United Nations

WFM publishes many books pertaining to our work at the International Secretariat. Whether you want an overview of the history of World Federalism or an in depth analysis of the key issues pertaining to one of our projects, WFM’s publications make great references. The Center for UN Reform Education also has many relevant publications available for purchase.

Shocking report details the UN’s failure to protect the people of Sri Lanka


A United Nations (UN) report alleging the failure of the international body to uphold its responsibilities to protect civilians threatened by massive human rights violations during the Sri Lankan civil war was released on 14 November 2012, and quickly spurred impassioned reactions from civil society and UN actors. For many, the Report of the Secretary-General’s Internal Review Panel on United Nations Action in Sri Lanka confirmed their earlier claims that the UN did not act rapidly or robustly to protect the people of Sri Lanka. For others, the report was a shocking reality check that the international community still has a long way to go to build the necessary political will and capacity to respond to these deadly conflicts.

Large-scale civilian suffering during the civil war

The final stages of the Sri Lankan civil war, from August 2008 until May 2009, saw a dramatic escalation of violence between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), known as the Tamil Tigers, who had been fighting to establish the state of Tamil Eelam in the north of the country since the late 1970s. Violence was concentrated in the Wanni, a northern region, and clashes trapped hundreds of thousands of civilians without access to basic necessities or humanitarian aid.

At the time, several civil society organizations, including Human Rights Watchand Amnesty International, criticized the UN for its limited efforts to hold the Sri Lankan government accountable for likely war crimes and crimes against humanity. As noted in the report, the UN evacuated its staff in the Wanni in September 2008 when the government announced it would not be able to guarantee their security, and after that was largely unable to gain access to distribute humanitarian relief aid. With the end of the war in May 2009 came widespread calls to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to investigate the perpetrators of mass atrocities and UN efforts to protect civilians.  After a Panel of Experts, established by the UNSG, reported in April 2011 that many UN agencies and officials had not done enough to protect civilians, the UNSG created the Internal Review Panel on UN actions in Sri Lanka, which is responsible for the recently released report.

UN fails to protect Sri Lankan population

The report concludes that though the government and LTTE were primarily responsible for “killings and other violations” committed against the civilians trapped in the Wanni, the “events in Sri Lanka mark a grave failure of the UN to adequately respond to early warnings and to the evolving situation during the final stages of the conflict and its aftermath, to the detriment of hundreds of thousands of civilians and in contradiction with the principles and responsibilities of the UN.”

The report criticizes the UN for its overall lack of action on the crisis, condemning the evacuation of UN staff without protestation as a “serious failure”. According to the report, the UN system as a whole did not put enough political pressure on the government, and left its staff on the ground ill-prepared to deal with the escalating crisis. The report also draws attention to the fact that, though the UN officials had data on the number of civilian deaths and evidence that the government, in many cases, was responsible, they only reported on the violations committed by the LTTE. According to officials at the time, they were reluctant to release information about the government’s involvement out of fear it would further hinder their access to the population in the Wanni. The sole exception was a public statement issued by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on 13 March 2009, in spite of strong criticism by most UN senior officials, which reported on the number of casualties and declared that actions by the government and LTTE “may constitute international crimes, entailing individual responsibility, including for war crimes and crimes against humanity”.  The report concludes that “in fact, with its multiplicity of mandates and areas of expertise, the UN possessed the capabilities to simultaneously strive for humanitarian access while also robustly condemning the perpetrators of killings of civilians.”

According to the report, the low level of commitment to civilian protection in Sri Lanka was exacerbated by the inaction of Member States, who failed to take up the escalating crisis in the Security CouncilHuman Rights Council andGeneral Assembly. To what extent was the commitment governments made in 2005 endorsing their collective responsibility to protect populations from crimes against humanity and war crimes considered during the crisis? The report notes that though RtoP was raised in the context of the war, states were unable to agree on how the norm could help the international community halt the ongoing violence. The report concludes that governments “failed to provide the Secretariat and UN [Country Team] with the support required to fully implement the responsibilities for protection of civilians that Member States had themselves set for such situations.”

