عنوان

The relationship between humanitarian international non-governmental organisations and states in periods of civil war :

Number

TLets684443

Title Proper

The relationship between humanitarian international non-governmental organisations and states in periods of civil war :

General Material Designation

[Thesis]

First Statement of Responsibility

Cunningham, Andrew John

Title Proper by Another Author

case study of Médecins Sans Frontières-Holland and the Government of Sri Lanka

Subsequent Statement of Responsibility

Berdal, Mats Ragnar ; Tansey, Oisin

Name of Publisher, Distributor, etc.

King's College London

Date of Publication, Distribution, etc.

2016

Dissertation or thesis details and type of degree

Ph.D.

Body granting the degree

King's College London

Text preceding or following the note

2016

Text of Note

This research examines the relationship between a humanitarian international non-governmental organisation (INGO) and a state against the background of civil war. This relationship is established as two sets of norms in tension: The moral as represented and made operational by humanitarian INGOs and the political as articulated and practised by states, mediated through the discourse of identity. Specifically the study investigates the constructed relationship between the humanitarian INGO Médecins Sans Frontières-Holland (MSF-H) and the Government of Sri Lanka (GoSL) during two periods of the Sri Lankan civil war (2006 and 2008-2009). A negotiation structure is proposed where an external actor-a humanitarian INGO-attempts to operate within the internal environment of a state. For a state, civil war is a 'state of exception', where a government's prerogative to act outside 'normal' legal and moral boundaries may be taken up and where international actors are securitised. For a humanitarian organisation a civil war is defined as a humanitarian crisis which must be responded to using humanitarian principles in a non-political manner. This case study relationship is viewed from both MSF-Holland's and the GoSL's perspectives. On the side of the GoSL the study describes and analyses the government's decision-making when faced by international criticism, a humanitarian crisis, and international organisations attempting to work on its territory. The background for the GoSL's actions is extensively explored. MSF-Holland's response to the thinking and actions by the GoSL is also closely examined, as is its internal discussions concerning its role in the context as a humanitarian actor. A discourse analysis methodology is used to analyse the primary source material. It was found that when securitised MSF-H had various options in responding: Accommodation to the demands of the GoSL; withdrawal from the country; counter-attacking the government; or concealment-hiding itself from attention. Rejecting these MSF-H chose desecuritisation. In the 2006 period engagement between the actors was possible albeit difficult; the securitisation process was manageable through desecuritisation. However, in the 2008-2009 period securitisation prohibited action and speech, and desecuritisation was not effective. The thesis proposes a theoretical framework-a negotiation structure, within which to understand these interactions, based on the case study findings. The conclusion points to further research needs and discusses the usefulness of the proposed negotiation structure to other contexts.

Cunningham, Andrew John

Tansey, Oisin

Berdal, Mats Ragnar

King's College London

Electronic name

p

[Thesis]

276903

a

Y