The integration of humanitarian action into intervention operations, and particularly the inclusion of a military component, carries risks—but none so great as to be worth sacrificing integration on the altar of humanitarian purity. As in the case of Iraq in the first, emergency phase of an operation, humanitarian teams working closely with the combat troops can greatly reduce civilian suffering caused by shock, displacement, and lack of access to necessities of daily life. In the transition phase, as the military begins to turn over power to an independent political authority, integration of development teams is likewise important. Integration in the interest of humanity is no vice. Humanitarian exclusivity in the interest of purity is no virtue. The Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration at the State Department is multilateralist in its approach to humanitarian action—because it works.
You may also like

JAN 7, 2021 • Journal
Ethics & International Affairs Volume 34.4 (Winter 2020)
The highlight of this issue is a roundtable organized by Kai He, T. V. Paul and Anders Wivel on international institutions and peaceful change. The ...

DEC 2, 2020 • Podcast
The United Nations at 75: Looking Back to Look Forward, Episode 4, with Bertrand Ramcharan
Bertrand Ramcharan, former acting high commissioner for human rights, discusses why he thinks the "UN human rights system is in crisis" and details the complicated ...

NOV 12, 2020 • Podcast
The United Nations at 75: Looking Back to Look Forward, Episode 3, with Noeleen Heyzer
Noeleen Heyzer, former executive director of the United Nations Development Fund for Women, discuss the role of women in the UN over the years. Heyzer ...