Interview with Philippe Lalliot, Director of the Crisis and Support Center at the Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs.
Alain Boinet: The 6th National Humanitarian Conference (CNH) was held in Paris on December 19. Could you tell our readers a little about this conference?
Philippe Lalliot: It was a great way to start my term of office. Indeed, I took up my post as head of the Crisis and Support Center at the Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs just under 4 months ago. This National Humanitarian Conference was eagerly awaited by all humanitarian actors.
This conference, and the Humanitarian Strategy presented at it, are truly a collective achievement, which enabled all partners, starting with the NGOs on the steering committee, to work together for many months. The result, I believe, is a good reflection of the discussions that took place, and of the subjects that were tackled in all their complexity. I hope that everyone is at ease with the event that took place and with the document presented.
What I would also like to highlight is the success of this conference, if only in terms of the number of participants: 650 attendees, including over 350 in person. We haven’t had a face-to-face national humanitarian conference since 2018. The 2020 conference was held remotely.
Circumstances, of course, also explain this success. What is happening right now in Gaza illustrates the need to think together and discuss the difficulties we face and the solutions we can imagine and implement together.
I was struck by the richness of the discussions that took place. Three round tables followed one another, with a wide variety of participants. The level of interest was also evident: the President of the Republic opened the event, via video, and there were two speeches by the Minister, UN officials, and leaders of French, international and local NGOs.
Last but not least, it was interesting to have a conference that looked back over the past years, but also reflected on the future. Given the state of the world today, with crises multiplying, worsening and overlapping, what more can we do together, and what can we do better?
I was particularly interested in all the discussions on innovation, on adapting our responses and the effectiveness of our actions to needs and changing needs.
Alain Boinet: As you just mentioned, this conference included three round tables with the participation of various partners. These roundtables dealt with the adaptation of humanitarian response to the multiplication of needs, the protection of humanitarian action in a context where international humanitarian law is being called into question, and the development of new financing methods for greater efficiency. In your opinion, what were the highlights of the conference?
Philippe Lalliot: The first thing I’d like to point out is that these themes were not chosen by chance, but were discussed by the steering committees. They allowed us to deal with subjects that are really priorities for humanitarian action.
First of all, funding illustrates the efforts made by France on humanitarian issues, since we have a budgetary trajectory which, after an initial doubling over the previous period, will double again to reach one billion euros per year by 2025. This is extremely important at a time when needs are exploding and some, if not most, of our partners are tending to cut back.
This round table also raised the central issue of partnerships. In the Strategy, particular importance has been attached to partnerships. To emphasize the European dimension, but also because we need to think about the place of new partners such as local authorities, foundations and private companies. We also talked about innovation, multi-annualization, flexibility and accountability, localization and privileged partnerships. Although a little dry on the outside, this round table raised some real issues of principle that will determine our modes of action in the years to come.
The second round table was, I think, just as interesting. It was devoted to international humanitarian law, its respect and promotion, and the protection of humanitarian personnel. Gaza today shows just how central these issues are. One of the participants rightly said that “without humanitarian law, there can be no humanitarian action”; this also illustrates France’s role as a great advocate of international law in general and international humanitarian law in particular. This is not just a subject that is taught at university, but one that has very important practical implications in the field. On the question of generalized exemptions, France’s position since the adoption of Resolution 2664 is well known. We have made progress recently on PC 931, but we still have a lot of work ahead of us, and we want to do it with the NGOs, because this is one of their major demands, and one that seems legitimate to me.
The aim of the first round table was to set out the general context in which humanitarian action takes place. Crises are multiplying. What strikes me is that they are becoming more serious, more complex and more intense. Some are more protracted than others, adding to each other like a kind of superinfection of the wound. This phenomenon is very worrying in itself. I think it also means that we need to think about the resources we can collectively make available to respond to these crises.
Alain Boinet: The CNH was an opportunity to present the French Republic’s new humanitarian strategy. What are its main thrusts?
Philippe Lalliot: There are four. The first part of the strategy is dedicated to international humanitarian law, its promotion and the protection of humanitarian personnel. This is of course a subject that is particularly relevant today, given what is happening in Gaza.
The second part sets out our main thematic priorities. Together with the NGOs, we have identified 5 priorities: climate, food security and nutrition, health and continuity of care, women’s and girls’ rights, gender equality, and childhood and children’s rights. These 5 priorities represent a form of continuity with previous strategies. I’m thinking in particular of climate and gender. There are some new things, and I’d like to thank the NGOs who have argued for this. I’m thinking in particular of everything to do with childhood and children’s rights, which for the first time are being given a cross-cutting scope.
