Fridays at the Corporation.

Is not Indian Punk night.

It’s Indie AND Punk.

Indie’n’Punk.

* Mental note; when talking to those less common than ones self, enunciate *

Up the Irons!

Not being a great football fan I can think of nothing better than getting paid to go and watch football (insert sarcasm as required). I have stated on many occasions that I would have to be paid to go to a ‘footy match’ and my wish may well come true. Due to my strange compulsion to get myself into situations that I can barely handle, I’m going for a stewards job. This means I will have to try and control the drunk leering crowd of townies who’s only wish is to throw coins and bottles and the opposition ‘scum’! Joy.

As stated before, I don’t look particularly scary or even moderately ‘ard. This means the interview process should be a laugh a minute as I square up against 16 and 17 stone bearded men with a penchant for violence.

I’ll let you know how it goes.

Why pubs are not utopic.

It has come to my attention that putting ‘wardyfireball’ into google pulls up some hits from a certain Pubutopia. Thinking nothing of this for a while it was shown to me that I apparently endorse some of the pubs around Sheffield. So I went and had a look. For example, I say that The Beagle and Forty Foot are good pubs. You will find my name in the “Who Likes This Pub?” section on the left.

The problem is, not only do I not remember signing up for this service, I have also never been to these pubs. So I thought that someone had been ‘comically’ using my pseudonym and was planning some kind of elaborate stitch up. I therefore tried to log into Pubutopia by using the ‘wardyfireball’ username and my generic password. Lo and Behold, it was me. I signed up for the site sometime in 2003, late at night, probably drunk. It would seem I then went on to click on random pubs in Sheffield.

Now I don’t know why I did this. Maybe I had been at a ‘Utopic’ pub and it seemed like a great idea. But from that day in May 2003 to today, my knowledge of this event was nil.
I put about 20 pubs in my favourites, I have been to one of them.
Must be more careful around my computer in the future. You never know what I could end up registering with!

The essay that saved my ass.

<>Here it is, in its entirity. This is 5000 words long so don't be expecting a quick read. In a nutshell, Security Council Resolution 1502 says that attacking Aid Workers is a War Crime.
Put the kettle on, get a cup of tea, sit down and read.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present you with the essay that saved my ass . . . . .

The Value of Security Council Resolution 1502.

1 - Introduction.

During my year out I became increasingly interested in the field of security, with particular emphasis on Personal Security. When researching this paper it was originally going to focus on the personal security procedures undertaken by NGO’s to improve the security of their staff. However, after reading numerous newspaper articles on aid staff being targeted by car bombs and the militia, it became apparent that the kind of personal security which may stop a worker wandering into a mine field or being mugged in the street, was very different to the security required to stop numbers of workers being killed by organised groups who were specifically targeting humanitarian workers during times of conflict. This led me to focus more on the governmental side of protecting aid workers. What underlying laws and agreements are there to protect the people who voluntarily work in the most dangerous parts of the world?

With more wars then ever being fought around the world, aid agencies are finding that they are putting their staff into increasingly dangerous situations. Where once aid agencies enjoyed a form of protection in conflict due to the nature of their job, this is not as apparent in today’s warfare. Organisations are often finding themselves singled out for attack. In Iraq almost all the aid agencies withdrew staff after the UN Headquarters were bombed. The only people to stay were the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

This report shall look at the changing face of warfare and try to answer why more aid workers are being killed. It shall then look at what safeguards are in place to protect aid workers at a governmental level, as well as go into further detail into Security Council Resolution 1502.

Questions this paper should answer are:

1 – Why are more aid workers being attacked?

2 – What instruments are currently in place to protect them?

3 – What practical differences will Resolution 1502 make?

2 - Methodology.

This report shall use the internet as the main form of research as events that shall be discussed happened recently. Newspaper archives, as well as the texts of the Geneva Conventions and the International Criminal Court Statute are readily available on the internet and in their most recent form. Using these texts in their electronic form also allows for ease of searching for relevant laws. Thus meaning that with little previous knowledge of these texts it is relatively easy to find the parts which are of interest.

While there are many newspaper and aid agency reports, there is little peer reviewed published material on incidents which happened only months ago. This led to a dependency on articles that were published by agencies on their websites. Although this will consist mostly of ‘grey’ material, the internet is increasingly being used by Aid Agencies to release information about their work. This means that instead of having to wait for a yearly report, the information is available only days after an incident has occurred.

