Macedonia: A dream coming true.

‘Balkan’ is a word which is made up of two components, meaning ‘honey’ and ‘blood’. It is perhaps a fitting name for a region in which there is so much that is sweet and good, but where there has also been so much bloodshed.

During our recent conference in Skiopje, Macedonia, one Bosnian participant suggested a new name: ‘Balhan’ which would mean ‘honey’ and ‘water’. The participant was expressing a deep wish – a dream that all citizens of the Balkans need to see become a reality: a future of peace and a break with the violence of the past.

The Humanitarian Forum had to fight with that great natural/supernatural force – Iceland’s volcano – to reach skopje, capital of Macedonia. It was a question of travelling through the ashes which were preventing thousands of people from going home. Many of our members from Europe and the Middle East couldn’t make it in person, and there was a time when we had to think seriously about cancelling this long-awaited event.

But in the end, we decided to go ahead – and I am very glad we did. Fifty representatives came together, from the local Civil Society Organisations of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Serbia, Kosovo and Albania. Our ‘Balkano’ meeting seemed like a challenge to the volcano – we were saying ‘you can’t deter us!’ Some of our members still managed to get there from Turkey, Kenya and Iran – I myself took a ten hour car ride from Istanbul with a colleague in order to make the meetings.

The most important aspect of the A HOPE for the Balkans conference was the spirit of dynamic discussion between different ethnic and religious groups. Here was Natasha, a Serbian from Belgrade, leading a mixed group of Muslims from Macedonia and Albania. Jason, who represented World Vision, led another group of Bosnian, Macedonian and Kosovan participants. Amer from ICRC lead another, equally diverse group.

This spirited and dynamic dialogue was most encouraging. To see so many actors from so many areas meet the challenges facing the development of a regional civil society together – to find both collective solutions and answers to the common problems – was inspiring.

One participant told his colleague that this was the first time in his life that they had met together with so many different people. A second representative wondered that he had travelled all the way from Tehran ‘to meet his neighbours’. It seems that for us the continuous process of communication is the foundation of confidence building, which leads to operational engagement of different CSOs from different cities and countries. This communication and operational engagement will be the bedrock of humanitarian partnership – not only in the Balkans but anywhere in the world.

We want to create A HOPE for the Balkans: an Alternative Humanitarian Operational Partnership Engagement between CSOs representing different ethnic and religious groups. This is really the dream that we can make a reality – a new ‘Balhan’ region.

So let the volcano bring ashes – we’ll bring the fire of unity. Let the sky be shadowed with dark clouds – we’ll bring the light of partnership. When the wind competes with us at breakneck speed, our steady determination will win through.

Our Balkano meeting was more dynamic than the Volcano!

Breaking old habits, forging new paths in Somalia

I’ve just returned from a marathon trip. I was away for a month and in that time, I visited (amongst other places) The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Balkans, and Nairobi and Somaliland, where I spent sixteen days with a range of stakeholders, discussing the challenges, successes and obstacles for the humanitarian sector in Somalia.

These days, humanitarian actors are struggling to reach those in need in Somalia; conflict and crisis make access difficult. This was why many of our meetings were held in Nairobi, and many organisations working in the area expressed concerns about the security issues.

One problem seems to be that there’s a set way of working in Somalia: a status quo, which has become a habit. It’s not just there: it's easy for all of us to fall into a comfortable pattern in our humanitarian work: we work a certain way because we’ve always done it that way. It can be comfortable, but it’s not always what’s best for the people in dire need. We need to address this issue before we can jump into creating a comprehensive humanitarian sector.

Over the sixteen days, I attended more than thirty meetings. Participants came from embassies, governments, UN agencies, INGOs, local organisations, and the business sector, to name a few. But we came to this conclusion: still more dialogue is needed if we want to include everyone, in the issue of humanitarian access.

Participants were Muslim and non-Muslim, and we welcomed the participation of local and grass-roots organisations. Many were concerned with personal safety; all accepted that a discussion with all stakeholders - without excluding anyone – was needed in order to ensure humanitarian aid to everyone.

We consider these 16 days the second round of extensive consultations with most of the stakeholders – the first round was our conference in October. In the third round, which will be soon, Insha’Allah, we’ll expand our reach again, this time hoping to reach all stakeholders: to enable more humanitarian organisations to deliver aid material to different and remote areas of Somalia where the need is dire.

