This analysis explores the implications of using armed protection in humanitarian efforts, highlighting vital conditions for effectiveness.
Armed protection is one of the means that humanitarian organizations are forced to use to protect their humanitarian convoys, in cases of extreme necessity, which is called the last resort. Despite the risks surrounding the use of this means in terms of the organization’s reputation and the violation of humanitarian principles, its use has become a reality for many organizations, for various reasons, with the necessity of providing specific conditions for its use. The research problem lies in the following:1- The lack of a clear and agreed-upon definition of the term armed protection.2- How to reconcile the geopolitical and security changes since the nineties of the last century, and traditional humanitarian work that relies on humanitarian principles only.3- The difficulty of assessing the moment or situation in which humanitarian actors decide to resort to armed protection or not, and the security and humanitarian consequences of that decision.4- Cooperation with an external armed force, including cooperation with a force mandated by the United Nations, or local actors, can lead to linking humanitarian organizations to the political and military objectives of that force.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hamza et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: