The banning of refugee agencies, which play crucial roles during wars in providing humanitarian support, sometimes takes place during wars in different countries. Many refugee and humanitarian aid agencies, the UNRWA from Israel and Jerusalem, several aid agencies from Sudan during the Darfur conflict and several other refugee/aid agencies from several other countries including Somalia, were fully or partially banned during wars/conflicts. According to multiple sources including the British Broadcasting Corporation and Cable News Network, Israel’s parliament Knesset voted to ban the UNRWA — the UN’s Palestine Refugee Agency — from its operation within Israel and occupied Jerusalem in October this year which will impact its ability to operate in war-affected Gaza and the Israeli-occupied West Bank, leading to concerns.
It is notable that organized crimes there are humanitarian and other outcomes of banning refugee agencies during wars. It leaves vulnerable populations without access to much-needed safety and protection, exacerbates humanitarian crises by limiting resources and support for those in need and increases the likelihood of refugees being forced to return to dangerous or unstable situations. The ban on the UNRWA, which has been working for decades for Palestinian refugees and providing humanitarian support to the Gazans since the beginning of the Gaza war, can notably worsen the humanitarian conditions for many in war-affected Gaza. Among others, it undermines the global efforts to promote humanitarian values and uphold the rights of displaced individuals and sometimes strains diplomatic relationships, hindering efforts to promote peace.
Hopefully saying, various countries and organizations including the United Nations take diplomatic and other steps to address the concerns involved with banning refugee agencies including creating pressures, implementing diplomatic negotiations to withdraw the ban, reach ceasefire deals to allow for safe passage and establish safe zones for refugees and providing humanitarian aid in alternative ways aiming to alleviate their suffering during wars, that bring some positive outcomes, reducing the impacts on displaced people driven by wars. Diplomatic negotiations and international pressures have resulted in some notable successes in the withdrawal of full bans and/or partial restrictions on different refugee agencies in several countries including Sudan and Yemen, enabling humanitarian aid deliveries to those in need during wars.
But there are flaws that hinder the effectiveness of efforts to address refugee crises during conflicts and avoidable suffering of the war-affected people. Diplomatic negotiations, international pressures and other steps are limited and there is a lack of political will and cooperation among nations many times, because of geopolitical and other causes, in addressing the full ban and/or partial restrictions on refugee agencies during wars and providing the needed humanitarian aid. Among others, there are limited resources and funding that constrain the ability of governments and international organizations to provide adequate support for refugees in conflict zones during international and civil wars — amidst the ban on refugee agencies.
Refugee agencies are vital and withdrawing the ban on them during wars is desirable. For this, emphasis on diplomatic steps is crucial and can be effective many times in withdrawing the ban. Establishing safe zones for refugees and providing humanitarian aid in other available and alternative ways may help reduce avoidable suffering. Addressing the reasoned concerns of the warring parties can also help withdraw the ban and facilitate humanitarian aid sometimes. But putting emphasis on peaceful resolutions to conflicts in order to prevent further displacement of populations is also vital.
Amir M Sayem
Chief Editor
Dhaka Opinion Magazine
