USAID: Centering LGBTQI+ People and Communities in Humanitarian Responses

August 2, 2022 — Right now, we are facing some of the greatest humanitarian challenges in history. Wars, political strife and instability, climate change, and poverty are all driving mass migration, from Afghanistan to Ukraine, from East Africa to Syria, from Myanmar to Venezuela, and in many more corners of the world. We are also struggling to respond to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, especially in under-resourced countries.

Given these interconnected crises, the U.S. government’s humanitarian response programs through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) are essential, perhaps more than ever, as literally hundreds of millions of people require assistance.

These challenges expose starkly how structural inequality puts the most vulnerable at risk. This includes the millions of LGBTQI+ people already facing discrimination, violence, poverty, and other human rights violations — risks often compounded by intersecting identities of race, gender, class, religion, ability, age, or other factors that further heighten social, political, and economic marginalization.

The Council for Global Equality, in consultation with its member organizations, has had the opportunity to review the draft of USAID’s proposed Humanitarian Action Policy. We appreciate the early steps USAID has taken to promote LGBTQI+ inclusion in its revised policy, but these steps do not go far enough. LGBTQI+ people and communities must be included consistently and comprehensively in USAID’s Humanitarian Action Policy.

Our full, technical recommendations can be found here.

Explicit Commitments to LGBTQI+ People and Communities

The draft policy includes LGBTQI+ communities in some of its terminology and in some lists of marginalized groups, but it does so inconsistently. LGBTQI+ communities must be identified explicitly among the most vulnerable groups in any enumerated list of vulnerable populations, and lists of marginalized stakeholders should mention LGBTQI+ individuals and the community-led organizations that support them. The policy also should insist that in addition to being culturally “relevant,” interventions should be culturally and linguistically responsive as well.

Promisingly, the section on “Gender Equality and Protection” focuses on the empowerment of “gender-diverse persons” as a component of any effective humanitarian action. We welcome the reference to “gender-diverse persons,” but this does not include all persons of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, nor is it fully inclusive of or an effective substitute for more inclusive LGBTQI+ terminology.

Given how these communities are routinely excluded from humanitarian programs and opportunities, the policy’s language should be expanded to include “persons of diverse sexual orientations, gender identities, and variations in sex characteristics,” or at the very least, it should revert to the standard language of LGBTQI+ persons.

Consultations and Partnerships

USAID should dedicate appropriate attention to the complexities of consultations with LGBTQI+ communities and organizations in hostile criminalizing contexts, while simultaneously recognizing that such consultations, while challenging, are almost always possible and can be conducted effectively with careful attention to the safety and security of the community.

As such, USAID has an obligation to consult with LGBTQI+ individuals and their local organizations in all humanitarian response operations and should develop security protocols to do so safely and effectively. Consultations with humanitarian partners does not substitute for direct consultations with LGBTQI+ leaders and organizations that understand the needs and vulnerabilities of the community.

We are pleased that the policy draft emphasizes USAID’s comprehensive non-discrimination policy as a cornerstone of all humanitarian action. That policy already prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity in any humanitarian response. But recent humanitarian crises have demonstrated the need to move beyond a “do no harm” framework, grounded in nondiscrimination, to an active consultation and partnership framework, grounded in deliberately consultative outreach to LGBTQI+ leaders and organizations.

Without this action-oriented partnership approach, the needs and perspectives of diverse LGBTQI+ communities, especially those who are even further marginalized within LGBTQI+ communities such as lesbian and bisexual women, trans people, and intersex people, will continue to be ignored, systematically excluded, or misunderstood in humanitarian actions.

Funding

Placing affected LGBTQI+ communities at the center of humanitarian action will require specific targets and dedicated funding for local, LGBTQI+-led organizations. When the temporary use of intermediary organizations is essential, all efforts must be taken to ensure that the intermediaries have a deep connection to LGBTQI+ communities. Unfortunately, very few large intermediaries that are active in the humanitarian response space have deep LGBTQI+ competency.

Sexual Exploitation and Sex Work

We are concerned that the draft language on protecting individuals from sexual exploitation and abuse risks conflating sexual exploitation in vulnerable situations with consensual sex work and may impinge on the rights of sex workers. The policy must specifically distinguish sexual exploitation and abuse from consensual sex work and ensure that sex workers themselves are not put in further harm’s way during humanitarian crises by punitive policies. These issues are of particular concern for LGBTQI+ communities, given how economic discrimination drives many sexual and gender minorities — especially transgender people — to engage in consensual sex work, and given how this dynamic is accelerated by the kinds of crises that require a coordinated humanitarian response.

Additionally, in the draft policy’s lists of populations who are marginalized as a result of environmental, social or economic forces, there is no mention of sex workers who suffer from many of these overlapping challenges as well as from discriminatory laws and policies. When USAID says it will seek the input of marginalized groups, the Agency must ensure that policies and programs also meet their needs of sex workers, and that they do not neglect or further stigmatize this population.

Reproductive Health and Rights

The draft policy declares its commitment to reducing the risks faced by women, girls, and gender-diverse persons in crisis and conflict and to meet the specific needs of women, girls, and gender-diverse persons who have experienced or are at risk of violence, exploitation, and abuse. However, for nearly 50 years, the Helms Amendment has been incorrectly applied as a total ban on U.S. foreign assistance for abortion care. The Helms Amendment restricts U.S. foreign assistance for abortion as a “method of family planning” alone. Safe abortions in cases of rape, incest, and life endangerment do not fall within this category and are not proscribed by U.S. law. Accordingly, we urge USAID to issue guidance stating that U.S. foreign assistance can support abortion care in cases of rape, incest, and life endangerment, including for victims of conflict-related sexual violence. 

Displacement and Migration Issues

The policy does not adequately address the vulnerability of LGBTQI+ persons in the context of displacement, migration, and refugee protection. The policy notes in passing that “Many people living in hazard-prone and climate-exposed areas experience other vulnerabilities that compound risks and make migration their preferred adaptation strategy.” This is certainly true of LGBTQI+ migrants, and the policy should emphasize the unique vulnerabilities that disproportionately drive LGBTQI+ individuals to seek protection through migration. The policy should also note that these same factors make LGBTQI+ migrants more vulnerable during flight and while internally displaced or in refugee camps or detention facilities at their points of destination. LGBTQI+ individuals need tailored evacuation options and special accommodations at every step in the evacuation or migration process.

USAID Structure

Understanding that the Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance (BHA) leads for USAID on disaster assistance, the policy should nonetheless highlight coordination mechanisms and require formal consultations with thematic experts across USAID in all major humanitarian response operations, including consultations with the Senior LGBTQI+ Coordinator.

Learning from the Past

We are grateful to USAID for this consultation process and are hopeful that the Agency will learn from past shortcomings in humanitarian response, especially unprecedented challenges in Afghanistan and Ukraine. In the humanitarian response sector, USAID has additional work to do to fully implement President Biden’s directive that “It shall be the policy of the United States to pursue an end to violence and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics, and to lead by the power of our example in the cause of advancing the human rights of LGBTQI+ persons around the world.”