A Souq of Bones, Buzzards, and Aid Workers: Negotiating Humanitarian Aid in Syria: 2010-2020
In this manuscript I explore the three-tiered humanitarian aid ecosystem that existed in Syria from 2010-2020. During this period, Syria was engulfed in a civil war creating one of the greatest human catastrophes since World War II. The three tiers are (1) national organizations, (2) International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs), and (3) the United Nations and its respective agencies. Each one of these organizations had successes and failures negotiating humanitarian assistance programs throughout the country. Of central concern to this study are the processes, strategies and structure of negotiations these organizations utilized to address the complexities of the diverse interests, issues of sovereignty, multi-culturalism, asymmetric power, coalition building, and amorphous conditionalities that were ever-present in the ongoing internecine civil war that spanned the decade. The global pandemic added a new dimension in the last year.
Negotiations are analyzed through the lens of three distinct sets of actors; all who “negotiated” with the Syrian government; (1) tribal entities, (2) non-state actors, and (3) foreign governments. In this unique Syrian nexus of murder, chaos, and dysfunction, I argue aid institutions which have successfully implemented enduring assistance projects have done so through negotiations contingent upon other ancillary failed projects and negotiations. These successful aid organizations throughout Syria sacrificed efficacy of certain projects, donor expectations, and strategic plans in order to succeed in delivering other continued humanitarian assistance projects. Entities with the least hierarchical structure and established working relationships on the ground were able to respond extemporaneously which allowed them to accomplish more in providing aid than organizations that required institutional approval.
This paper conducts its research using Howard Raiffa’s synthesized approach to decision making— an interconnection of decision analysis, behavioral decision making, game theory, and negotiation analysis—derived from numerous interviews and questionnaires analyzing the decision-making characteristics of aid projects that were executed or attempted over the decade.