Western NGOs and Islam: How to counter the image of 'missionaries and spies'

European and American development aid and emergency relief workers have a proud record of bringing assistance to the world’s disaster zones. But are they culturally insensitive? Moustafa Osman of Islamic Relief Worldwide explains why in some Islamic communities they are viewed as missionaries and spies (article first published in Europe's World autumn 2006)

Has it become too difficult for western humanitarian agencies and NGOs to work in the Islamic world? If so, why is that, and what is the way forward?

First, I should define what I mean by the “Islamic world”. The interpretation or practice of Islam is not the same in, say, Afghanistan or Iran as in Kosovo, Bosnia or Albania. Bosnia and Albania may have Muslim majorities, but they can’t be considered in the same Islamic context as Afghanistan, Iran, Palestine or parts of Sudan, because the latter are countries where culture, customs and traditions are predominantly influenced by Islam. It is equally important to define western agencies and NGOs, by which I mean organisations with their headquarters or main base in Europe or America, primarily run by white non-Muslim staff and volunteers. Thus the Muslim NGOs established in Europe or America are not considered as western in the eyes of
ordinary people in Islamic countries. This means that Islamic Relief or Muslim Hands are not perceived as western NGOs, even though they were born and bred in Europe.

How difficult is it for western NGOs to work in the Islamic world? It has been increasingly hard for them to gain access and work securely in countries like Iraq and Iran. Following the Bam earthquake in southeastern Iran, NGOs experienced difficulties in obtaining visas or extensions
once the emergency phase was over. The same was the case in Iraq before the fall of Saddam Hussein in April 2003, and continues to hold true as most western NGOs have had to discontinue work there because of the increasingly dangerous security situation. More recently, some western NGOs have not been very welcome in Aceh, Indonesia, and only gained access to Darfur, Sudan, after intense external pressure. The difficulties that western NGOs face when operating in an Islamic context is largely due to a combination ofmisperceptions, mistrust and suspicion. The chief misperception is that these NGOs are seen as a modern form of colonialism. Aid workers inadvertently encourage this misperception by excessive visibility; they make great use of flags and stickers, forgetting that armies use flags to indicate victory and occupation. NGOs’ offices are usually located in compounds with walls surmounted by sandbags and militarylooking security measures. Using visibility materials especially flags in a small city like Bam, which typifies conservative society in Iran, can be very provocative and has unfortunate connotations of occupation and control. An NGO raising a flag on the gate of a camp or a compound can be interpreted by the host government or the indigenous population as taking control, so they might well feel threatened. It is quite understandable that local people can seethe NGOs as an occupying force. The mistrust comes from the fact that western NGOs are often suspected of having a hidden agenda. The suspicion is that their primary aim is the propagation of “western values”. When western NGOs claim that they are promoting the “liberation” of women, this suggests that Muslim women are oppressed. Issues such as family planning are sometimes highlighted as necessary steps for progress; and when mentioned in the same breath as women’s empowerment, this can make the local male population feel threatened, if not handled sensitively. As to more generalised suspicions, some western NGOs seem to invite these. They are sometimes suspected of being Christian missionaries – one organisation makes bible reading compulsory in the schools it supports – and at other times of simply being spies because they collect information and carry out socio-economic surveys. Mistrust is therefore widespread, fuelled by the fact that some NGOs are culturally insensitive, enough to allow the women in their teams to wear shorts in public. The drinking of alcohol is commonplace amongst humanitarian workers, and it has a negative impact on local perceptions of all western organisations.

Then there is the problem of NGOs “importing” personnel to do jobs that might just as well be performed locally. One international NGO brought around 80 expatriates into the small Darfur city of El Geneina, and the same organisation brought 90 expatriates into Banda Aceh. This leads the local population to wonder what those 90 very expensive foreigners are doing that they couldn’t do themselves. And the sensitive problem of misperceptions seemed further aggravated in the wake of the tsunami disaster by the reported remarks of Andrew Natsios, the Administrator of USAID, when he commented that “US relief efforts have halved negative perceptions of Washington in Indonesia”.

The often limited impact on ordinary people’s lives of the development projects being implemented by western NGOs is also a factor. One Islamic webpage recently reported that “NGOs have brought in billions of dollars to help the poor people, but it is estimated that only 5% has gone to the target group; the rest of the money is spent to materialise their hidden agenda, namely, to convert the indigenous population to Christianity”. In a number of disaster zones, local research has found that the impact of the aid effort by all the international NGOs was far outweighed in effectiveness by small local organisations and by the host government; and this commented one observer, “despite the luxurious vehicles and huge resources they have, compared to the local ones”. All too often, pledged aid from the international community sometimes never reaches, or even comes near, the supposed beneficiaries. It is considered phantom aid. A recent report on the UK government’s Department for International Development (DFID) work in Malawi showed that of a total £3m budget it had given a US organisation to run a project to support the committee system in Malawi’s parliament, £1m had been spent on the salaries of the entirely American staff, and nearly £700,000 had gone on hotel and food bills for their staff and for Malawian MPs. In Iraq, the image of western aid giving and development organisations is worse still. Humanitarian aid is delivered by armed military personnel, by contractors with weapons and by NGOs with armed protection. It is a real challenge for the local population to distinguish between them, and this seriously blurs the distinction between political or military actions and independent humanitarian aid provided and administrated by NGOs. So what should western NGOs be doing to counter these perceptions and remove these prejudices? To begin with, they should make greater use of local experts and local partners. That may sound obvious, but first a word of warning. NGOs should not be misled into placing too much confidence in young local staff members who have been educated in the West and speak one or more foreign languages. They are usually considered as local by western NGOs, but they are seen as “westernised” by the local community and are not always respected. Usually, too, all the decision-makers in emergency or development aid in projects are expatriates, with national staff hired mostly as drivers and translators, cooks and cleaners. The lesson to be learned is that NGOs shouldn’t use local staff only in low-level functions, but should rely more on local experts to help decide policy and should allow them to take responsibility.

Western NGOs should also pay much more attention to grassroots communications. They need to convey their messages in the local cultural context, using local terms and even slang instead of their own internal jargon. Expressions like “strategy” and “evacuation” sound alarmingly like military terminology. I can confirm this from personal experience in Iraq, when I was arrested and detained by Saddam Hussein’s regime at the start of the 2003 invasion. I was accused of being a spy for the West, yet in fact I had come to Iraq to prepare for the post-war humanitarian response. In the aid world as elsewhere, transparency and openness always pay off. Raising local awareness of an NGO’s mandate, aims and core values holds the key to better understanding and acceptance. I was impressed not long ago by a number of western NGOs that had started to translate their names and objectives into the local language, and also issued a newsletter in that language explaining their mission, vision and core values. International NGOs should never be vague about their aims and their plans.

Respect for the local culture andadherence to its traditions will greatly increase acceptance by the local populace,and will enhance an NGOs workenvironment. On the other hand, ignorance of the local culture and its traditions can have serious negative consequences, not least the difficulties and even unrest that stem from misperceptions about the “real” aims of an organisation. Western NGOs need to be culturally extra sensitive when operating in an Islamic context where certain types of behaviour by aid workers will be seen not just as inappropriate but as disrespectful of Islam.