Civil society and former UN officials clash over the report’s findings

Civil society organizations swiftly responded to the report, calling for accountability and to use the example of Sri Lanka as an impetus to strengthen UN protection capacities. On 14 November Amnesty International’s José Luis Díaz called the report a “wake-up call for UN member states that have not pushed hard enough for an independent international investigation into alleged war crimes committed by both Sri Lankan forces and the LTTE in the last phase of the war.”  Philippe Bolopion of Human Rights Watch agreed, stating that the report serves as “a call to action and reform for the entire UN system.”  Additionally, Bolopion noted that “The UN’s dereliction of duty in Sri Lanka is a stark reminder of what happens when human rights concerns are marginalized or labeled as too political”.

Meanwhile, others reacted to the UN’s decision to evacuate its staff from the Wanni region. In reading the report, Edward Mortimer, who serves on the Advisory Council of the Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace and Justice and who formerly served as Director of Communications in the Executive Office of the UN, declared that he believed the UN left when they were most needed. The report, Mortimer stated, would show that the “UN has not lived up to the standards we expect of it…”

Benjamin Dix, a UN staff member in Sri Lanka that left the war zone, recalled his own doubts at the time, saying that he “believe[d] we should have gone further north, not evacuate south, and basically abandon the civilian population with no protection or witness….As a humanitarian worker questions were running through my mind – What is this all about? Isn’t this what we signed up to do?

Sir John Holmes, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs at the time of the crisis and one of those whom the report blames for underreporting the government’s responsibility for the violence, defended the UN’s actions. Holmes told BBC that “the idea that if we behaved differently, the Sri Lankan government would have behaved differently I think is not one that is easy to reconcile with the reality at the time.”  In an attempt to provide clarity on the UN’s decision not to report casualty figures, UN spokesperson in Colombo, Sri Lanka at the time, Gordon Weiss, stated that, “It was an institutional decision not to use those [casualty lists] on the basis that those could not be verified and of course they couldn’t be verified because the government of Sri Lanka wasn’t letting us get anywhere near the war zone.” However, his remarks starkly contrast the findings of the report.

Some took the opportunity to remind that the report highlighted the ultimate failure of the Sri Lankan government to protect its population from mass atrocities.Steven Ratner, a professor at University of Michigan’s Law School,stated, “the UN failed, but the Sri Lankan government is ultimately most responsible…They are the ones who have not begun a bona fide accountability process.”  Echoing this, Amnesty International’s José Luis Díaz noted that “The report clearly illustrates the Sri Lankan government’s lack of will to protect civilians or account for very serious violations. There is no evidence that has changed.

Report shows challenges in implementation must not lead to inaction

The Secretary-General’s report not only shows the need to uphold the responsibility to protect populations in Sri Lanka by preventing a culture of impunity for crimes against humanity and war crimes, it emphasizes the critical gaps that the international community must address to strengthen its political will and overall capacity to respond to emerging and ongoing situations of RtoP crimes.

With regard to the Responsibility to Protect norm, the report concludes that, “The concept of a ‘Responsibility to Protect’ was raised occasionally during the final stages of the conflict, but to no useful result. Differing perceptions among Member States and the Secretariat of the concept’s meaning and use had become so contentious as to nullify its potential value. Indeed, making references to the Responsibility to Protect was seen as more likely to weaken rather than strengthen UN action.” This finding serves as a sober reminder to governments, UN officials and the international community as a whole that though we continue to address important questions about how to implement the Responsibility to Protect, these disagreements must never hinder our commitment to react when populations are in dire need of assistance.  The report as a whole underlines the prevailing importance of the prevention of and rapid response to RtoP crimes and violations by highlighting a tragic example of the consequences when the protection of populations is not prioritized.

