Humanitarianism and the politics of hope

This comes a little late but still worth posting.

James Orbinksi on humanitarianism.
Speaking at the University of Manitoba, October 28, 2009.

James Orbinski is one of those people that make you feel small when you're in the same room with them. He's reached a certain echelon of success and realm of understanding about the world that I've never really been delusional enough to think about reaching myself.

Currently a professor of politics and medicine at the University of Toronto, Orbinski has spent much of his professional career working as a medical doctor in some of the world's most volatile and forgotten locations, including being on the ground during the 1993 Rwandan genocide. Working with Médecins Sans Frontières in the late 90s, he was president of the organization in 1999 when they received the Nobel Peace Prize.

Speaking on the relationship of politics and humanitarianism, Orbinksi ended the question-and-answer period with a stirring words of advice to any of those looking to get into the field of humanitarian aid.

The politics he describes is not one of power acquisition but rather that of creating a platform for discussion and debate. I remember making that parallel distinction while taking a first year politics class years ago. It's something that gets lost in the modern day media flurry and the idea that politics is the same as a scramble for power.

"Real change," he said, "Will come from the politics of real debate that gives new points of reference."

Humanitarianism, he said, is more about the realization of equality than furthering a savior-like agenda.

"When one sees the other as equal, humanitarianism is not about compassion, it's about solidarity . . . the willingness to see the dignity of the other."

In the beginning and the end and at every point of every project it means a wholly collaborative approach and pointed confrontation with indifference, power, and the politics of the day. In this way, humanitarianism is itself political as it deals with the engagement of people and creating that platform for discussion and action.

He used the example of genocide as a political crime. As far as philosophy and religion can go, alone they cannot prevent such atrocities. As a political crime it has political answers.

"Ideas have always been more powerful than economies or armies and are essential."

Orbinski went on to distinguish hope from optimism. These ideas that need to infiltrate our political arenas both locally and internationally need to come from ideas of hope.

Hope, he said, is more about knowing you are making the right choice and is a powerful force the fuels the move for change. Optimism, on the other hand, is knowing that there is a reasonable chance of a certain outcome. In the face of modern global forces, being optimistic is not always possible. There is always, however, room to be hopeful.

At the end of the day, whatever humanitarianism tries to do will be imperfect because it is, at its roots, human, and human beings are inherently imperfect.

"With success comes failure . . . Humanitarianism is an imperfect project and is most imperfect when it delusions itself to think it's perfect."

So where does this put us? Why should we even try to work at these problems when the mountains we need to climb are seemingly insurmountable?

Orbinski on apathy: "I just get up and do whatever I'm going to do. I'm not interested in people who aren't interested. I don't feel responsible for those who choose to be apathetic. The train is moving . . . get on board or get out of the way."

"Wanting to do good is good . . . but it's not good enough," he said.

In terms of working in the developing world we need to realize that labour is everywhere. Going on a trip overseas to help build a school or dig a well doesn't make any sense, he said. They're building their own schools and digging their own wells. What there is a shortage of, however, is highly skilled individuals.

"What skills do have or can you get?" he asked the audience. "What are you bringing to the party?"

He was adamant about students sucking their university experience dry and learning as much as they possible can.

"Become an expert at something," Orbinski said, "Don't waste this precious opportunity."

The most important thing future humanitarian workers, development practitioners, politicians, can do right now, he said, is gain skills. The world needs medical professionals and engineers more than anything else.

Second, he said, learn a second language. And a third. And a forth.

Third, gain practical experience. That can either be at home or abroad but the most important thing is to apply what you're learning in class to the outside world. Every bit of experience, he explained, gives you a little bit of wisdom. Before long, all those bits begin to add up.

Last, cultivate humility. "You are not the answer," he said, "You are part of it."

The most successful humanitarian endeavors will be those that have found a way to "achieve good outcomes in imperfect (read: human) situations."

I left the session feeling both inspired and as if I had just been scolded by a parent. Where do I fit into this scheme? Where do my skills lie and what skills should I be trying to obtain? Am I really part of the solution here? Are you?