INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS - BREAKING NEWS - ADVANCED (C1 – C2)

The Weaponization
of Humanitarian Aid

1. inviolable (adj.) a) to strongly criticize somebody/something, especially

publicly
2. polarized (adj.) b) a large piece or area of something

3. swaths (v) c) to be responsible for paying the cost of something

d) having lost effectiveness or vigour due to underuse or

4. whittle (v) neglect

5. atrophied (adj.) e) not supporting one person or group more than another

f) that must be respected and not attacked or destroyed

6. foot the bill (phr)
g) reduce something in size, amount, or extent by
7. entrenched (adj.) a gradual series of steps

h) to separate or make people separate into two groups with

8. decrying (v) completely opposite opinions

9. impartial (n) i) to make a law, right, etc. respected or official, especially by

stating it in an important written document
10. enshrine (adj.) j) to be established very strongly so that it is very difficult to
change

1/5
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS - BREAKING NEWS - ADVANCED (C1 – C2)

The Weaponization of THE LAST LIFELINE

Humanitarian Aid 5 The weaponization of humanitarian aid is not a new

phenomenon, but the results of it in Syria are
particularly acute and tragic. After a revolution broke
How to Stop countries from Manipulating out in Syria in 2011, the Assad regime systematically
Relief Money denied humanitarian assistance to large swaths of its
population, seeking to force the surrender of
1 The UN Security Council renewed a resolution that communities under opposition control or eliminate
allows humanitarian aid to be delivered to millions of them altogether. In response, the Security Council
Syrians without the permission of Syrian President unanimously adopted Resolution 2165 in 2014. This
Bashar al-Assad. In the weeks leading up to the vote, resolution allowed UN agencies to fund, deliver, and
diplomats, aid workers, and millions of Syrians worried coordinate aid through four border crossings to areas
that Russia would use its veto in the Security Council to that Assad’s forces did not control—without the
block the cross-border aid. They had good reason to be regime’s consent. As a result, aid agencies reached
concerned. Moscow, one of Assad’s closest backers, millions of people who would otherwise have
has long argued that the humanitarian mission violates remained beyond help.
Syria’s sovereignty, and it has previously vetoed the
use of other crossing points for aid delivery into Syria. 6 In recent years, however, Russia—Assad’s
This time, the crisis is averted, at least for the next six indispensable ally—has used its leverage at the
months. But the uncertainty about the resolution’s Security Council to whittle the resolution’s remit down
fate has exposed the difficulty of providing to a single crossing between Syria and Turkey. Even
humanitarian aid during an era of great-power with these restrictions, UN aid reaches 4.5 million
competition. people trapped in northwest Syria, mostly survivors of
Assad’s sieges and Russia’s bombing campaigns. Still,
2 In recent years, Russia and China have shown Moscow’s efforts have ensured that the vast majority
themselves more willing to use their diplomatic muscle of UN aid is funneled through Damascus, giving the
and veto power at the Security Council to enable Assad regime more control over aid delivery. This
governments to deprive their own people of control has allowed Assad to withhold aid from certain
humanitarian aid. This summer, Russia and China areas and channel it to his allies. It also lets him shape
helped Ethiopia delay meetings of the Security the narrative of the conflict itself. Most infamously, the
Council to discuss the declaration of famine in Tigray. UN hub in Damascus did not disclose the Syrian
Famine still has not been officially declared in northern government’s siege of the rebel-held town
Ethiopia, though nearly half a million children are of Madaya until shocking images of starving children
estimated to be malnourished in Tigray. circulated in the media in January 2016.

