When I say I work in humanitarian security the response is often, "Oh, how interesting. Were you in the military then?" At this point I bristle slightly. I have to say that yes, I was, a very long time ago, in the military. And I always go on to add that contrary to easy-to-make assumptions, my military background does not have much of a bearing on what I do now. Sure, it is useful to have some of that knowledge and experience, but it can easily become an "overdone strength" if you don't "get it" about humanitarian security.
Humanitarians are often in the same contextual space as the military, and are often uncomfortable with them. We are values-led, we believe in fairness, opportunity, honesty, respect for life and protecting the vulnerable. But which "we" am I using here? Am I speaking as an ex-military person, or as a humanitarian? The thing is that both groups are likely to identify with many of the same values.
I know military people who genuinely believe that they have carried out humanitarian work in military uniform. They are as proud of building a school or a clinic in Helmand as running for charity in the London marathon. That the former would be part of a military strategy does not matter to them as it would to the humanitarian. That's part of the difference.
So what is it about military style and attitude that doesn't help? Most in the NGO sector would cite the autocratic, the hierarchical, the dependence on overwhelming force, and the preparedness to kill. None of this plays well in an NGO culture where a job title is much more likely to be "coordinator" than "leader".
The truth is that in the modern military this autocratic style is normally reserved for occasions when there is no time for debate. Most of the time good military leadership is about example, consideration, listening and knowledge. Many of those same skills are at the heart of good humanitarian security, as well as self-awareness.
Some of the best humanitarian security officers I have met are ex-military. When they lose the uniform, and understand that not all "security" makes you safe, and still apply strong process-based, context-informed strategies that enable programmes, then you can have a winning combination.
Some NGO perceptions of the military style are stereotypes, and in a culture where values are important, the stereotype can create a barrier between programme people and military-style security people. Which is another problem – good security is about enabling programmes. When 'security' is its own rationale, it can be hard to gain acceptance and achieve consensus.
When you are developing and managing humanitarian security, just as in dealing with culturally-diverse communities in field programmes, it is as much about how you say it as about what you say. When you spend more time asking than telling, more effort understanding the context and the programme rather than security in isolation for its own sake, then you build understanding, acceptance and respect. Ironically, then, when the bullets are flying and there is no time for a debate, you can be strongly directive and be listened to.
The security person who is not going to get the attention and compliance of the humanitarian team is more likely to have the characteristics of the negative military stereotype – a one-dimensional "steely-eyed killer" who does not understand that humanitarian security is different and who imposes narrow traditional security solutions to life that become a barrier to work. I've met these people in humanitarian security, too.
But the ex-military person who has learned to appreciate the full spectrum of humanitarian inclusive security – and who adapts his or her expertise and experience to the NGO culture – can have a lot to offer and be a great asset. Not all security makes you safe, and often security isn't even about security, it is about good programme design, leadership, resilience, and above all, communication.
Steve McCann is the director of Safer Edge. Follow @SaferEdge on Twitter.
Read more stories like this:
• International development: how to minimise the risks
• Safety awareness for aid workers in conflict zones
• Doing development in conflict zones
Join the community of global development professionals and experts. Become a GDPN member to get more stories like this direct to your inbox
.png?w=600)
