CPSA/ISA-Canada section on International Relations

C17(b) - Issues in Humanitarian Politics

Date: Jun 1 | Time: 10:30am to 12:00pm | Location: Classroom - CL 431 Room ID:15736

Chair/Président/Présidente : Chris Roberts (University of Calgary)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Jeremy Wildeman (University of Bath)

Politics is its Vocation: Extending Humanitarian Governance Authority through Innovation: Emily K. M. Scott (University of Toronto)
Abstract: In the wake of the Syrian War humanitarian organizations drew on existing repertoires of response to care for refugees. INGOs sought out patients who suffered war wounds caused by Kalashnikovs and M16s and provided care designed outside the Middle East. This paper explores the innovative shift that followed and identifies mechanisms that made it possible; the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) redefined the war wound, moving away from a requirement that activities be life-saving and injury defined by the battlefield. In so doing, the ICRC extended its governance of populations. While scholars of the political economy of aid contend that INGOs are beholden to the states that fund them and diminish the INGO’s power to determine its direction, research indicates that INGOs have independent distributive, political authority. Drawing on over 100 interviews, 8-months of observation in Lebanon and Jordan, organizational material, and secondary research, this article illustrates that field-based aid workers posses authority by virtue of their proximity to recipients and can drive an organization in new directions. The force of the field is eased by an internal distribution of power and bureaucratic structure that allows an entrepreneurial aid worker room to manoeuvre.

The International Criminal Court and Reparations for Child Soliders: A Challenging and Possible Poor Fit: Kirsten Fisher (University of Saskatchewan)
Abstract: While its ability to award reparations to victims of crimes prosecuted by it sets the International Criminal Court apart and suggests a more victim-centric approach to post-conflict/ post-atrocity justice, the first implementation of reparations from the ICC demonstrates some of the challenges for such an institution and makes us question whether the ICC is truly right for this job. In a uniquely challenging first implementation, the first reparations awarded by the ICC’s Trust Fund for Victims were awarded in the Lubanga case to child soldier victims in the DRC. Reparations in this context have the potential to assist, but may also hamper the reintegration prospects of this vulnerable segment of the post-conflict population, especially when ICC reparations awarded must be tied to specific crimes, perpetrators, and convictions. Drawing on years of field research regarding post-conflict justice and child soldier experiences and reintegration, this paper explores the limitations of the ICC reparations mandate, highlighted by this first case, and questions whether these limitations don’t make it unsuitable for the job.