There’s no comparison between a globally funded organizations that depend on international support for every mission and project that has been launched , and the minor aspects of intervention that are locally based and depend on no social organizations and international funding for aid and support. It’s a huge gap that would not be easily filled within the upcoming years, due to the lack of analytical skills, experience, support, and most importantly the financial resources that boost such projects. For outsiders, the success of those humanitarian missions are an easy target to overcome and tick off the list for the records in a short time. But the reality of what is going on is based on a number of factors that have been overlooked and proven to be wrong by time.
The depth and magnitude of a humanitarian mission’s success and impact on the domestic and international community is not based on fundings or the participants, who are mainly the driving forces for its success. It’s more about the theoretical basis of understanding the community first, and consenting to the changes that would overcome the challenges and situation they’re working towards. It’s a two dimensional reality and framework, it requires the ability and skills of both parties involved despite the lack of capabilities, social situation, and labeling.
Every humanitarian mission the media covered, ended in success with a standing ovation that was meant to secure and finalize a better future for the affected people. However, when touching up the bases of the conflict, it’s easy to dissect the core values of the situation and estimate the range of assistance that was truly effective to the community and not vise versa. Every crisis is different in application, methodology and execution. But every situation is united in identity and prosperity when the community is the center of the crisis and intervention.
Humanitarian aid workers are trained to understand and work with a clear sense of openness that allows disagreement of cooperation to come along the process of taking a step towards the mission. But that kind of training tends to be less applicable when the situation actually gets into action and the requirement of a presentable intervention and assistance is a necessity of current practice and urgency of the moment.
As much as organizational and strategical training is of importance, the level of leadership and success of this project will lead to a disastrous outcome due to a simple theoretical approach. And that is the convenience of the community who will not only live through the changes, but will need to adapt to every challenge that will be the result of it. The media circus never misses the opportunity to disclose the aftermath of every huge humanitarian missions, and appointing them as an effort that sealed the deal. However, one the long-term, one can sense that those alleged missions tend to turn into a new vital element for violence and a long-term domestic conflict. All due to the idea of not negotiating with the community first about what fits best in terms of what kind of change will be prosperous, and what will be disastrous.
Not every culture is the same. Communities, ideologies and understanding the perspectives of the outside world all differ from one place to another. It’s a coping mechanism that workers and aid organizations are in need of understanding and communicating along the way. With having the communities in the middle of the projects that is centered around them, success will never be a far away outcome.
Some cultures are open to change, while others are more willing to keep their identity hidden even if they are in massive need for help and assist. That’s when the role of a humanitarian leader and worker comes in. By first studying the culture and fixate on the environment’s strength and weakness when it comes to outsiders. For that will be a passing board to understand and choose on whether to take a step forward, or pull away a level in order to investigate and research more.
As outsiders and foreigners, the community’s ability to trust aid workers and foreign organizations is not as easy as it may seem. Despite them being the affected population, and in need of help, it’s also important to keep in mind that those communities are still rational citizens of their land, with independent mindsets and will to accept or reject a change that will shift their lives. And enforcing changes through organizational means and policies that are foreign to them will make the community’s future uncertain and more likely to suffer from additional risks and challenges that could have been overlooked from the start.
To lend a hand of help and assistance under the name of humanity is not a matter of personal gain and achievement. It’s a collective responsibility and effort to understand and accept what is right and needed from one to lend a hand of help and peace. It’s the trust one would work on building to try to be an insider rather than a foreigner. It’s understanding that change will never come easy, but through challenges and hardships of what makes us rational beings.
In the end we’re all vulnerable and in need of a hand to close the bridge of despair and helplessness, so why not understand one another from an anthropological and sociological perspective before getting into the middle of enforcing laws and policies that were never even a matter of choice for us.
Original article
Comments