Hello Brussels bobo! European humanitarian aid in action
(Archives B2) Famines, earthquakes, epidemics… the EEC has become over the years one of the first providers of funds and coordinator of emergency aid in the world. Sometimes at the cost of a certain complexity, often of relative discretion, always of criticism. Faced with these difficulties, the EEC now intends, if not to change its policy, at least to reform it in the long term and thus 'mark' its aid more.
As early as 1976, the European Communities set up a real operational crisis unit, the emergency aid unit. In the event of a natural or similar disaster endangering human health or life, anywhere in the world, the unit can decide on the aid measures required to provide countries in difficulty, either material or financial aid, or direct food aid.
Two advantages: operational capacity + financial weight
Of course, many structures exist at all intergovernmental levels. But none has acquired both the operational capacity - and above all the financial weight - of the EEC. At the international level, UNDRO - the Office of the United Nations Coordinator for Natural Disasters - appears more like an information centralizing office than a structure that can directly coordinate operations. In France, the Quai d'Orsay emergency cell can certainly free up funds and men, but remains closely linked to French government policy. Finally, in Strasbourg, the Council of Europe has set up a 'larger earthquake warning system', but which remains limited on the one hand to this problem, on the other hand to the zone of action of the Advice. Admittedly, he took a timid step in the direction of emergency aid by coordinating, since the beginning of 1992, an operation to come to the aid of the children of Albania.
The multiplication of Mecus
However, the annual European budget for emergency aid is often set at a ridiculously low amount: 18,5 million ECU for 1991 for example. But by what miracle, once the year has passed, European calculators display a figure often increased tenfold? Quite simply because the emergency unit also has the 'emergency aid component' of the European Development Fund set up for ACP countries, i.e. a five-year budget of ECU 250 million (2% of the budget), and 'on the other hand funding for 'emergency food aid' which differs from other food aid managed by other EEC services, for "its rapid and completely free distribution, even to the smallest village in Africa ».
In addition, the amount entered in the general budget - explains Gérard Molinier, head of the emergency aid unit - " is only an incentive. In the event of a serious crisis, we can have larger budgets. Community emergency aid then comes from different chapters of the community budget. The rule indeed is then to look for money there in the sectors that have it available. So much the worse for those who wouldn't have taken care to spend their money fast enough within their budget. Needless to say that this 'super-privilege' does not go without triggering some gnashing of teeth in the corridors of Breydel, within the European administration.
To add to the confusion, alongside this emergency aid, there are a number of other humanitarian aids, nearly fifteen in all, in particular 'routine' food aid or development aid... , specific measures taken by the Commission 'as a matter of urgency'. The latest case to date is aid to the former USSR, totaling almost 500 million ECU. No wonder that even within the European Community's own services, we do not find ourselves in this veritable labyrinth which is enough to make more than one financial controller suffer from migraines for life.
This complexity is fortunately compensated by the speed of decisions, something relatively rare in any administration. Indeed, a system of authorizations exists at the level of the Commission. A few days, even a few hours are enough to unblock a situation. A European commissioner can decide in solo on any decision relating to an amount of less than 500 ECU (or 650.000 ECU for ACP countries). " For decisions of a higher amount, — explains Gérard Molinier — we adopt ad hoc procedures. For example, for theaid to Romania, in 1989, as soon as the partner organizations sent us their requests with figures, we took a first set of measures. On 22 December, a first installment of one million ECU was released for the dispatch, by plane and truck, of medicines, medical equipment and rescue teams. A new tranche of aid of ECU 5,5 million was decided two days later ". A Sunday !
Adorned with this financial virtuosity, the managers of the emergency aid unit are confronted every day with the permanent puzzle of distributing aid wisely: for what needs, by what means? This is their fate...
The essential: knowing where the needs are
All the countries in the world affected by a natural (floods, earthquakes, etc.) or human (famine, war, refugees, etc.) disaster can benefit from European aid. But when it comes to disasters, warning is essential, " it is necessary to know in time the urgency ". To determine their aid, those in charge of the European emergency refer to all available information: the EEC 'embassies' on the spot, the delegations when they exist, the UNDRO or UNHCR alert systems, humanitarian associations and of course the media are involved. “It's not always so obvious. It took six months for the international rescue chain to be set up for the Horn of Africa, finally triggered by Visnews journalists,” recalls Hubert Ferraton, EEC information manager for this sector. .
