Search

Begin New Search Topic Protection Political Geography Middle East

1. No Women, No Peace – A Snapshot of Oxfam’s Engagement with the Women, Peace and Security Agenda: Lessons and Opportunities

Author:
Marie Sophie Petersson, Lydia Ayikoru, Souhadou Diasso, Fatma Jaffer, and Moath Jamal
Publication Date:
06-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
This briefing paper summarizes the important lessons learned since 2018 by Oxfam Denmark and the wider Oxfam confederation while promoting the women, peace and security (WPS) agenda and supporting WPS programming in Burkina Faso, Colombia, Ghana, Kenya, Lebanon, Mali, Niger, the Occupied Palestinian Territory, South Sudan, Syria, Uganda, Ukraine and Yemen, including under the Danish International Development Agency (Danida) strategic partnerships. It contains practical and policy-level recommendations for international actors working on the WPS agenda in various crisis and conflict contexts globally. The briefing paper shows that supporting and amplifying locally led feminist action by diverse women-led, women’s and LGBTQIA+ rights organizations, networks and groups is a central foundation for peace and justice.
Topic:
Leadership, Crisis Management, Gender, Protection, Localization, Women, Peace, and and Security (WPS)
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, Middle East, and Global Focus

2. Uncovering the Depths of UXO Contamination: A Town-Level Analysis of Three Areas in Syria

Author:
The Carter Center
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Carter Center
Abstract:
Alongside armed combat and a dire socioeconomic downturn in Syria, civilians must continue to navigate the hidden threat of unexploded ordnance (UXO). The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs estimates that half of people in Syria are living in areas contaminated with explosive ordnance.
Topic:
Syrian War, Armed Conflict, Protection, War Remnants, and Unexploded Ordnance
Political Geography:
Middle East and Syria

3. In the Middle East, Biden Is on the Razor’s Edge

Author:
Riccardo Alcaro
Publication Date:
10-2023
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
US President Joe Biden is walking on thin ice while he attempts to deal with the most serious crisis in the Middle East since the ill-conceived US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. Biden has orientated his administration’s action along three tracks: supporting Israel; protecting as many Palestinian civilians as possible while also resuscitating the defunct Middle East peace process; and preventing the conflict from extending to the wider region.[1] The problem is, reconciling these three priorities may be impossible.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Civilians, Hamas, Protection, and October 7
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Gaza, North America, and United States of America

4. THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT PALESTINIANS

Author:
Michael Barnett
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
A recent headline from the Israeli newspaper Haaretz describes a familiar event: “West Bank Palestinian Village Residents Flee Amid Ongoing Settler Violence.” In many respects, this is old news. Settlers have been terrorizing Palestinian residents for decades, and 2023 appears to be a particularly horrific year. In response to these criminal acts, the Israeli army and government have tended to look the other way. The military is often slow to react or a no-show when settlers take to the streets and rampage through Palestinian villages or uproot olive trees. The Israeli government rarely attempts to arrest or punish the offenders, often citing a lack of evidence or persuasive identification of suspected perpetrator, but the dominant reasons range from ideological sympathies with the settlers to the indirect benefits of keeping Palestinians in fear. The international community has developed a moral register and set of possible responses for such situations: a responsibility to protect. The general claim is that when the state fails in its responsibility to protect its citizens and civilians, then the international community inherits this duty. The original formulation applied to situations of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, but it has expanded over the years to include less severe events and apartheid. These and other state-sponsored or state-enabled actions now sometimes go by the name atrocity crimes. Additionally, the United Nations and other international bodies have a protection of civilian mandate, as do many humanitarian and human rights agencies.
Topic:
Apartheid, Human Rights, Violence, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), UN Security Council, Protection, and Israeli Settlers
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and West Bank

5. Between Humanitarian Assistance and Externalizing of EU Borders: The EU-Turkey Deal and Refugee Related Organizations in Turkey

