularly children)? Where will the information be stored and who will have access to the information? What considerations have been made for information security in the technological age?
Flexibility - How will the results of data collection impact project activities and outcomes? Is the project cycle flexible enough to accommodate changes in project priorities based on research findings and monitoring?
Capturing the evolution of needs - How will the research methodology capture the evolving needs of the affected population? Is data-collection an on-going
activity? Does the responder have the ability to adapt projects to evolving needs or are they tied by ridge donor/organizational requirements?
Added-Value - What is the added value of the data collection? Will it provide new and insightful information that will better enable responders to meet the needs of children? Does it replicate research and data collection that has already been done or is on-going? Is there any possibility of working with other responders to create a common data collection and/or monitoring system?
Annex 1 - Code of Conduct
The Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and Non- Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in Disaster Relief
Prepared jointly by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the ICRC
Purpose
This Code of Conduct seeks to guard our standards of behaviour. It is not about operational details, such as how one should calculate food rations or set up a refugee camp. Rather, it seeks to maintain the high standards of independence, effectiveness and impact to which disaster response NGOs and the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement aspires. It is a voluntary code, enforced by the will of the organisation accepting it to maintain the standards laid down in the Code. In the event of armed conflict, the present Code of Conduct will be interpreted and applied in conformity with international humanitarian law. The Code of Conduct is presented first. Attached to it are three annexes, describing the working environment that we would like to see created by Host Governments, Donor Governments and Inter- Governmental Organisations in order to facilitate the effective delivery of humanitarian assistance.
Note
1. Sponsored by: Caritas Internationalis*, Catholic Relief Services*, The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies*, International Save the Children Alliance*, Lutheran World Federation*, Oxfam*, The World Council of Churches*, The International Committee of the Red Cross (* members of the Steering Committee for Humanitarian Response
Definitions
NGOs: NGOs (Non-Governmental Organisations) refers here to organisations, both national and international, which are constituted separately from the government of the country in which they are founded.
NGHAs: For the purposes of this text, the term Non-Governmental Humanitarian
Agencies (NGHAs) has been coined to encompass the components of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement – The International Committee of the Red Cross, The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and its member National Societies – and the NGOs as defined above. This code refers specifically to those NGHAs who are involved in disaster response.
IGOs: IGOs (Inter-Governmental Organisations) refers to organisations constituted by two or more governments. It thus includes all United Nations Agencies and regional organisations.
Disasters: A disaster is a calamitous event resulting in loss of life, great human suffering and distress, and large-scale material damage.
The Code of Conduct: Principles of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Response Programmes
1. The humanitarian imperative comes first.
The right to receive humanitarian assistance, and to offer it, is a fundamental humanitarian principle which should be enjoyed by all citizens of all countries. As members of the international community, we recognise our obligation to provide humanitarian assistance wherever it is needed. Hence the need for unimpeded access to affected populations is of fundamental importance in exercising that responsibility. The prime motivation of our response to disaster is to alleviate human suffering amongst those least able to withstand the stress caused by disaster. When we give humanitarian aid it is not a partisan or political act and should not be viewed as such.
2. Aid is given regardless of the race, creed or nationality of the recipients and without adverse distinction of any kind.
Aid priorities are calculated on the basis of need alone. Wherever possible, we will base the provision of relief aid upon a thorough assessment of the needs of the disaster victims and the local capacities already in place to meet those needs. Within the entirety of our programmes, we will reflect considerations of proportionality. Human suffering must be alleviated whenever it is found; life is as precious in one part of a country as another. Thus, our provision of aid will reflect the degree of suffering it seeks to alleviate. In implementing this approach, we
recognise the crucial role played by women in disaster-prone communities and will ensure that this role is supported, not diminished, by our aid programmes. The implementation of such a universal, impartial and independent policy, can only be effective if we and our partners have access to the necessary resources to provide for such equitable relief, and have equal access to all disaster victims.
