As crises continue to multiply, the SDC gives priority to engagement in fragile contexts and conflict affected countries. Markus Heiniger, an SDC expert on the subject of “conflict and human rights”, here answers a few questions in the context of an international meeting which took place on 25 May 2015 in Abidjan, Ivory Coast.
Ebola epidemic, war in Syria and Iraq, tragic migratory exodus from Libya, devastating earthquake in Nepal… These crises and the resulting insecurity for millions of people are front page news and seem to be endless. The SDC is directly concerned in many of these troubled contexts: half of the countries in which it has long term commitments are considered “fragile”, in some cases torn apart by conflict. And this does not include the natural disasters that require a spontaneous humanitarian response.
According to the definition of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) a state is considered “fragile” when its government is unwilling or unable to provide the population with services indispensible for development, security and respect for human rights. In such circumstances the population finds it difficult to cooperate with the authorities in question.
Reducing factors of conflict
Preventing and dealing with crisis situations is one of the strategic objectives of the SDC. In fragile contexts the SDC tries to address the factors of conflict and instability – and to reduce these – with the help of the development projects it organises locally, and continuous political dialogue with the relevant authorities and civil society. The aim is to help strengthen the structures of the state with a view to ensuring that all citizens have the same rights and opportunities. The SDC contributes to peacebuilding efforts in a number of countries, often in collaboration with the FDFA’s Human Security Division.
New Deal
Switzerland does not act in isolation. It participates in an international dynamic negotiated and formalised in 2011, a ‘New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States’. This framework for action, approved by a coalition of countries from North and South, is the subject of regular follow-up meetings.
The most recent meeting was on 25 May 2015 in Abidjan, Ivory Coast, under the auspices of the African Development Bank. Markus Heiniger, an SDC expert on conflict and human rights, represented Switzerland, together with SDC deputy director Elisabeth von Capeller, co-chair of the International Network on Conflict and Fragility.
Interview with Markus Heiniger
Markus Heiniger, what was on the agenda of the Abidjan meeting?
The purpose of the meeting was to assess the progress made on a global scale since the agreement of 2011. The priorities – combating fragility and situations of violence – are still relevant. The meeting was also an opportunity to discuss the post-2015 sustainable development agenda and stress the importance of having as a specific objective the establishment of peaceful, inclusive societies. Security for all and equal access to justice are fundamental conditions for guaranteeing development in fragile contexts.
In view of the proliferation of crises around the world, is it really possible to reduce the instability in which several states and their citizens find themselves?
We see the reduction of situations of fragility and violent conflicts as the result of a long term engagement. Rebuilding citizens’ confidence in their authorities takes time and requires patience. Ultimately however one can arrive at some very encouraging results, as in the case of Mozambique and Nepal. Both of these countries have managed to pull out of an acute political crisis, which undoubtedly has a positive impact on development and poverty reduction.
Let us take the example of Nepal, which unfortunately has again been in the news. How has the SDC taken the country’s fragility into consideration in the past few years?
It is a well-known fact that in Nepal the SDC specialised in building bridges and roads among other issues. In the midst of the civil war (1996-2006), and the period of transition that followed, our efforts have always been based on in-depth analysis of the causes of instability and the actors involved. Three fundamental questions had to be asked: how to plan the work on infrastructure, for what purpose, and who should do the planning? It was of the greatest importance to include the district authorities and local communities in the planning stages, so as to take into account the needs expressed by the population in terms of access to the market, school, etc. In particular we have always tried to promote the interests of castes that suffer discrimination and of women in general.
How did that work in practical terms?
We made it possible for these segments of the population to work in the construction sites and be paid a daily wage. This meant making the least possible use of bulldozers so as to give preference to manual labour. By paying in cash each day we were able to ensure the maximum transparency of payroll management. All of this was in fact closely monitored by representatives of the local population. Then, it should be borne in mind that in parallel with these infrastructure projects the SDC was active, at a more political level, in peacebuilding and establishing the rule of law in Nepal.
Do you think that, thanks to the efforts of the SDC, the people of Nepal were less “fragile” when confronted with the earthquake of 25 April 2015 and its aftershocks.
I am convinced that the joint efforts of the SDC and other donors in the country made it easier for the Nepalese to deal with the political crises. Whether or not the country was in a better position to manage the humanitarian crisis caused by the earthquake than would have been the case before remains to be seen. That has been another test. One thing that is certain is that Switzerland’s efforts in Nepal are generally much appreciated. And I am sure that the “conflict sensitive” approach developed by the SDC will continue to be relevant with regard to the reconstruction work that lies ahead.
Promising results
Any intervention in a fragile context or a situation of conflict involves increased risk for the donors. That said, the projects implemented by the SDC in most cases show promising results. Thus, apart from Nepal, in the Great Lakes region (Rwanda, Burundi, Democratic Republic of the Congo), the SDC finances a programme for the medical, legal and psychosocial support of victims of sexual violence. Since 2011 about 16,000 women have received assistance. In Honduras the SDC is supporting reform of the national police, the aim being to make it less corrupt and more aware of human rights and the concerns of the population. In 2014 no less than 1,000 officers benefited from in-depth training in these areas. In Myanmar, a project initiated by the SDC ensures improved access to healthcare for the inhabitants of Kayin/Karen, a conflict-affected area in the south-east. What is original about this project is a readiness to cooperate with the government authorities as well as with the ethnic minorities. In Afghanistan, where children’s access to education, particularly in the case of girls, is a key factor of development, the SDC has contributed substantially in recent years to the enrolment ratio at the national level. In 2014, nine million children, of whom 40% are girls, attended school. In 2001 the figure was just one million.