Finally, there are two last sections, devoted respectively to financing and partnerships. We wanted to give this Strategy a truly European dimension. We have already made a start under the French Presidency of the Council of the European Union with the Humanitarian Forum. I think we have some tools in place, and others that we certainly need to create. We need to pool our resources and think collectively, given the scale of the needs we see today, which are not going to diminish in the coming years.
Alain Boinet: You mentioned the increase in France’s humanitarian budget between now and 2025. At a time when some countries are reducing their contributions, how should we understand this budgetary effort? How will the budget be divided between the Fonds d’Urgence Humanitaire, the Aide Alimentaire Programmée and the Direction des Organisations Internationales? Lastly, what are the main innovations envisaged in the implementation of these resources with your partners?
Philippe Lalliot: First of all, I think it’s fair to say that, with two successive Strategies, France has regained a strong voice and its place in the concert of nations on humanitarian issues. We had become inaudible, and in two steps, with a first level of 500 million and a second level of one billion euros per year, France is among the top 10 donors internationally, and the top 3 in Europe. We are once again in a position to match our ambitions.
This collective effort also reflects the priority given to humanitarian issues in budgetary arbitration and in the choices made. It makes a major contribution to our country’s credibility and international influence.
In terms of what you call “windows”, we have three channels for distributing humanitarian credits: funding from United Nations agencies, programmed food aid and the humanitarian fund or NGO fund, to put it simply. Systems of coordination between us ensure that we don’t operate in silos, which would be disastrous for the effectiveness of our action. Today, we are roughly divided into thirds. I think we’ll keep to this balance.
Our sectoral and geographical priorities remain the same. There’s a kind of continuity. Our action must be long-term. So we’ll be back to the main priorities of Ukraine, Syria and Gaza, as well as many initiatives and projects in Africa.
As far as sectoral priorities are concerned, there are the five I mentioned earlier: climate, food security, health, gender and children.
Alain Boinet: Since the deadly Hamas attack on Israel on October 7 and the taking of numerous hostages, the Gaza Strip has been the scene of incessant daily bombardments and fighting, resulting in numerous civilian casualties, the destruction of infrastructure and major emergency humanitarian needs. What is France’s position and what aid is it providing?
Philippe Lalliot: We’re witnessing a humanitarian tragedy, and describing it as such is no way of minimizing what happened on October 7, which is absolutely unspeakable. Let me remind you of the heavy toll paid by France, which lost 41 of its nationals and now has 3 hostages being held in the Gaza Strip.
There are several issues at stake today. There are issues linked to respect for humanitarian law and the protection of humanitarian personnel, as we were talking about a few minutes ago. I am struck by the losses suffered today by the major NGOs and by certain UN agencies, starting with UNRWA. To my knowledge, this is unprecedented, and obviously unacceptable.
Our approach has been defined by the President of the Republic. It comprises three pillars: a security pillar, notably to combat Hamas and the terrorist movements involved in the October 7 massacre; a humanitarian pillar, to which I’ll return in a little more detail; and finally a political pillar, because there will be no peace in this region until there is a political solution that meets the legitimate demands of both Israel and the Palestinian people. This is the two-state solution.
If we want to be a little more specific about the humanitarian pillar of this “peace for all” approach, we are trying to work with our partners – both NGOs and our Egyptian and Jordanian counterparts – on several fronts.
Firstly, humanitarian freight. We’re going to send 1,000 tonnes of humanitarian cargo to Gaza: 200 tonnes by air, using both military and civilian resources, and just over 700 tonnes by sea. These shipments include medicines, medical supplies, shelters, tents, food and various equipment.
A second action focuses on medical aspects. One of our helicopter carriers, the Dixmude, is docked in El-Arich, treating wounded Palestinians. Working very closely with the Egyptian authorities, the Dixmude is fully integrated into the Sinai hospital system. We are currently considering the replacement of the Dixmude, as it will have to leave El-Arich in January.
And we have also started medical evacuations of Palestinian children in our hospitals. Here again, we are working closely with the Ministry of the Armed Forces, the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of the Interior. The first children started arriving at the end of December. We are also working more and more closely with our Jordanian friends, in particular on hospital equipment, both in Gaza, at the Jordanian military hospital in Gaza, and in Nablus on the West Bank.
We’re trying to do as much as we can. I think we’ve done things that no other country, at least in the West, has done, and we’re doing it in coordination and agreement with our partners in the region.
Alain Boinet: We just spoke of tragedy with regard to Gaza. What other crises have you had to deal with since you took office in August? What humanitarian responses have you been able to provide?
Philippe Lalliot: Unfortunately, there are too many. I took up my post at the end of August, and since then we’ve been faced with one crisis after another, from natural disasters such as the earthquake in Morocco and the floods in Libya, to security crises such as Nagorno-Karabakh and now Gaza. The CDCS is trying to be present on all these fronts, bearing in mind that other crises are far from over. I’m thinking of Ukraine and Syria, but also Yemen, Sudan and Haiti. On a more ad hoc but no less urgent level, when a petrol depot explodes in Conakry, our help is called for. When a mine collapses in Surinam, our help is also needed, and of course we do everything we can.
