C ONCLUSION

The term complex political emergency, as illustrated above, is rather open-ended and can be applied to a number of emergency situations placed on a continuum between one single disaster to a temporarily, or long-lasting, disrupted (or stalled)

development situation, when there is an internationally recognised ‘political’

dimension to it. Humanitarian organisations, it appears, have embraced rather than debated and provided nuance to the term, possibly as the looseness of the term has enabled interventions by a wide range of agencies and provided access to a wider

Chapter 1: Complex Political Emergencies and Forced Migration

range of funding sources. This observation begs a critical question, namely, for whom is a (political) emergency complex? Is it for the relief agencies, the donors, the media reporting on the complexity, or the local population who have to live in and survive the complexity both before and after the humanitarian interventions?

Furthermore, would it be less complex if the range of external actors had paid more attention to the view of the local population, or of the migrants fleeing ‘the

complexity’, and would such a strategy have made it less ‘complex’ for either group?

For the purpose of this thesis it would seem most relevant to adopt the description Hallam provides of a CPE in the RNN publication, including state collapse as a factor, whilst adding the observations made by the author as to what differentiates a disaster and a CPE. Moreover, the impact of a CPE on the state structure and, not least, the different elements of what constitutes a civil society, must be taken into consideration. Consequently, there is a need to consider which needs these different and at times competing elements of a civil society might have for humanitarian assistance. Included here should be so-called ‘post-conflict situations’ when there is still a recognised need for humanitarian assistance and/or when forced migrants have either been unable or unwilling to return. In addition, consideration should be given to those situations where the conflict at large has not come to an end, although there might be a large geographical areas excluded from the armed conflict; or where people have voluntarily returned or taken up their daily life despite any ongoing skirmishes.

There is no doubt that forced migration constitute a major humanitarian challenge, by while the numbers of forced migrants increases, migration research grapples with theory development to enable analyses of the increasingly complex dynamics of migration discourse. From the literature review there appear to be no prominent contradictions between the different generations of theory; rather an evolution of theory as empirical research has added knowledge to the subject. The distinction between forced and voluntary migration, however, is still far from clear, with far-reaching consequences for those who seek protection from armed conflicts, hunger and persecution. Particularly vulnerable are those who are internally displaced and not able or allowed to cross into neighbouring countries. They are not covered by any binding international legislation, nor are they granted the same right to humanitarian assistance as forced migrants, who are formally recognised as refugees.

Other concerns relate to a lack of knowledge of decision-making processes, and the degree to which these are individual or group orientated, and, in particular, how extended are the various groups and which persons (or gender) within the group make the decisions.

Of particular concern is the interaction between forced migrants and the humanitarian agencies: this includes the nature of the experience, and on what information the agencies base their policy and interventions, especially the degree to which they seek the active participation of the forced migrants in these processes.

Many researchers seem to question the ability of humanitarian agencies to regard the forced migrants as social actors, with a right to be informed and involved in their own recovery, rather than as an undifferentiated group of migrants with easily defined needs and predictable migration patterns. Arguably, solid needs assessment, country- and situation-specific understanding of vulnerability, establishment of trust

between forced migrants and assistance providers, sharing of information between humanitarian agencies and coordinated actions could all be activities that can enable a move from a group to a more individual approach, ensuring that the needs of minorities, marginalised and specially vulnerable groups within society are met.

It is firmly established that NGOs play an important role as providers of

humanitarian assistance for, and to some extent in the protection of, forced migrants, not least in countries where there is war or internal conflict, or where the government or groups competing for control over land or government positions are not able or willing to assist forced migrants. However, as some commentators suggest, the agencies might become instruments for governments wishing to contain forced migrants within the developing world, thus reducing migration to the West and to other developing countries. So, while the humanitarian deeds might be rooted in well-founded humanitarian principles, the politics behind the selection of countries and migrants to assist might be highly political and less based on a universal humanitarianism.

This notion would warrant a closer scrutiny of the large groups of organisations termed humanitarian agencies, and how they interact at both the policy and

implementation level. While this includes intergovernmental organisations (IGOs) such as the humanitarian and development organisations of the United Nations, the International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Federation and the International Organisation of Migration, for the purpose of this thesis the main focus will be on the role of the non-governmental

organisations, NGOs. These are increasingly implementing programmes directed at forced migrants on behalf of the IGOs, and are working in a number of locations where some IGOs face restrictions. The NGOs are, however, a very diverse group of organisations, representing different constitutions, operational concepts, and

religious and political ideals, which will be detailed in the next chapter.