The media emergency decides
The attitude of the States concerned is also essential. " Two tendencies emerge: either to minimize the needs so as not to provoke an intervention; or on the contrary increase it artificially to obtain more ". In general, the EEC, respecting in this the international principle of non-interference in the affairs of a State, awaits their agreement, even if it means obtaining it. But when the government is in a difficult patch or when the emotion is too strong in European opinion, the EEC ignores it. Thus for aid to Romania, Ceausescu had no sooner fallen - at noon - than at 16 p.m. the Commission had taken the decision to initiate an aid program, without even waiting for the official constitution of the new Romanian government. This shows the importance of the primordial criterion, often forgotten in official speeches, the media. " There as everywhere, it's the TV that decides sums up a Caritas official. The media urgency takes precedence, sensitizes public opinion for 24 hours and therefore politicians. Too bad for non-media emergencies that are much less cared for. Of course !
Once these needs have been determined and funding for the aid has been found, all that remains is to send it. The Community has many 'channels' for this: direct aid to the States concerned or more often indirectly via a partner chosen within the 'family' of the United Nations such as the UNHCR, High Commissioner for Refugees or non-governmental organizations (NGOs ) The latter quickly understood the interest they could have in collaborating with the EEC and established close relations with the Community institutions. Practices that are substantially similar to a lobbying policy...
The NGOs receiving aid deny that they want to influence the budget allocated to them. We prefer to speak of dialogue, of relations of " trust built over the years ". But European experts should not be too embarrassed to find a competent NGO interlocutor to discuss with. Each organization has thus organized itself to be as present as possible in Brussels. The International League of Red Cross in Geneva, and Caritas Internationalis in Rome were the first to feel the need to establish permanently in Brussels one of their 'representatives' to the EEC. Development NGOs - which are smaller - have come together in a liaison committee. More recently, Médecins sans frontières opened an office in Brussels in the premises of its Belgian branch. Apart from these various European 'coordinations', certain national organisations, mostly German, are personally represented; for example Caritas Germany and the German Red Cross.
The staff of the emergency unit, few in number, only six in ordinary times, double in times of overheating - that is to say all the time since the beginning of the Gulf crisis in August 1990 - and overwhelmed would obviously have liked that the NGOs come together and train - why not the ideal! - a single partner. Because " when the international community mobilizes, the problem is often not a lack of means, it is coordination. " But it has not happened. " It must be recognized that the spirit of coordination is poorly developed, it does not happen spontaneously or really effectively. »
As a result, it is often the same NGOs, the most organized, that are regularly granted community manna. Real subscribers. This point gives rise to lively controversy between NGOs. For one of its managers, EEC officials have extremely large funds which they would like to be able to continue to distribute arbitrarily. They prefer to give to the operator present. In the hours following a disaster, they distributed their finances to the German Red Cross and the multinational MSF. It's not acceptable. the EEC decides too quickly for the emergency; and for the long term, too slowly. »
No patronage
At the emergency aid unit, we defend ourselves against such types of relationships: contrary to what one might imagine, we do not have a clientelism policy. There is no a priori distribution by country, by type of NGO. The humanitarian organizations that benefit are selected according to a set of criteria, in particular their ability to meet the needs on the spot, according to a precise program and in a rapid manner. "..." But things have to be said as they are. At the European level, there are only a few organizations oriented towards urgency, ie with a propensity to act quickly and a real capacity for expertise. Many NGOs take time to define what they are going to do and emergency aid colleagues have spent their time soliciting NGOs for projects… with no response or not quickly enough. Appealing to the rich, to a network of organizations that we know well, is to appeal to organizations capable of mobilizing large battalions and moving quickly. And also to mobilize funds, because most of the time, except in exceptional cases, it is up to private organizations to advance the funds, which are often substantial. The EEC only reimburses on “supporting documents”. It is better that the organization is assured of a certain cash flow or that its bankers trust it.