Although the internet is not the ideal medium for research, the ability to quickly cross reference material means that, by the sheer number of pages that report the same thing, the data lends some validity to itself. This report shall also use first hand accounts of aid work taken from the personal letters of workers written while they were in the field. These have been taken from the book Another Day In Paradise (Bergman, 2003) and allow for a personal opinion of aid work from people with years of experience, which I would have been otherwise unable to procure.

The results of this study would vary if repeated. This paper shows the initial reaction to a new Resolution that did not deliver what many were hoping for. Over time, the Resolution may be amended to help remove the ambiguity in its wording and aid agencies may find other ways to make it work for them in the eyes of the law, which they have not yet discovered.

If this study was repeated in a year the author believes one of two things may change, either the Resolution will have been almost forgotten about, and so be resigned to just another piece of legislation, or it will be refined over time and become a useful tool for aid workers while not depriving them of any of the liberties they wish to keep.

3 - Current Situation.

During the bombing of Afghanistan, US soldiers were tasked with not only bombing the country, but also with providing humanitarian relief. This meant the same organisation which had been dropping bombs, started handing out food.

While this was good for the US military, as they were meeting guidelines laid out in the Fourth Geneva Convention, it led to problems for Non Governmental organisations (NGO’s) working in the area. The military blurred the lines between who was a soldier, and who a relief worker. This increased the risk that an NGO would be attacked with every day that passed.

In a letter to national security advisor Condoleezza Rice, the heads of 16 organisations asked that the practice of allowing military aid workers in Afghanistan to work out of uniform be stopped, as it “significantly increases the security risks of every humanitarian aid worker in that country.” (Walsh, 2003). The letter went on to say that the practice “risks confusion between military and humanitarian personnel precisely where security risks to our international and local staff members often are most threatening.”(Walsh, 2003).

A French worker was killed in Afghanistan with no attempt to disguise the attack. It took place in the middle of a town in broad daylight. Gorm Pederson, director of the Danish Committee for Aid to Afghan Refugees, who employed the worker, said the attack “. . . demonstrates a new ruthlessness of approach which is of immense concern.” (CARE, 17/11/2003).

Humanitarian workers are becoming a target for the simple reason that they provide aid. The Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) states that the occupying power should provide all items indispensable for the survival of the civilian population (MacLeod, 2003).

The feeding of a population is outside of the normal operating boundaries of the military, they rely on CiMiC (Civil Military Cooperation) to fulfil this role. When anti US forces see the military working with these organisations, then it makes good military sense to attack the enemy where they are weakest, the aid workers (MacLeod, 2003).

For forces looking to attack the ‘west’ then organisations like the Red Cross and Oxfam are recognisable targets. By virtue of their own success they become vulnerable (MacLeod, 2003).

This reinforces the danger of military personnel being involved in humanitarian work. Soldiers take sides, that is the very essence of their job. If they are shooting at a city one day and handing out food packages to the population the next, then it is unsurprising that the dividing line between friend and foe is blurred. This means that while aid workers are neutral in a conflict, they could be perceived as a member of the military in civilian clothing and therefore be targeted.

While this leads to an increase in violence against aid workers, it is to stop this violence being directed towards themselves that the military do not wear uniforms. In an interview to the Washington Post, Brigadier General David Kratzer, commander of the Coalition Joint Civil Military Operation Task Force in Afghanistan said, “We couldn’t do what we’re doing and walk around in uniforms.” (Walsh, 2003).

Many conflicts since the 1990’s have not been cross boundary disputes, but civil unrest. As the civilian population are often the targets for attacks, to relieve their suffering could be perceived as taking sides. The resources that agencies transfer to the civilians are important to the warring parties and they therefore gain strategic significance (AGDNGO, 2003).

Workers in these conditions may be the target of attack due to their proximity to valuable resources such as aid supplies, and also because their efforts to assist civilians could be seen as prolonging the conflict, and therefore aiding the enemy (Helton, 1997).

While aid workers are now working very closely with the military during times of conflict, there is no greater protection under international law for non-combatants than for combatants (Fleck et al, 1999).

