September 2, 2025 • 30 mins
On World Humanitarian Day, Inside Geneva spoke to a man who has dedicated his life to humanitarian work. He grew up in a quiet Swiss village – so what inspired him to take this path?
“When I was young, I quickly realised that many people didn’t have the same opportunities, they didn’t have equal chances. And to me, that felt fundamentally wrong,” says humanitarian worker Stéphane Jaquemet.
His first posting was to Gaza in the 1980s.
“Gaza was already in a bad state at the time. I think there were nightly curfews and raids by the Israeli army. They would break into homes and mainly arrest young people,” he says.
Then came the 1990s and the conflict in Yugoslavia.
“A conflict in the middle of Europe: I don’t think we were ready for that, or for witnessing the same kinds of violations. It was a truly horrific conflict; we saw real ethnic cleansing.”
Aid workers today face big challenges and serious personal risks. Yet Jaquemet remains committed. “I would encourage young people to remain interested in humanitarian work, ” he says.
Would he do it all again? “Yes, I would. I’m still motivated.”
Join host Imogen Foulkes on our Inside Geneva podcast.
Get in touch!
- Email us at insidegeneva@swissinfo.ch
- Twitter: @ImogenFoulkes and @swissinfo_en
Thank you for listening! If you like what we do, please leave a review or subscribe to our newsletter.
For more stories on the international Geneva please visit www.swissinfo.ch/
Host: Imogen Foulkes
Production assitant: Claire-Marie Germain
Distribution: Sara Pasino
Marketing: Xin Zhang
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
This is Inside Geneva .
I'm your host, imogen Fowkes,and this is a production from
Swissinfo, the internationalpublic media company of
Switzerland.
Speaker 3 (00:20):
In today's program when I was young, I very quickly
realized that there were many,many people who did not have
this equal opportunity, who didnot have equal chances, and for
me that was fundamentally wrong.
Speaker 1 (00:36):
The Israelis claim that Gaza has been quiet for the
last few years because theyrounded up or drove out all the
active Palestinian guerrillas.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
In the mid-80s.
Gaza was already bad at thattime.
There were curfew every night.
There were raids by the Israeliarmy.
They would break into houses,arrest mainly young people, the
young people.
Speaker 4 (01:06):
In Yugoslavia, an EC-led convoy heading for the
besieged town of Vukovar hascome under mortar fire.
Speaker 3 (01:12):
The idea that we would have a conflict in the
middle of Europe.
I think we're not ready forthat and we're not ready to see
the violation.
So it was a very awful conflict.
We had a real ethnic cleansing.
Speaker 4 (01:30):
The Serbs conquered several areas of Croatia,
notably bordering on Bosnia.
Here was the self-declaredRepublika Srpska Krajina.
Speaker 3 (01:38):
I think that was for me.
The exact definition of thehumanitarian work is that you
are dealing with incredibleviolation, but you can still do
something to help and support.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Hello and welcome again to Inside Geneva.
I'm Imogen Folks, and today webring you the fifth in our
series of summer profiles.
A few weeks ago, we brought youan aid worker who is in Gaza
right now.
Today we'll talk to someone whostarted his career as an aid
worker in Gaza 40 years ago.
(02:14):
A lifetime's work forhumanitarian organisations
followed in all sorts ofdifferent places.
Speaker 3 (02:21):
I'm Stéphane Jacquemé and I'm currently working for
the International CatholicMigration Commission, ICMC, as a
Chief Operating Officer, butbefore that I worked 25 years
for UNHCR and five years for theInternational Committee of the
Red Cross.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
So really a life's work in the humanitarian sector.
Speaker 3 (02:45):
Something like 40 years.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
yes, what did you think when you were a child?
What was it like when you weregrowing up?
Is that something you alwayswanted to do?
Speaker 3 (02:54):
I was born in Switzerland, in the Canton du
Valais, in a small town calledSaint-Maurice.
My parents had a small groceryshop.
They were not rich, but theywere, let's say, ambitious.
They wanted their children tostudy not to become rich, but to
study.
They wanted us to have a betterfuture than themselves, and I
(03:17):
think that was really very, very, very important for me.
For me, and despite the factthat my parents were not rich, I
was able to study first highschool and then university.
