Humanitarian Profile - John Holmes
Published October 05, 2008 @ 10:33PM PT
This humanitarian profile looks at John Holmes – the UN Under Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs / Emergency Relief Coordinator.

Sometimes, writing about humanitarian relief feels like an extended exercise in the statistics of misery; that, or a collection of anecdotes about life among the dispossessed – some amusing, most rather less so. In many ways, this parallels the experience of being out in the field, or at least my experience. A temptation to see people as no more than abstractions, reduced to numbers on a report, or a temptation to see the work as a humanitarian safari.
Such reflections are not particularly new; in fact, they tap into an entire genre of aid worker angst, focused on our relationship with those we try to help. Or, for some of our more religious brethren, save.
Yet it’s not just beneficiaries or crisis-affected populations or partners (or, god forbid, victims) who become depersonalized. So too do those organizations – donors and the UN and NGOs – which shape humanitarian response.
It’s sometimes easy to forget that it’s not acronyms which make decisions, but specific individuals. People who decide how much money is spent, and where, and on what. People who help ensure that a crisis stays in the news.
These profiles are meant to take a look at those individuals who exert a tremendous influence on humanitarian relief.
As mentioned above, John Holmes is the UN Under Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs / Emergency Relief Coordinator. Or, as he’s known on the street, the USG / ERC.
As such, he’s the head of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), which seeks to “mobilize and coordinate effective and principled humanitarian action”. The USG / ERC develops humanitarian policy, advocates on humanitarian issues, and helps coordinate the international humanitarian response to specific crises.
All of which means that Holmes plays a critical role in keeping international attention focused on specific crises. He also has the power of the purse, insofar as he manages the UN Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF).
Holmes was born in England in 1951. After attending Balliol College, Oxford, he entered the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office in 1973 – rising eventually to become Principal Private Secretary to the Prime Minister, and then Ambassador to Portugal and France.
(An advantage of being British – he was knighted along the way, and is now Sir John Holmes GCVO, KBE, CMG.)
Holmes became USG / ERC in January 2007, replacing Jan Egeland. Since then, he’s spoken out on crises including Afghanistan, Darfur, Iraq, Somalia, Zimbabwe and the conflict in the Ogaden region of Ethiopia.
Three issues in particular stand out. First is his focus on gender-based violence, and in particular rape in Congo. (For an audio clip of Holmes discussing the situation, click here.)
Second is his strong stance on the humanitarian situation in Gaza, which he described as “extremely severe and totally unacceptable.” See also the Op-Ed he published in Al Ahram in March 2008, following his visit to the region.
Third, he spoke out against a “confrontation” with the Burmese Government in the weeks following Cyclone Nargis, when others were arguing that a humanitarian intervention was necessary to overcome Burmese reluctance to accept international assistance. Writing three months after the cyclone, he noted that the much feared “second wave of deaths from starvation or disease has not happened” – as those advocating humanitarian intervention had predicted.
It’s worth quoting his remarks in detail:
“[W]e must stay focused on the goal: assisting people in crisis. From the first, the aid operation in Myanmar – as is true everywhere we work – had to be about helping vulnerable people in need, not about politics. In this post-Iraq age, I am concerned that humanitarians are often pressured to choose between the hammer of forced intervention and the anvil of perceived inaction. Was there a realistic alternative to the approach of persistent negotiation and dialogue that we pursued? I do not believe so. Nor have I met anyone engaged in the operations who believes that a different approach would have brought more aid to more people more quickly.
This is not to say that there can never be a role for humanitarian intervention, even in natural disasters. But it must be the last resort, when all else has been tried and the only alternative is death and suffering on a mass scale.”
Finally, to see the man himself – below is a video of Holmes from the Davos World Economic Forum:
If you have any suggestions for future profiles, please let me know.
Images: John Holmes - UN
Share this Post
Related Posts
-
Climate Change and Humanitarian Catastrophes
-
Humanitarian Intervention - Or, Can I Bring Myself to Agree with John Bolton
-
Statistics on Humanitarian Relief
Comments (3)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Email


















I CAN ONLY LAUGH AT JOHN HOLMES. IF HE ASKED A SMALL TAMIL CHILD ABOUT THE SITUATION IN NORTHERN AND EASTERN SRI LANKA. HE WILL GET THE RIGHT ANSWER!