We were carrying a purely humanitarian message, to everyone, including governments, organisations, businesses, groups and the international community. We don’t want to be misunderstood or misread. The human need in Somalia is more than the imagination of decision makers can understand. We need to put our humanitarian spirit to the test; to balance our impartiality. If we really claim that we are the champions of the needy, we must take on board that the championship is won by delivering on people’s expectations, not by talking and doing nothing. We must give hope, and remove the conditions that breed radicalisation.

The message of humanitarianism is beyond the scope of politics, tribalism, sectarianism and ‘groupism’, not to mention the religious ‘isms’ that can abound. Since we believe the message of humanitarianism is far more universal than all of these, we have to work collectively to a sustainable solution for the humanitarian catastrophe in Somalia, as well as everywhere else.

The answer is a collective comprehensive effort by all of us, even if some of us will need to implement it on behalf of all. The time for working as individuals is past: all individuals must come together in a common cause, setting aside their differences to address the need collectively, as a community.

Let us discuss serious issues. What do we mean when we talk about security and insecurity? Do we mean the security of the vulnerable community? Do we mean the security of our national field staff? Our international field staff? Do we mean the security of our organisations? Or is it the security of our funds we worry about the most? We need to be very honest about our interests when we claim to be champions of vulnerable people – to go beyond our own partialities, and put local civil society organisations at the centre of our operations. Our first responsibility is not to ourselves, but to the local community.

So we should not give up striving –however many rounds it takes – to create sustainable, ongoing security in the future.

Humanitarianism: The new colonialism?

Talking about colonialism is problematic. People might label me a reactionary or a radical...but since I’m neither, I have to have the courage to open my heart to you, so we all can learn from one another.

The world has been facing numerous emergencies over the past few years. Some were manmade while the rest were natural disasters. The individual humanitarian response was overwhelming – to the point where we as international humanitarian organisations could hardly deliver the dreams and desires of our donors. The last few disasters – the tsunami; Darfur; the Asian earthquake; Yemen – proved that the international community cannot do it alone, even if we had the resources and the expertise.

We’re at a time when we have ample money to respond to disasters. But how do we allocate it? It’s my belief that we need to use some part of this money in building the local infrastructure of Civil Society Organisations in disaster areas. Five years on from the tsunami I’d like to raise a question: How much have we spent on relief, and on capacity building of local civil society, and how much has been drained and wasted because of inefficient delivery and overspending on bringing in our own experts, imported from Country A to Disaster Area B, when we could have utilized the expertise and knowledge of local organisations?

If we’re honest enough to answer such questions, I propose we change the policy of our funding with the intention of building stronger, more independent CSOs in such areas. I propose we ask our governments, institutions and INGOs to allocate 10-15% of funds to the future of local civil society in these areas.

This would be an important step, but funds alone are not enough. If our long term goal is to hand the capability for disaster response over to the local and national organisations, we need to shift our entire attitude. Rather than supporting our own organisations exclusively, our emphasis must be on partnering, training and supporting local humanitarian actors in becoming more effective, sustainable and accountable. In short: treating local actors as equals.

Changing the way we work will take time and investment. It will not happen overnight; rather it will happen over a generation. But by beginning that investment now, we will eventually build a truly global humanitarian society – one which really does ‘think globally and act locally’.

We need to be courageous - to admit that it’s impossible nowadays to respond to these terrible disasters from an international perspective alone, and to admit that it is indeed preferable to reach beneficiaries in their own communities and through their own communities. Because if we don’t work this way, we’re missing the most important players or stakeholders: namely the local civil society organisations, whom we should use as active partners from the time of planning to the process of delivering and monitoring. This could only be done when we change our mindset from a top-down, ‘colonial’ humanitarian approach to a grass roots humanitarian approach.

Our new role should be complementary to the emerging new role of stronger local civil societies. It should not replace them or exclude them. It is for us to be honest enough to step back, and instead empower those people who are already ‘on the ground’ when disaster strikes, and will continue to be there long after our operations have left.
Shall we be a colonial humanitarian movement - or a people’s humanitarian movement?

Yemen: Turning a coach ride into a journey

On my recent trip to North Africa, I spent 3 days in Yemen with our new country director and many of the members of Humanitarian Forum Yemen (HFY), in what turned into an inspirational visit.