Of course, my parents investedin it, but there was also a
system which basically gaveequal opportunity to all the
(03:38):
children, and I think I wasreally when I was young, I very
quickly realized that there weremany, many people who did not
have this equal opportunity, whodid not have equal chances, and
for me, that was fundamentallywrong.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
You went to university in Switzerland, yeah,
and that was when you thoughtI'd like to be a humanitarian
worker yes.
How did that happen exactly?
Speaker 3 (04:08):
I mean, I studied law and just realized through my
law studies that in reality noteveryone was equal before the
law, that inequality was part ofwhat we have in almost every
single society.
Probably quite a bit better inSwitzerland than in other
(04:32):
countries, but even inSwitzerland I saw people who
were marginalized and I foundthat not right, that we had to
do something about it and thatif I had the privilege to be
(04:52):
able to study, to be successfulin my studies.
But I believe that if you areprivileged, one of your
responsibility is to support andhelp the people who are less
privileged.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
But your first posting was Gaza, that's quite a
difference, switzerland to Gaza.
Speaker 3 (05:12):
It's very, unfortunately, very, very
different.
And that was 40 years ago, inthe mid 80s, and Gaza was
already bad.
At that time there were curfewevery night.
There were raids by the Israeliarmy.
They would break into houses,arrest mainly young people.
Speaker 4 (05:35):
Israelis are not going to pull out.
That's the point.
There's no chance of theinhabitants of Gaza having their
freedom to do anything.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
The Israelis are worried that without their army
here, the Palestine LiberationOrganization will be back in
strength.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
But what shocked me was that very often they would
humiliate elderly people infront of young people and of
course, the young people werearrested.
Icrc at that time I was workingfor ICRC.
At that time ICRC was the firstorganization to have access to
the people under interrogation.
(06:12):
That was two weeks after thearrest.
Most of the people had beenbeaten up and they were really
in a very bad shape.
But it was very important to bethe first contact with these
people and then, immediatelyafter seeing the detainees, we
would visit the family and ofcourse, this first meeting with
(06:37):
the family was something very,very special.
It was extremely emotional.
I mean, the families wereextremely upset, but the idea
that we had seen their childrenwas so important for them.
So I think that was for me, theexact definition of the
humanitarian work is that youare dealing with incredible
(06:59):
violation but you can still dosomething to help and support.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
And when you look at Gaza now what do you think Just
awful?
Speaker 3 (07:08):
I mean, look at the number of deaths on every single
day, look at the number ofviolations, look at what almost
60,000 people killed, and what Ifind shocking is, generally
speaking, the lack of reactionof the international community.
(07:30):
It's probably even moreshocking than the violations.
Speaker 2 (07:34):
When you were there 40 years ago.
I mean, this is perhapshindsight, but you talk about a
community which was disrespected, I guess to a point where
violations could take placeeasily.
Could you have predicted what'shappening now?
Speaker 3 (07:54):
I don't think we could predict the level of
violations that we have today,but I think we could predict
that things would just get worse.
So when you have a pattern ofviolations and it just continues
and there is no realaccountability for those
(08:14):
violations, where you had moredecent political parties in
power, but that those moredecent political parties had a
pattern of violations, whatwould happen if you had other
political parties?
Couldn't care less about eventheir own reputation.
(08:37):
So yeah, I think we could atthat time predict that the
situation would deteriorate.
I don't think that everyonewould have expected to reach the
point where we are today.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
Gaza is, of course, the conflict that everybody is
talking about, sometimes to theneglect of other conflicts, and
you, of course, have been postedto many conflict and crisis
zones, to many conflict andcrisis zones.
You were also in formerYugoslavia, which interests me
because I actually also, asstarting out in my career, spent
(09:12):
some time there and also foundit quite something that I don't
forget, because we moved fromthis hope of Europe in 1989 to
war quite quickly.
Tell me about your experiencethere.
Speaker 3 (09:27):
Yes, I was posted in Krajina, which was the part of
Croatia which at that time wasbasically controlled by Serbian
militias, and I stayed there oneyear and I think it was indeed
a very, very difficult situation.
(09:48):
It was the first conflict inEurope after World War II.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
Astonishingly, on the Croatian side, civilians are
still up there with the soldierseither unable to leave their
homes or trying to get back tothem.