This situation is made worse as there are an increasing number of actors who do not recognise international humanitarian law and do not observe the internationally agreed rules on the treatment of civilians during a conflict. There is a field of thought that says soldiers in conflicts today have more chance of survival than civilians do (cited from Slim, 1996. (AGDNGO, 2003).

Those responsible for the killing of aid workers are very rarely brought to account for their actions. The UN reports that only 7% of perpetrators ever face a form of justice (cited from UN 2002. AGDNGO, 2003). This may also be because NGO’s are working in more ‘failed states’. This would mean any accountability which may have existed for the people that undertake crime are effectively dissolved (AGDNGO, 2003).

The number of civil unrest incidents has been rising and therefore so have the number of aid missions. The UN is now carrying out a large number of peace missions, which are almost always accompanied by humanitarian aid (AGDNGO, 2003). So even if the number of NGO casualties has not seen an increase per mission, due to the higher number of missions, the final number of deaths will be higher than normal.

4 - Why are NGO’s subjecting themselves to risk?

Competition among aid agencies is forcing them to put marketing needs above those of security. They are also more willing to work in an area that puts their staff at considerable risk (AGDNGO, 2003). Aid agencies only survive through funding, this means they have to constantly be impressing donors. To be the first into a disaster area; to be closest to the needy; to be seen to be acting in the most dangerous conditions; these are all qualities that aid agencies strive for. If they are seen on television then they will raise more money, their profile will be increased, and donor agencies will be more easily impressed. This has forced agencies to push the boundaries of what they deem acceptable working conditions.

The type of people that are attracted to aid work are also the type that would revel a certain degree of danger and unpredictability in their job. As the situations get ever more unstable, then the more adventurous and danger seeking volunteers and staff rise to the top. This means that the situation fuels itself and as each new boundary is broken, there will be a willing line ready to push the next.

The dilemma for aid agencies is that while there are people who are willing to work in these conditions, should they provide the resources for them to do so. To withhold resources would mean that people suffer needlessly, to grant them means putting staff members in danger.

Although security measures are undoubtedly put in place by aid agencies, there is a fine balance that has to be met when applying them. Dworken in his paper on threat assessments outlines the major factors in determining which security strategies to adopt. Keeping Effectiveness and Efficiency harmonised is a major obstacle that has to be overcome. Effectiveness is how appropriate a measure is with regards to increasing security; Efficiency is how little these measures cost in resources, time and effort (Dworken, 2004).

Humanitarian work has become more dangerous over the years, this is fuelled by increased competition, staff members that are more willing to accept risks and a media that thirsts for human acts of bravery and selflessness. The question, is how to make it safer.

5 - What protection do aid workers already have?

The International Criminal Court (ICC) identifies that a war crime can be “intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict.” (ICC, Article 8. 1998).

Civilians are protected under the law of war from the Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 4 (1949). It states that they are protected from the outset of any international armed conflict or occupation until one year after the general close of military operations, if “in any manner whatsoever” they find themselves in the hands of a party to the conflict or occupying power.

The Geneva Convention prohibits subjecting non-combatants to murder, torture, hostage taking, or execution without a trial, and specifies that the sick and wounded must be cared for (Helton, 1997). If the resolution is meant to stop these things from happening then attention needs to be focused on why these acts are happening when law already forbids them.

For international conflicts Protocol 1 goes farther and specifies the right of humanitarian agencies to initiate and carry out assistance to the sick and wounded without interference (Helton, 1997).

In non-international conflicts the legal protections are noticeable weaker. The conventions do not largely address civil war. The Geneva Convention does not define “non-international armed conflict” and only address the subject when laying out the rules for non-combatants. Humanitarian workers are offered a “right of initiative” to work during internal conflict, however, while the provision may place pressure on states to accept the assistance, humanitarian groups must still seek consent before undertaking any work.

This leads to agencies following their own rules and deciding that the “right to intervene” is strong enough that they will do so regardless (Helton, 1997). This is another example of aid agencies pushing the boundaries of what is acceptable. This also raises a more serious point, if agencies are going to break international law in order to do their work, it makes their case weaker when it is broken back. What are the moral and legal grounds for an organisation who are operating without authorisation in a country, and are subsequently attacked?