Author:
Ludger Pries and Berna Safak Zülfikar Savci
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
This paper examines whether multilevel transnational cooperation makes a difference in refugee protection, especially in protracted displacement. In response to the forced migration of millions of Syrians to Turkey starting in 2011, the EU and Turkish government published a joint statement in March 2016. The so-called EU-Turkey deal (EUTD) provided a substantial flow of money (EUR 6 billion in four years) from the EU to Turkey. In return Turkey had to commit to contain and control migration movement toward the EU. In social science, there are quite diverse evaluations of the EUTD. Whereas some studies focus on its effectiveness and efficiency in reaching the outlined goals, other publications stress its geo-political effects on migrants’ mobility and (externalized) border control. Meanwhile some studies look for points to improve the EUTD while others criticize it fundamentally. This article analyzes the involvement of different types of international governmental and non-governmental organizations (IGOs and INGOs) in the four main action fields of the EUTD and its implicit side effects on the Turkish regime of migration management. It first summarizes some crucial findings and pending questions in the social science literature. Based on analysis of available documents and our own interviews in Turkey, we then shed light on the organizations involved in the implementation of the EUTD and its effects on the Turkish regime of refugee protection. In 2022, Turkey hosted some 3.7 million Syrian refugees of a total of almost four million registered international forced migrants. The EUTD of 2016 was mainly a response by the EU to the large numbers of Syrian refugees arriving in its members’ territories. When more than 1.2 million asylum seekers were registered in the then EU-28 in 2015 alone — more than twice the number in the preceding year — some EU member states (MS) negotiated with the Turkish government (Eurostat 2015, 2016). Based on a meeting of the European Council and its “Turkish counterpart” the so-called “EU-Turkey statement” was published on March 18 in 2015 (European Council 2016). From the very beginning, this EUTD was controversial — both in public discussions and in the social science literature. Was it primarily a payment from the EU to the Turkish government for externalizing its responsibilities of refugee protection? Or was it an appropriate measure for sharing the burden of an urgent humanitarian crisis? Was the money spent for refugee-oriented humanitarian aid and development expenses or was it instrumentalized by the Turkish government for its own ends? How did refugee related IGOs and INGOs participate in the management of the EUTD? In the following sections, we focus on some selected aspects of the role of national and international, governmental and non-governmental organizations active in the field of refugee protection, specifically the role and cooperation dynamics of these refugee related organizations (RRO) in implementing the Facility for Refugees in Turkey (FRIT) as part of the EUTD. Based on expert interviews in Turkey and an analysis of spending under the EUTD, the paper analyzes (1) how the landscape of RROs developed in the context of the EUTD, (2) how the budget of the EUTD was spent, and (3) how the cooperation between these RROs developed. The paper adds new insights into the contradictory dynamics between organizing services for refugees and controlling and containing refugee movements to the EU, between assisting and instrumentalizing forced migrants in Turkey, and between humanitarian aid and development activities. Especially the last point is relevant for contexts of protracted displacement as instruments of immediate humanitarian assistance have to be combined with means of longer-term development. From a perspective of organizational sociology, it argues that the EUTD contributed to a multi-level transnational organizational field of refugee protection, where collective and corporate actors relate in conflict and cooperation between the poles of rational self-interests and mutually recognized norms, between control-oriented state authorities up to grass root action networks. Analysis of the EUTD enables us to draw out specific insights and practical lessons for a broader audience. Before presenting our own empirical findings we first will sketch out the broader landscape of social science research and analysis of the EUTD.2
Topic:
Treaties and Agreements, European Union, Refugees, Borders, Protection, and Humanitarian Assistance
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Middle East

6. Toward a Paradigm Shift in Humanitarian Response: Centering Women and Girls in Integrated Health and Protection Services in Syria

Author:
Amany Qaddour
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
While regional instability and upheaval in the Middle East and North Africa may have foreshadowed the complexity and longevity of the crisis that would unfold in Syria in 2011, few anticipated it would exceed ten years, amounting to 6.8 million refugees across the world and 14.6 million people in need of hu- manitarian assistance within the country.1 The crisis has been defined by mass displacements, with large swaths of the population uprooted from their homes and forced to reside in camps and precarious housing; sieges in Aleppo City and Eastern Ghouta; chemical weapons attacks in Khan Shaykhoun and Douma; infectious disease outbreaks, including polio and cholera; food insecurity, notably among children and infants; a rise in persons with disabilities; persecution of aid workers; and both systematic and indiscriminate aerial bombardment of civilian infrastructure—namely hospitals, schools, and marketplaces.
Topic:
Health, Women, Syrian War, Girls, Humanitarian Response, and Protection
Political Geography:
Middle East and Syria

7. Overcoming Barriers to Poverty Alleviation in the Arab Region

Author:
Khalid Abu-Ismail and Vladimir Hlasny
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
Many Arab countries have been living beyond their means. Following years of high spending without developing a solid revenue base or adequate emergency reserves, public debt levels have skyrocketed, and governments’ balance sheets have struggled to cope with waves of crises and their required responses. Private debt levels have also grown amid chronic economic stagnation, worsening cur- rent account deficits, and absent effective public assistance during recent crises.
Topic:
Poverty, Inequality, Economy, Protection, and Income
Political Geography:
Middle East, Arab Countries, and North Africa

