In IFP we did an activity where we simulated effectively humanitarian aid from the perspective of the country providing the aid and the country receiving the aid. The group was split into two groups one group assigned the country Jay and the other Kah. Each group was given different briefings and then after 5 minutes the country providing the aid went into the country receiving the aid. Kah was the LEDC and Jay was the MEDC. I was part of Jay and we were told that we were going into a country that needed our help and we had enough resources for not only ourselves but for others. My group decided that we would take what we deemed most important which included education, crops, housing and medical care. Kah was told that they were finally free of their oppressors and that they were to build a statue to celebrate their freedom and their independence day.
Upon arrival we faced immediate backlash before we had even spoken. At the beginning it was very clear that we were not going to achieve what we wanted to and many of us wanted to leave as we not only felt unwelcome but also we believed that if they truly didn’t want our help then we should provide it to other countries. Unfortunately this could not happen in our scenario. After a few jokes we tried to take a more strategic approach. There was one person in Kah who was visibly the spearhead of their operation, they gave the most resistance and often silenced others in their group as it went against their beliefs. Our group found this very unsettling as we assumed that we would be welcomed with open arms. After talking in groups with other members of Kah without their ‘leader’ proved effective as they still didn’t have the same views as us but the conversation was able to move forward. This collaboration was useful as it gave an insight into what they believed without being shouted at to leave, proving to be a constructive conversation between what could have been a dead end. When we all came back together as a group it was clear that most felt as though that situation was impossible to diffuse when one person speaks for everyone. It has high significance in todays times as COVID-19 has seen a spike in giving and receiving donations such as ventilators, masks and eventually vaccinations to other countries. I feel as though this activity made me more aware of the complexities that this issue raises making me more open-minded to different solutions. Moreover, his made me think about how do LEDC’s think about humanitarian aid. It made me question the ethics of forcing help when one believes they don’t need it. Should we force aid to help other humans or leave them under their ruler who may be doing more harm than good?