3. Aid will not be used to further a particular political or religious standpoint. Humanitarian aid will be given according to the need of individuals, families and communities. Notwithstanding the right of NGHAs to espouse particular political or religious opinions, we affirm that assistance will not be dependent on the adherence of the recipients to those opinions. We will not tie the promise, delivery or distribution of assistance to the embracing or acceptance of a particular political or religious creed.
4. We shall endeavour not to act as instruments of government foreign policy. NGHAs are agencies which act independently from governments. We therefore formulate our own policies and implementation strategies and do not seek to implement the policy of any government, except in so far as it coincides with our own independent policy. We will never knowingly – or through negligence – allow ourselves, or our employees, to be used to gather information of a political, military or economically sensitive nature for governments or other bodies that may serve purposes other than those which are strictly humanitarian, nor will we act as instruments of foreign policy of donor governments. We will use the assistance we receive to respond to needs and this assistance should not be driven by the need to dispose of donor commodity surpluses, nor by the political interest of any particular donor. We value and promote the voluntary giving of labour and finances by concerned individuals to support our work and recognise the independence of action promoted by such voluntary motivation. In order to protect our independence we will seek to avoid dependence upon a single funding source.
5. We shall respect culture and custom. We will endeavour to respect the culture, structures and customs of the communities and countries we are working in.
6. We shall attempt to build disaster response on local capacities. All people and communities – even in disaster – possess capacities as well as vulnerabilities. Where possible, we will strengthen these capacities by employing
local staff, purchasing local materials and trading with local companies. Where possible, we will work through local NGHAs as partners in planning and implementation, and cooperate with local government structures where appropriate. We will place a high priority on the proper co-ordination of our emergency responses. This is best done within the countries concerned by those most directly involved in the relief operations, and should include representatives of the relevant UN bodies.
7. Ways shall be found to involve programme beneficiaries in the management of relief aid.
Disaster response assistance should never be imposed upon the beneficiaries. Effective relief and lasting rehabilitation can best be achieved where the intended beneficiaries are involved in the design, management and implementation of the assistance programme. We will strive to achieve full community participation in our relief and rehabilitation programmes.
8. Relief aid must strive to reduce future vulnerabilities to disaster as well as meeting basic needs.
All relief actions affect the prospects for long-term development, either in a positive or a negative fashion. Recognising this, we will strive to implement relief programmes which actively reduce the beneficiaries’ vulnerability to future disasters and help create sustainable lifestyles. We will pay particular attention to environmental concerns in the design and management of relief programmes. We will also endeavour to minimise the negative impact of humanitarian assistance, seeking to avoid long-term beneficiary dependence upon external aid.
9. We hold ourselves accountable to both those we seek to assist and those from whom we accept resources.
We often act as an institutional link in the partnership between those who wish to assist and those who need assistance during disasters. We therefore hold ourselves accountable to both constituencies. All our dealings with donors and beneficiaries shall reflect an attitude of openness and transparency. We recognise the need to report on our activities, both from a financial perspective and the perspective of effectiveness. We recognise the obligation to ensure appropriate monitoring of aid distributions and to carry out regular assessments of the impact of disaster assistance.
We will also seek to report, in an open fashion, upon the impact of our work, and the factors limiting or enhancing that impact. Our programmes will be based upon high standards of professionalism and expertise in order to minimise the wasting of valuable resources.
10. In our information, publicity and advertising activities,we shall recognise disaster victims as dignified humans, not hopeless objects
Respect for the disaster victim as an equal partner in action should never be lost. In our public information we shall portray an objective image of the disaster situation where the capacities and aspirations of disaster victims are highlighted, and not just their vulnerabilities and fears. While we will cooperate with the media in order to enhance public response, we will not allow external or internal demands for publicity to take precedence over the principle of maximising overall relief assistance. We will avoid competing with other disaster response agencies for media coverage in situations where such coverage may be to the detriment of the service provided to the beneficiaries or to the security of our staff or the beneficiaries.