The first day of this 72 hour visit included 5 meetings, and I was very happy to learn that the government has appointed State Minister for Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), who is doing his upmost to meet the needs of the quarter of a million IDPs as well as the challenges of the local and international community. This newly appointed position is to coordinate the needs of IDPs from a government point of view, but with a new vision: to understand the language of the international and donor community. Before this there was no minister for IDPs – the growing situation in Yemen led them to invent this post. The position will create a more cohesive response to the problems for IDPs, a more focussed and undivided attention to this issue.

Days 2 and 3 comprised a long field trip to three different IDP camps in Harad. We started out at 6am on Wednesday 25th February, taking with us 25 individuals (7 of whom were women) from 17 local organisations. The journey from sana’a to the IDP camps in Harad, over mountains and switchback roads, took 7 hours. Although tiring, it turned out to be the most fruitful of journeys, where some of us became sick (myself included!) and others became energetic and hyperactive.
The journey turned into an operational workshop – or workshop in action. An informal, impassioned 2-day discussion – so different to such high level, high calibre, traditional, static workshops we in the humanitarian community generally favour. The fruit from such a workshop was immense – and less costly than those expensive traditional varieties, which can often be unproductive because of the top-down approach which forms them.

The result of this impromptu workshop in action was firstly confidence building between all members of HFY who participated, and secondly an implementation of THF’s organisational learning philosophy. Each small organisation was educating its sister organisations and the larger organisations managing the camps were able to educate the smaller organisations in turn. The IDPs who participate in managing the camps also educated the visiting local organisations and indeed those larger organisations managing the camps, through their involvement and feedback.
The tone of the discussion that took place between every participant was vibrant. They inspired one another, because each and every one of them was focussing on the issue of the IDPs and their welfare, and not on the agendas of their organisations, or other such issues. People didn’t feel tired as they talked; not on the coach in the early morning or the late evening; not in the field which was so hot and humid; nor even over dinner as they continued to discuss while they killed their hunger.

I came back with a new dimension of our message of capacity building and humanitarianism. The discussions we had shout: ‘no more traditional workshop: enough is enough’. Instead, let us build a new style workshop on the foundation of our collective dynamic action, led by the local participants. Let us take what we discuss in the conference room with us on buses, on planes and to the camps themselves, and let us bring what we discuss in those places to the conference room in turn. From here, local organisations will be able to transfer the knowledge and the expertise to their colleagues in different cities and districts, so their colleagues can feel that such a product can be, and is made in Yemen itself, and not only in Europe. If we want to leave a stronger, sustainable civil society, we must enable its members to build it, whether we’re there or not.

Honestly, at the end of the trip, we did not feel tired. No headaches, backaches, vertigo or dizziness – the spirit which was born inside this atmosphere had replaced our ills with vitality. So let’s bring the spirit to the workshop in action, actively engaging the local owners of the programmes in the stage of designing, not the stage of implementation.

Sowing the seeds of peace in Sudan

While Sudan is enjoying the first few days of ceasefire in Dafur, and in the run-up to the preparation for the general elections and referendum on the Southern issue, The Humanitarian Forum (THF) is working to become part of cementing the relationship between Sudan and the outside world, from a humanitarian point of view. Following the visit of the high-level delegation last November, THF went to Khartoum to discuss peace in Dafur. We held meetings with the Minister of Humanitarian Affairs, HAC, and a number of special advisors in the humanitarian field, to try and capitalise on humanitarian society, to build peace in the Sudan as a whole.

The atmosphere in Sudan is different from that which we experienced at the beginning of last year, when some aid agencies were asked to leave the country, and even from the atmosphere of the meetings we held in London last November. The authorities are taking on a new role, and the tune of the officials is changing. It has become more welcoming than the media portrayed last year. Now is our opportunity build a stronger relationship and a solid bridge, and we will all have to revisit our roles as we look to strengthen the role of civil society in Sudan and build long term peace.

We have to see Sudan not as a handful of problems - which we can impose solutions on from the top down - but to see Sudan as a resourceful country – as its own solution – which all of us need to bear its fruits. We need to change not only the local mindset in Sudan, but our own mindset. If we want to maximise the our common global benefit which is emerging from Sudan, the only way forward is to meet in the middle.

I am optimistic about the signing of the ceasefire, but optimism is not enough. We must now work to change the ceasefire into sustainable peace, based on delivering the needs of citizens of the area, and become vital parts of the Long Term peace. Not only for the benefit of Sudan and its citizens, but for the benefit of humanity.