3 To justify limiting or blocking aid, China and 7 Moscow has also used the threat of its veto to extract
Russia argue that sovereignty is inviolable even when diplomatic concessions from other Security Council
oppressive regimes are conducting siege warfare members, including the United States. Last year, it
against their own people. Of course, theirs is a very threatened to shut down the remaining crossing, Bab
inconsistent application of international law, especially al-Hawa, to secure Security Council approval for early
given Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine. By recovery activities in regime-controlled areas and
politicizing and weaponizing humanitarian aid, China greater support for cross-line aid operations,
and Russia are expanding their influence at the where humanitarian assistance is channeled through
expense of international stability, humanitarian norms, Damascus across the frontlines into opposition-
and human rights. controlled Syria. Cross-line aid delivery gives the Assad
regime more control over what aid gets into northwest
4 If oppressive governments can manipulate relief aid to Syria. It also tends to be poorly coordinated and lacks
prosecute their own internal conflicts, the the robust monitoring mechanisms that govern cross-
international community loses an essential tool to border aid.
alleviate suffering and manage crises. Countries must
find ways to minimize the impact of great-power 8 This past July, after furious debate at the Security
competition on humanitarian crises—in Syria and Council, Russia forced through its own draft of the UN
beyond. One way would be to move some of cross-border extension, which gave aid groups only six
the debates over relief aid out of a polarized Security months to plan how to meet the acute needs of
Council. Syrians in northwest Syria. Previously, the resolution

2/5
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS - BREAKING NEWS - ADVANCED (C1 – C2)

would somewhat assuredly be extended for 12 months IS PERMISSION NEEDED?

at a time. This would give aid groups the ability to hire
aid workers, plan programs, and run hospitals, schools, 12 What Assad and Putin are trying to do in Syria is not
water facilities, and food deliveries to serve millions new. In 2008, the military government in Myanmar,
dependent on that aid. With the resolution set to fearing outside interference by foreign governments,
expire on January 10, the Security Council had to vote forbade international aid workers from entering the
once again on whether to extend the UN mandate for country after Cyclone Nargis left nearly 140,000 people
another six months. dead and another 2.4 million in peril. Today,
Myanmar’s military junta is preventing aid from
9 The short six-month time frame and the diplomatic reaching several ethnic minority areas, whether
uncertainty have left UN agencies and delivered internally or by cross-border means. In the
nongovernmental organizations unable to plan an Tigray region of Ethiopia, the federal government,
effective humanitarian response. For example, they hoping to cut off opposition forces and weaken
cannot hire for positions that may or may not be populations under rebel control, imposed a blockade
funded. The impact on the ground has been two years ago on aid and services to millions of
tangible. The Northwest Syria NGO Forum reported civilians. Over the last two years, Russia and China
last year that over 8,500 nongovernmental jobs in have blocked the Security Council from passing
northwest Syria had been cut and over 400 medical, resolutions decrying the humanitarian crisis and calling
educational, protection, and water and sanitation for stronger humanitarian action in both Myanmar and
facilities’ activities suspended. The bottom line is that Ethiopia.
the mere threat of a Russian veto has already
atrophied the humanitarian response. 13 An oppressive government should not be able to
decide which of its citizens receive foreign assistance.
10 For Russia, that is likely the point. The Syrian regime In certain cases, removing the Security Council from
and Russia could not quickly retake northwestern the equation would be an important first step.
Syria by force. They would face an extended and
expanded insurgency, complicated by the presence of 14 Even before the passage of Resolution 2165, a number
Turkish troops. But by limiting aid to the region while of legal scholars had argued that a Security Council
sporadically bombing it, they are able to contain the resolution is not required to legalize the delivery of
opposition and weaken the civilian population. Cutting cross-border aid in the face of opposition from
off cross-border aid altogether would further tighten oppressive governments. The argument is essentially
the noose. Millions of Syrians would pay a terrible twofold. First, there is no rule of international law that
price. Many would try to flee to Turkey or other says, unequivocally, that it is illegal for UN
neighboring countries, which have largely closed their humanitarian agencies to cross an international border
doors to Syrian refugees. The results could destabilize into part of a country over which the national
an already fragile region, resulting in additional government does not have territorial control to
suffering for which U.S. and European donors would provide impartial humanitarian assistance in full
foot the bill. The United States, Germany, and the cooperation with local authorities and local
United Kingdom have already been the most communities.
generous donors to humanitarian aid worldwide for
the past decade and will be hard-pressed to sustain 15 Second, the Assad regime’s refusal to allow
those levels. humanitarian assistance to populations in need
throughout the conflict suggests a pattern in which
11 Worse, the harmful effects of a deteriorating alternatives such as cross-border aid are
humanitarian situation in Syria could easily spread necessary. The UN General Assembly, the Security
beyond the region. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Council, and the UN emergency relief coordinator have
Erdogan, who is facing an election later this all implicitly or explicitly suggested that the Syrian
year, would likely respond to a fresh wave of Syrian government’s withholding of consent to humanitarian
refugees by pushing the flow into Europe. The last assistance in non–government controlled parts of Syria
major movement of Syrian refugees and migrants, in is arbitrary. This means, among other things, that the
2015–16, entrenched divisions within European Syrian government has blocked aid in a manner that
societies, elevated far-right parties, and challenged violates a state’s obligations under international law.
European conceptions of human rights. Putin would For example, states are not allowed to starve civilian
surely rejoice to see Europe face such a situation again. populations. Nor can they withhold aid to civilians