IS HE FOOL OR WHY HE IS TALKING AS CHILDISH?
NOW ONLY THE STUDIED PEOPLE TALKING AS CHILD LIKE BAN KE MOON.
JOHN HOLMES DO NOT NEED TO TALK WITH THE HIGHER AUTHORITIES TO KNOW THE SITUATION IN SRI LANKA. ALL CHILDREN IN NORTHERN AND EASTERN SRI LANKA FROM AGE 5 YEARS CAN TELL HIM THE WHOLE STORY AND WHAT IS HAPPENING IN SRI LANKA!
IF HE ASKED A TAMIL CHILD TO COME TO THE SRI LANKAN ARMY CONTROLLED AREA, HE WILL GET THE ANSWER THAT THEY DO NOT COME!!
BUT IF HE ASKED THEM TO BE WITH THE TAMIL TIGERS THEN THEY CAN VIEW HIM THEIR HAPPINESS!!
Posted by JEYASEELAN ARULANANTHA... on 02/19/2009 @ 09:02AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Hi Jeyaseelan
He is not a fool. Answer is simple. West has an anti-Tamil policy based on their value system - protect friendly states regardless of their brutality. Replace Sri Lankan state and put Zimbabwe or North Korean state in place - John Holmes would be shouting from the roof top about the plight of the civilians and would condemn the state outright without mincing his words. You know why? These are hostile states for the west and west would be happy to weaken them. So Holmes would use his UN identity to promote West's policy.
To add to this he is Brit. A non-British European in Holmes' place would probably helped Tamils a bit more within his / her capacity. The fact that John Holmes being a British from Foreign & Commonwealth office back ground also disadvantageous to Tamils. It is always a Brit who would go an extra mile to disrupt Tamil aspirations. It was British Diplomats who worked behind the scene to put the LTTE on EU ban list. It was them who worked quietly to encourage Sri Lanka to go on a military path and abandon the 2002 ceasefire. And Historically it was the British who betrayed the Tamils and put them into this forced marriage with the Sinhalese in the island of Ceylon and thereby created this time bomb. They did this for their geo-political interest of the 1950s. Interests might have changed a bit now but still the Anti-Tamil British policy remains. British policy has always been to talk nicely to Tamils and then them stab them in the back when they are not looking. To date this policy remains in tact.
West is simply waiting to see Tamils become completely defenseless on their own right - full destruction of LTTE. After that they plan to pick Tamils plight up and work against Rajapakse Government. Their idea is to use the economy to topple Rajapakse and then crown Ranil or Chandrika - prince and princess in waiting. So much for the lofty western ideals of humanism and democracy! But what they do not realise is the mindset of the Sinhalese. If and when Rajapakse is successful in destroying the Tamil defense in full, the Sinhalese would crown him as their life time emperor and west would have a Sri Lankan state which is least friendly to them. But that is tomorrow's problem right? So the likes of John Holmes or his mates at the Foreign office do not care about that eventuality and that is for their successors to handle. In the mean time thousands of Tamil civilians would continue to perish at the hands of brutal butchers of Sri Lankan state.
Posted by Thiru Kumar on 04/16/2009 @ 01:44AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I think you both need to get a grip on reality - the UN has spoken out repeatedly about Sri Lanka, and the plight of civilians trapped in the north. For instance, in just the past few days:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gVoaDFmbCYS-Usz9ACDRIengj21QD97DN5A81
http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900SID/EDIS-7QWKT5?OpenDocument&RSS20=18-P
Further, the Tigers are hardly blameless, unless you count killing civilians as an acceptable tool of the revolutionary struggle. Don't get me wrong -- I'm certainly no supporter of the Sri Lankan military, and their penchant for slaughtering civilians, but I think there's more than enough blame to go around,
MBK
Posted by Michael Bear on 04/16/2009 @ 09:27PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.