Speaker 4 (10:02):
Croatian President, franjo Tudjman, together with
military leaders, launchedOperation Storm to rid Krajina
of Serbs.
Speaker 3 (10:09):
And I think I had been posted in the Middle East,
in Africa, and then just theidea that we would have a
conflict in the middle of Europewas, I think we're not ready
for that and we're not ready tosee the exactly the same kind of
violation.
(10:30):
So it was a very awful conflict.
We had a real ethnic cleansing.
I mean the expression ethniccleansing was applied to the
conflict in former Yugoslavia.
I don't know whether it was thefirst time, but at least it was
really a kind of defining theconflict.
(10:51):
Again, it was a conflict wherethere were many, many violations
, but there was also the feelingas a humanitarian actor that
there was something that couldbe done.
We were not able to addressmost of the violations, but I
(11:12):
think we were able to supportpeople and to empower a number
of the refugees in particular.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
Did that give you comfort at the time?
Because I have quite a fewcolleagues in journalism and in
the humanitarian sector who cameout of the wars in former
Yugoslavia quite traumatised andquite frustrated that they went
(11:40):
either to report on atrocitiesand think that this might help
or to try to bring humanitarianrelief and found themselves
actually virtually helpless.
Speaker 3 (11:51):
You know, I guess it also depends on where you were
posted.
I mean, for people who wereposted, for example, in Sarajevo
, there was indeed frustrationabout convoys not being able to
have access to the population inBosnia, Several convoys were
(12:11):
delayed, etc.
Etc.
Speaker 1 (12:12):
He says you don't have permission to travel this
way, tell him I don't need hispermission.
He wants to check your vehicle.
Speaker 4 (12:20):
No, he's not checking my vehicle.
Un.
The refugees came through in 11covered trucks.
One truck was full of wounded.
It went straight to thehospital, the doctors stunned by
what they found inside.
Speaker 3 (12:34):
Some convoys were targeted, some of the drivers
were wounded, etc.
Etc.
So I guess that the people whowere in Sarajevo were indeed
deeply frustrated, and I hadother colleagues who were even
more traumatized.
Those were the people who were,for example, in a place like
Banja Luka, where they were thewitnesses of ethnic cleansing
(12:58):
without any possibility tosupport them.
Krajina was a bit of a forgottenpart of former Yugoslavia.
There was not much reportingabout it.
There were indeed violations.
I would not say that we weresuccessful all the time, but
there was, let's say, at leastsome willingness from the part
(13:21):
of the de facto authoritiesthere to at least facilitate
some of our work.
So I would say you know,humanitarian work you can be,
and in that sense I feel that Iwas privileged all my career
because I was never posted in aplace where I had the impression
(13:46):
that I was unable to do my job,my job with limitation, my job
with failure, etc.
But there was still thepossibility to influence the
authorities and to be able toprovide support to most of the
(14:06):
people.
By definition, humanitarianwork has failures, has
frustration work has failures,has frustration.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
You have been posted in many different places.
Is there one place, event, thatreally stands out, that you
don't forget or can't forget?
Speaker 3 (14:23):
Nepal.
Nepal was maybe the mostpositive one in the sense that
we had a large camp populationof Bhutanese who had been 15
years without any hope to return, any hope of resettlement In
the past decade, tens ofthousands of Bhutanese have
(14:46):
escaped what they claim to betyranny, torture and ethnic
cleansing.
Speaker 1 (14:51):
The government's clampdown sparked an exodus from
the kingdom to refugee camps inNepal In the early 90s.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
tens of thousands left, most not by choice.
Speaker 3 (15:01):
And suddenly a US official visited Nepal and
basically offered resettlementto the government of Nepal and
to UNHCR the government of Nepaland to UNHCR and after back
sound force, it was decided thatthe resettlement program for
Nepalese would start.
(15:21):
And then, during the time I wasUNHCR representative in Nepal,
we managed to resettle over50,000 Bhutanese to the US, but
also to Australia, canada, theNordic countries, and it has
been a remarkable resettlementprogram with a very large number
(15:46):
of the people being able tostart really a new life, to have
jobs, et cetera, et cetera.
It's a population, veryresilient population.
As soon as we started theresettlement program, they all
switched off, they all startedto learn English.
