The United Nations Under Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, Tom Fletcher, is the figure behind the coordination of global efforts to deliver humanitarian aid to some of the world's most severe crises.

As head of OCHA (the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs), he plays a critical role in protecting civilians, mobilizing international support, and ensuring access for the delivery of aid in conflict zones such as Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan, Syria, Afghanistan, and Yemen.

With a significant diplomatic background as former UK ambassador to the Middle East and foreign policy advisor to three UK Prime Ministers - including Gordon Brown and David Cameron - he told the Athens-Macedonian News Agency in an exclusive interview that he "resists the politicization of humanitarian aid." 

He emphasized that the independence of humanitarian action remains at the forefront of efforts to integrate humanitarian issues into the broader priorities of the United Nations.

The full text of the interview with UN Under Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Tom Fletcher, to ANA-MPA and Georgia Garantzioti:

The IPC has warned of imminent famine in northern Gaza. What is the current status of aid delivery efforts given the Israeli limitations on the aid's delivery and Do you consider that the current mechanisms are protecting aid workers adequately, or is there a need for a structural overhaul?

"Truckloads of life-saving aid are finally on the move into Gaza again - flour for bakeries and nutrition supplies for malnourished children. But the tiny quantities allowed through are a drop in the ocean of need for 2.1 million people cut off from aid for more than than 11 weeks. The latest IPC analysis warns that people across the Strip are at risk of famine. After nearly 80 days of a total blockade on aid and all other supplies, much, much more vital assistance must get through - now. The Israeli authorities must support humanitarians' efforts to bring these supplies into Gaza and facilitate their safe movement - via secure routes - to everyone in need, everywhere across the Strip. 

In the past 19 months, more than 400 aid workers have been killed in Gaza. Nowhere is safe. But this is not because our mechanisms are failing - we've repeatedly shown that when we can deliver, we deliver. And in conflict zones around the world, our security risk management has proven effective and allowed us to carry out vital aid operations. The protection of aid workers hinges on parties to conflict protecting civilians and respecting their obligations under international law. If this were the case, humanitarians could work safely. No mechanism will ever be able to protect aid workers against a party that acts recklessly or shoots at our vehicles and premises. 

I have called repeatedly for the protection of civilians - including humanitarian workers - in armed conflict, most recently during the Security's Council's annual debate on the matter, convened by Greece during its presidency of the Council this month. "The scaffolding built last century to protect us from inhumanity is crumbling," I warned. "Those who will die as a result need us to act."

With humanitarian needs in Ukraine remaining acute, particularly in frontline areas, how is OCHA adapting its operations in response to continued hostilities and attacks on civilian infrastructure?

"Every day, attacks by the Russian Federation drive misery deeper into the lives of civilians. Communities on the front lines - which are constantly shifting - continue to be hardest hit. When I visited areas earlier this year, aid workers were not just present - they were in action, responding and delivering. Under the leadership of our Humanitarian Coordinator, Matthias Schmale, and in lockstep with the Government of Ukraine, OCHA is making sure the humanitarian response remains nimble and adapts to fast-moving developments on the ground.

Securing humanitarian access in an active conflict zone doesn't happen by chance: It requires constant, coordinated effort - and OCHA leads on this advocacy so that aid and services reach people in need safely, quickly, and in line with humanitarian principles. Through our humanitarian notification system, we provide vital information about aid movements and premises to the Ministries of Defense of both parties to facilitate compliance with international humanitarian law. 

Since the start of the full-scale invasion, OCHA has coordinated over 200 inter-agency convoys, bringing life-saving assistance to 850,000 people in front-line communities, complementing the work of the broader humanitarian community. 

The risks are real: Two aid workers have been killed and nearly two dozen others injured this year alone. Despite this, Ukrainian and international aid organizations are doing everything they can to reach civilians in need each day. They carry on despite severe funding shortfalls, which have forced a global humanitarian reset. In Ukraine and everywhere we work, OCHA and our partners are reprioritizing our responses to focus on the most life-threatening needs and bring humanitarian action much closer to the people we serve. Just to reach 4.6 million of the most vulnerable people in Ukraine - front-line communities, displaced families, the injured, and those who need evacuation support - we'll need $ 1.7 billion. Yet to date, we've received just over $ 650 million for the year. 

