Boko Haram's Anti-Western Strategy and the 'Western' Aid Worker
Boko Haram has notoriously grown into one of the most well-known fundamentalist groups active in the northeastern region of Nigeria. They have frequently taken hostages and responsibility for attacks on Nigerian cities, that involve terrorist tactics and force. While the group remains at large and is highly controversial, they have also been utilizing aid workers as part of their campaign against Westernization as the group's title suggests since it translates to "Western Education is Forbidden/Sinful." Keeping this context in mind, it is essential when discussing the topic of the protection of aid workers in conflict zones, to understand the cultural implications of humanitarian work that is often facilitated by Western-aid organizations or NGOs based in the US and Europe. While that's not to say that Boko Haram would not be opposed to aid, that did not arrive from a Western organization, it is an important claim to understand that aid from organizations that appear to conflict with the group's values, will inherently be turned away. This understood concept also indicates that there is an underlying threat to the people who work for these organizations as a result, as the attached article illustrates.
The situation described in the article details the kidnapping of an International Red Cross worker, along with two others. One of the kidnapped Red Cross workers was shot by the Boko Haram captors causing regional outrage, yet the Red Cross did not take an official action to remedy the situation besides sending condolences to the victim's family. The Red Cross also kept the motives of the attack a confidential mater, thus raising further questions as to the limited extent the Red Cross had been involved in protecting their workers and the primary cause for the attack on the aid workers. Therefore, we are left primarily with speculation as to the group's reason for kidnapping aid workers and murdering one of them. One local source, reports the group communicating with the Nigerian government on the status of hostages, before being ignored and consequently, executing one of them. The extent of the group's demands with the government and terms to release the hostages were unknown though.
What we can conclude from the events in Nigeria however, is that the presence of the International Red Cross in Boko Haram-held territory (disputed), still caused for a targeting of aid workers, that ultimately deprived their right to life. Whether or not the Western-backing of the Red Cross acted as a catalyst for its targeting by an anti-Western organization is up to debate, yet addressing this implication may be crucial in a long term solution.
1. How can aid organizations, especially ones funded by prominent Western nations, alter their appeal or adapt to become viewed more as a "neutral" entity especially in the eyes of groups like Boko Haram, that are self-proclaimed anti-Western?
2. What sort of actions should organizations like the International Red Cross take in incidences like a hostage situation in a sovereign state like Nigeria? Should the organization be responsible for settling negotiations with a paramilitary group for the release of an aid worker held hostage, or does that violate negotiation standards or a nation's right to negotiate with the groups in its own country?
Kidnapping of Aid Worker Article
(Image credit: CNN, 3 aid workers were killed in Nigeria in addition to the 3 that were kidnapped)
The situation described in the article details the kidnapping of an International Red Cross worker, along with two others. One of the kidnapped Red Cross workers was shot by the Boko Haram captors causing regional outrage, yet the Red Cross did not take an official action to remedy the situation besides sending condolences to the victim's family. The Red Cross also kept the motives of the attack a confidential mater, thus raising further questions as to the limited extent the Red Cross had been involved in protecting their workers and the primary cause for the attack on the aid workers. Therefore, we are left primarily with speculation as to the group's reason for kidnapping aid workers and murdering one of them. One local source, reports the group communicating with the Nigerian government on the status of hostages, before being ignored and consequently, executing one of them. The extent of the group's demands with the government and terms to release the hostages were unknown though.
What we can conclude from the events in Nigeria however, is that the presence of the International Red Cross in Boko Haram-held territory (disputed), still caused for a targeting of aid workers, that ultimately deprived their right to life. Whether or not the Western-backing of the Red Cross acted as a catalyst for its targeting by an anti-Western organization is up to debate, yet addressing this implication may be crucial in a long term solution.
1. How can aid organizations, especially ones funded by prominent Western nations, alter their appeal or adapt to become viewed more as a "neutral" entity especially in the eyes of groups like Boko Haram, that are self-proclaimed anti-Western?
2. What sort of actions should organizations like the International Red Cross take in incidences like a hostage situation in a sovereign state like Nigeria? Should the organization be responsible for settling negotiations with a paramilitary group for the release of an aid worker held hostage, or does that violate negotiation standards or a nation's right to negotiate with the groups in its own country?
Kidnapping of Aid Worker Article
(Image credit: CNN, 3 aid workers were killed in Nigeria in addition to the 3 that were kidnapped)
To the delegates of UNHRC,
ReplyDeleteIn order to provide humanitarian assistance in the form of a neutral entity, Venezuela believes the best way to do this is through the recognition or agreement upon the creation of safe zones from all parties related to the conflict. Policy makers and the International Humanitarian Law oversee these safety zones in order to protect civilians located both inside and outside conflict regions. In the past, the cause of failed neutralized zones was due to a lack of internationally recognized standards. Therefore, Venezuela emphasizes the need for humanitarian agencies to implement a documentation system of the challenges that are faced within the neutralized areas so that field staff and policy makers can implement more practical and feasible literature within future international standards.
