Suchergebnisse

The protection of civilians remains an urgent task in Syria. Mass atrocities may resume if the political impasse is not overcome. While the government's allies have gained significant ground with the fall of Aleppo, those who remain in opposition areas, and the governorate of Idlib in particular, face an immediate risk of mass-scale assault. In these areas, targeted aerial attacks on civilian neighbourhoods and infrastructure persist notwithstanding the present ceasefire. A no-fly zone exempting the country's IS-controlled east is the only effective means of preventing a military resolution of the conflict, which may result in mass atrocities.
Given that all parties to the war have continuously violated the provisions of international humanitarian law, none of these actors should be entrusted with the task of preventing atrocities on the ground. While a conflict of interests is likely to erupt between Russia, Hezbollah and Iran as for their respective roles in Syria's political future, neither of these forces could secure that a renewed escalation of violence is prevented.
The mission of the UN Special Envoy de Mistura can regain traction if supported by a new UN Security Council resolution and by offering to opposition forces and Russia as the main guarantor behind the Syrian government to freeze the military status quo through UN troops.
The unprecedented scale of displacement has created a high dependency on aid, yet aid distribution has strongly privileged areas under government control. Pull-effects of populations towards those areas where aid is accessible have been the result. The presence of UN troops would not only safeguard safe return by those displaced, but it could also help ensuring a readjustment of imbalances in aid.
Small-scale safe zones could prompt unpredictable mass movement towards these zones, which would further enhance IDPs vulnerability to attack. Equally, small-scale safe zones would neither resolve the hardships of forced displacement nor would they protect millions of civilians at risk from attack throughout the country.

Since 2009, the North‐Eastern part of Nigeria has been engulfed with the scourge of Boko Haram attacks leading to a severe humanitarian crisis and food insecurity within the region. Studies have shown that in the various internally displaced persons' (IDPs) camps, women and children are malnourished, depicting that there is a shortage of food. More importantly, upon the return of many of the local population into surrounding border communities, returning IDPs are met with ransacked houses, stolen food stuffs, and the decimation of their farmlands by members of the Boko Haram sect. This study investigates the various efforts of local and international actors towards addressing the humanitarian crisis within the region and the impact of these actions on women and children. Accordingly, the qualitative research model was adopted using a phenomenological case study approach. The findings from the study reveal the neglect of the inhabitants of border communities and the poor state of IDPs in the various camps as a direct result of the uncoordinated stakeholders' responses and the Nigerian government's inability to fulfil its role as the main actor responsible for providing relief support and coordinating the needed humanitarian solutions to the crisis. To address this problem, the article identified corruption as a major bane which needs to be tackled so that the government agencies responsible for coordinating humanitarian responses can effectively carry out their function. Second, the UN agencies and non‐governmental organisations stakeholders have a responsibility of putting away their differences and evolving a common approach for sustainable response and solutions.