Poul Nielson: Speech at the Annual ECHO Experts Seminar

Good morning,

I am very happy to have the privilege of opening this seminar and of welcoming you here.

Recognition of ECHO experts' role

Once again, I would like to start by acknowledging the excellent work you do for us. ECHO needs your first-hand knowledge and your experience in the field to perform in the best possible way and achieve its targets. Thank you for your work and your commitment.

Challenges ahead

At a time when we are preparing our strategy for next year, I would like to seize this opportunity to stress that 2004 is going to be an extremely challenging year for all of us and this for many reasons.

One of the main events of next year will be enlargement:

After successfully growing from 6 to 15 members, the European Union is now preparing for its biggest enlargement ever in terms of scope and diversity. 13 countries have applied to become new members: 10 of these countries - Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, the Slovak Republic, and Slovenia are set to join on 1st May 2004.

Enlargement is one of the most important opportunities for the European Union at the beginning of the 21st century. It is a unique, historic task to further the integration of the continent by peaceful means, extending a zone of stability and prosperity to new members.

We need a more efficient, stronger and more focussed European Union. A stronger European Union should play an increasingly important role internationally. The fundamental values that are at the basis of the European project: namely democracy, human rights, open dialogue and a common approach to solving common problems, are values that we must promote globally.

From May 2004 onwards, Commissioners of the 10 new Member States will become members of the College.

The new members of the Commission will be nominated by the 10 acceding countries and appointed by the Council on 1 May in agreement with the Commission President. The European Parliament will carry out ad-hoc hearings with the nominees at the end of April.

The 10 new Commissioners will participate fully in the collegial decision making as of 1 May 2004. However, given the short length of the transition period before the next Commission, the portfolios of the current Commissioners will not be reallocated. Each new Commissioner will work closely with an existing Commissioner in a form of partnership which will need to be defined.

In June 2004, the elections for a new European Parliament will take place. In June-July, the name of the future President of the Commission and of his team will be made known. In the beginning of October hearings with the nominated Members of the new Commission will take place in the European Parliament. The new Commission should start its 5-year mandate on 1 November 2004.

We will thus have to work next year within the framework of an institutional instability.

Another event of paramount importance will be the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) which will be opened on 4 October by an extraordinary Summit of the Heads of State.

Based on the draft Constitutional Treaty prepared by the Convention, the IGC will decide on the amendments to be brought to the treaty. As regards the completion of the work of the IGC, I think it is superficial to talk about a fixed date for its conclusion; what is more important in my view is that we sincerely do agree when we conclude.

The European Union is one of the major players in the field of humanitarian assistance. European humanitarian assistance is an expression of the solidarity of the people of the European Union with the victims of humanitarian disasters in developing countries. And yet, in reality European humanitarian assistance has not up to now been reflected in the European Treaties.

This is why during the discussions on the future Constitutional Treaty I pleaded in favour of including a specific provision dealing with humanitarian aid in the treaty. We succeeded.

I am very pleased that, for the first time in the history of the European Union, we will have in the future constitutional Treaty an article specifically devoted to humanitarian aid as a shared competence between Member States and the European Union.

The provision lays down the objective of humanitarian aid, that is, to provide assistance relief and protection to victims of natural or man-made disasters in order to meet the humanitarian needs arising from these situations.

It stresses that humanitarian aid operations shall be conducted in compliance with the principles of international humanitarian law, in particular (but not limited to) impartiality and non-discrimination.

The article is not perfect. I am in particular not in favour of the idea included to set up of a European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps in order to establish a framework for joint contributions from young Europeans to the humanitarian actions of the Union.

Providing humanitarian assistance means nowadays operating in complex and often dangerous environments. We therefore need professional, experienced and trained partners able to deliver quality humanitarian aid and to minimise the risks for their own security of operating in dangerous contexts. And it is professionally degrading to consider humanitarian aid workers as well-meaning-do-gooders! Humanitarian organisations and donors are well aware of the reality and are putting a lot of efforts into the development of a humanitarian professionalism.

I believe that such a Young Volunteers Corps would run counter to current efforts to bring professionalism into an activity which has become more technical and increasingly dangerous. However, the inclusion of this idea is a strong signal to us that there is actually no real understanding outside of what this is about and this is a challenge I take seriously.

I also conveyed my views on the need to clarify the humanitarian component of the so-called Petersberg tasks, i.e. the humanitarian and rescue tasks in accordance with Article 17 of the EU Treaty which deals with Common Foreign and Security Policy. The Commission presented an amendment to make the use of the Member States' military forces in support of humanitarian activities exceptional and in full compliance with international humanitarian law. Unfortunately the draft Constitutional Treaty does not include this amendment but there is still room for discussion at the IGC; the work to achieve to include this is in my view the one of the most important tasks ahead of us.

