Other Coordination Mechanisms

In the case of a natural disaster, the military and the IO/ NGO community have a common priority: humanitarian assistance and disaster recovery. Military assistance is likely to focus on filling gaps in the resources and capabilities the IO/NGO community needs to provide an effective response. This requires coordination between the military and the IO/NGO communities to provide assessments, determine priorities, and deconflict resource allocations.

In a post-conflict environment, a key IO/NGO concern is likely to be the reestablishment of security so that the IO/ NGO community may continue its activities. Conflict can dramatically affect the nature of the relationship between the IO/NGO community and the military. The traditions of impartiality generally prevalent in the IO/NGO community, and necessary to perform their mandates, may result in hesitation to coordinate too closely with the militaries of either belligerent or even of the stability force.

In either case, a holistic comprehension of the operational environment requires the military commander to understand both the civilian and military aspects that impact the force's assigned area. One resource available to help the commander obtain a perspective of the civilian factors is participation in a variety of civil-military coordination mechanisms. These mechanisms may go by a variety of names depending on the particular scenario and the level at which they are established, but they all perform essentially the same function, that is, to provide a physical, doctrinal touchpoint for day-to-day information exchange and coordination between the military, the IO/NGO community, and the interested civil populace.

Civil-military mechanisms include a variety of coordination/operations centers, such as Humanitarian Assistance Coordination Center (HACC), Humanitarian Operations Center (HOC), and Coalition Humanitarian Liaison Center (CHLC). All are designed to provide a coordination point between the military commander and the various civilian actors. The military commander may use these organizations as a platform to help him or her fully understand and apply the complex civilian dimensions of the environment in which he or she is operating. This information may include considerations of a diverse set of factors related to legal, cultural, societal, ethnic, and critical infrastructure issues.

A combatant commander may establish an HACC within the theater to assist with early interagency coordination and planning and to provide a link between the command and other government and non-governmental agencies participating in the operation at the theater strategic level. The combatant commander may also organize and deploy a humanitarian assistance survey team (HAST) to acquire information required for planning, such as an assessment of conditions and requirements for humanitarian assistance force structure. The humanitarian operations center, normally established by the United Nations or a relief agency, coordinates the overall relief strategy; identifies logistic requirements for NGOs, the United Nations, and IOs; and identifies, prioritizes, and submits requests for military support to a JTF through a CMOC in cases where a CMOC has been established. In addition, CMOCs may be established at various local or regional levels within the area to provide adequate coverage for the mission.

Whenever possible and appropriate, the military will encourage civilian humanitarian/disaster relief professionals and their organizations to mutually plan, conduct, and participate in or cooperate with civil-military operations. Sharing pertinent information, particularly that related to security, will enhance communication between the military and humanitarian organizations. It should be recognized that, by and large, the humanitarian organizations will be in the operational area long before the military arrives and long after the military departs. The military can learn from these organizations and, where appropriate, either assist in their programs, or at the least be informed of their existence to avoid duplicative civil-military operations.

The hierarchical structures of the military and IOs/ NGOs are different, and this is especially apparent in the area of decision making. The military values planning, preparation, and timely staffing to provide a foundation for its leadership to make decisions. IO/NGO hierarchies often involve boards of directors and operating mandates where operational-level decision making may also be delegated and implemented at field level. Unlike in the military, however, field-level decisions are frequently made by consensus. Accordingly, the military should maintain flexibility in its dealing with IOs/NGOs and appreciate that different structures and corporate cultures are at work.

Whether the coordination mechanism involves established structures, such as CMOC-type organizations, or personal relationships, the military should understand and appreciate that NGOs, IOs, and other humanitarian players might possess information that could be relevant to civil-military operations, but they may be unable to divulge that information to the military when doing so will jeopardize their organization's charter of impartiality and independence. The appearance of partiality or lack of independence can adversely affect these organizations' ability to continue working in the operational area.

See also the supplemental brochure, Guidelines for Relations Between U.S. Armed Forces and Non-Governmental Humanitarian Organizations in Hostile or Potentially Hostile Environments

Continue to Phasing