We cannot let generosity fall behind need. As this brutal war grinds on for a fourth year, the people of Ukraine deserve our unwavering commitment to stand with them through the toughest days ahead".

What is OCHA's position on balancing early recovery initiatives with severe emergency responses, especially in parts of Syria outside interim government's control?

"More than 13 years into the crisis, Syria remains trapped in a cycle of conflict and crisis - and we have an historic opportunity to step up. There's a clear need to invest in early recovery to build resilience and reduce longer-term dependence on aid. But we're not there yet - given insecurity, displacement and limited access, life-saving interventions remain the top priority. 

In Syria, as in every other humanitarian crisis where OCHA operates, we base our work on need and humanitarian principes, not by who controls which area. Between January and March of this year, we reached some 2.5 million people a month. That's thanks to the sustained presence of the humanitarian community, working under very difficult conditions and facing operational cliffs.

But we're running out of money. Almost halfway through 2025, the UN and our partners have received just 10 per cent of the $ 2 billion we need to reach 8 million of the most vulnerable people in the country through next month. This yawning funding gap puts our ability to maintain emergency and recovery assistance at risk.

Unlocking longer-term development and stabilization financing is essential, no doubt. But right now, humanitarian funding must keep flowing to stem Syria's crisis". 

Given the collapse of the local economy in Yemen, how does OCHA intend to strengthen its humanitarian diplomacy-both with de facto authorities and regional actors-in order to ensure access, civilian protection and humanitarian principles on the ground?

"Since Day One, OCHA's message - to the parties in Yemen, in the region and around the globe - has not wavered: To reach people in need, barriers must be taken down, international humanitarian law has to be respected, and Member States need to firmly support the protection of humanitarian space. 

Humanitarian access remains a mammoth challenge in Yemen. The operating environment is growing more and more restrictive, impeding the scope and efficiency of aid operations. Between this January and April alone, our humanitarian partners reported over 110 access incidents, everything from bureaucratic impediments to restrictions on aid workers' movements, interference in humanitarian activities, and threats to humanitarian workers and assets. Each incident means delays or disruptions in delivering life-saving assistance.

Despite the challenges, the UN and our partners remain on the ground, doing everything we can to deliver aid to those in Yemen who rely on it. And we continue to engage with the Government of Yemen and the de facto Houthi authorities to ensure that we can maintain principled humanitarian access to people in need". 
 

With Afghanistan facing growing humanitarian needs under worsening economic conditions, how has OCHA navigated Taliban restrictions on female aid workers and sector-specific operations?

"The world cannot stay silent as Afghan women and girls are being pushed out of public life. When I visited Afghanistan last month, the many women I met told me they wanted to be heard, not saved, to balance public statements with quiet engagement. 

In all of my meetings with the de facto authorities, I underscored the vital importance of women and girls to the humanitarian effort - and to Afghanistan's future. 

Let's be clear: when women can't move freely, they can't access essential services, and they can't help other women either. These directives have added an additional layer of complexity to daily humanitarian operations in Afghanistan. But we continue to engage with all parties at all levels. The UN and our partners are finding ways to make sure that female staff can continue aid work and that women-led and women-focused organizations are represented at the highest levels of humanitarian decision-making.

In Kunduz, I heard from women health workers about how access to critical care is shrinking as resources dry up and force other health providers to shut down. Pregnant women have lost their babies because healthcare is too far, too expensive or too late. Funding cuts are costing lives, and the international community has a moral duty to mobilize more support for Afghan women".

The conflict in Sudan has led to mass displacement and severe aid access constraints, especially in Darfur and Khartoum. What are OCHA's priorities in engaging both parties to allow safe humanitarian corridors?

"Sudan is one of the toughest places for humanitarians to deliver aid right now. Front lines are shifting by the day, conflict dynamics are hard to predict - all as many are teetering on the edge of famine. 

But just as we do everywhere around the world, our job is to stay out of politics and prioritize people who need our support, no matter where they are. We operate according to humanitarian principles - humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence - alone.

This means talking to all sides to get access - and that's exactly what we do in Sudan. Neutrality and impartiality are tools to help us reach people safely, including by ensuring that our humanitarian role is accepted by all sides. We engage directly with the parties to the conflict, with local communities, and with volunteers and civil society organizations on the front lines of the response. As Emergency Relief Coordinator, I also take that advocacy to the global level, including to the UN Security Council. 