3/5
 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS - BREAKING NEWS - ADVANCED (C1 – C2)

because those civilians are deemed supportive of the 20 Acting now is critical. China and Russia will likely grow
state’s enemies. even more willing to use their influence on behalf of
tyrants as great-power competition grows
16 More recently, the American Relief Coalition for fiercer. Their weaponization of humanitarian aid is
Syria, a group of Syrian diaspora–led humanitarian devastating for millions of civilians and will be
organizations, and international lawyers at Guernica costly for the United States and its partners. Yet with
37, a British law practice that focuses on international diplomatic cooperation and persistence, the crisis in
criminal and human rights law, argued that although Syria could serve as the international
action by the Security Council gave a clearer basis community’s chance to tackle the problem head-on
for cross-border aid with Resolution 2165, the and, in the process, save lives in other humanitarian
situation on the ground today makes the resolution crises, both now and in the future.
only one of several legal justifications for such aid to
continue. In short, the regime’s arbitrary denial of aid
throughout the conflict and the static lines of control in
the country support the argument that cross-border
humanitarian assistance is legal.

17 None of this is to suggest that the Security Council

should refrain from renewing cross-border aid. Even a
temporary disruption of aid could be catastrophic for
the people of northwest Syria. The UN’s Office of Legal
Affairs still considers the resolution a prerequisite for
this humanitarian assistance to continue, and UN
agencies clearly still feel bound by this internal legal
opinion. Although the other members of the Security
Council should continue their diplomatic efforts to
keep Resolution 2165 alive, the current dilemma will
persist until there is a vigorous and transparent debate
between the Office of Legal Affairs and numerous
outside experts who disagree with its analysis.

18 Other UN bodies have an important role to play in the

case of Syria. As scholar Rebecca Barber has argued,
the General Assembly and its relevant committees
could pass a resolution underscoring the imperative of
continuing cross-border aid in light of conditions in
northwest Syria. Such a step would be an important
demonstration of global political will and would
strengthen the legal argument that Security Council
action is not necessary.

19 More broadly, the United States and its allies should

work to enshrine the right to humanitarian
assistance even if a sovereign government arbitrarily
denies it. This could be done by means of a General
Assembly resolution or by an amendment to the 1991
resolution that essentially created the current
international humanitarian system. Such amendments
could clarify how and when the UN is able to provide
for civilians in situations such as the ones that exist
today in Syria and Ethiopia. The United States and
other champions of the international humanitarian
architecture should encourage like-minded nations to
build multilateral support for this sort of approach.

4/5
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS - BREAKING NEWS - ADVANCED (C1 – C2)

Summarize the options the author gives to resolve the issue of weaponizing aid and discuss the
feasibility of these options and if they might make a difference.

5/5