Where to find Security Analysis in High Risk situations
“Building trust in relationships so information is shared across organizations, teams, and within communities is a wise approach to faith-based security analysis.”
Those who are new to the field of risk analysis still may wonder how security is monitored and analysis happens, and what the sources are available. There are free and paid sources, but also a risk network has developed. Relationships and trust on the ground are some of the best sources.
But the longer one lives in a risk situation, the more one develops broad based contacts who can help speak into the situation. Note that all of the items below are the ones on the ground. However, it is wise to get input from professional security experts who are analyzing from a sending country.
The role of the regional and HQ staff is to continue to monitor security reports and in dialogue with the field staff on the ground, make the decision when a situation, project, and people are in more risk/danger than is tolerable. This is where assessing the Holy Spirit's leading and the calling of the individual and the organization is crucial. If the folks are called to stay, then all measures are already put in place to handle the looming crisis.
Communication is key.
How does an NGO or Organization monitor the security context?
The NGO Security Officer, Regional Team Leaders, and Country Director, gather and interpret information from the following sources:
1. International NGO Security Organization (INSO)
INSO security incident reports and analyses give a consistent measure of Armed Opposition Groups (AOGs), Government of ABC Country (GOA), and criminal activity in each region of ABC Country. INSO’s analyses are based on incident analysis, consideration of AOG statements (in the media and through back channels and at local place of worship), and other data.
INSO reports are not comprehensive but are consistent enough to provide adequate trend analyses. More information on INSO is available at this link.
2. Local staff assessments.
Some local staff have a good ‘feel’ for what might happen with respect to security. While individual assessments are subjective and not necessarily completely reliable, collating assessments gives a more reliable picture. It's a good idea to get input from various socio-economic levels of local staff and friends.
What my illiterate guard thinks may be just as important as the most senior level and highly educated local liason. Both are in tune to the local culture at different levels and have quite a bit at stake in the situation as well.
3. Incidents involving NGO and other NGOs and their staff.
It is important to evaluate the incidences. Are they opportunistic? Then they are less threatening. Simple mitigation will mitigate future events. Are they coordinated, complex attacks? Then a lot more evaluation needs to occur.
What is the demographic and geographic proximity to the project? When both of these are intersecting, then one's security level should change. What is the severity and frequency of these incidences? Keep a timeline of events as well as a map of where they are occurring and to whom will aid in evaluation.
4. Threats, general and specific.
Threats may be made to elicit a response (without any intention to carry out the threat), or may be statements of real intent. It is difficult to determine the length of time for which a threat applies.
However, we must evaluate the source of the threat. Threats are one of the hardest aspects to evaluate, because they make the risk situation incredibly confusing. It's hard to know what reality is. It is highly recommended for folks on the ground in the risk situation to regularly discuss with their security team (or leadership or RMT/CMT) who is outside of the situation what is happening, what threats are being made and by whom.
A regular reality check is important here, especially as risk increases. Folks on the ground are wise to incorporate the assessment from their security and regional team who have been regularly walking with them.
Some questions to consider:
Have they followed through on their threats before?
What is their position in the "strong man" hierarchy
What is their political and religious motivation for their threat?
Who are they trying to please by making the threat?
Who is backing them with arms, power, and other resources?
What Westerners often don't take into account is the fear/power distance from their own culture, as well as the shame and honor issues of what is happening, along with a struggle for political and religious power. See this link to evaluate the differences from your home culture and your host culture. Hofstede's work is invaluable for understanding more of the background to the political climate, war of words, and possible motivations for what leaders are saying.
5. General political situation.
Internal ABC Country politics, international relations, and relationships between the GOA (Government of ABC Country)and AOGs (Armed opposition groups). Although not specifically focused on security, the ABC Country Analysts Network provides valuable assistance in interpreting and navigating the fluid political context. See websites providing analysis for your host country.
6. Formal and informal consultations with other INGOs.
In addition to regular Heads of Agency Security Meetings for like-minded NGOs, meetings are held with senior ICRC staff as the need arises (ICRC staff work in almost every place a Christian NGO works), and less formally with the Security Officers and other relevant staff of INGOs working in the same provinces and/or sectors.
Download the Global Risk Resource List.
Feel free to contact me to request consultation of Neal and/or me. For those from faith-based agencies and who raise their own support, our consultation service with you is already paid for.