The United Nations General Assembly in resolution 46/182 state that “. . . humanitarian assistance should be provided with the consent of the affected country and in principle on the basis of an appeal by the affected country.” This means that the ‘consent’ can come from the country itself and not necessarily from the Government. Should humanitarian activities be carried out in areas without governmental consent then even though there may be solid humanitarian grounds for intervention, this may still be illegal under International Humanitarian Law (Cutts and Dingle, 1995). This could lead to the situation whereby if a humanitarian worker is killed, and therefore a ‘war crime’ has been committed, should the case make it to the courts the government may not recognise that they were an aid worker as they were not invited into the country, and may have broken laws themselves by being there.

The August 19^th attack on the UN Assistance Mission Headquarters in Baghdad killed at least 23 people and injured more than 100 (Aita, 2003). Shortly after this Resolution 1502 was introduced by the UN Security Council which was meant to herald a new era in the protection of humanitarian workers. It urged all states to produce new laws which would punish those who attack aid workers and stipulated that any attacks would be seen as a war crime.

While aid workers have been putting themselves at what would now seem ‘undue’ danger for years, it takes an attack on the members of the UN who are not field workers, before any real advancement in security procedures are made.

Mexican Ambassador Adolfo Aguilar Zinser said that the Security Council members “owe it to (aid workers) to give support and create better conditions of security, particularly since the events of Baghdad, and to shoulder a clear responsibility to show we appreciate them and stand side-by-side with them.” He went onto say that the resolution provides “the capacity to take action. It specifies when and how the secretary general has to raise the issue of protection of humanitarian workers so the Security Council takes action.” (Aita, 2003).

However, this is not always the case. The American society of International Law (Kirgis, 2003) explains this. Take, for example, the bombing of the UN Assistance Mission Headquarters on August 19^th 2003. If the people behind this were Iraqi’s, there is very little chance that if they were detained, they would be prosecuted under the ICC. The ICC’s jurisdiction can only be exercised if the UN Security Council refers the case to it; if the crime was committed in the territory of a state party to the ICC Statute or by a national of a state party; or if either the territorial state or the state of the accuser’s nationality , though not party to the Statute, makes a declaration accepting the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the crime in question.

Iraq is not party to the ICC statute. The US, as the occupying power in Iraq would not make a declaration accepting the jurisdiction of the Court. It is uncertain whether the Iraqi Governing Council could make such a declaration, but in any event it is unlikely that it would try to do so or that it could effectively deliver anyone to the courts custody while the United States is the occupying power (Kirgis, 2003).

The resolution could have been stronger were it not for a statement which the US insisted was removed which referred directly to the ICC. Richard Dicker, director of Human Rights Watch’s International Justice Program said that;

“After the tragic killing of aid workers in Baghdad, the US opposition to the proposed resolution is disgraceful. The United States should not let its ill-conceived and ideologically driven crusade against the International Criminal Court compromise efforts to protect humanitarian aid workers.”

(Dicker, 2003)

6 - Problems with 1502.

The types of people that make bombs and then detonate them in densely populated areas, specifically targeting westerners, are not going to be deterred by a new resolution, and could even be spurred on by the notoriety they could receive by calling themselves “war criminals” (Cater, 2003). This could have the unwanted effect of increasing the risk of aid workers being attacked. There have been a recent number of kidnappings and aid workers used as bargaining tools. The resolution would make the kidnap of an aid worker as appealing as that of a soldier, while the risk involved is considerably smaller.

By the very nature of their work, humanitarian staff do not want any special standing. They want to be with the people, at their side, going through the same hardships. By granting aid workers this special, protected status, they lose one of the attributes which makes them feel like they are making a difference. By making the killing of a worker, a war crime, and then subconsciously drawing a line between them and military personnel, these workers lose some of their neutral stance.

John Sifton shows how the average humanitarian worker does not wish to be connected to the military in the book, Another Day In Paradise;

“No one responds directly to the officers welcome. Most of us on the plane are humanitarian aid workers, diplomats, or human rights advocates, some new to Afghanistan, others not, but we are not inclined to be cheery with these military officers, no matter their nationality or how gregarious they are. It reflects a humanitarian elitism of some sort; most aid workers are from a different world than military folk. We have different aesthetics, ethics, and educations. It’s just the way it is. The pilots do strike up a conversation with the officers eventually, but most of us walk past them to get our bags, glum and aloof.”