The initial establishment of the Panel and the Secretary-General’s decision to make its findings public show a commitment to holding perpetrators of the crimes committed in Sri Lanka accountable. However, as Human Rights Watch’s Philippe Bolopion said, “While Ban deserves credit for starting a process he knew could tarnish his office, he will now be judged on his willingness to implement the report’s recommendations and push for justice for Sri Lanka’s victims.”  The UNSGstated that the report’s findings have “profound implications for our work across the world, and I am determined that the United Nations draws the appropriate lessons and does its utmost to earn the confidence of the world’s people, especially those caught in conflict who look to the Organization for help.”  We can only hope that this report will act as a much needed impetus to reform the system as a whole to better respond to protect populations from the most horrific crimes known to humankind.

New Governance Needed for a New Year

Credit: UN Photo/Isaac Billy

By Lloyd Axworthy 

I write this under a certain cloud of apprehension. Ancient Mayan prophecies predict the end of the world on December 21st, 2012, which just happens to be my birthday. So in addition to preparing for another ring on the tree of life, I labour under the prediction that the aging process may not matter a hill of beans, it may just be a collective *poof*.

However, if the Mayans prove wrong and December 22nd dawns another day (likely at well below freezing here in Winnipeg), my sense of relief will be tinged with an ongoing feeling of dread and remorse. For there is a major and consequential shift taking place in the world I know, and the principles I believe in.  Namely, the demise of a period of time, where the world appeared to be working toward a system of cooperation and collaboration.

When was that period you may well ask? Last week, I attended the 15th anniversary of the Land Mines Treaty in Ottawa. There, I had the chance to talk to many had been involved in making the treaty happen, and one common theme arose out of our conversation: It was how in that period of the late 1990s, it was indeed possible for governments, NGOs and international organizations to work together to advance the principle of human security.  This collaboration then became the standard for collegial behaviour between nations and people to build up institutions and standards that offer protection  from threats and risks that cross border.  “Problems without passports,” as Kofi Annan described them.

Today, there is not the same motivation or commitment to multilateral problem solving. As a result, we are regressing to a world system that is becoming fractured and divided without a common cause to uphold, or stand on. Consider recent evidence: The Doha talks on climate change collapse without any serious movement towards an agreement to limit carbon emissions. At the same time, to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius there will have to be drastic cuts to greenhouse gas emissions on a global scale. This understanding exists as new information reveals that 1200 new coal plants are planned around the world [1], the majority in India and China.

Then there is the Eurozone financial morass. Once the model of interstate cooperation, and integrated, cross border policy and practice, the EU has become a sorry example of failure and bickering.

For those of us who took pride in peacekeeping, the sorry sight of UN peacekeepers being pushed aside in the Democratic Republic of the Congo as civilians are killed or rapes, or the tragic case of the Haitian cholera epidemic being traced to peacekeepers is an embarrassment. This is especially true of the effort of UN officialdom to downplay its consequences.

This is only surpassed by the futility of the UN membership, especially the P-5 to mount any form of protection for civilians in Syria, causing the institution to have lost any credibility as the keeper of peace and security.

Al of this simply adds up to a deepening crisis of international institutions to play the role of governance in a world of quarreling, quibbling nation states, sticking their heads in the sand when it comes to acting in a global interest. Why? Possible answers are the failure of leadership in the institutions, or the institutions themselves are becoming too unwieldy vis-à-vis the tens of thousands who populate the large UN conferences. Or is it that in difficult economic times, leaders have to hunker down on domestic issues and don’t have the time or inclination to focus on broader global issues that don’t have immediate political payoff. Daniel Rodgers in his recent book “The Age of Fracture” simply asserts that the consensus — the common acceptance of certain values and commitments has “disaggregated” to use his word and there isn’t much that we believe in together.

