Documents

Contextual Analysis of Japanese In-Kind Contribution to International Humanitarian Relief Efforts: The Cases of Rwanda and East Timor

Description
Contextual Analysis of Japanese In-Kind Contribution to International Humanitarian Relief Efforts: The Cases of Rwanda and East Timor Submitted to the Secretariat of the International Peace Cooperation Headquarters (IPCH), Cabinet Office, Government of Japan, on Sept. 28, 2009 By Satoko Okamoto, served as Program Advisor at the IPCH from Oct. 1, 2008 to Sept. 10, 2009. Contact Information: satoko.okamoto1@gmail.com Table of Contents 1. Introduction………………………………………â
Categories
Published
of 34
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Share
Transcript
  Contextual Analysis of JapaneseIn-Kind Contribution to International Humanitarian Relief Efforts: The Casesof Rwanda and East Timor Submitted to the Secretariat of the International Peace Cooperation Headquarters (IPCH),Cabinet Office, Government of Japan, onSept.28, 2009 BySatoko Okamoto, served asProgram Advisor at the IPCH from Oct.1, 2008 to Sept.10, 2009.Contact Information: satoko.okamoto1@gmail.com Table of Contents1.Introduction……………………………………………………………………………..…….…12.Case one: Rwanda…………………………………………………………………………….....42.1   Contextual analysis of the Rwandan crisis in 1994………………………………...…….4 2.1.1The international peacekeeping regime in the mid-1990s ………………………...……42.1.2The international humanitarian regime prior to the mid-1990s........................................52.1.2.1 Cooperation among humanitarian actors: Establishment of DHA……………...……52.1.3International humanitarian responses to the Rwandan crisis…………………………....62.1.3.1 Cooperation among humanitarian actors………………………….…………….……62.1.3.2 Cooperation between civilian and military actors……………………………………82.1.4 Politicalclimate in Japan prior to 1994………………………………………………...10 2.2 IPCH’s response to the Rwandan crisis through in-kind donations……….………….123. Case two: East Timor…………………………………………………….……………………143.1 Contextual analysisof theEast Timorese crisis in 1999…………………………………14 3.1.1 The international peacekeeping regime in the late 1990s and beyond…………………143.1.2 The International humanitarian regime in the late 1990s and beyond……………….…153.1.2.1 Cooperation among humanitarian actors: Establishmentof OCHA………………...153.1.2.2 Cooperation with non-humanitarian actors: Relief-development gap discourseandbeyond………………………………………………………………………………..173.1.2.3 Implications of better cooperation: Political humanitarianism………………...……183.1.3 International humanitarian response to the East Timorese crisis …………………........203.1.4 Political climate in Japan in 1999………………………………………………………22 3.2 IPCH’s response to the East Timoresecrisis through in-kind donations………………244. Conclusion………………………………………...…………………………………….……...275. Addendum………………………………………………………………………….………..…28  1 1. Introduction In 1992, the International Peace Cooperation Headquarters (IPCH) was establishedwithin the Prime Minister's Office of the Japanese governmentto carry out the mandate of theInternational Peace Co-operation Law (IPCL). 1 Over the subsequent 17 years,the IPCHdispatched a total of 6,016 personnel to 23 United Nations peacekeeping missions in 14different countries. 2 Both Self Defense Forces (SDF)personneland civilian officials wereassigned to the UN missions, playing various roles, including cease-fire monitoring, logisticalsupport, election monitoring, humanitarian relief, and so forth. Of the23 missions,only five –Rwanda, East Timor, Afghanistan, and two to Iraq –were humanitarian in nature. During thesefive missions, the IPCH dispatched, both SDF personnel and civilian officialsto assistrefugeesand internally displacedpersons (IDP) directly and indirectly. 3  The IPCH’s efforts to support peacekeeping have not been limited tothedispatchingof personnel. It has also donated items to UN peacekeeping missions and to UN and non-UNhumanitarian agencies 21 times overthe past 17 years. The items have included such things asrefugee relief supplies and materials to facilitate the running of elections, as well as constructionmaterialsfor temporary housingfor dispatchedSDF personnel. 