July 19, 2007 | Read Time: 2 minutes
International charities in Iraq have alienated Iraqis by placing more importance on their own security than charitable efforts, says a report by Tufts University’s Feinstein International Center, in Boston.
Ruth Gidley, a blogger for AlertNet,
a Web site that focuses on humanitarian causes, says the report shows that aid organizations “have made a bad name for themselves with Iraqis.”
While facing increasing violence, the nonprofit groups have abandoned any attempt to be neutral in the conflict by rarely talking to insurgent groups and have developed a “green-zone mentality,” she writes.
“Aid agencies working in conflict zones sometimes have a quiet preference for one side or the other, but usually they’re in touch with all parties. It’s the best way of making a good show of impartiality, and it helps in getting aid through safely,” she writes. “Many aid agencies’ willingness to talk to the U.S.-led coalition, together with the fact that most international groups still in the country are bunkered down behind thick walls in Baghdad, has helped give many Iraqis the impression that aid workers are in bed with the Americans.”
As a result, local charities — some connected to terrorists, she writes — have filled the void by providing food and other aid.
“Iraqis know the insurgents’ charity wings are biased, and that they’ve got a political agenda, but they’re starting to welcome any assistance that’s offered,” she writes about the report’s findings.
Read The Chronicle‘s article about the challenges aid groups are facing in Iraq.
What do you think? Have international charities hurt themselves by being too closely associated with the United States? Or is Iraq too dangerous not to rely on the U.S. military for protection? Click on the comments link below this post to share your thoughts.
