In the aftermath of the Rwandan genocide mass exodus led to a humanitarian crisis in Goma. The humanitarian aid was compromised due to the presence of refugees and government officials in the refugee camps. Humanitarian bodies provide relief work and assistance to people at risk as relief work. This essay describes the actions and principles of humanitarian standards evaluating the crisis of Goma as a failure of humanitarian action.
Goma had experienced a controversial relief experience in 1994 (Licsher, 2003). Goma has functioned as a seige of the rebel movement, the international agencies and NGOs provide services that were outsourced by the rebel movement. The Goma influx caused by scale and geographical concentration saw more than 8,00,000 refugees in the African area (Lautze et al, 1998). The influx of large people and the outbreak worsened the situation for Goma. The humanitarian crisis is characterized by their nature being impartial and neutral in times of crisis. The effects of the crisis resulted in political and military repercussions. The African military landscape was transformed with refugees that were assisted by NGOs, majorly led by UNHCR for their contribution The core humanitarian standard by a sphere that highlights resources are managed and used for the intended purpose was not followed entirely. The relief showed an ethical dilemma as the refugees were involved in mass genocide. The crisis was not recognized by the west and showed it was the failure of the civil and political system. The mortality rate was high in the case that showed many people died of dehydration (Stockton, 2002). UNHCR was responsible for the emergency relief team. The tragic and awful conditions showed resulted in poor sanitation and an outbreak of cholera among the population. Humanitarian action works on core standards of neutrality and avoiding negative effects (Sphere Standard, 2014). Conflict Resolution is actions to mitigate conflict for agreement. Goma crisis involved complex humanitarian emergencies which included human rights violations and genocidal projects. The crisis reflected fluency in local action and a lack of knowledge of local parties. The United Nations agencies and beaches of military contingents with more than 250 NGOs (Lautze et al, 1998). Some of the NGOs abandoned their mission due to a violation of ethical conduct. UNHCR recorded thefts that occurred during its relief camp. International agencies made no distinction between soldiers, militants, and civilians. They were forced to negotiate with government groups.
The humanitarian organization should evaluate their operations. The neutrality conduct of the operations was questioned as supply humanitarian assistance under governing authority. The involvement of international NGOs in political emergency showed an impact on the Goma crisis. In the Goma crisis, the type of work offered by created support services has supported the genocidal regime. The functioning of the NGO and the military groups have led to action far from the required remedial action. The forces have benefited from being direct recipients. The inexperience of the staff deployed of the political climate in Goma. The NGO did not practice the facilitation of action and their principles in a defensible position of humanitarian action has to be determined on standing aside in complex situations. The relief action and humanitarian aid by the UNHCR had an exclusion clause that was not followed by UNHCR (Stockton, 2002). The immediate relief that was on the ground was not specially trained for the mass influx, the presence of armed elements showed a lack of monitoring and competence . Humanitarian action is vital in providing aid in natural crises. The action in Goma resulted in accountability, impartiality in work by NGO’s. The relief aid resulted in the paradox of a humanitarian crisis. The humanitarian culture with limited coordination proved a threat to agent autonomy. The lack of regulation on the aid system could not monitor the primary accountability in the crisis of Goma. The accountability on moral dilemma showed implications of the dominant humanitarian ethic that impacted humanitarian principles. They did agencies segregation of funds and misuse of aid act with the response from MSF and CARE who had withdrawn aid (Stockton, 2002).
Challenges on legitimacy and effectiveness threatened the course of action. No mandate expansion on the humanitarian system resulted in boundaries on development. The code of conduct related to independence was compromised for accountability. It acts as a trade for independence as a humanitarian agenda. The western state direction in earmarking for interest and principles had resulted in independent functioning. The analysis of the refugee crisis shows as a negative consequence can lead to a prolonged situation. To improve accountability, agency coordination and a sense of individualism should reflect in the mechanism. The merging of humanitarian and political donates had compromised the relief measure in Goma. The sphere standard of humanitarian action implies the principle of independence. It specifies that humanitarian action must be autonomous from any political, military objective concerning humanitarian action (Sphere standard, 2014). The action on the relief camp was impacted on the principles of neutrality that give the humanitarian organization not to take sides or ended in political controversies with influence from West countries. Humanitarian actors could define organizational responsibly and commitment due to overwhelming demand. This led to an ethical dilemma and prejudice in action.
The refugee relief helps the population through humanitarian aid as a response action. Serving the militants and not on need basis indirectly resulted in the war economy. The politicized action of the Goma crisis led to undermining the legitimacy of humanitarian action. The external response and collaborative services had violated agency independence. The determination as a trade for long term service and short term suffering led to the humanitarian organization's on material assistance from the political sphere. The dependence on emergency aid in mass influx has developed concern on UNHCR to discharge its protection mandate (Lischer, 2003). Humanitarian assistance is largely based on conditionality for an implicit response. The humanitarian need was compromised by unsustainable and conditions consent due to the rehabilitation and political purpose of the regime. The diversion of human assets by the outbreak of genocide we are fuelled by the cycle of violence. The humanitarian activities were complicated with a lack of capacity and re-establishing if orders for a refugee camp. The observance on outsourcing of health services during the crisis and resources were not used for their intended purpose. This had led to condemnation by media sources and international outpouring for conductive action.
Humanitarian service delivery was severely impacted in humanitarian actions decline. The crisis of Goma is a reflection of political, humanitarian action and the need for emergency preparedness by humanitarian actors to comply with accountability and neutrality in their action. This reflects that the crisis in Goma was a failure of humanitarian action. The collaborative actions in humanitarian work on resource management and the response were impaired to the humanitarian standard,
Lautze, S et al. (1998). Strategic humanitarian coo-ordination in the Great Lakes region. OCHA
Lischer, K.S. (2003). Collateral damage: Humanitarian Assistance as a cause of conflict. International security. 28(1), 79-109. DOI: 10.2307/4137576
Stockton, N. (2002). In Defence of Humanitarianism. Disasters. 352-360. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7717.00098
Storey, A. (1997). Non-Neutral Humanitarianism: NGOs and the Rwanda Crisis. Taylor & Francis. DOI: 10.2307/4029004
Sphere standard. (2014). Core Humanitarian Standard. Retrieved from https://corehumanitarianstandard.org/files/files/Core%20Humanitarian%20Standard%20-%20English.pdf
Remember, at the center of any academic work, lies clarity and evidence. Should you need further assistance, do look up to our Management Assignment Help
Proofreading and Editing$9.00Per Page
Consultation with Expert$35.00Per Hour
Live Session 1-on-1$40.00Per 30 min.
Doing your Assignment with our resources is simple, take Expert assistance to ensure HD Grades. Here you Go....