On the side of the NGOs benefiting from the system such as MSF, the International Red Cross or Caritas, it is emphasized that " it is not codified. And it doesn't have to be. It would be a shame. Because when Europe imposes conditions, we can disagree and negotiate. The EEC needs NGOs to distribute the money and the NGOs cannot refuse money which may correspond to needs. »
Quick designation of funds and bonds
The rapid designation of the funds is accompanied above all by certain obligations, worthy of Courteline. Aid must be spent within a certain time frame - usually three months. Which is "often impossible to do unless you spend haphazardly" explains an organization manager. On an emergency aid budget, one cannot theoretically buy vehicles, only rent them. Which is sometimes also, if not more expensive…
However, according to Caritas officials, who summarize a general opinion here: “ the post-emergency is a big problem. Indeed, what to do with refugees once settled in survival camps? How to rehabilitate areas destroyed by an emergency… This is a concept that is missing (in the panoply of European means). It's always the same thing, it takes time, it's the same everywhere, it lacks attraction, lack of spectacularity. In short, it's not media. And when the TV's off, there's no more public pressure ". So less money both from the European community and also from private donations.
An underground help
Community help is not well known to the public. For Hubert Ferraton, “ we ask the NGO partners to make it known that their interventions are financed by the Community. Only for various reasons, sometimes urgency or other reasons, community funding is not known to the general public ". This concern to give more weight to EEC aid, to better 'sell Europe' as certain EEC documents like to point out, and to simplify emergency aid procedures is found implicitly in the draft adopted in November by the EEC Commission.
The idea of a European humanitarian aid office is not new. Alternately named agency, office then office, it has been in the air for a long time, since "we became aware" that the current functioning of emergency aid is not satisfactory. This sentence constantly comes up in the mouths of European officials. This 'ideal' service would therefore not only take charge of aid coordination but could also have logistical means.
This idea immediately led to great concern among NGOs, fearing at the same time as losing one of their reliable sources of funding that " an additional player when humanitarian organizations now exist in sufficient numbers », and beyond the arguments of 'boutique', to confine humanitarian aid to the rank of a simple tool in the service of diplomacy.
For Rony Brauman, President of Doctors Without Borders France, “ the (political) status of the European Community seems to me difficult to reconcile with that of a humanitarian organization in its own right. Moreover, humanitarian action is a real profession that cannot be learned in a day, and requires, beyond the best wishes, specific skills. I can't imagine, for example, the Community proceeding with the recruitment of doctors, the purchase of surgical equipment, etc. »
Towards a European office
The result of a Commission decision of November 1991, but above all the result of laborious negotiations - in Brussels people prefer to speak of "dialogue" - between the EEC and the NGOs, between supporters of an operational super-agency and those in favor rather than maintaining a simple subsidy office that is more richly endowed and better organized, the European Office for Emergency Aid should see the light of day on 1 March 1992. That is to say in a few weeks.
Its first task will be - proof if it were still needed, of the complexity of the current system - to " identify the fields of activity, the legal gateways in place so far, the operators acting and to take stock of the existing structures ". In short, to precisely define the very concept of emergency aid. Better late than never ! In a second phase, “pilot experiments could be initiated, including direct interventions”. Finally, the third stage will see the setting up of the office. Its lifespan will be limited to seven years… at the end of which we can end up with the creation of an agency. In addition, a report and evaluation of its activity will be presented to the Commission periodically. As we can see, this masterpiece worthy of the best diplomatic goldsmiths, knew how to spare both the humanitarian goat and the Brussels sprouts...
(Nicolas Gros-Verheyde)
Published in a short version in Panorama du Médecin July 1992
Emergency aid (in a few figures)
in million ecus
| Humanitarian aid | |||||
| Cash help | Food aid | TOTAL | |||
| Third country | (planned) | ACP countries* | urgency | emergency aid | |
| 1990 | 69 | 18,5 | 42 | 36 | 147 |
| 1991 | 143 | 18,5 | 56 | 203 | 402 |
| 1992 Prev | 60 | 50 |
* 68 African Caribbean Pacific (ACP) countries signed the IV Lomé Conventions in 1989.
Main operations in 1990/1991
- Repatriation of foreign workers (by air) victims of the Gulf crisis (1990) = 50-60 million ECU
- Aid to Romania (1990) = ECU 11-12 million (mainly medical aid)
- Aid to the Kurds (1991) = ECU 105 million
- Famine in Africa (1991) = ECU 140 million (emergency food aid totaling 400.000 tonnes of cereal equivalent)
- Civil war in Yugoslavia (1991) = at least 13 million ECU.
Through whom does the aid pass?
- 20% International Committee of the Red Cross
- 30% United Nations & co
- 50% Non-governmental organizations.
