1. The Securitization of Aid to Education After 9/11 MARIO NOVELLI, CENTRE FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX & UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM Prepared for International Seminar: Education and International Development: Why research matters. Amsterdam, September 2011

2.  Introduction: The rise of security, conflict & education  Security and Development: The new common sense  The Dangers of the securitisation agenda  Conclusions and ways forward....

3.  In the strategic defence and security review one year ago, the UK coalition gov’t pledged to double by 2014 the £1.9bn that is spent on "fragile and conflicted states".  Learning For All: DFID’s Education Strategy 2010–2015 – 50% of all aid to conflict affected states goes to education, and 50% of all UK aid to be targeted at conflict effected states.  These shifts are also occurring in US, Australia, Canada, the Netherlands – with more resources targeting conflict affected states & 3 D strategy  Education delivery now seen as part of emergency relief package (since 2008)  Increased focus on Madrasas, out of school youth, demobilised soldiers as ‘problems’ that need to be ‘contained’  UKFIET/CIE ; education and conflict industry that has emerged since 2000

4.  Drivers:  1990’s Human Security and right to intervene  2000 EFA DAKAR – 50 % out of school in conflict states  2001 – 9/11 conflicts elsewhere can come to us  2006/7 – failure of US led military strategy – soft power  2008 – Economic crisis and the pressure to prove use of AID for Northern Donors Effects Changing environment for ‘education and development specialists’ to work in : new actors, agencies involved, with very different agendas

5.  Security and Developments relationship is accepted by all players  But the rationales behind this link are different  Two main drivers  Reaching EFA (40% of out of school children are in conflict affected states)  Post 9/11 Security Concerns  Not just a division between state vs. civil society, but also within the state

6.  For the EFA agenda in conflict affected states its about how to deliver education in conditions of conflict/post conflict – strategies, good practice, resources etc  For the Security Agenda its about how can development aid and education aid be used to protect OUR SECURITY HERE  Does it matter?

7.  The Merging of Security and Development is leading to:  Development objectives being sidelined for national security issues (unequal power of departments) – as in the Cold War  Education being seen by the militaries (particularly in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan) as an arm of counterinsurgency strategy – a means to an end  Development aid and education aid therein is unevenly distributed to countries in conflict:

8. Fifty percent of net ODA benefited just five out of 48 fragile and conflict affected countries (OECD/DAC 2008:9)

9.  Education & Development projects often become aimed at short term concerns – winning hearts and minds, keeping youth busy, building school for propaganda purposes  Aid workers become seen as part of military and security agendas – by both sides:  Co-option  Increased Casualties amongst aid workers  Makes schools targets  Reduced credibility of western development & humanitarian organizations  Development aid delivers less and becomes further undermined –thus reducing public commitment

10. 1. Need for a problematisation of the security turn in development and education (challenge dominant common sense on relationship between Sec & Dev) 2. Need to question the quality, not just quantity of aid to education in conflict affected states. 3. Need to Intervene in debates on the nature of aid to education in conflict effected state – challenge short-term security use of education and promote long term sustainable development as a sustainable security solution. 4. NGOs and Humanitarian orgs need to work on codes of conduct/limits to engagement with militaries & agencies seeking to politicise their work & strategies to cope with security challenges