(16:06):
Well, that was remarkable.
I mean, six months later almostthe entire camp population was
speaking English, including theelderly.
So I mean that was justremarkable.
And you know, resettlement issomething so positive.
There are failures, there arepeople who cannot adjust, there
are people who have difficulties, but I would say, largely you
(16:30):
go from a camp situation whereyou really don't have any hope
of any form of integration, intoreally providing real
opportunities.
Speaker 2 (16:42):
You speak about that program of resettlement as one
of the most positive memoriesyou have of your career, and yet
this kind of program isscarcely happening anymore.
The United States hascompletely stopped its
resettlement program In Europe.
You know the narrative aroundmigration, refugees and asylum
(17:04):
seekers is almost uniformlynegative, and you spent 25 years
working for the UN RefugeeAgency.
What do you think about the waythe debate around this seems to
have shifted?
Speaker 3 (17:18):
It's extremely sad and it could have been avoided.
I believe All illegal entrywill immediately be halted and
we will begin the process ofreturning millions and millions
of criminal aliens back to theplaces from which they came.
Speaker 1 (17:38):
Anyone who comes here illegally should be deported
within hours and days, not weeksand months.
That is the will of the Britishpeople.
Speaker 3 (17:46):
I mean the problem.
If we talk about migrationgenerally speaking, today, the
narrative around migration isnot influenced.
It's dictated by the far right.
You don't see other politicalparties coming with a different
narrative.
They just respond sometimes andI would say most of the time
(18:11):
very weakly to the narrative ofthe far right.
And this is, in my view, themajor problem as long as we will
not have a different narrativeand this narrative should be
realistic, it should be based onfacts, it should be based on
what migration is.
(18:33):
Migration brings incredibleopportunities, but also
challenges, and I think it'simportant to acknowledge that
they are both opportunities andchallenges.
But when you talk to experts,including experts who are
leaning towards the right, theywill all agree that the way
(18:56):
migration is being handled bythe far right or by other
political party influenced bythe far right is wrong.
It doesn't work.
But you know, when you thentalk about the cost of living
and then you convince peoplethat their cost of living is
impacted because of foreignersor migrants, then I think this
(19:20):
is always the twist that youhave with.
You know the far right narrativeand you know, when I was UNHCR
representative for SouthernEurope and I was, in particular,
covering Italy and I was basedin Rome.
One day I was invited by asmall NGO saying do you want to
(19:40):
come to a discussion debate in amunicipality in northern Italy
and this municipality iscontrolled by the Lega the far
right and I was a little bithesitant.
I discussed with my colleaguesshould I go, should I not go?
In the end I took the decisionto go and of course I was in a
(20:02):
kind of in a room where therewere 200 people.
It was obviously not the mostfriendly environment.
I said I think can we agree onsome rules that I will respect
you but you will also respect me?
So I let you talk and you letme talk.
Then it was agreed.
(20:23):
And the conversation startedwith immigration, refugees etc.
And then we just realized thatthese specific municipalities
had been completely abandoned bythe authorities that people had
.
They were not flooded bymigrants and refugees.
(20:44):
Some people had never met arefugee or a migrant, but they
were absolutely convinced thatmost of their problems was
because of migrants or refugees.
In reality, there were no jobs.
The policy of the governmentwhich was to support small
(21:07):
enterprises, small businesses,had failed, that there was
corruption, that if you wanted ajob you needed to know someone.
All that had nothing to do withmigrants and refugees.
But of course, it was mucheasier to say your problem is
refugees and migrants.
(21:27):
And we ended up having a gooddialogue, a good discussion.
I'm not sure that that specificdialogue had a major impact,
but it also showed that there isa possibility.
But that needs to be replicatedseveral times and you need
(21:49):
leadership among the opposition,among the other political
parties, to really dare to speakup and to have a different
narrative and not to just havethe kind of same policies as the
far right.
Speaker 2 (22:07):
Very interested that you mentioned there speaking up
and you're referring topolitical leaders over the
question of immigration.
But I also wonder, because atthe beginning you also mentioned
the silence over Gaza.
Your profession istraditionally neutral, impartial
, to allow aid workers to workwherever and have some
(22:27):
protection, have trust, but doyou think that there are
occasions, given the world we'relooking at now, where
humanitarian leaders also needto speak out?
