After the cuts, can the aid system deal with the next disaster?

A recent United States decision to shift its foreign assistance policy is a “black swan” event — one so rare the results are hard to predict — a former U.N. humanitarian leader told an audience at a Devex event on Tuesday. Anthony Banbury, now president and CEO of the International Foundation for Electoral Systems, was speaking to Senior Global Reporter Colum Lynch at a Devex Impact House event during the high-level week of the 80th United Nations General Assembly. He said that we do not really know how much impact the U.S. withdrawal will have, but that he thought the system could cope so long as the U.S. did not actively oppose the work of the United Nations. “So long as they’re not actively opposing other actors — the U.N. first and foremost, but other member states — from really trying to solve a global crisis, I think the resources, the capabilities, the tools, are there,” Banbury said. U.S. President Donald Trump has spoken of the need for change and reform at the United Nations, if the organization is to live up to its potential. However, Banbury questioned whether there was any need for reform in order for the U.N. to tackle disasters. “Change does not necessarily equal reform,” he said. “And neither are really required to do for the U.N. to do some amazing and very important and valuable things.” He pointed out that the United Nations had managed to set up a mission to tackle the Ebola virus in a single week and had the mission on the ground the week after. “No rules had to be changed for that,” he said. “There weren’t any special authorities. It was just about thinking differently.” Banbury said that there were severe limitations on peacekeeping work in particular, and he laid the blame on both member states and the United Nations itself. “There’s no question that there are enormous constraints imposed by member states, and politics, and security council dysfunction,” he said. “Notwithstanding that, the secretariat has both an opportunity and a huge obligation which they have not fulfilled, to tailor their internal ways of working to meet the needs of a crisis.” Banbury did make the case that to tackle issues such as gang violence in Haiti requires assessed funding — compulsory contributions to the U.N. — rather than voluntary funding. Separately, he spoke about the struggle to preserve democratic values. Pro-democratic forces have become “outdated” and “atomized” in their approach, he said. Meanwhile, “malign anti-democratic forces have a very integrated strategy and approach in how they’re seeking to undermine democratic values in countries around the world,” he said. “They are applying all the different levers of their power to do that in a very effective way.”