Whatever the reason, it is having disastrous effects, both domestically and globally. There is a real loss of direction and purpose, which results in an unwillingness to work much beyond our own immediate narrowly conceived national interests. This folly is symbolized by the refusal of the US Senate to ratify a treaty on disabilities [2] that mirrored practices already in domestic law.

In this one sense maybe the Mayan prophecy is right. The sense of one world, of belonging to a community of shared interests is breaking down. Meanwhile, as the earth warms, natural disasters increase in severity, the public purse is strained to meet these catastrophes, and worst of all millions of innocent people die because of the failure to find common cause on prevention and solutions.

Too pessimistic? Maybe.

Ultimately, I want to issue an invitation to those who might be reading this blog. Let me know whether or not you agree that there is a crisis in our international governance. If you do tend to agree, or partially accept the argument, then offer your own suggestions on how to rehabilitate the concept of a collaborative system that can both incorporate the myriad of competing pressures and override this self-serving trend. Let’s get a conversation going on how to find a consensus to restrain violence, control emissions, exchange ideas and design better functioning international architecture.

Until then, Happy Holidays


Governments at the UN vote in favor of an Arms Trade Treaty

Credit: CICC

New York- On April 3 the United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly in favor of the Arms Trade Treaty, with 154 in favor, 3 opposed and 23 abstentions. The Treaty will create binding obligations for governments to assess all arms transfers. It will require governments to refuse any transfers of weapons if there is a risk countries would use them to violate human rights or commit war crimes. Another grownbreaking provision in the treaty is that it recognizes the link between gender-based violence and the international arms trade.

“The Arm Trade Treaty is a great step forward in dealing with the unregulated and illicit global trade in conventional weapons and ammunition, which fuels wars and human rights abuses worldwide”, said WFM-IGP Executive Committee Member Don Kraus. “How many of the 500,000 deaths worldwide that happen as a result of armed violence will be prevented? How many of these folks who will live productive lives as a result of today, will never know the historic reason why they are alive?”

“By voting yes on the Arms Trade Treaty in the UN General Assembly, an overwhelming majority of States proved they would not let a tiny minority obstruct a treaty that will save people’s lives. This hard-fought treaty is a victory not only for governments and civil society, but also for people around the world who suffer every day from the deadly, unregulated arms trade,” said Alexandra Hiniker, of IKV/ Pax Christi.

Seminar on UN Security Council Reform: UNSC 2020 & 2050

From Rwanda to Syria, from Eastern Europe to Asia, the UN Security Council is failing to protect millions of innocent civilians and refugees. There is a widespread agreement that the Security Council must reform - but how?

To discuss this question, on June 15th 2016, the World Federalist Movement – Institute for Global Policy (WFM-IGP) co-hosted a seminar on UN Security Council reform, along with the Workable World Trust and the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. The meeting was held across the road from the UN Headquarters in New York, and was very well attended - dozens of senior UN diplomats, leading UN experts and civil society representatives arrived, demonstrating a growing momentum and interest in UN Reform, and in particular, Security Council reform.

Different models for restructuring the Security Council were presented at the seminar - a few of them can be viewed here. Also discussed at the event were the next steps in the two recent initiatives for Security Council veto restraint – the ACT initiative, which at the time had 111 government supporters, and the French-Mexican initiative which had 86 supporters. Both initiatives were strongly endorsed by international NGOs, who advocate a stop to the misuse of the veto in the Security Council.

“We realize the pessimism that often surrounds ‘Security Council reform’ but behind these three words reside the fate of the UN and the prevention of World War III,” said Mr. Bill Pace Executive Director of WFM-IGP, in his opening remarks. Prof. Joseph Schwartzberg, author of Transforming the United Nations System: Designs for a Workable World and director of the Workable World Trust, outlined a proposal for structural Security Council reform in his presentation and accompanying PowerPoint. He stressed, "to change the Security Council, we must build effective civil society and governmental coalitions and demand a ‘Workable-World’. It is not because it is difficult that we are afraid to act; it is because we are afraid to act that it is difficult.” Executive Director of Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung - New York Office, Ms. Bettina Luis Rurup, said in her opening comments: “paraphrasing our Trust’s founder, it’s true to say that today the UN needs democracy - but it also needs democrats.”

