Background Summary

WB8 has followed a fascinating career path, primarily in the humanitarian sector.  She originally served in the Australian Defence Forces (ADF) for 13 years, but since 1993 has mainly worked in the humanitarian aid sector.  She first worked for a couple of years for a major Australian and International NGO in trouble spots such as Northern Iraq, Yemen, Rwanda and Zaire.  She then spent the next ten years with a major UN operational agency, with the first part spent on field operations across locations in Africa, Asia, Europe and the Middle East.  For the second stage of her time she was mainly based in the agency’s primary headquarters in Europe, where increasingly her role related to training of humanitarian practitioners.  Since 2005 she has mainly worked as an independent consultant, and now runs her own company.  Training for humanitarian practitioners covers most of her professional time, with the subject material including cross-cutting health, safety & security, disaster and emergency management.  WB8 currently lives in Australia, but travels extensively globally as part of her work.

Question 1

It’s interesting that you originally spent the first part of your working career in the armed forces, and thereafter moved over to the humanitarian sector.  What, in your opinion, are some of the advantages (and disadvantages?) of working in the aid sector and having a military background? 

Also what are your thoughts about the increasing role of the military in some humanitarian situations (such as the use of so-called ‘Provincial Reconstruction Teams {PRTs}’ in Afghanistan), and do you feel this creates an encroachment into the ‘humanitarian space’ traditionally occupied by mainstream NGOs, the Red Cross, and operational UN agencies?     

Military training is such that no matter the nature of circumstance thrown up, you will survive. Many military personnel are trained in large scale logistical operations, where a high volume of people and equipment must move rapidly. Detailed planning and implementation of these plans, often on the run, becomes ingrained, as does developing and nurturing an ‘esprit de corps’ within your own field-based teams. This is a positive crossover of military and humanitarian work in the field.

A number of other skills are particularly useful for humanitarian situations.  I’m thinking here of radio procedures and protocols (phonetic alphabet etc.);  convoy procedures;  combat weapons and mines awareness;  understanding of rank structure (which increase credibility) when dealing with hostile counterparts; and the ability to speak in two ‘languages’-  humanitarian with a military slant; and also military with a humanitarian slant; have together helped me negotiate access in conflict zones.

On the debit side, my predisposition to go out on a limb in search of justice and to dig my principled heels in have, occasionally, placed me in a danger I was initially unaware of, but eventually conceded to. There are many ways to get from A to B – it is the degree to which you compromise on principles and your own values that remains a constant balancing act.

As the most dangerous locations are frequently those where the state lacks basic capacity or political will to provide protection for humanitarians, we (as humanitarians) can increasingly find ourselves operating in militarised zones.   For many on the receiving end of aid and development, the humanitarian agenda has now become a ‘Western’ agenda, this meaning that a number of these recipients do not necessarily see the difference between the UN and the US.   Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) are an example of intentional blurring, where the strategy to win hearts and minds can contravene the principles of independence and neutrality.  The need to collect intelligence (i.e. for military strategy) versus the need to collect information (such as for needs assessment) can undermine the hard-fought ground for impartiality.

As humanitarians, I believe it important for us to educate ourselves first and foremost on the notions behind neutrality and independence; and then, should we decide to continue with this work, ramp-up advocacy at all levels to regain our humanitarian advantage. These principles are critical as we cross into ‘no-man’s land’, i.e. assisting the poorest of the poor, or reaching out to those who live in fear.  In a sense this is the humanitarian dilemma we face-  the right for the Rule of War to co-exist alongside strategies of war; and the right to protect the principles of humanity.

Question 2

I noticed that you worked in Rwanda and Zaire (presumably the refugee camps in or around Goma) during the mid 1990’s.  This was obviously a dreadfully traumatic time for affected people, both the 800,000+ caught up in the massacres by the Interhambwe militia in Rwanda; but also for the victims of the massive cholera outbreaks in the refugee camps in Zaire.  Whilst positive outcomes came out of such events (such as the Sphere Project, and the development of new organisations such as the Antares Foundation), what are your thoughts on the levels of psycho-social support offered to humanitarian workers since that time?  Maybe briefly outline the positive outcomes you’ve seen in this particular field, and also add your comments on how this could be improved.        

The Headington Institute recently undertook a survey of the humanitarian sector and found that at any given point 15-25 % of humanitarian personnel suffer anxiety, depression or effects of Post Traumatic Stress Disorders (PTSD).  That up to 1 in 4 of us will experience a life-threatening event in the course of our mission, is a sobering statistic.  Psycho-social support is now recognised as a Duty of Care by all the major humanitarian players.

From a personal perspective, individual resilience is tested in an emergency operation.  The first few days, weeks and months are debilitating as you face unrealistic deadlines, long hours, lack of sleep, ridiculous requests, sketchy information upon which you have to make decisions etc.  Some people have tremendous capacity to absorb stress and withstand the demands of their work and they bounce back. Taking R&R (rest and recreation) is very important in those early months.   Other folk don’t bounce back well at all, however, as they seem to have less of a capacity to withstand the strain. Under normal circumstances, I wonder whether this could also be true, but in an emergency situation the requirement to work under pressure is exacerbated. 

Many of the big agencies have full-time counsellors onboard, and a network of selected external psychologists who are familiar with field related stress. Follow-up can be patchy and sometimes overlooked. For me, the impact of working amidst genocide took years to come to grips with - going from one emergency to the next, I had a tendency to put the emotional impact on the back-burner. I had drifted well off-track, cynical to the point of becoming immuned (or so I thought), and finally sought help through the in-house counsellor,  in understanding what burnout was,  and what it was doing to me. I’m OK now though,J but it took a while.

Question 3

You’ve been involved in a number of humanitarian situations which have involved some form of military involvement (e.g. work in Northern Iraq, Kosovo, Rwanda/Zaire, East Timor).  In your opinion, have these ‘complex emergencies’ become more ‘complex’ over the years?  Within Australia, do you sense that the general population has been positively impacted by the West’s involvement in these complex emergencies (e.g. by making people generally better informed); or conversely, have these situations caused increased negativity here, both because people become overwhelmed by the complexity of the situation, or alternatively become more polarised by issues such as the so-called ‘War on Terror’ following 9/11?       

Complex emergencies have become more complex,  in part due to the digital media streaming live into our living room (big competition to get in there first,  and to be seen to be doing something, and media exposure relates to dollars).  Australians can take a virtual reality tour of life in a refugee camp in Chad; or watch an angry mob at a food distribution on the Tunisian border, on almost any evening of the week. Our awareness of political action and consequence has inevitably grown, as has  our exasperation at the lack of resolve shown at the highest levels of decision-making, be this at national government, UN, ASEAN levels etc. This ultimately may leave us disillusioned, and consequently disinterested.

Perhaps East Timor was a turning point, as Australians, in general, became more aware on the different agencies and their mandates, together with the complexities underpinning the coordination of full scale emergency response, involving both defence and civilian assets.