RESUMO
The January 2010 earthquake in Haiti was a catastrophe not only for the loss of life it caused, but also because it destroyed the very thin layer of state administrative capacity that was in place in the country. This article argues that the fragility of the Haitian state institutions was exacerbated by international strategies that promoted NGOs as substitutes for the state. These strategies have generated a vicious circle that, while solving immediate logistical problems, ended up weakening Haiti's institutions. However, the article does not call for an overarching condemnation of NGOs. Instead, it explores two cases of community-based NGOs, Partners In Health and Fonkoze, that have contributed to creating durable social capital, generated employment and provided functioning services to the communities where they operated. The article shows that organisations that are financially independent and internationally connected, embrace a needs-based approach to their activities and share a long-term commitment to the communities within which they operate can contribute to bringing about substantial improvement for people living in situations of extreme poverty. It concludes that in the aftermath of a crisis of the dimension of the January earthquake it is crucial to channel support towards organisations that show this type of commitment.
Assuntos
Terremotos , Organizações , Áreas de Pobreza , Assistência Pública , Saúde Pública , Socorro em Desastres , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Distúrbios Civis/economia , Distúrbios Civis/etnologia , Distúrbios Civis/história , Distúrbios Civis/legislação & jurisprudência , Distúrbios Civis/psicologia , Planejamento em Desastres/economia , Planejamento em Desastres/história , Planejamento em Desastres/legislação & jurisprudência , Terremotos/história , Haiti/etnologia , História do Século XXI , Direitos Humanos/economia , Direitos Humanos/educação , Direitos Humanos/história , Direitos Humanos/legislação & jurisprudência , Direitos Humanos/psicologia , Organizações/economia , Organizações/história , Organizações/legislação & jurisprudência , Medicina Preventiva/economia , Medicina Preventiva/educação , Medicina Preventiva/história , Medicina Preventiva/legislação & jurisprudência , Assistência Pública/economia , Assistência Pública/história , Assistência Pública/legislação & jurisprudência , Logradouros Públicos/economia , Logradouros Públicos/história , Logradouros Públicos/legislação & jurisprudência , Saúde Pública/economia , Saúde Pública/educação , Saúde Pública/história , Saúde Pública/legislação & jurisprudência , Socorro em Desastres/economia , Socorro em Desastres/história , Socorro em Desastres/legislação & jurisprudência , Problemas Sociais/economia , Problemas Sociais/etnologia , Problemas Sociais/história , Problemas Sociais/legislação & jurisprudência , Problemas Sociais/psicologia , População Urbana/históriaRESUMO
This article analyses selected cases of mass killings and genocide during the civil wars in El Salvador and Guatemala in the 1980s and the way in which the truth commissions in both countries reframed locally grounded narratives to fit the state-centred language of human rights. Redefining wrongdoings as human rights violations produces stories that communicate poorly with local worldviews because the 'truths' that human rights language proposes disregard local realities and transform local conflicts into a type of 'modern', nationwide struggles. Thus, while the concept of genocide might capture well the horrendous nature of a mass killing, it will also ethnify the conflict. Comparisons between local readings and human rights-based reinterpretations reveal a 'modernizing' or 'Westernizing' bias of international law; the article argues for more awareness about such effects in analysis as well as in policy-making.