Search results

AbstractThis article explores the prevalent issue of sexual violence against and among humanitarian aid workers, with a focus on why the aid sector creates a particularly permissive environment for sexual violence. Although the issue is primarily an industry problem, with both perpetrators and survivors being members of the aid community, humanitarian organizations have been hesitant to address the issue. The article argues that legal ambiguities, barriers to accessing justice, and organizational mismanagement contribute to the permissive environment in the aid industry. Drawing on secondary survivor testimonies and legal frameworks, I highlight the need for more tangible prevention and follow-up mechanisms for survivors based on the legal duty of care of aid organizations. The analysis underscores the need for a comprehensive and proactive approach to addressing sexual violence within the aid sector, grounded in an understanding of power dynamics and organizational culture.

Abstract: The surge in violence against healthcare during the 2018–2020 Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo was attributed to distrust from insufficient community engagement. This article challenges the widespread view and argues that the response failed to acknowledge the politicized nature of the outbreak stemming from the government's election interference. The humanitarians' desire to remain neutral prevented them from speaking out against the government, leading to the paradoxical outcome that they were perceived as supporting the government's oppressive agenda. This article highlights the importance of recognizing political dynamics to improve community acceptance.

2019 has been the most violent year on record for health workers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Attacks on healthcare coincided with the first-ever Ebola outbreak in an active conflict zone. Many of the attacks on the Ebola response were perpetrated by civilians who intended to disrupt the response, which in turn contributed to the spread of the virus. Why would communities attack the very people trying to protect them from disease? This mixed-method study examines the case of violence against Ebola responders during the Democratic Republic of the Congo's tenth Ebola outbreak from 2018 to 2020. First, an 'explaining-outcome' process tracing reconstructs key events that led to the violent resistance of the population. I find that – contrary to popular belief – distrust alone was not the main driver. Rather, I argue that the politicization of the response provoked violent popular resistance. Second, an interrupted time-series model shows that the exclusion of three regions from the presidential election due to Ebola led to a significant increase in attacks on Ebola responders. The analysis demonstrates that the behavior of healthcare responders has limited ability to build trust when other political dynamics are at work. The article illustrates how combining process tracing with quantitative causal inference methods enables the simultaneous inquiry of cause, mechanism, and effect.

While the peacekeeping mission in Mali is the deadliest active mission, aid workers are not a prominent target. This is puzzling because humanitarians argue that integrated missions aligning political, military and humanitarian goals impede their security. I argue that the fallacy of integrated peacekeeping missions is that the humanitarian space shrinks due to rising insecurity. This takes place when integrated missions blur the lines between civilian and military action and when they politicize humanitarian aid through biased mandates. I test the argument by comparing new data on peacekeeping stabilization projects with other aid projects, using a matched wake analysis that estimates a difference-in-difference model with sliding spatio-temporal windows. I find that peacekeeping stabilization activities increase violence against civilians on the ground in the short term, which ultimately decreases humanitarian access. Paradoxically, the UN names lack of humanitarian access as a key challenge to protecting civilians, but contributes to the access challenge itself.

Abstract
Do rebels target civilians as part of the process of establishing control in their territories? This research note shows that transition periods after rebels gain territorial control are remarkably violent for civilians. Speaking to the civilian victimization and rebel governance literature, we investigate the immediate time period after rebels successfully capture and hold territory. We argue that rebels use violence to gain compliance in newly captured territories until they are able to build up local capacities and institutions for peaceful governance. To test this argument, we draw on methodological advances in integrating event data and combine multiple datasets to study patterns of violence perpetrated by the Revolutionary United Front in Sierra Leone from 1997 to 2001. The findings of our spatiotemporal analysis show that civilian targeting increases in the period after rebels capture territory from the government compared to areas without territorial takeover, suggesting that life under the roof of rebels is initially more dangerous for civilians.

Do rebels target civilians as part of the process of establishing control in their territories? This research note shows that transition periods after rebels gain territorial control are remarkably violent for civilians. Speaking to the civilian victimization and rebel governance literature, we investigate the immediate time period after rebels successfully capture and hold territory. We argue that rebels use violence to gain compliance in newly captured territories until they are able to build up local capacities and institutions for peaceful governance. To test this argument, we draw on methodological advances in integrating event data and combine multiple datasets to study patterns of violence perpetrated by the Revolutionary United Front in Sierra Leone from 1997 to 2001. The findings of our spatiotemporal analysis show that civilian targeting increases in the period after rebels capture territory from the government compared to areas without territorial takeover, suggesting that life under the roof of rebels is initially more dangerous for civilians.