1 Introduction and Objectives

1.1 Humanitarian Engagement and Negotiation with Armed Groups

To effectively undertake their work, United Nations humanitarian, development and human rights practitioners must interact with a diverse range of stakeholders—including national governments, inter-governmental institutions (e.g. EU, ECOWAS), and non-State actors such as non-governmental organizations (NGOs), rebel groups, and private entities. Depending on the context and intended outcomes, engagement with these different actors can take several forms, including: advocacy, negotiation, mediation and liaison interactions. These different types of engagement generally share some common elements of process and objectives.

As one form of engagement, negotiation is defined as a process of communication and relationship building undertaken with the objective of arriving at an agreed outcome

around a particular set of issues, in situations where the parties are not in complete accord on those issues to begin with.

Negotiation therefore seeks to reconcile differences in perspectives, positions and/or interests to reach outcomes that no individual party could achieve independently. Successful negotiations result in outcomes that all parties agree to abide by or implement. Such an agreed outcome can be informal (e.g. verbal agreement to facilitate access) or formal (e.g. a written agreement such as a Memorandum of Understanding).

Moreover, negotiation is sometimes described as a process of influencing individuals or groups through joint decision-making. It requires the consent of all parties to participate in the process and to accept and respect the agreed outcome.

Humanitarian negotiations are defined here as negotiations undertaken by civilians engaged in managing, coordinating and providing humanitarian assistance and protection for the purposes of: (i) ensuring the provision of humanitarian assistance and protection to vulnerable populations; (ii) preserving humanitarian space; and (iii) promoting better respect for international law.¹As a means of achieving these objectives, negotiation at times becomes a humanitarian necessity!

This manual provides guidance on humanitarian negotiations with non-State armed groups (referred to throughout this manual simply as armed groups), defined as groups that: have the potential to employ arms in the use of force to achieve political, ideological or economic objectives; are not within the formal military structures of States, State-alliances or intergovernmental organizations; and are not under the control of the State(s) in which they operate.²,³ A more detailed characterization of armed groups is provided in Section 2.3 of this manual.

The guidance contained in this manual is applicable to humanitarian negotiations with all armed groups, including armed groups that employ terror tactics. Because of their exclusively humanitarian character, humanitarian negotiations do not in any way confer legitimacy or recognition upon armed groups, nor do they mean that the humanitarian negotiators support or agree with the views or perspectives of an armed group.

Humanitarian negotiations with armed groups stand apart from other types of negotiation (such as negotiation between two private corporations) for several reasons:

1. the stakes are high : in many cases, a successfully-negotiated outcome can result directly in lives saved;
2. there exists a de facto power imbalance between the negotiating parties, for example in terms of ability to employ coercive armed force to exert control;
3. the motivations, objectives and operational ‘cultures' of the parties contrast sharply ;
4. ensuring commitment to and implementation of an agreed outcome may be difficult because of the less formal organizational and command structures of many armed groups; potential limitations in the capacity of an armed group to ensure implementation; and/or the fact that some armed groups may consider themselves immune from accountability for their actions;
5. the operating environment for humanitarian agencies generally imposes acute time and communication constraints on negotiations with armed groups.

The unique characteristics of humanitarian negotiations necessitate a targeted and nuanced approach to these types of negotiations. This manual prepares the reader for such an approach.

________________________
¹The term “humanitarian space” is defined to mean “a conducive humanitarian operating environment.” See: UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), Glossary of Humanitarian Terms in Relation to the Protection Of Civilians In Armed Conflict ( New York : United Nations, 2003). Another definition is given as: “scope for neutral and impartial humanitarian action in the midst of conflict.” See: Meinrad Studer, “The ICRC and Civil-Military Relations in Armed Conflict,” International Review of the Red Cross 83 No. 842 (June 2001): 367-391. Please consult the attached bibliography (Annex II) to access external documents.

²This working definition of armed group draws on that defined in the OCHA Glossary of Humanitarian Terms (2003): “ Armed Group: An armed non-State actor engaged in conflict and distinct from a governmental force, whose structure may range from that of a militia to rebel bandits. ”

³ The use of force by some armed groups may extend beyond that which actually requires weapons (e.g. sexual violence), however, the difference (by definition) between an armed group and another type of unarmed group is the ability of the former to employ weapons in their use of force.