The IGC will furthermore decide on the future configuration of the Union's common foreign and security policy and on the role of the Union Minister of Foreign Affairs. We will have to remain vigilant to ensure that the principles governing humanitarian aid and the humanitarian space are preserved and we need to mobilise Member States and work in a well organised manner to do this as good as possible.

Let me now turn to more down to earth realities of your work.

Helping people to survive is a challenging task that may involve personal risk as we all have seen recently with the tragic death of the UN Special Envoy to Iraq, Sergio Vieira de Mello and many of his team. Throughout the year we have witnessed numerous security incidents which resulted in the tragic lost of ICRC delegates and other humanitarian workers to whom I would like to pay tribute today.

Security

Security is certainly one of the key issues of our profession today and you will have the opportunity to devote half a morning on discussing this very important issue later this week with the newly-appointed ECHO Security Co-ordinator. Security conditions remain very tense in many regions and for this reason I would like to say a few words on the new Guidelines on the Use of Military and Civil Defence Assets to support United Nations Humanitarian Activities in Complex Emergencies.

MCDA Guidelines

The guidelines are the result of a three-year process of negotiations with Member States, international and regional organisations and agencies from the humanitarian and the military field. ECHO was also involved. The guidelines are non-binding but they provide an outline on the use of military and civil defence assets for particular humanitarian complex emergency operations.

Indeed, lately we have been witnessing the growing presence in humanitarian activities of non-humanitarian actors. Military forces are more and more involved in peace building and peacekeeping operations and even in post-conflict stabilisation. Their involvement in humanitarian crises has sometimes led to confusion as for the respective roles of military and humanitarian organisations.

No matter the number of times we have stressed these principles in the past, humanity, neutrality, impartiality and non-discrimination in the delivery of aid are the cornerstones of humanitarian aid. These principles should guarantee the security of humanitarian personnel and the access to the victims in conflict situations. Humanitarian assistance must remain neutral to avoid being taken hostage by political considerations and jeopardising humanitarian workers in the field thus making the delivery of aid impossible.

It is my strong concern to avoid all possible encroachment of the humanitarian space by military actors: not only for security reasons and to avoid humanitarian actors to become war targets, but also for the effective and professional accomplishment of the humanitarian operations. Humanitarian focus and expertise cannot be improvised.

Therefore, military assets should be requested by the humanitarian side only as a last resort, in specific situations, whenever no comparable civilian alternative exists and when only their use can meet a critical humanitarian need. Logistical or security related obstacles could justify it but the military and the humanitarian actors have to work side by side each doing its task (and this is what the guidelines clarify).

A good example in this sense is Operation Artemis in support of the MONUC, in the province of Ituri, in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The liaison between the military and the humanitarian side has been constructive and the results clearly are positive.

I took the example of the Democratic Republic of Congo because it is also an example of the strong and sustained commitment of ECHO. For too long, Africa has remained the "forgotten" continent, forgotten by the media and out of the limelight but certainly not forgotten by ECHO that has made the forgotten crises and forgotten needs its priorities in 2003 and will continue to do so in the future as well.

Forgotten crises and forgotten needs

Humanitarian aid for the victims of natural or man made disasters cannot depend on the media coverage or political interests but on the very needs of the people affected. A sad example is the crisis in Myanmar: malaria and water borne diseases, poor sanitary conditions, over a million of displaced people. Or remember the refugees of Northern Uganda, the victims of the devastating droughts of Somalia, or Sudan and its on-going internal conflict, Colombia and its huge number of displaced people, North Korea and the chronic economic crisis, the tragedy of Chechnya and so many other countries where the needs of the victims are neglected. In some situations, other donors may be reluctant to get involved in short-term rehabilitation measures because of the high risks involved. Europe must intervene and I think that this approach is where we have made a difference compared to other donors. We have not only been involved in high profile crises like Iraq, Afghanistan or the Middle East but have also provided assistance to emergencies or sectors that have lost donor attention.

Tribute to ECHO Management

To conclude, after having recognised your role in the implementation of our tasks, I would like to seize this opportunity again to praise and thank ECHO staff and its Management for their efforts to make ECHO an internationally recognised and respected donor that can contribute to alleviate the plight of innocent victims of humanitarian emergencies.

******

I look forward to hearing your questions and comments. Thank you.