About : The Author : Contact : Terms Of Use

Negotiating Neutrality

by Christopher R. Albon on September 8, 2010

Foreign Policy recently published a worthwhile article on humanitarian neutrality in Afghanistan. Somewhat erroneously titled “Cozying Up to the Taliban“, the piece is really a discussion of why and how NGOs negotiate for their neutrality with insurgent groups in the war-torn country.

“The reason for the cooperation is to keep aid workers and their services safe, says Laurent Saillard, director of the Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan Relief. It’s an uphill battle, he told me, with national NGO staff are kidnapped at a rate of “10, 15, 20 people” per week. “So you can guess [that] there are a lot of NGOs in contact with the Taliban,” he said. The Taliban has largely opened the door to NGOs; whereas insurgents from abroad, including Iran, Chechnya, Saudi Arabia, and Uzbekistan have a “reputation [of being] much tougher when it comes to foreigners.”

Well-known humanitarian groups such as Médicins Sans Frontières (MSF) have all negotiated for their protection. And recently, the relative strength and organization of the Taliban has made it an easier task. Michiel Hofman, the organization’s country representative, met face to face with Taliban commanders in the chain of command between March and May 2009 in order to re-establish the organization’s presence in Afghanistan, he told me in an interview.”

The article is one more data point that the blanket humanitarian neutrality is a myth.

Christopher R. Albon is a political science Ph.D. specializing in armed conflict, public health, human security, and health diplomacy.

Want more? Subscribe to Conflict Health through RSS or email.

Comments on this entry are closed.