1. Counsel for International Development Annual Civil Military Forum 2013 ‘Protection of Civilians’ Panel – Peacekeepers and Protection: Methods of Protection from Soft to Hard Protection A International Humanitarian Perspective Presented by Kevin Riddell - TEAR Fund NZ Friday 24 th May – St John’s Willis Street Wellington.

2.  There is an ongoing ‘Civil-Military’ discussion around this!  How do we as International Stakeholders Effectively address this?  How do we ensure our mandate and action will ‘Protect Civilians’ and ‘do no harm’?

3.  From a ‘humanitarian perspective’ our effectiveness in reaching this outcome, is determined by …  Our recognition of ‘Humanitarian’ principles and Practice (As outlined in the Sphere Handbook and the Red Cross Code of Conduct).  Our willingness to interact and understand each others mandates.

4.  Effective Interaction and coordination of Stakeholders depends on;  Recognizing all the ‘stakeholders’.  Adapting to the ‘changing landscape’ of a multi- stakeholder environment.  Creating ‘safe operating zones?’ for multi- stakeholder interaction.

5. Example from my own experience … Iraq

7. Iraq in 2005 was a country divided into ‘safe’ operating zones and very definite ‘danger’ zones!  3,000 civilians were being killed per month  3m people displaced in Jordan and Syria and 1m internally displaced in Iraq.  The US was spending 2b USD per month on the reconstruction of the country.  Private security number 150K compared to US troops on the ground @ 60K

8. What do you think is missing in these photos? There are no people! Why do you think there are no people? Kirkuk Rehabilitation Centre People felt too unsafe to come for treatment

9. Instead people would travel to Rehab Centres in Safer Zones! Suleimania – 2hrs drive East Soran – 4hrs drive North Erbil – 2hrs drive North- east Dyala displacement township – 1 1/2hrs drive North-east

10. The Changing Landscape

11. Changing landscape of Iraq  Closed Country 1970s/1980s – 1 in 3 people worked for security police  Post Conflict Zone (1990s – Following Kuwait war) No Fly Zone UN Sanctions Government controlled zone/Kurdish enclave  Safe Haven (Kurdistan) – 1991 - 2003 Civil war – Kurdish in-fighting Turkish/Iranian influence – PKK Snipers  War – US led coalition ‘Iraqi war’ – 2003 Collapse of Bath’ist Regime – 45yrs reign  Danger Zone – 2003 – present day Reconstruction of Iraq. Introduction of Western style political reform ‘Democracy’. Power Vacuum – rise of terrorism/organized crime/new political elites. Kurdistan region of Iraq legitimized.

12. How did we adapt to this changing landscape? Included Ministries & Community Groups in ‘Danger’ Zones in the discussions Included the CIMIC teams Developed a regional strategy based in the ‘Safe’ zones that included representation from all zones Developed a referral system – from ‘hostile’ areas into ‘safe’ zones

13. Elaborating further - Example from Afghanistan Eastern Region Community Development Programme

15. 15 ERCD Project : Nangahar Province 1. Feuding Communities 2.Poor, rural and illiterate 3.Taliban Presence 4.Marginalized minority 5.Suspicious of outsiders

16. 16 The Consequence of the intervention … Feuding stopped and dialogue began Influence of Taliban to control these communities weakened Majority of adult men and woman reading and writing Communities food secure and disaster resilient

17. To Summarize

18.  The Conflict environment is a complex scenario of multiple stakeholders with wide and distinct Mandates  Important that International Stakeholders ‘interact’ and work in the spirit of ‘inclusiveness’.  Recognize that the environment is a ‘changing landscape’ that requires an adaptive approach within our programmes.  Crucial that international humanitarian principles and Practice are applied by all international actors

19. The CHALLENGE for us as International Stakeholders remains;  How can we ENTER and OPERATE in this Environment without endangering each others lives and the lives of people being assisted?  How can we EXIT with some kind of reassurance the people receiving assistance will benefit from our combined intervention?’