Political Conditionality and Humanitarian Aid

PremisesP1. For political conditions for humanitarian aid to be unjust, the conditions themselves must be unjust, as opposed to the fact that there are conditions.P2. Political conditions placed on humanitarian aid are not necessarily unjust.C1. Political conditions for humanitarian aid are not necessarily unjust.P1. Political conditions for humanitarian aid are not necessarily unjust, which means that it is possible for political conditions on humanitarian aid to be just.P2. Historically, political conditions placed on humanitarian aid have been just.C2. Political conditions on humanitarian aid in action is just.Arguments for C1Conditions Are Not Necessarily UnjustIt stands to reason that conditional assistance is not, in and of itself, unjust. Although altruism may or may not have its applications, it certainly isn't always practical. Ideally, there will be a mutual benefit in all exchanges. Empowerment comes not only in the form of autonomy, but also in the form of earning assistance when it's needed, rather than relying on the good will of wealthier or more stable nations. More importantly, conditions can actually improve aid provided by making it more helpful in both the short and long term. Without these conditions, nations that receive aid can become dependent on it, or end up in worse conditions.Moreover, there is a great deal of humanitarian aid that is needed worldwide by several nations simultaneously. This requires distinctions in both who will receive humanitarian aid (as, what determines what nation needs it or deserves it more than any other?), as well as how humanitarian aid will be of any benefit, both in the long term for the nation receiving assistance, as well as the nation providing assistance. Conditions on the humanitarian aid provided can help make these distinctions (as, those willing or able to meet these conditions can then be deemed eligible for aid) while also make only those who will actually benefit from the aid in the long term eligible, rather than those who will persistently require aid (as, ultimately, that aid would be of benefit neither for those giving the aid, nor those receiving it).Arguments for C2Historically, Conditions Have Been JustThe Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG) released a report in 2001 called Politics and Humanitarian Aid: Debates, Dilemmas and Dissension [1], in which the reasons for political conditions were outlined. These include:Geopolitical ChangesThe last time there was an interest in global influence on a political level, rather than exclusively on an economic level, was the Cold War. At this time, spheres of influence were managed through diplomacy. However, with the end of the Cold War, and with a significant reduction in the colonial approach to global influence, there required another way to maintain diplomacy with the world to maintain security and peaceful relations.Changing the Nature of the ConflictCivil conflict in other countries often causes humanitarian aid to be futile. For example, in some African countries, a lack of a stable government results in several splinter factions that war for control, resulting in the civil unrest that causes a requirement for aid. Those splinter factions often use humanitarian aid, such as food rations, as leverage to increase their control over territories. Sometimes, humanitarian aid becomes the only form of currency in an area. Political conditions that can change the nature of such conflict to shift control back to the people or a more stable form of government can help solve the problem, which can serve as another form of humanitarian aid, despite that it's in the form of a condition.New Definitions of SecurityThese same factions described above are also rife with criminal activity, which can then turn the country into a channel for drug and human trafficking, terrorism, and refugee flows, which can then become a threat to national security. Political conditions can help to, "change the behavior of populations within countries," [1] thus decreasing security threats while also providing humanitarian aid to those who need it.The Perceived Failings of Traditional Humanitarian ActionThere is a breadth of criticism of past humanitarian aid failings. In Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society, [2] evidence is given that some governments will turn against their own people in light of humanitarian aid from other countries with which they do not have positive diplomatic relationships. Moreover, humanitarian aid sometimes functions to actually worsen a civil or economic struggle within a nation. Criticisms to humanitarian aid points this out, citing Haiti as a primary example, as seen in The Moral Hazards of Humanitarian Aid published in The New Yorker. [3]Conditions can include provisions to ensure that governing bodies take steps to decrease their need for aid in the future, so that they don't remain in the same dire straits, or in an even worse condition.Domestic Policy in Donor GovernmentsDomestic policy is a large influence on humanitarian aid. A government can't very well violate it's own ideals for the sake of a country that appears to need help elsewhere. These ideals may not only include commercial interests (such as capitalism) or security interests (such as the elimination of terrorist threats), but also good international citizenship (or, acceptable practices within spheres of influence.Moreover, conditional humanitarian aid may simply be part of a country's practices. In the United States, for example, welfare is conditioned on whether those that receive it find gainful employment within two years of receiving aid. [4]Liberal Global Governance in Search of OrderIt is often the government or practices of a nation, particularly a developing one, that leads to the requirement of humanitarian aid, usually from civil strife or economic disability. Political conditions can help include non-state actors that would bring skills and resources state actors cannot legitimately include, which can help change the behaviors and attitudes causing the need for aid in the first place. This is tantamount to allowing someone with mental issues to live independently on the condition that he or she receives counselling, rather than committing the person or leaving him or her to their own devices, which can be ultimately harmful.Risk Assessment and Risk ManagementPart of providing humanitarian aid is determining the risks and necessary investment involved. These risks can be mitigated by proposing conditions that will eliminate them, rather than simply stating that potential recipients of aid are ineligible for aid due to the risks involved (such as those that would render the aid inconsequential, or that which would threaten national security of a donor nation, a donor nation's allies, or neighboring nations of the recipient). On the Power of ConditionalityIt is true that conditions do limit the power of the recipient government and increase the leverage of the donor government. But, that is the essence of giving aid: it already admits that one party is weak -- in fact, too weak to take care of itself -- and that the other party is significantly stronger, in that it can take care of itself (generally speaking) in addition to taking care of another (the recipient party). Moreover, although it may not always solve a problem, it is the most moral way to attempt to do so. Without attempting to influence a government to improve its practices or a population to improve its ideals through the use of conditions, there is little a government can do to help them short of forcing them. There is no complete removal or emasculation of a government or nation in the case of conditional humanitarian assistance, as a country can always reject conditions, as some have.Sources 1. http://www.odi.org.uk...2. http://books.google.es...3. http://www.newyorker.com...4. http://www.welfareinfo.org...