WHITE PAPER
The Growing Threat to Charities Working Abroad

by Ashley Truluck, Director, Blue Sky Group Foundation
December 2003

Charities and other organisations associated with the relief of suffering around the world are made up of very special people. Whether as organisations or as individuals, they are fiercely independent. Only by being so can they hope to dispense their services impartially and with the minimum risk of becoming part of the problem, rather than part of the solution.

As a result, such organisations (be they strategic in nature such as the United Nations; directly involved with the relief of suffering such as the International Red Cross; or the media, striving to report events impartially) have all traditionally enjoyed a measure of respect and protection as they go about their business.

A fast changing world

That situation is now greatly changed: charities working abroad are finding it increasingly difficult to operate in safety.

Internal dissent has become the norm in many countries of the developing world. Conflict has become more widespread and complex in nature - to the extent that there is no longer a clearly-defined 'front line' behind which charities can safely operate.

Similarly, charities can no longer rely on the Geneva Convention or even the 'rule of law' to the extent they once could. And 9/11 and the growth of international terrorism have only exacerbated these trends.

So where does all this leave organisations working abroad, and those working alongside them? United Nations delegations are now routinely targeted by terrorist organisations. The sign of the Red Cross/Red Crescent is no longer a universal passport to safe passage.

More than a thousand members of the media have died in the course of reporting from remote and hostile regions in the past decade. No comprehensive casualty statistics have been compiled for charities working abroad, but one suspects that they amount to at least the same numbers.

Improving Security

Clearly, those providing assistance now need some assistance themselves. But by their very nature, charities have resisted engaging the services of commercial security organisations, either on ethical grounds or for purely financial reasons.

Resorting to armed guards is not a guarantee of independence and security - in fact they can make things much worse in some cases. What is needed is a more holistic approach to the whole business of safety and security, at a price that charities can both justify ethically and afford economically.

Prevention being better than cure, this process starts with a thorough risk assessment; a discussion of the options available; training for key individuals in operating in hostile environments; and risk awareness briefings.

Once abroad, charities would benefit from expert assistance in setting up in new locations, because this is when they are at their most vulnerable, whether to physical attack, looting, theft or illness.

Such expert assistance is invaluable in setting up operations efficiently; negotiating with local authorities and security organisations; and providing advice and safety awareness on the ground. It is, one might argue, a duty of care owed not only to the charity's own staff but also to those people with whom they work.

Charities being independently-minded organisations, it can be difficult to coordinate their operations and security in areas where a number of aid agencies find themselves operating alongside each other, in the aftermath of a natural or man-made disaster, for instance.

In such circumstances, the provision of an independent 'safe haven', available to all aid agencies, where vehicles and specialist equipment can be stored securely, can be a great common asset.

Similarly, an independently-provided operations/information centre, where up-to-date 'situational awareness' data is made available around the clock (e.g. on the status of supply routes, progress of aid convoys, location of security hazards etc) can be another invaluable aid to safety.

The fact that such facilities are provided for all agencies wishing to participate means that the associated costs are pooled rather than duplicated. In such circumstances, engaging outside security assistance could actually save charities money, rather than adding to their operating budgets.

A foundation for progress

In order to deliver this kind of service what is needed is a private-sector security organisation which understands the needs of charities working in remote and hostile regions of the world - and which shares their ethos of public duty.

Such an organisation should be able to draw on a breadth of security experience and services, including management consultancy; risk assessment; risk-avoidance planning; safety awareness training; the creation of secure operating and coordinating infrastructures; and in extreme situations, the provision of emergency evacuation facilities.

Building on three years' experience in this area, the Blue Sky Group Foundation was formed in 2003 specifically to meet the growing need to support charities, humanitarian aid organisations and United Nations agencies working in the increasingly hostile environment abroad.

In keeping with the Foundation's aims and ethos, its services are provided on a not-for-profit basis and, as part of the Blue Sky Group, its activities are continually monitored and governed by an external Ethical Overview Committee.