4 During some crises, the IPCH extended only personnel support, and during othersitextended only material support. And as previously indicated, there wereseveral missions forwhichthe IPCH extended both types. For instance, during the fivehumanitariancasesmentioned above, the IPCH dispatched personnel and donated refugeerelief supplies to UNhumanitarian agencies, primarily the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees(UNHCR), to support their operations.The Rwandanand East Timorese cases arethe first and second cases of the IPCHextendingboth personnel and materialfor humanitarian relief purposes. During the Rwandancrisis of1994, the IPCH donated refugee relief items to UNHCR, marking the first time itprovided humanitariansupplies since the establishment of the IPCL. 5 Following its provision of  1 TheLaw Concerning for United Nations Peacekeeping Operations and Other Operationsis abbreviatedas theInternational Peacekeeping Cooperation Law (IPCL). 2 The total number of personneldispatchedis tallied based on the number of people assigned to the 23 UNmissions. Theduration of theassignmentsranged from three days to over oneyear. One person may be countedmultiple times, for instance, someone serving onthree different assignmentswould be counted as three persons.Therefore, thepersonnelfigureoverstatesthe number of actual people who served duringthe 23 UN missions.IPCH, 2009, pp.6-7. 3 Humanitarian missions to helpIraqirefugees were conducted twice. The first one was March–April 2003, andthe second was July–August 2003. Ibid ., pp.6-7. 4 The total value of these items donated to the UN peacekeeping missions and UN/non-UN humanitarian agencies,including transportationcosts, was 1.709 billion yen from 1992 through 2008. Interview with an IPCHstaff member, IPCH office in Tokyo, 1 Sept.2009. 5 The relief items provided to Rwandan refugees and IDPs were:3,550 blankets, 2,600 sleeping mats, 1,000shovels, 43 large tents, 213 jerry(fuel)cans, and several emergency and non-emergency medical kits. IPCHbinder“In-kind contribution, no. 8 (2588),”tab“Document for explanations to Director General,”doc. “On theimplementation of in-kind contribution to Rwandan refugees,”22Aug.1994.  2 the supplies, the IPCH carried out refugee-relief operations under which about400 SDFpersonnel served for three months in 1994. 6 During the crisis in East Timor in 1999, theIPCHalso extended both material and personnel to UNHCRfor humanitarian relief purposes; itprovided relief supplies to UNHCR, followed bythesending of a SDFtaskforce that airliftedrelief items on behalf of UNHCR. 7  This paperreviewsthe international and domestic contexts ofthe IPCH’s twohumanitarianin-kind contribution operations in Rwandaand East Timor. In doing so, the paperintendsto shedlight on some of the international and domestic factors that led the IPCH to offerboth material and personnel overseas. Since the IPCH promotesaid of both typesunder theguiding principleof “aidvisibly tied to Japan,”a contextual analysis ofIPCH’s operationsin1994 and 1999 may offer some insights forpolicy makers interested indevelopingapeacekeeping support formula that embodies the sprit of the IPCL.The IPCH carried outthese two in-kind contribution operations,and subsequentpersonnel-dispatching assignments, against the backdrop ofmanyinternational and domesticcontexts –contexts that generated policy discussions that enabled theoperations –but the scopeof this paper is limited to four of them. The first is the international peacekeeping regime,whereby supranational institutions(such as the UN),national governments,and sub-nationalinstitutions (such as militaries)plan and executeinternational peacekeeping activities under setsof normsandrules. The second context istheinternationalhumanitarian regime, wherebydifferent setsof institutions cooperate oninternational humanitarian operationsunder differentsetsof normsand rules. The third context isthat ofinternational humanitarian response. Whilethis context is related tothe workings of the existing international humanitarian regime, thispaperreviewshumanitarian responseseparately. Since Japan tends to thoroughly review otherdonors’ moves prior to acting, international humanitarian reactions on their own are worthexaminingas something that influencesthe formulation of Japanese policy. The fourth