8. The Broadening Protection Gap for Stateless Palestinian Refugees in Belgium

Author:
Wout Van Doren, Julie Lejeune, Marjan Claes, and Valerie Klein
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Statelessness & Citizenship Review
Institution:
Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness, Melbourne Law School
Abstract:
This paper reflects upon the issue of statelessness, Palestinians and a recent evolution of Belgian caselaw. When seeking to apply the definition of a ‘stateless person’, as found in art 1 of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons to Palestinians, judges are confronted with specific challenges. Since 2016, divergent standards are developing as to the question of whether, and in which circumstances, Palestinians may be stateless for the purposes of international law. This evolution takes place in a national landscape characterised by a statelessness determination procedure that falls short of standards set out in the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons in a number of areas, while a growing number of asylum seekers originating from Palestine are registered over the period 2016–19. This paper exposes, anno 2020, the protection gaps left open by the remarkably divergent approaches to this question taken by the different national actors involved.
Topic:
Territorial Disputes, Citizenship, Stateless Population, and Protection
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, Palestine, and Belgium

9. CAN TURKEY PROTECT THE UIGHURS?

Author:
Emir Yazici
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
Several international actors have condemned China’s ongoing massive assimilation campaign of Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang. Turkey was not among the states who condemned China until rumors emerged about the death of Uighur poet and musician Abdurehim Heyit on February 7. In an official statement, the Turkish government described the events in Xinjiang as a “policy of systematic assimilation” and a “great shame for humanity.” Immediately after this statement, a video was released by China Radio International’s Turkish-language service which features Abdurehim Heyit stating that he is in good health and in the process of being investigated for violating national laws. The long-awaited reaction by Turkey—a powerful ethnic kin of the Uighurs—is more important than the rest of the international community. Here’s why.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Human Rights, Uyghurs, and Protection
Political Geography:
China, Turkey, Middle East, and Asia

10. Fighting Fire with Fire: The Growing Nexus between Atrocity Prevention and Counterterrorism and Its Implications for the Use of Force to Protect Civilians

Author:
Colin Thomas-Jensen
Publication Date:
02-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
By the fall of 2014, before the United States and its partners began the military campaign to erode the territory held by the self-proclaimed Islamic State (IS) in Iraq and Syria, the international community understood the horrors endured by civilians living under IS control. While IS leadership plotted politically motivated attacks against its enemies in the region and in the West, reports trickling out from areas under the group’s merciless grip and IS’s own online propaganda clearly indicated a grave pattern of war crimes and crimes against humanity, including violence targeted at ethnic and religious minorities; women; the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community; and other vulnerable groups. As the United States considered its response to the rise of IS, the duality of the group’s threat—an external one to Americans and American interests and an internal one to civilians living in IS-held areas—animated two communities of US policy makers that had rarely interacted with one another: those focused on counterterrorism and atrocity prevention. The US-led military operation to prevent genocide by IS against the Yazidi community on Mount Sinjar, Iraq, that President Barack Obama announced on August 7, 2014, included the first volley of airstrikes in the more-than-three-year counterterrorism campaign to defeat IS in Iraq and Syria. Important for the atrocity-prevention community, the airstrikes and deployment of Special Operations Forces (alongside humanitarian experts) to help coordinate the evacuation of civilians demonstrated an openness on the part of senior US policy makers to use counterterrorism capabilities to prevent a mass atrocity. In hindsight, however, US-led lethal action against IS fighters who threatened thousands of Yazidis trapped on Mount Sinjar was more the outcome of a unique set of circumstances than a harbinger of a more collaborative relationship between the counterterrorism community and policy makers focused on preventing atrocities committed by state actors, such as the governments of Syria, South Sudan, and Myanmar, and nonstate actors, including militia groups with little to no connection with international terrorist networks. With terrorist groups such as IS, Boko Haram in the Lake Chad Basin, and al-Shabaab in the Horn of Africa almost certain to continue atrocities against local populations in areas in which they operate, a fundamental question for policy makers arises. Did the extreme circumstances under which the United States and its partners decided to intervene on Mount Sinjar necessarily represent a threshold for action, or can a more normalized relationship between the atrocityprevention and counterterrorism communities be advanced—a relationship that would seek to leverage counterterrorism tools and resources to take decisive action to protect non-US citizens from atrocities while improving measures to avoid civilian casualties, including civilians killed during actions taken by US counterterrorism partners? Drawing from interviews with nearly 40 former and current US policy makers and outside experts1 , as well as a convening of 20 experts at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in June 2017, this paper explains the increasing relevance of the counterterrorism–atrocityprevention nexus and defines some of the significant challenges of closer collaboration between those communities, with a specific focus on preventing imminent atrocities. Defining when (including clearly articulated criteria for what constitutes “imminent” in this scenario), how, and under whose authority to use force to prevent atrocities against civilians is only one element of broadening a counterterrorism strategy that also includes diplomacy and countering violent extremism (CVE) efforts. 2 This paper is narrowly focused on the use of force and argues that in some circumstances, the atrocity-prevention agenda can be advanced by using counterterrorism tools—including lethal strikes—to prevent imminent atrocities against civilians in areas where terrorist groups operate.
Topic:
Counter-terrorism, Islamic State, Civilians, Atrocity Prevention, and Protection
Political Geography:
Iraq, Middle East, Global Focus, and United States of America