英语论文网

do not conform to the set standard. It condemns the apolitical and neutrality principles of the old approach claiming it is impossible to remain politically neutral in the face of conflict. Base on this, it favours the politicisation of aid in humanitarian intervention.
The loss of neutrality meant that aid providers took sides and spoke up against human rights abuses. Though it breeds animosity between the sides judged as the aggressor, new humanitarianism believes that maintaining silence is condoling violence and human rights abuses.
Intervention is now dependent on an assessment of the present and future impact of aid intervention. To ensure that it does not become a catalyst for fuelling conflicts as was the case with the old approach. Just like the mergence of development and security, aid, the tool for construction is fused with military and diplomatic tools to make a coherent conflict and development strategy (Fox ;2001,276 www.51lunwen.org/politics/ ).
This new strategy creates a way for humanitarian groups to become involve with the governance of the warring state and the opportunity to model the state for easy foreign influence or global governance in practical terms. A senior official of ECHO, Mikael Barfod noted that;
‘‘There is no way we can handle a situation without linking up with human rights issues, without linking up with development, to understand the real impact. We have to be part of the political process leading to peace’’ (Fox ;2001,276)
Going by his statements and the use of policy as politics in the manner of carrot and sticks, it is evident that global actors base on their commitment to solve the persistent crises of development and security seek to break all barriers that may forestall free movement of goods, people interpreted as consolidation of global liberal governance.
Base on this, Fox argues that rather than base its actions and inactions on saving people, the new humanitarian focus on how the perceived consequences of intervention fits into the big picture of development plans. Similarly, Duffield asserts that the shift in humanitarianism tends to focus on how such action supports or affects the social process (Duffield; 2001,80). In the long run humanitarian assistance should be used to alleviate the plight of man and protect the society from future occurrence.

Though the global effort to address development and security issues is commendable, the present Posture of withholding humanitarian intervention until conformity is tantamount to judging aggressors, the aggressed and civilians trapped in war zone guilty. A brief analysis of the Zaire Refugee camp between1994-1996 will be evaluated to show the flaws of the old humanitarian and the consequences of applying the new formula.

Zaire Goma Refugee Camp 1994-1996
Following the seizure of power in Rwanda by a Tutsi regime at the heel of the country’s 1994 genocide, about two million Hutus fled to Tanzania and Zaire in fear of a reprisal attack from the new government.
Over a million settled in Zaire Goma refugee camp and were catered for by aid workers. This soon drew international condemnation as some refugees were Hutu militias, who were allegedly feeding on the aid while planning to attack the Tutsi regime. This shows how the old humanitarian system can fuel crisis if administered wrongly.
The pressure from donor agencies and government to clo