H.E. Ms. Raimonda Murmokaitė, the Permanent Representative of Lithuania to the UN, spoke about her frustrating experience as the president of the United Nations Security Council in 2014 and 2015, stating “we are not a factory producing press statements and resolutions." She further stated, "We need to ask ourselves - what is the impact of these statements and resolutions? Are they just an excuse for our existence, or do they make a difference?” H.E. Mr. Christian Wenaweser, the Permanent Representative of Liechtenstein to the UN, spoke about the ACT initiative on the Code of Conduct regarding Security Council actions against genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. He called for civil society to pressure more governments to sign the Code of Conduct.

H.E. Prof. Ibrahim Gambari the Former Foreign Minister of Nigeria and Co-Chair of the Commission on Global Security, Justice and Governance, spoke about the absurdity of the Security Council veto power, the difficult and unequal relations between the UN and the African Union, and about the commission’s approach to Security Council reform. Mr. Fergus Watt, Executive Director of World Federalist Movement – Canada (WFM-C), spoke about a campaign for United Nations Emergency Peace Service (UNEPS). Prof. Thomas Weiss, a leading authority on the UN, presented a skeptic’s view regarding the chances of meaningful UN Security Council reform in the near future. He also spoke about the missed opportunity to reform the UN at the end of the cold war. Ms. Nicole Fritz, from the African Futures and Innovation Program, Institute for Security Studies (ISS), Pretoria, South Africa, spoke about the Elect the Council initiative for structural Security Council Reform. Prof. William Durch, the Research Director of the Commission on Global Security, Justice, and Governance, argued that aging institutions like the Security Council can be reformed and made more relevant to the needs of our times.

Notes taken during the seminar can be accessed here, and the general program of the seminar can be accessed here. Other documents handed out which might be of interest included a summary of recent efforts to reform the Security Council, produced by the Center for UN Reform Education, and a timeline of review processes and outcomes, produced by the International Peace Institute.

For any questions or input regarding the seminar and our work on Security Council reform please email info@wfm-igp.org.

"Unite for Peace" in Syria: Global Civil Society Appeal to UN Member States

UN Photo/Loey Felipe

WFM-IGP has joined a global coalition of more than 200 NGOs that has issued a declaration to the United Nations General Assembly to take meaningful action to stop the atrocities and protect civilians in Syria. While the UN Security Council has mandated with the primary responsibility of maintaining international peace and security, the UN General Assembly is able to recommend collective action when the UN Security Council has failed to uphold this responsibility under a "Uniting for Peace" proceducure, adopted in 1950. Therefore, we call on all Member States to convene an Emergency Special Session, and demand urgent intervention in aiding the victims and ending this ongoing humanitarian catastrophe.

The civil society declaration coincides with new research by Human Rights Watch, which shows that war crimes were committed in Aleppo during the Russian-backed Syrian Campaign in September and October 2016, with at least 440 civilians killed including 90 children.

The full statement and list of NGO signatories is below:

Uniting for Peace in Syria: Global Civil Society Appeal to UN Member States

The UN Security Council has failed Syrians. In almost six years of conflict, close to half a million people have been killed and eleven million have been forced to leave their homes. Most recently, the Syrian and Russian governments and their allies have carried out unlawful attacks on eastern Aleppo with scant regard for some 250,000 civilians trapped there. Armed opposition groups have also fired mortars and other projectiles into civilian neighbourhoods of western Aleppo, though according to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, “indiscriminate airstrikes across the eastern part of the city by Government forces and their allies are responsible for the overwhelming majority of civilian casualties. "Efforts to stop these atrocities and hold those responsible to account have been blocked repeatedly by Russia, which continues to misuse its veto power in the Security Council.