We don't have a one-size-fits-all approach on the ground. Where people have safe and predictable access to markets, we support the use of cash. In other areas, we move in large amounts of food and relief supplies, which requires navigating red tape and security risks. Some areas remain effectively cut off - like El Fasher in North Darfur and parts of the Kordofan region - and we continue to push for safe access to these areas". 

With spillover into neighboring countries like Chad and South Sudan, how is the regional humanitarian strategy being coordinated and funded?

"The war in Sudan has unleashed the world's largest displacement crisis, shaking an already fragile region. Since April 2023, 12 million people have been forced to flee their homes, with nearly a third having sought refuge in neighbouring countries: the Central African Republic, Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya, South Sudan and Uganda. UNHCR is leading on the Regional Refugee Response, an appeal for $ 1.8 billion launched earlier this year that is woefully underfunded - just 12 per cent to date. 

Across the region, our humanitarian leadership is coordinating closely - not just to track movements of people across borders, but also to monitor conflict dynamics and assess socio-economic strain. Chronic underfunding of our response efforts is a huge concern: The reality is that if we don't support people where they are, they will keep moving onward, into the broader region and beyond. 

When I visited Sudan late last year, I also traveled to eastern Chad, where host communities have been supporting nearly a million people who fled the violence in Sudan over the past 26 months. Food, water, healthcare, nutrition assistance, and sanitation and hygiene services - everything is urgently needed. What struck me most was the unwavering generosity of people in Chad's eastern provinces, and it must be matched by international solidarity".

The UN faces an ever increasing deadlock, which seems present in every aspect of it, yet it tends to manifest itself more explicitly in its political and peacekeeping agenda (Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan, Haiti, Cyprus). As a result, there are some who would advocate a "more humanitarian" UN. But would you consider humanitarian affairs to be immune from this political deadlock? Or maybe even a way for the UN to be "reactivated" in the political field?

"These are tough times for the multilateral system, and unfortunately, the global humanitarian response is not being spared. Around the world, people in need are being cut off from essential support due to decisions to pursue military victory at any cost. At the same time, local and international humanitarian organizations are forced to scale back due to catastrophic funding shortfalls.

Yes, we do want to see more humanity across the UN system, there are also important reasons to maintain a distinction between humanitarian action and other forms of international engagement. Humanitarian work isn't political - it is implemented and prioritized solely on the basis of need. This is at the core of the principles of humanity, impartiality, independence and neutrality that frame our work, and through which we negotiate access and keep our personnel and partners safe. 

Of course, different considerations apply to other kinds of UN engagement. This not to say that we ignore one another, or that one is more important that the other - but maintaining this distinction is important. Humanitarian support or compliance with international humanitarian law cannot become bargaining chips in a larger process". 

Humanitarian affairs and emergency relief is not a core component of neither the UN Counter-Terrorism Architecture, nor the Peacebulding Architecture. However, one would argue that it plays a critical support role in both of them. Would you envision a stronger role for it in either one? Could this be a way for the UN to surpass the deadlock it increasingly finds itself into during the last years?

"OCHA is the UN Secretariat's only humanitarian entity - and that means we are responsible for making sure that humanitarian issues are an integral part of the conversation across the Organization. This includes counterterrorism and peacebuilding, which is why we have observer status in the UN Global Counterterrorism Compact, for example. We also work closely with entities like the Security Council's Counter-Terrorism Committee and the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs to look at the adverse consequences that counterterrorism measures and sanctions can have on humanitarian operations. Greece helped play an important role in spotlighting these impacts and promoting solutions, such as humanitarian exemptions, during the last high-level review of UN sanctions to date, which was sponsored by Athens back in 2015. 

But it's also critical that humanitarian action maintains independent. By definition - and in line with General Assembly resolution 46/182 - humanitarian action is neutral and impartial, free from political interference. Our only objective is to alleviate human suffering wherever it is found, based solely on the scale and urgency of people's needs - this is our raison d'etre.

Assigning security or political objectives to humanitarian work risks compromising the trust that allows us to operate and our colleagues' safety. And with humanitarian principles coming under unprecedented attack today, we must work harder than ever to defend them - clearly, consistently and collectively".