On the other hand, we strive to adjust our aid as closely as possible to needs, as they come back to us from the field. This involves our diplomatic and consular posts. We are fortunate to have the third largest network abroad. We rely heavily on them both for contacts on the ground and to calibrate our response.
It really is a collective effort, in conjunction with the ministries I mentioned: the armed forces, the interior and health, and also with our major NGO partners. Without them, nothing would be possible, and it is very often thanks to them that we are able to intervene in very remote theaters. I would like to pay tribute to them for all the work they do, often under very difficult conditions.
Alain Boinet: At the previous CNH, the question of possible sanctions, if not the criminalization of humanitarian actors under anti-terrorism laws, was a major concern, particularly on the part of the President of the Republic. Where do we stand today?
Philippe Lalliot: It’s an issue that’s been hotly debated not only between the Crisis Center, the administration in general and NGOs, but also with our major partners. I think we need to take stock of how far we’ve come in the direction desired by the NGOs with the adoption of Resolution 2664 in New York, co-sponsored by France. What we need to find is a balance between the need for sanctions, for example to combat terrorist movements, and the need to avoid criminalizing actions, or a fortiori humanitarian workers.
What we are seeing is a gradual extension of the principle of humanitarian exemption to the various autonomous sanctions regimes. This was the case most recently with PC 931. But we have to recognize that the very principle of exemption does not meet with unanimous approval among our partners, and we have to find safeguards that enable us to maintain the effectiveness of sanctions regimes.
Alain Boinet: Humanitarian aid is increasingly in demand as a response to crises. Rescuing populations in danger and saving lives is at the heart of humanitarianism. But isn’t there a danger that extending humanitarianism ad infinitum will dilute, weaken and even endanger it? Can we apply and respect the humanitarian principles of neutrality, impartiality and independence in matters of education, gender, climate, war and peace, which are more a matter of political choice and the responsibility of States? Is everything humanitarian and can humanitarianism do everything?
Philippe Lalliot: I take a very pragmatic approach to these issues. I believe that the humanitarian response is necessary, but not sufficient. It’s necessary to solve urgent problems where it’s a matter of life and death, but it’s not the way to solve problems as complex as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine, or the future of Afghanistan, to take just three examples. I mentioned earlier the 3 pillars – political, security and humanitarian – of France’s approach to Gaza. I believe this is in fact an action grid that can be applied to many complex crises. We can’t pretend to solve a political problem simply with a security approach, just as we can’t pretend to solve a political problem simply with humanitarian action. It’s the combination of these three elements that will enable us to envisage a way out of the crisis.
Added to this is the question of the Nexus, i.e. how do we ensure coherence, not to say meaning, to an action that ranges from the most urgent, the most immediate, which we’ll call humanitarian and stabilization, to longer-term reconstruction and development actions. Work is underway, in particular with our friends at the Agence française de développement, to ensure even greater fluidity in our respective actions, and to be in phase with our teams both in Paris and in the field.
Finally, I don’t think we should give in on the principles you mentioned, which are the cardinal principles of humanitarian action. I think it would even be dangerous to give in on these principles, and that they must continue to be both the framework and the basis of everything we do.
France’s Humanitarian Action with the Crisis and Support Center of the Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs© Ambassade de France à Chypre
A final remark: everyone must be in their place, and this is a guarantee of efficiency. In other words, the State will never be an NGO in its modes of action and intervention. Just as an NGO will never be a State. We approach the same situations from different angles, and we are complementary. Each in its own role, faithful to the missions entrusted to it, with its own limitations, constraints and difficulties. It is in this complexity and complementarity that we must deploy our actions.
Alain Boinet: A process of international fragmentation seems to be underway, sometimes resulting in war. We are facing other immense challenges, such as climate change, the global water issue, demographics in Africa, and the control of weapons of mass destruction. How do you see these challenges and the role of the CDCS?
Philippe Lalliot: I’d like my answer to be optimistic, but I’m afraid it’s rather gloomy. Because we mustn’t harbor any illusions either. That’s what was so interesting about the national humanitarian conference: the unanimous acknowledgement of the immensity of the challenges we collectively face. Which is also a call to collective action. I fear that the weeks and months ahead will add further crises to those we are already facing.
Secondly, to answer your question about the role of the CDCS: the CDCS is a very young instrument, only 15 years old, but it quickly established its credibility within the government and, I believe, with the various humanitarian players, quite simply because it met a need.
