In many of the most difficult operating environments, the relationship between humanitarian and military actors has been unconstructive, largely because of differences in motivations, goals and approaches. Lessons from more positive interaction indicate that investment is needed over time to establish a relationship, to explore areas of common ground, establish boundaries and increase mutual awareness and understanding. The humanitarian community could improve its approach to military actors by providing clearer operational guidelines and by conducting research to address knowledge gaps.
In crisis contexts, principled civil-military coordination is critical to protecting humanitarian principles and, therefore, ensuring an effective humanitarian response. Despite the fact that humanitarian organisations and militaries increasingly operate in the same environments, there is limited analysis in existing literature of how their relationship functions in practice. In particular, there is little analysis of how the relationship has been affected, in operational terms, by the changing nature of conflicts and the development of more integrated approaches to international interventions.
The literature suggests that the main factor contributing to fraught civil-military relations is a fundamental difference in motivations, goals and approaches. Other factors include differences in terminology, cultures and concepts.
A more positive relationship has been achieved by consistent efforts on both sides to develop clear structures and mechanisms for coordination and leadership, and the deployment of dedicated capacities to support coordination. The literature also suggests that shared goals, such as the protection of civilians, have facilitated more effective engagement.
Documenting operational experiences and best practices would make an important contribution to strengthening humanitarian civil-military coordination. In addition, the humanitarian community could improve its approach to military actors by:
- Providing clearer operational guidelines, such as on: the principle of last resort and information-sharing protocols; how the relationship should or does change in relation to different mandates and types of forces and contexts; and on how humanitarians should interact with other military actors, particularly national militaries but also private security or military companies.
- Conducting research to address knowledge gaps: the reasons why neither military nor humanitarian actors adhere consistently to established guidelines and basic principles; how global policy frameworks apply to different geographic contexts; and the extent to which the civil-military relationship affects those the humanitarian interventions seek to assist.