The UN’s special envoy to Syria, Staffan de Mistura, has warned that the UN must not allow “another Srebrenica, another Rwanda, which we are sadly ready to recognize written on that wall in front of us, unless something takes place.” Yet, there is no sign that the Security Council deadlock will end anytime soon. The guardian of international peace and security has failed to fulfill its task under the UN Charter and has failed to uphold its responsibility to protect the Syrian people.

This is why we, a global coalition of 223 civil society organizations, urgently call upon UN member states to step in and request an Emergency Special Session of the UN General Assembly to demand an end to all unlawful attacks in Aleppo and elsewhere in Syria, and immediate and unhindered humanitarian access so that life-saving aid can reach all those in need. Member states should also explore possible avenues to bring perpetrators of serious crimes under international law on all sides to justice.

We welcome Canada’s leadership in seeking UN General Assembly action and we strongly urge all Member States to join the 73 countries from all regions by endorsing their initiative. These countries should work toward an Emergency Special Session of the General Assembly at the earliest opportunity, as UN member states have done in the past when the Security Council was deadlocked.

We call in particular upon the 112 supporters of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) Code of Conduct, which includes a pledge to support “timely and decisive action” aimed at preventing or ending the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes, to join this effort and actively promote meaningful action through the UN General Assembly.

Inaction should not be an option. UN member states should use all the diplomatic tools at their disposal to stop the atrocities and protect the millions of civilians in Syria. History will judge harshly those that fail to step up.