In incidents similar to Boko Haram in Nigeria, organizations such as the International Red Cross should be responsible for settling negotiations with the paramilitary groups when their own aid workers are kidnapped, as it is an organization's right to negotiate for their own workers. This can be done through a third party who would provide ransom insurance and assistance to cover costs of investigations, negotiations, arrangements and delivery of funds. Clements Worldwide Kidnap and Ransom Insurance, for example, utilizes an outside employee to hold place of the victim, and pays off both the placeholder and the victim’s ransom. Through this and the help of third party assistance, organizations will have the financial opportunity to reclaim their employees.
Thank you,
Venezuela
Fellow delegates,
ReplyDeleteThe delegation of Peru strongly believes that the most efficient and sustainable means to maintain neutrality is through communication between all actors of conflict. Neutrality must be recognized internationally, and by all actors of conflict, regardless of political affiliation, to uphold protection. It is essential for agencies to invest in negotiated access as a key enabler in operating in insecure environments, as partnerships provide access to areas that couldn't be accessed otherwise.
The need for communication between NGOs and actors of conflict can be exemplified in the Syrian province of Idlib, as this territory is impossible to reach by humanitarian aid without inadvertently supporting a terrorist organization known as the Al Nusra Front. This providence was part of a deconfliction zone established by the United Nations, yet the terrorist organization was excluded from peace negotiations. Due to its exclusion from negotiations, this terrorist organization does not recognize the deconfliction zone, leading to the United States removing assistance from the providence and heightened violence against aid workers.
Through examples such as Idlib, Nigeria, South Sudan, and the cases of the 313 aid workers who were subject to major attacks in 2017, it has become clear to the international community that we must take actions of negotiation and communication as an imperative step in reducing violence against humanitarian aid workers.
The delegation of Peru believes that negotiations regarding aid workers should be under the jurisdiction of humanitarian agencies, as the lives of the aid workers are under their responsibility. The delegation of Peru further condemns the minimal responsibility and action of the Red Cross in the Boko Haram kidnappings,.
Thank you,
Peru
Fellow delegates of UNHRC,
ReplyDeleteThe country of Japan finds it imperative that a long term solution is enacted for progress towards the overall resolution of Boko Haram's assaults on partisan humanitarian aid organs. Consequently, it is important to target the basis of attacks against these organizations and workers. As one of the main contributing factors towards Boko Haram's increase in violence against humanitarian aid is the perceived absence of neutrality, the international community must work towards establishing this neutrality.
With the introduction of humanitarian aid coordination centers, this can be achieved. Centers would be located in internationally neutral countries such as Sweden, Austria, or the Netherlands and would be able to coordinate between “westernized” aid organizations as well as more neutral, local, and trusted non-governmental organizations within Boko Haram-controlled territories and countries. This would successfully enable the same deliverance of quality aid typically sponsored by more established, western nations without cause for violence as it would be delivered and distributed by neutral humanitarian aid organs without ulterior motives.
In addition to this, Japan finds it crucial that humanitarian aid organizations such as Red Cross, which is a renowned and well-established organ, are held in partial accountability for the loss of life within their staff. Although the aid organs are not directly responsible for the deaths of their members due to state-endorsed or terrorist led assaults, they are partially to blame due to a lack of substantial security. As those who choose to volunteer in conflict zones are aware of the potential ramifications yet choose to risk their wellbeings for the benefit of others, their corporations should provide them with sufficient security measures. Humanitarian aid organizations should be obligated to take responsibility for the lives lost in the line of aid provision as well as encouraged to take future steps towards combatting the factors that lead to the targetting of their operations.
Regards,
Japan
Greeting delegates,
DeleteThe People’s Republic of China would like to commend Japan on their ideas, but we would like to bring up some points to consider in regards to these solutions.
When proposing that humanitarian aid centers be in neutral countries such as Sweden and Austria, it is important to remember that these are still European countries and would technically be seen as western. If all humanitarian aid organizations are centralized to have a base in these countries, this will only perpetuate the connection between humanitarian aid and western influence and make it more difficult for countries who need the humanitarian aid to be open to it.
In addition, while the delegation of China does believe that certain responsibility should be placed on the humanitarian aid organization, the response from these organizations will not be favorable. It must also be considered that if there is less protection of humanitarian workers from the international community and more responsibilities is placed on the organization, the number of people who want to work for the organization will decrease. This means that even less calls for aid will be answered. How do we as a committee place more responsibility on the humanitarian organizations while still maintaining good relations and keeping the number of humanitarian workers stable?
The People’s Republic of China welcomes replies and contribution as well work towards a viable solution.
Thank you,
The People’s Republic of China
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-china/china-says-humanitarian-aid-should-not-be-forced-into-venezuela-idUSKCN1QB0TT
http://www.un.org/ha/general.htm
https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/statement/2014/08-19-world-humanitarian-day-protection.htm