op 18 front pages-converted - The Watson Institute for International ...

10. Assisting Civilians without Prolonging the War
As the humanitarian involvement of the United Nations in
the crisis approached the end of its second year, the conflicts
proceeded with no end in sight. With each setback in the peace
process, a negotiated settlement seemed harder to imagine, let
alone achieve.
As peace prospects receded and a potentially catastrophic
winter loomed, a single question came into sharper focus: was
humanitarian assistance keeping the conflict alive? While
evidence from our interviews was fragmentary, the question
was clearly legitimate. One of the key measures by which the
U.N.’s humanitarian effort would be judged was whether it
had prolonged the war.
Keeping the War Alive
“We’ve prolonged the war by being here,” lamented an
official of one major NGO. “If there had been no humanitarian
intervention, the war would have been over sooner. It might
have been ugly, but it would be over.” Having provided lifesaving
essentials for civilian populations on all sides, the
international community had, in effect, freed the protagonists
to fight more single-mindedly for their political objectives.
Speaking privately, some U.N. officials acknowledged a similar
view. “We don’t know who the end-users are,” said one,
reflecting on difficulties of monitoring relief supplies. “We’re
feeding all three armies.”
Had inordinate amounts of relief supplies ended up in the
hands of the militaries and fed the troops? This question was
hard to answer because of the difficulties of monitoring already
noted. UNHCR had started systematic monitoring in
the Sarajevo area only in the fall of 1993, when, according to
one official, the tonnage arriving significantly exceeded civilian
food needs. Two British army officers deputized by UNHCR
concluded from their initial monitoring in October that over
half of the food going to Muslim areas was being properly
distributed. They had not reached a judgment about Serb
areas.
121