Offenders of international humanitarian law should be punished. Unfortunately, many states are unable, or un-willing to enforce these obligations. Internal conflict may mean a state lacks the resources to bring the criminals to justice. States may also be unwilling to extradite criminals if they feel that the state which will receive them lacks the due process to try them fairly, or even out of fear of political manipulation. This means that many humanitarian workers are left effectively unprotected by the Geneva Convention due to individual states and the international community as a whole lacking the political will to enforce it (Helton, 1997).

There are more specific problems with the resolution, mostly regarding whom is covered in the wording. For example how would you identify that an individual specifically targeted humanitarian workers. Maybe they were just going to attack the next car, or mug the next lone commuter. Although still obviously a crime, the perpetrator could be promoted from opportunist thief, to war criminal.

If a bomb was detonated in a public area, would only the foreign staff that were killed count towards the “war criminal” casualties, or would national staff be included as well? If they were doing the same job at the same time then instantly one of their lives is perceived as being more important than another (Cater, 2003). Should this perception of ‘grandeur’ become the norm in an area, then workers will find it harder to gain community cooperation. There can be large discrepancies between how an organisation perceives itself within the community and how the community perceives the organisation (AGDNGO, 2003).

All of the points raised above eventually come back to organisations losing their independent status. They are meant to be outside of conflicts, politics and governments. They are Non Governmental Organisations. They do not want special standing or special protection. The irony is that they want exactly the opposite, they want nothing at all. Complete impartiality and the ability to do their work, in any country, at any time, regardless of circumstance.

It is as MacKay Wolff says when writing in 2002 about his work in Palestine during the late 1980’s;

“. . . the form of coexistence that developed among the three sides – Israelis, Palestinians, and UN – during the first intifada would not be possible under the second one. In fact, it is inconceivable that any international humanitarian force could serve the same function again under the present circumstances. I believe this not only because both sides are more violent, but because the neutral space that the United Nations occupied – the space that supported its role as impartial observer and relief agency – has vanished.”

(Bergman, 2003)

Would the resolution apply only to UN employees, or only NGO employees, or only NGO’s working within the United Nations, would it be full time staff only, or include those hired on a casual basis, would day workers fall under the jurisdiction? What about volunteers who are in a country on their own, if they are undertaking humanitarian work, are they then protected by the resolution (Cater, 2003)?

For example, during the rebuilding of Iraq there will be hundreds of non-combatants working in the area, should they become the target of attacks, will they fall under the jurisdiction? Could the work they are doing be classed as humanitarian or are they simply foreign workers? The problems of definition in this area are far reaching and many.

This double standard of life may also cause internal problems within an organisation. Van Brabant (2000) warns against the dangers of real or perceived divisions among staff. If the local workers feel that their lives are not worth as much in the eyes of the law then at the very least they may be unwilling to work and could even turn against the organisation if they feel they are ‘second class’.

Humanitarian workers want to feel like they are one of the people. They do not want to stand out and be looked upon as more than the people that are trying to help. However, this is exactly what this resolution would do. It would make an aid workers life, somehow more valuable, and their death more tragic than people caught up in the same situation, maybe even killed in the same attack (Cater, 2003).

Aid workers must share the apprehensions and tensions of the people they are helping, they cannot be seen to be standing on a golden platter, if there want to be accepted by a community, they have to be seen as living as one with the community. Socialising is an integral part of applying the acceptance strategy as described by Van Brabant (2000). If the organisation is now at higher risk, they may have to reduce the number of social visits. Not only will this strain relationships in the community and reduce the amount of cooperation and feedback that community leaders have, it is also a step closer towards the protection strategy. Through reducing their exposure to a risk the organisation will be protecting its staff, but also moving further away from being a part of the community they are trying to help.

If aid workers did receive this kind of privileged position then governments may become more unwilling to let them enter the country for fear that if they are killed it will become a high profile international affair. This could mean that while the resolution is acting to try and protect aid workers, they are now unable to gain permission to enter countries because of the serious repercussion should anything happen to them.

Bjarte Vandvik, director of the International Department of the Norwegian Refugee Council welcomed the resolution but was concerned about the mechanisms for enforcing it. He said that “We think it deplorable that the Security Council missed the opportunity to use a concrete international tribunal which could have been strengthened by such a resolution.” He went on, “As such, there is nothing new in this.” (Staveland, 2003).

