Antonio Donini

Between a rock and a hard place: integration or independence of humanitarian action?

This article looks at the tension between principles and politics in the response to the Afghan crisis, and more specifically at the extent to which humanitarian agencies have been able to protect themselves and their activities from overt instrumentalization by those pursuing partisan political agendas.

From face-to-face to face-to-screen: remote management, effectiveness and accountability of humanitarian action in insecure environments

This article provides a first attempt at analysing the complex set of issues around remote management practices in insecure environments and their increased use. It looks at definitions and reviews existing published and grey literature on remote management and related practices. It tries to situate remote management in the evolving context of post-Cold War strategies of dealing with conflict and crisis. On the basis of interviews with a cross-section of aid workers, senior headquarters managerial and policy staff, donors, and research institutions, it provides an assessment of current remote management practices, with a particular focus on Afghanistan and Somalia, and their implications for the future of humanitarian action.

Humanitarian ethics. A guide to the morality of aid in war and disaster

One of the striking revolutions in international relations of the last three decades is the rapid expansion of an organized international ‘humanitarian system’. This system represents the self-cons...

Romancing principles and human rights: Are humanitarian principles salvageable?

“Classical” or “Dunantist” humanitarianism has traditionally been constructed around the core principles of neutrality (not taking sides) and impartiality (provision of assistance with no regard to ethnicity, religion, race or any other consideration, and proportional to need), plus the operational imperative (rather than a formal principle) to seek the consent of the belligerent parties. These principles, whilst never unchallenged, have dominated the contemporary discourse of humanitarianism and have been synonymous with or at least reflections of a presumed essential, enduring and universal set of humanitarian values. This paper offers a more dynamic and changing vision of the content of humanitarian action. It maps the origins and content of the “new humanitarian” critique of the humanitarian sector and principles and argues that this has both misrepresented the ethical content of neutrality and obscured what amount to significant operational adaptations that leave traditional humanitarianism well prepared for the contemporary operating environment.

Disasters and the Future of Humanitarian Action: Issues, Trends, and Challenges

Since the end of the Cold War, there has been an unprecedented growth and institutionalization of the international humanitarian enterprise. This growth was to a large extent due to the end of bipolarism and the consequent lifting of inhibitions around military and humanitarian interventions. Accordingly, humanitarian agencies have adapted to a new context that allowed presence ‘in’ conflict areas, rather than just ‘around’ conflict. The model was predicated on two assumptions that have now become increasingly questionable: the first was that conflict would continue to be the main driver of disasters and vulnerability; the second was that western-driven approaches to the provision of assistance and protection would continue to be welcome in disaster affected States. After discussing major trends in disasters and disaster response, this chapter questions both these assumptions and provides pointers on the humanitarian challenges of the future.