  1. ABBAD
  2. Abrar Halap Association for Relief and Development*
  3. ActionAid International
  4. Action des Chrétiens pour l'Abolition de la Torture (ACAT)
  5. Afghanistan Global Civil Society Consortium (AGCSC)
  6. Africa Atrocities Watch
  7. African Centre for Transitional Justice (ACT-J)
  8. African Youth Initiative Network (AYINET)
  9. Ahl Horan*
  10. Alkawakibi Organisation for Human Rights
  11. Al Seeraj For Development And Healthcare*
  12. Amnesty International
  13. Amrha*
  14. Antiwar Committee in Solidarity with the Struggle for Self-Determination
  15. Arab Human Rights Organization - Libya
  16. Arab Program for Human Rights Activists (APHRA)
  17. Asia Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
  18. Assistance Mission for Africa (AMA)
  19. Associação Brasileira de Organizações Não Governamentais (Brazilian Association of NGOs)
  20. Association For Promotion Sustainable Development, India
  21. Association Medina
  22. Assyrian Human Rights Network (AHRN)
  23. Association de Soutien aux Médias Libres (ASML)
  24. Attaa for Relief and Development (ARD)*
  25. Attaa Association*
  26. Avaaz
  27. Badayl-Goa
  28. Badhon Human Development Organization (Badhon Manob Unnayan Sangstha)
  29. Balad Syria Organization*
  30. Basmeh & Zeitooneh For Relief and Development
  31. Basmet Amal Charity*
  32. Baytna Syria
  33. Big Heart Foundation
  34. Bihar Relief Organization*
  35. BINAA for Development
  36. Bonyan*
  37. Bridge of Peace
  38. Broederlijk Delen
  39. Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS)
  40. Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace
  41. Canadian Council for International Co-operation (CCIC)
  42. Canadian Labour Congress (CLC)
  43. CARE International
  44. Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace (CCJP)
  45. Center for Civilians in Conflict (CIVIC)
  46. Center for the Development of International Law (CDIL)
  47. Center for Conflict Resolution (CECORE)
  48. Christian Aid UK
  49. Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC)
  50. Collectif pour une Syrie Libre et Démocratique
  51. Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI)
  52. Concern Worldwide
  53. Conectas Human Rights
  54. Control Arms Foundation of India
  55. Council for Arab-British Understanding (Caabu)
  56. CCFD-Terre Solidaire
  57. Damascene House Foundation for Society Development*
  58. Deir Elzzor United Association - FURAT*
  59. Democratic Republic Studies Center
  60. Doctors of the World UK
  61. East African Civil Society Organisations' Forum (EACSOF)
  62. Economic Justice Network Sierra Leone
  63. Education without borders - MIDAD*
  64. Emaar AL Sham Humanitarian Association*
  65. Emissa for Development
  66. End Impunity Organization (EIO)
  67. Enjaz Development foundation*
  68. Equitas
  69. EuroMed Rights (Euro-Mediterranean Network for Human Rights)
  70. Foundation for Democracy and Accountable Governance (FODAG)
  71. Fraternity Foundation for Human Rights
  72. Fundación Jóvenes y Desarrollo
  73. Ghiath Matar Foundation*
  74. Ghiras Al Nahda*
  75. Ghiras Foundation for Child Care
  76. Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
  77. GOAL
  78. Greater Upper Nile, Bahr el Ghazal & Equatoria Youth Association (GUBEYA)
  79. Insan for Psychosocial Support*
  80. Halina Niec Legal Aid Centre (HNLAC)
  81. Hand In Hand For Syria
  82. Help 4Syria
  83. Helsinki Committee for Human Rights of the Republic of Macedonia (MHC)
  84. Humanitarian Relief Association - IYD*
  85. Human Appeal
  86. Human Rights Documentation Organization (HURIDO)
  87. Human Rights First Society - Saudi Arabia
  88. Human Rights Now (HRN)
  89. Human Rights Watch (HRW)
  90. Hungarian Helsinki Committee
  91. Instituto Brasileiro de Analises Sociais e Economicas (IBASE)
  92. ICJ Kenya
  93. IHH Humantiarian Relief Foundation
  94. Independent Doctors Association (IDA)
  95. Insan for Psychosocial Support
  96. Instituto de Estudos Socioeconômicos (INESC)
  97. Institute for Promotion of Civil Society (IPCS)
  98. Instituto Igarapé
  99. Intercultural Resources
  100. International Alert
  101. International Association of World Peace Advocates
  102. International Center for Policy and Conflict (ICPC)
  103. International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
  104. International Humanitarian Relief*
  105. International Rescue Committee (IRC)
  106. International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
  107. International Supporting Woman Association - ISWA*
  108. International Youth For Africa (IYA)
  109. Irtiqaa Foundation*
  110. Jonglei Development Agency (JODA)
  111. Jugend Eine Welt – Don Bosco Aktion Österreich
  112. Karam Foundation
  113. Kesh Malek