The Resolution had been discussed for a number of months with particular emphasis on the passage regarding war crimes. Then after the bomb attack, the latest draught of the resolution was put to vote (CARE, 29/8/2003). While this act may seem commendable, it is an emotive reaction to a difficult situation and completely the opposite of the reaction that is required when making decisions about security. It would have been better to truly discuss the issue for as long is it took for an agreement to be made which would benefit the people who fall under the resolutions jurisdiction, rather than rush through a resolution ‘in the heat of the moment’ which has a large scope for discrepancy in its application.

7 - Conclusion.

The questions that this paper set out to answer were:

1 – Why are more aid workers being attacked?

2 – What instruments are currently in place to protect them?

3 – What practical differences will Resolution 1502 make?

Answers to these questions can now be given.

1 - Why are more aid workers being attacked?

Aid workers are no longer perceived as neutral parties to a conflict. Where once all factions revered them, they are now viewed as a target. Wars are changing and civilians are increasingly being used by the military to cause devastation to a country. Leaders use the suffering of populations as international trading chips. As NGO’s move into a country and try to halt this suffering, they are in direct opposition to what the militia is trying to achieve, and therefore become a military target.

The role of the NGO has not changed to cause them these problems, the role of the soldier has. It is now not enough for some leaders to make their army attack another, but also to cause as much general devastation as possible.

2 - What instruments are currently in place to protect them?

There are a number of instruments in place to protect aid workers. From the Geneva Conventions to the International Criminal Court there have been strict guidelines laid out as to how humanitarian workers should be treated. However, these guidelines are increasingly being ignored. This is only to be expected in a war, that people will not always play by the rules. What is not to be expected is that these people are not help accountable for their actions by the international community.

If such deeds were dealt with both swiftly and harshly by the international community, their occurrence would decrease. It is because the perpetrators feel that they than undertake these acts without reprisal, that they continue to commit them.

3 - What practical differences will Resolution 1502 make?

Drawing on many of the previous points. If the new resolution is to have any meaningful effect then the international community must enforce what it has so publicly agreed on. The resolution itself remains useless unless enforced. It is no good to be outraged and pass a resolution and then believe that all will take note. The bombing of the UN Headquarters, which spurred this resolution, is not a ‘one off’. It will happen again, but it will happen again because once the moral outrage has died down, there is no real impetus to follow the law through and show a solid, united front to deter these acts.

The resolution also suffers from lack of definition. The workers that will be covered, and therefore those that will not, is somewhat vague. This could lead to resentment within organisations and a culture of ‘double standards’. This brings us to the final and most prominent failing with the resolution. It grants aid workers exactly what they do not want. Aid workers do not want to be special under the eyes of the law, this is not why they work in these conditions. They expect to be protected, and they would if the law written before the resolution was upheld properly, but they do not want to appear any different in the eyes of the law than the people they are helping. The resolution removes the essence of aid work, selflessly helping others, by granting a kind of special status.

The days of chivalry in war are long gone. It is inconceivable that soldiers would ever again stop at Christmas to play football, nor that medics are lent safety by battlefield etiquette. While this new resolution tries to make the battlefield a safer place for those not involved in the conflict, it is flawed by the reputation that precedes it. To truly deter those who would commit acts during times of conflict, it is no good to make new laws, the laws which already exist must be enforced.

The greatest irony of all is that humanitarian workers do not feel they should need laws to be protected, and yet the Security Council do. It is as Benjamin Disreali said, “When men are pure, laws are useless; when men are corrupt, laws are broken.” (1804 – 1881)

8 - References.

(AGDNGO) Association of German Development NGO’s. Minimum Standards regarding Staff Security in Humanitarian Aid. Sources from Relief Web.

Accessed 27/12/03. http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/0/dd84efcad067143049256d2e0009f090?OpenDocument

Aita J. U.N. Security Council Focuses on Protecting Aid Workers. 3^rd September 2003. Accessed 9/1/04. http://www.usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/usandun/03082622.htm

Bergman, C. Another Day In Paradise.2003. Earthscan Publications.

CARE International UK. International community must act quickly to enforce new Security Council for aid workers. 29^th August 2003.

Accessed 9/1/04. http://careinternational.org.uk/cgi-bin/display_mediarelease.cgi?mr_id=239

CARE International UK. Murder of UNHCR worker highlights unacceptably dangerous security situation in South-East Afghanistan. 17^th November 2003.