contextis that of the domestic political climate in Japan. To examine this context, the paperfocusesonpolicy initiatives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) and the Ministry of Defense(MOD), which are the two ministries mandated to engage in international cooperation andpeacekeeping. By looking at these four contextualdimensions, thispaperintendsto create anarrative framework behind the IPCH’s two in-kindcontributionoperations in Rwanda and EastTimor,so that policymakers mayhave a broad overview oftheirpast decisions.As for the types of operations, the paperfocusesonly on the IPCH’s in-kindcontributions. Donation of supplies has been less controversial in Japan than the deploymentof    6 Miner et al.,1996, p.135. 7 Items provided were:20,000 jerry cans, 11,140 sleeping mats, 9,000 blankets, 5,120 plastic sheets and 500 tents.IPCH, 2000, binder “In-kind contribution: East Timor/stockpiled items,”tab “Receipts,”doc. “Re: receipt of humanitarian relief stockpile items for East Timor emergency operation99/DRRM/182UNHCR,”10 Nov.1999.  3 SDF personnel, as this sort of operation appears less risky in terms of potential loss of life. Assuch,in-kind operations have not beenstudied as closely by policymakers,and for their part,critics have tended to focus on the legal and political ramifications of dispatching theSDFtoUN peacekeeping missions. The paperintendsto provide some perspectiveon theunderstudiedarea of in-kind contributions.Thispaperalso limitsitsexamination of the IPCH’s operations to humanitarianactivities. The initial reason for choosinghumanitarian operations over UN peacekeepingandelection monitoring was to examinethe problemof the operational and thematic discontinuitybetween the relief and development phases in international aidmissions,and to exploretheIPCH’s ability to implementrelief operations that smoothly connect tothe development phase.International attention toward bridging this relief-development gapexisted for only ashort period of time, however. The height of the discussioncame when then UNHCRCommissionerSadako Ogata and then World Bank PresidentJames Wolfonsonlaunched theBrookings Process in 1999to discussproblems related tothisgap. Subsequently, policymakersagreedto implementseveral projects to address theproblem. Although the Brookings Processbrought some welcome results tothe international aid community–such as increased fundingfor previously under-funded areas–the momentum was eventually lost,partly becausepilotprojects were halted, 8 and partly because Ogata went on to resign fromUNHCR in 2001. Afterthe terrorist attacks of Sept. 11,2001,the gap-filling discourse wasovershadowedby newconcernsconcerning the reconstruction of post-conflict failed states.Although the discussions on the gap between relief and development phases proved tobe a fleeting agenda topic in the international aid community, humanitarian assistance remainsan area where Japan could do more. The IPCH is indeed uniquely positioned toprovide reliefinpost-conflict areas, through both dispatching personneland sending supplies. Originally, theIPCL was created to fill the legal lacuna of the International Disaster Relief Law (JDR Law) of 1987–some aspects of humanitarian relief duringcomplex emergencies cannot be addressedwithin the framework of that law.For instance, under the law,relief operationscannot beconducted in regions that do not meet its safety criteria. 9 In the 1990s,however, the linebetween battle zone and relief area blurred,and it became increasingly necessary for civiliansand armed forces to cooperate. As such, it became sensible to have aframeworkso that the twocamps could work together onhumanitarian-orientedoperations. Today, the IPCLallowstheJapanese government to participate ininternational humanitarian relief efforts that may requirepartneringwith military contingents.Although it has become increasinglynecessary for humanitarian actorsto cooperate or 8 Takasu, 2001, p.60. 9 Regardingthe safetycriteria, see Institute for International Cooperation, Japan International CooperationAgency (JICA). JICA, 2002, p.9.
Search
Tags
Related Search
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks
SAVE OUR EARTH

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!

x