As far as its missions are concerned, I often say that we are the Quai d’Orsay’s emergency specialists, and that our role is to act as a whole. So we go to the Ministry of the Interior for civil security expertise when we need it, to the Ministry of Health for medical expertise when we need it, to our military friends, to the CPCO when we need transport or to be able to deploy the resources of the armed forces health service, to take just a few examples. In the same way, it’s through very close dialogue with our NGO partners that we define our priorities and projects together, but it’s then up to these NGOs to operate in the field. The CDCS must not be mistaken, and must not seek to replace others who have the competence, but on the contrary work together towards the most relevant and effective humanitarian responses.
This is reflected in the very organization of the CDCS. What strikes me as I arrive at the head of the CDCS is not only the great dedication and professionalism of the teams to whom I would like to pay tribute here, but also the wealth of backgrounds, skills and professions. You’ll find doctors, psychologists, magistrates, firefighters, gendarmes, diplomats, logistics and communications specialists, all of whom make up a richly diverse team that, I believe, is remarkably effective collectively.
I say this all the more casually because, as I’ve just arrived, I had nothing to do with it, and so it’s also a tribute that I pay not only to the teams in place, but to those who came before us. They were able to build, for the benefit of the most vulnerable in situations of atrocious conflict or war, an instrument that is a credit to the Republic, to put it mildly. In fact, I’ve noticed that our partners are increasingly interested in this model.
Alain Boinet: How would you like to conclude this interview?
Philippe Lalliot: First of all, I think that the National Humanitarian Conference came at just the right time. It was long-awaited by all the humanitarian players. Circumstances have given it particular resonance. Simply because in Ukraine and Gaza, and in a number of other crises the world is experiencing today, we find the major themes that were debated for a whole day with all those who took part in this National Humanitarian Conference.
Secondly, I think that the Strategy, because it is the result of a collective effort, in particular with the NGOs whom I would like to thank here, reflects the state of our thinking on major humanitarian issues. It provides what I consider to be an objective assessment of what has been done in recent years, and projects all our partners towards the issues that will be our priorities in the future, both thematically and geographically. On all these subjects, we will only find effective responses if they are collective, and therefore if we maintain the working method that has proved so successful between us.
The town of Dnipro, in eastern Ukraine, hit by new Russian missile attacks. © Proliska
My third and final remark is that we need to leave ourselves enough agility and flexibility to adjust our strategy along the way. It needs to remain relevant, and therefore needs to be systematically and almost daily confronted with needs, changes, constraints and difficulties. We therefore have a certain number of intermediate meetings which will enable us to take stock.
So I look forward to seeing you at the beginning of next year, and regularly over the coming months, all those who helped organize the CNH and draft the Strategy, and whom I would like to thank for their help and commitment.
Alain Boinet: I’d like to thank you for this interview for the online magazine Défis Humanitaires, whose raison d’être is to identify the major challenges that threaten and help mobilize capacities to face them, by better understanding the causal links between humanitarianism and geopolitics, as well as conflicts, disasters and epidemics. Without forgetting the respect we owe to the identity of the peoples with whom we work together in solidarity.
Philippe Lalliot
Philippe Lalliot has headed the Crisis and Support Center (CDCS) since August 2023. He began his career in 1996 in the legal affairs department of the Quai d’Orsay, before being seconded to the Prime Minister’s office in 1999, to the General Secretariat for European Solidarity Affairs.
From 2001 onwards, he was First Secretary in Washington, then Second Counsellor at France’s Permanent Representation to the European Union in Brussels, before returning to the Quai d’Orsay as Chargé de Mission to the Secretary General.
Between 2009 and 2013, Philippe Lalliot was Consul General of France in New York, then Director of Communications and Press, Spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
He was appointed Ambassador, Permanent Delegate of France to UNESCO in 2013 and, in 2016, Ambassador to the Netherlands and Permanent Representative of France to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. He has been France’s ambassador to Senegal and the Gambia since September 2019.
A graduate of the Ecole Normale Supérieure and Sciences Po, Philippe Lalliot holds an agrégation in economics and social sciences. He also holds a master’s degree in administrative sciences and a master’s degree in French literature. He has lectured at Sciences Po and ENA.
Philippe Lalliot has been appointed Chevalier de la Légion d’honneur, Chevalier dans l’ordre national du Mérite and Officier du Mérite agricole. He is Grand Cross of the Order of Orange-Nassau (Netherlands) and Grand Officer of the Order of the Lion (Senegal).
Find:
- Philippe Lalliot onLinkedIn : Philippe Lalliot
- The French Republic’s humanitarian strategy:
- National Humanitarian Conference 2023: https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/politique-etrangere-de-la-france/action-humanitaire-d-urgence/actualites-et-evenements/article/conference-nationale-humanitaire-cnh#sommaire_2