Building the bridge from both sides in Egypt

How can we work together to strengthen the social fabric of the Arab world? This is the issue we’ve been discussing with The Arab League over the last two years, to find solutions through building stronger Civil Society Organisations (CSOs). And in my most recent visit we took great steps forward.

Through the vision of Secretary General Mr Amr Mousa and his chief of Staff, Ambassador Hisham Yousef, we reached an agreement to work together in addressing this huge issue. On the one hand this gave The Humanitarian Forum a very positive message, that the League has confidence in our mission, and on the other hand it conveyed the more dynamic message that we are building the bridges from both sides – across the gaps, the rivers, the oceans that divide us. This is a new milestone that The Forum is building with the Arab League.

The Arab world has tens of thousands of civil society organisations (CSOs) which need to work together in a more conducive atmosphere with their societies and their governments. Their intentions are sincere, pure, and clear. But sometimes the mechanics of the philosophy of their discussions can be misinterpreted through many different pressure points, both global and local. On the global side, there’s the global political climate; global financial problems; global war on terror; the media war on Islam and Arab nations; the global culture of divides. On the local side, the philosophy can be seen through the lens of local theological interpretations and understanding of religion, and the role of local culture, values and religions. The impact of these pressures on cementing or fragmenting the social role of Civil Society in building (in partnership with governments and the private sector) more sustainable economic, political and social movement within the country should not be underestimated.

Many efforts have been made to address such points – and we don’t want to reinvent the wheel again. While we’re mapping the TREE of problems (Terrorism, Radicalisation, Extremism, Exclusion), we also need to find the proper solutions for every large and small problem.

Our proposed conference in December 2010 will be the beginning of a long term process, not only addressing the problems but identifying the solutions. To organise such a conference, we’re facing a few challenges: coordination, finance, logistics, and most importantly, implementation of the result in action with the community – our challenge is to close any gap – be it in civil society, government or private sector - and our success will be measured by the dynamic social, political and economic atmosphere we create. We must all work together for our nations, not for our organisations / political parties /companies. Our focal point should be our citizens, our countries; our world. And we are grateful for any support from you to make our conference a success story.

We love Mondays!

The British Pop band, The Boomtown Rats, had a hit with the song ‘I don’t like Mondays’. But even though we all woke up in the early hours, to get from our various locations to the Central London conference centre last Monday before 9am, it was still a Monday to love. Because last Monday, we had the chance to communicate face-to-face with humanitarian organisations in Gaza.

The day after Valentine’s day, (shall we call it Pale-ntine’s day?!) marked the first of The Humanitarian Forum’s video link conferences: bringing together local and international actors in the UK, Gaza and Qatar.

The reason we were so excited and motivated by such an event, is because it represented such a great opportunity for people under the siege to be seen, heard and taken seriously. They were recognised as part of the solution, not part of the problem. In the different rooms - in Doha, London and Gaza -everyone felt ready to search for a new alternative solution to the lack of communication with Gazan people and Gazan humanitarian organisations.

We heard the message from Gaza. It was loud, clear and to the point. ‘We can do it, because we have the knowhow. Consider us as valuable partners, from the time of creating the proposal for a project to the time of delivering such a programme.’

What made us all so excited and motivated was witnessing the hope in our colleagues’ eyes, the passion and determination in their voices; the spirit of resilience created by being together and facing problems jointly.

Such an alternative way of communication by The Humanitarian Forum was a new opportunity for the forgotten voices to be heard by others. It helped us all see Gaza as a source of the solution, not a base of extremism, radicalism and terrorism. If we really want to fight such ‘isms’, we have to – all of us – plant a new ‘TREE’: of Trust, Respect, Engagement and Empowerment.
If we plant those seeds - in Gaza or in any vulnerable, marginalised, depressed community - we will be able to bring from amongst them both the ideas, and the leaders to put the ideas into practice. Not only to sort out the local problems, but also to find a solution to our global problems.

It’s an open invitation to everyone: to come together and to start to listen so we can understand others. Because listening means consideration, accommodation and partnership, and giving up disregard alienation, marginalisation and polarisation.

Every person at the meeting came out highly motivated – because we felt that we all shared some common ground – the value of our ‘TREE’.

We hope to double the number of organisations at our next conference call and hope to receive your ideas for a better future, not only for Gaza but for other communities.
To have your say on Gaza, please visit our online forums.
You can read more about The Forum in Gaza here.