Accessed 9/1/04. http://careinternational.org.uk/cgi-bin/display_mediarelease.cgi?mr_id=253

Cater N. Extra Protection for aid workers could backfire. 19^th September 2003. AlertNet.

Accessed 9/1/04. http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/0/ac4a105f9237e95449256db1000e4f2f?OpenDocument

Cutts M and Dingle A. Safety First, Second Edition. 1995. Save The Children.

Dicker R. U.N.: U.S. Should Not Undercut Protection of Aid Workers. Human Rights Watch. 25^th August 2003.

Accessed 9/1/04. http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/08/un082503.htm

Dworken J T. Threat Assessment, Training module for NGO’s operating in Conflict Zones and High Crime Areas. Institute for Public Research.

Fleck at al (Editors). The Handbook of International humanitarian Law In Armed Conflicts. Oxford University Press. 1999.

Fourth Geneva Convention. Convention (IV) Relative To The Protection Of Civilian Persons In Time Of War. Geneva. 1949.

Accessed 0/1/04. http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/Human_Rights/geneva1.html

Helton A C (Director). Protecting aid workers: prospects and challenges. Forced Migration Projects, Open Society Institute, Hungary. 1997.

Kirgis F L. Security Council Resolution 1502 on the protection of Humanitarian and United Nations Personnel. September 2003. American Society of International Law. Accessed 9/1/04. http://www.asil.org/insights/insigh115.htm

MacLeod A.Why aid workers are now in the crosshairs. The Age. 26^th November 2003. Accessed 9/1/04. http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/25/1069522602801.html

People In Aid. Policy Pot, Safety and Security. May 2003. Accessed 9/1/04 http://www.peopleinaid.org/pubs/freepubs.php

Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). 1998.

Staveland L I. Aid groups divided on UN resolution. 10^th September 2003. AlertNet. Accessed 9/1/04. http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/0/0045f55070b4be6849256d9e00008dbe?OpenDocument

UN SC expresses strong condemnation of violence against humanitarian workers, calls for action to ensure their safety, resolution 1502 (2003) adopted. 26^th August 2003. Accessed 9/1/04. http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/s/87C224DC0E61646A49256D8F000C0D07

Van Brabant, Koenraad. Operational security management in violent environments : a field manual for aid agencies. London. 2000.

Walsh E. Aid Groups Fear Civilian, Military Lines May Blur. Washington Post. 3^rd April 2003.

Accessed 9/1/04. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A54255-2002Apr2?language=printer

9 - Bibliography.

CARE International UK. CARE international calls on UN Security Council to support new resolution strengthening the Protection of Humanitarian Workers. 26^th August 2003.

Accessed 9/1/04. http://careinternational.org.uk/cgi-bin/display_mediarelease.cgi?mr_id=238

CARE International UK. Landmine explosion kills six CARE International workers in Angola. 18^th December 2003.

Accessed 9/1/04. http://careinternational.org.uk/cgi-bin/display_mediarelease.cgi?mr_id=262

The New York Times. Oxfam withdraws from Iraq; 2 G.I.’s killed. Associated Press 27^th August 2003.

Accessed 9/1/04. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/27/international/27CND-Oxfam.html

United Nations Security Council. Resolution 1502. 26^th August 2003. United Nations. Accessed 91/04 http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_resolutions03.html

At long last.

Well I did it. All the sacrifice, hard work and late nights finally paid off.
I found out yesterday that I got a 2:1 in my degree. I am beyond happy. I am now officially a graduate in International Disaster Engineering and Management. It somehow sounds cooler now I know I’m graduated than I thought it would when I started all those years ago.
I only did the course because I thought it had an ace title. Now I’ve got to go out and try and earn a living from it.
I also fully kicked the arse out of the Independent Study which I often bemoaned about on this very site. I got my highest mark in that which is so far passed amazing I can’t wait to read it again. The second I have it I’m going to post it because I’m very proud of it.
 
So this is it. University is officially over. I have a degree.
 
The funny thing is, I still just feel like the kid that doesn’t know what to do with himself. I still don’t have a ‘big plan’ that I’m trying to follow. The past four years were a convenient stop gap in which I didn’t have to really think about my future. Well that’s over now. It’s time for me to find a direction.
 