  114. KHOJ
  115. Latvian Platform for Development Cooperation (LAPAS)
  116. Maram Foundation for Relief & Development*
  117. Médecins du Monde France
  118. Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP)
  119. Middle East and North Africa Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (MENAPPAC)
  120. Misiones Salesianas
  121. Mother of Hope Cameroon (MOHCAM)
  122. Mountain Foundation*
  123. Najda now*
  124. Nasaem Khair*
  126. Non C'è Pace Senza Giustizia (No Peace Without Justice)
  127. Norwegian Church Aid
  128. Nuon Organization for Peace-Building
  129. Ohaha Family Foundation (OFF)
  130. Organization for Non-violence and Development (ONAD)
  131. Orient for Human Relief*
  132. Oxfam
  133. Pan African Lawyers Union (PALU)
  134. PAX
  135. Pax Christi Flanders
  136. Peace and Development Collaborative Organization (PDCO)
  137. People in Need (PIN)
  138. People's Action For Rural Awakening (PARA)
  139. People's Empowerment Foundation (PEF)
  140. Permanent Peace Movement (PPM)
  141. Physicians for Human Rights (PHR)
  142. Protection Approaches
  143. Qitaf Al Khair Relief Association*
  144. Quaker Peace and Social Witness
  145. Radanar Ayar Rural Development Association
  146. Relief International
  147. Relief & Reconciliation for Syria
  148. Rethink Rebuild Society
  149. Revivre
  150. Rideau Institute
  151. Rwanda Green Initiative
  152. Saed Charity Association*
  153. Sanayee Development Organization (SDO)
  154. Save A Soul*
  155. Save the Children
  156. Sedra Association For Charity*
  157. Shama Association*
  158. Shaml Coalition
  159. Snabel Al Khyr*
  160. Solidarity Ministries Africa for Reconciliation & Development (SMARD)
  161. Souria Houria
  162. South Solidarity Initiative
  163. South Sudan Action Network on Small Arms (SSANSA)
  164. South Sudan Christian Community Agency (SSCCA)
  165. South Sudan Human Rights Society for Advocacy (SSHURSA)
  166. South Sudan Law Society (SSLS)
  167. South Sudan Youth Peace and Development Organization (SSYPADO)
  168. South Sudanese Diaspora Civil Society Network (SSDCSN)
  169. Sri Lanka-United Nations Friendship Organisation (SUNFO)
  170. STAND
  171. Stichting Vluchteling (Netherlands Refugee Foundation)
  172. SUDO (UK)
  173. Syria Charity
  174. Syria NGO Alliance
  175. Syria Relief*
  176. Syria Relief and Development (SRD)
  177. Syria Relief Network (SRN)
  178. Syria Relief Organization*
  179. Syrian American Council
  180. Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS)
  181. Syrian Center For Legal Studies and Research
  182. Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression (SCM)
  183. Syrian Center for Statistics and Research (CSR-SY)
  184. Syrian Education Commission - SEC*
  185. Syrian Engineers For Construction and Development Organization - SECD*
  186. Syrian Expatriate Medical Association - SEMA*
  187. Syrian Institute for Justice
  188. Syrian League for Citizenship
  189. Syrian Medical Mission*
  190. Syrian Network for Human Rights
  191. Syrian Orphans Organization*
  192. Syrians for Truth and Justice (STJ)
  193. Takaful Al Sham Charity Organization*
  194. Tearfund
  195. The Center for Victims of Torture (CVT)
  196. The Commission for Disappearances and Victims of Violence (KontraS)
  197. The Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies (MIGS)
  198. The Red Elephant Foundation
  199. The Syria Campaign
  200. The Syrian Establishment for Human Care & Enhancement – MASRRAT*
  201. The Violations Documentation Center in Syria (VDC)
  202. Trócaire‎
  203. Tuba Dernegi*
  204. Unified Revolutionary Medical Bureau in East Gouta*
  205. Union Of Syrians Abroad*
  206. URNAMMU
  207. Vision GRAM-International
  208. Voice for Change (VFC)
  209. War Child
  210. White Hands - Beyaz Eller*
  211. Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF)
  212. Women Monthly Forum
  213. World Federalist Movement–Institute for Global Policy (WFM-IGP)
  214. World Renew
  215. World Vision
  216. Youth Forum on Foreign Policy
  217. Youth for Peace and Development
  218. Youth in Action Balochistan
  219. Youth in Action Nepal
  220. Yuwalaya
  221. Zimbabwe Human Rights Association (ZimRights)
  222. Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum
  223. 11.11.11

*These organizations are members of the Syria Relief Network (SRN), an umbrella organization of Syrian humanitarian NGOs working inside Syria and neighboring countries to provide relief to Syrians in need of assistance.

Subscribe to United Nations


New York
155 E. 44th St, Suite 1715
New York, NY 10017
Phone: +1212 599-1320
Fax: +1212 599-1332
The Hague
Bezuidenhoutseweg 99A
2594 AC, The Hague
The Netherlands
Phone: +31 70 363-4484
Fax: +31 70 364-0259