Causes of Complex Emergencies

Current Thinking

Many relief organizations view complex emergencies as mainly problems with the political and social order during and after a disaster event. This is supported by the United Nations (UN) Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) handbook, which states that major challenges include coordination of response between all actors. The coordination is made difficult as the number of actors increase and as their political and social ambitions conflict. For example, existing governments conflict with rebel groups, leaving the relief efforts either waiting for permissions that never come, or insecure because neither group is willing to face each other for the handoff of security forces that are protecting the relief groups.

Government entities can conflict and point to each other in turn as focal points and coordinating agencies. Agencies can have policies that forbid certain activities by criminal forces, but that are also essential for relief efforts, such as medical teams transporting drugs such as habit-forming painkillers. Teams using certain technologies may be forbidden entry either by the home or host country, because the technology either has advanced components that would violate embargoes if they fell into the host country's hands, or because the technology allows access to things forbidden in the host country (such as certain Internet sites). While conflicts may make relief efforts interesting because of their challenges, the goal is to cut through the conflicts and provide relief as quickly and effectively as possible.

[Page 49]Similarly, USAID reports that complex emergencies also threaten livelihood and life through political conflicts and high levels of violence. Poverty, inequity, injustice, and racism are all factors that adversely affect relief efforts. They manifest in displaced populations, destruction of infrastructure, and disruption of food supplies. These situations create conditions that promote illness, death, human rights abuses, disabilities, and excessive stresses. While many relief organizations view complex emergencies in a similar light, there is evidence that additional factors complicate relief efforts.

Whatever the emergency, the Rule of Threes applies; three minutes without air, three days without water, three weeks without food, three months without hope. Not providing response and relief within the Rule of Threes essentially causes failure of the primary purpose of response and relief efforts.

A New Set of Issues

Militarization of relief efforts is both a requirement and a hindrance. In many cases, the military has the only infrastructure and resources readily available to support relief efforts. They can provide transportation and security to relief teams as well as assist local authorities in restoring order. Hindrance comes into play when the affected government and even the people view the militaristic response as an intrusion or even an invasion of their community. For example, with the 2008 interventions of Russia in the Ossetia region of Georgia, the Georgians were hard pressed to allow humanitarian aid to be delivered by Russian military units. Similarly, with the conflict between Iran and the United States, the Iranian people would certainly view U.S. military personnel on their soil delivering aid as an unacceptable circumstance. Religious organizations delivering aid can also present problems, as relief workers whose religion requires them to act or engage victims in certain ways may be harmful or even illegal in the country where relief is being administered.

...