Before I do that I’m going on holiday though. Then when I get back I’m sure I’ll find something else to distract me from having to ‘get a real job’.
 
Like becoming a space man, or a jet pilot.
 
Or a lion tamer. Oh yeah, lion tamer, that would be cool. 
  
 

Day in the life.

A working day.

Wake at alarm.
Work.
Lunch.
Work.
Dinner.
Chill out.
Sleep.
Repeat.

An unemployed day.

Wake at leisure.
Play X-Box.
Lunch.
Play X-Box.
Dinner.
Play X-Box.
Sleep (on hold).
Play X-Box.
Finally crawl to bed.
Repeat.

Work has its perks. Money being the biggest of these. Yet the joys of lounging are oft overlooked.

Job centre tomorrow.

This has to end.

One, Two, Three, Kerrrschmacko!!

Well I’ve been away. But you have stayed with me. For this, you are good.

I have a very impressive foot long scar on my leg where I gouged myself with a piece of aluminium. It looks ace, like I’ve been knife fighting or something. The real story is so many more times boring than knife fighting that I’m not even going to tell you about it. If any of your friends ask, I’ve been knife fighting, and I won.
You should see the other guy.

As well as working I went to a gig. Well I say gig. More like a Talentfest. If you ever get the chance to watch the mighty Stonylacuna play, then do.
“Why should I?” you ask. Well let me tell you why not. You should not watch them for the top quality songs, nor you should you pay attention to the clever lyrics, you should not even glance twice at the foxy lass on keyboards (well maybe just the twice) . For while all this and more is going on around you, there is only one thing you should be concentrating on.
“But I’m going to watch the greatest band in Sheffield play,” I hear you moan “surely I should pay attention to the songs?!”. Yeah, well if you want to go and rock your socks off all night then be my guest. If you want to get your moneys worth out of a band and become a fan for life, then go see Stonylacuna.

But there is more.

If you want to go out, rock your socks off, discover a great band and yet get so much more, then heed this advice.

Concentrate. On. The. Drummer.

Slap My Face. I have never seen a drummer like him. Some drummers have a distinct ‘drumming personality’ and this dude just takes it to a whole new level. He doesn’t play the drums, he owns that drum kits ass. He bought two drum kits, made them breed, and bound the result into his rhythm slavery. It is not the physical act of stick hitting skin which makes his drums be heard, it is the drum screaming for mercy every time the full force of his arm descends upon it.

Go see Stonylacuna. Go watch drumming how it was meant to be done.

Short but sweet

Working away from home all week.

Time to post = none.

Stay with me faithful readers, for when I am done. The post of all posts shall follow!

Hot Dawg, that was fun.

Well well, after buying myself a new skid lid (guess which one) to make up for the embarrassment of my old 80’s “purple helmet”, I ventured into the Peaks.

Now, as many of you will know, I managed to have a laugh going up and down a ‘psycho frequented’ canal basin. Well if I thought that was fun, I had obviously been worrying far far far too much about university and forgetting what fun really feels like.

Today I rode up a mountain and then fully bezzed it down to the bottom again. It was amazing. It has been too long since I last experienced true exhilaration, since the adrenaline was pumping, since I was in pain but knew the moment I gave into it, I would find myself in a whole lot more.

Flying down that mountain has made me realise that a good hobby is just what I need. All the time in the gym trying to get fit came to nothing today when I thought I was going to puke on the way up. It is impossible to compare doing 45 minutes on a ‘hill climb’ cycling machine with the real thing. I know this sounds really obvious when written down, but doing it for real is just so many more times demanding. I was embarrassed at my own wheezing and panting.

So tomorrow I’m going to yet again fix my bike. I now have the full use of my brothers tools and I intend to put them to good use.

Yes, my forearms got shaken to high heaven and back, yes I was a wreck of a man when I reached the top, but hold the headlines, I loved it.

The best bit about all this is that I am currently Rubbish at mountain biking. I worry when it comes to riding down the crazily steep bits, at high speed I have an aneurism every time I see a little rock in my way, and my health had been found wanting.

This means that there is so much more to come. When I’m confident enough to just go for the neck breakingly steep bits, when high speed is second nature and when my health is such that I don’t wheeze like a donkey after 10 minutes. Oh man, when this day comes, I’m gonna have to buy a new bike!