The Working Environment
Having agreed unilaterally to strive to abide by the Code laid out above, we present below some indicative guidelines which describe the working environment we would like to see created by donor governments, host governments and the inter-governmental organisations – principally the agencies of the United Nations – in order to facilitate the effective participation of NGHAs in disaster response. These guidelines are presented for guidance. They are not legally binding, nor do we expect governments and IGOs to indicate their acceptance of the guidelines through the signature of any document, although this may be a goal to work to in the future. They are presented in a spirit of openness and cooperation so that our partners will become aware of the ideal relationship we would seek with them.
Annex I: Recommendations to the governments of disaster- affected countries
1. Governments should recognise and respect the independent, humanitarian and impartial actions of NGHAs
NGHAs are independent bodies. This independence and impartiality should be
respected by host governments.
2. Host governments should facilitate rapid access to disaster victims for NGHAs. If NGHAs are to act in full compliance with their humanitarian principles, they should be granted rapid and impartial access to disaster victims, for the purpose of delivering humanitarian assistance. It is the duty of the host government, as part of the exercising of sovereign responsibility, not to block such assistance, and to accept the impartial and apolitical action of NGHAs. Host governments should facilitate the rapid entry of relief staff, particularly by waiving requirements for transit, entry and exit visas, or arranging that these are rapidly granted. Governments should grant over-flight permission and landing rights for aircraft transporting international relief supplies and personnel, for the duration of the emergency relief phase.
3. Governments should facilitate the timely flow of relief goods and information during disasters.
Relief supplies and equipment are brought into a country solely for the purpose of alleviating human suffering, not for commercial benefit or gain. Such supplies should normally be allowed free and unrestricted passage and should not be subject to requirements for consular certificates of origin or invoices, import and/ or export licenses or other restrictions, or to importation taxation, landing fees or port charges. The temporary importation of necessary relief equipment, including vehicles, light aircraft and telecommunications equipment, should be facilitated by the receiving host government through the temporary waiving of license or registration restrictions. Equally, governments should not restrict the re-exportation of relief equipment at the end of a relief operation. To facilitate disaster communications, host governments are encouraged to designate certain radio frequencies, which relief organisations may use in-country and for international communications for the purpose of disaster communications, and to make such frequencies known to the disaster response community prior to the disaster. They should authorise relief personnel to utilise all means of communication required for their relief operations.
4. Governments should seek to provide a coordinated disaster information and planning service.
The overall planning and coordination of relief efforts is ultimately the responsibil-
ity of the host government. Planning and coordination can be greatly enhanced if NGHAs are provided with information on relief needs and government systems for planning and implementing relief efforts as well as information on potential security risks they may encounter. Governments are urged to provide such information to NGHAs.
To facilitate effective coordination and the efficient utilisation of relief efforts, host governments are urged to designate, prior to disaster, a single point-of-contact for incoming NGHAs to liaise with the national authorities.
5. Disaster relief in the event of armed conflict.
In the event of armed conflict, relief actions are governed by the relevant provisions of international humanitarian law.
Annex II: Recommendations to donor governments
1. Donor governments should recognise and respect the independent, humanitarian and impartial actions of NGHAs
NGHAs are independent bodies whose independence and impartiality should be respected by donor governments. Donor governments should not use NGHAs to further any political or ideological aim.
2. Donor governments should provide funding with a guarantee of operational independence.
NGHAs accept funding and material assistance from donor governments in the same spirit as they render it to disaster victims; one of humanity and independence of action. The implementation of relief actions is ultimately the responsibility of the NGHA and will be carried out according to the policies of that NGHA.
3. Donor governments should use their good offices to assist NGHAs in obtaining access to disaster victims.
Donor governments should recognise the importance of accepting a level of responsibility for the security and freedom of access of NGHA staff to disaster sites. They should be prepared to exercise diplomacy with host governments on such issues if necessary.
Annex III: Recommendations to intergovernmental organisations