Speaker 3 (22:40):
Of course, I still believe that there are a lot of
merits to be neutral, impartial,etc.
Etc.
And that a discreet dialoguewith the authorities in a number
of circumstances is very, veryimportant.
If you openly criticize theauthorities, you may lose a bit
(23:00):
of leverage to obtain more fromthe same authorities, but that
will apply only if you aredealing with authorities where
there is still a minimum ofdecency.
When you have lost that kind ofdecency and Gaza is a very good
example I don't think there isany decency in the Netanyahu
(23:25):
government, I think in that kindof situation, I think it is the
responsibility of humanitarianactors, and not only of human
rights actors, to speak up.
Speaker 2 (23:38):
You have really spent your life working in this
sector.
But now here we are in 2025,the world does look quite bleak.
We're seeing big funding cutsto humanitarian work.
We've seen, particularly in theMiddle East, a brutal year for
(24:15):
aid workers.
Speaker 3 (24:16):
So many have been killed.
If you were talking to your own20-something self back in the
1980s, somebody now whointernational organizations like
UNHCR, icrc a little bit less,but IOM, for example, is the
case losing between 25 and 50percent of their funding.
(24:38):
So today we have thousands ofhumanitarian workers being laid
off and looking for a job.
So it means that thecompetition in the humanitarian
field is really very, very, very.
I think it's a very sadsituation.
So I would say you are a youngguy, you are motivated, you want
(25:04):
to have an impact, you want tobe able to fight for a better
world.
It's very complicated and yourchances to get a job is really
minimal.
So that's the reason for my no.
The yes is because I believethat, in spite of what happened
with is because I believe that,in spite of what happened with
(25:28):
the US cuts, with what we see interms of disrespect for the
rule of law, etc.
We are in a very negativesituation.
At the same time, I belong tothe generation who started
humanitarian work before thefall of the Berlin Wall and we
(25:49):
also realized that in the Istarted in the mid 80s, in the
mid and late 80s, but alsobefore you had the Cold War, you
had guerrillas being financedand basically these guerrillas
not only were financed, butbasically whatever violation
(26:12):
they would commit would betolerated.
So it was the end of a verynegative cycle and then, I would
say, in the 90s, 2000, 2010, wesaw a lot of improvement.
There was really a belief inhuman rights.
(26:33):
So I would say, based on thefact that maybe I started in the
late 80s and that I witnessed Iwouldn't say the golden age of
humanitarian work, but to someextent, some very positive
development, including on thehuman rights side, I still
believe that we will be able tosee a new, more positive cycle
(26:59):
and that's why I would encourageyoung people to remain
interested in humanitarian work.
Speaker 2 (27:07):
And you'd do it all again.
Speaker 3 (27:09):
Yeah, I would, I would.
I'm still motivated.
Speaker 2 (27:20):
And that brings us to the end of this edition of
Inside Geneva.
My thanks to Stéphane Jacquetfor his time and his fascinating
perspectives.
After a lifetime inhumanitarian work, Now about to
take a well-earned retirement,we wish him all the very best
for the future.
Join us again next time onInside Geneva where, ahead of
(27:48):
the UN General Assembly in NewYork, we ask how the United
Nations, now 80 years old, canreassert its relevance.
Speaker 5 (27:55):
We do sometimes forget that the UN still has
60,000 peacekeepers around theworld.
It's still running enormoushumanitarian operations.
Speaker 2 (28:05):
So the UN is not dead but I think the UN is drifting.
Richard Gowan of theInternational Crisis Group
brings us an in-depth assessmentand warns of the risks of
bypassing the UN.
Speaker 5 (28:18):
Donald Trump actually says that he wants the UN to
focus back on peace and security.
We prioritise globalpeacemaking, but the reality is
that the US and other powers arenot working through the UN on
any of the big crises of the day, which leaves the UN with the
crumbs.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
That's out on September 16th.
Do join us, then.
A reminder you've beenlistening to Inside Geneva, a
Swiss Info production.
You can subscribe to us andreview us wherever you get your
podcasts.
Check out our previous episodeshow the International Red Cross
(28:57):
unites prisoners of war withtheir families, or why survivors
of human rights violations turnto the UN in Geneva for justice
.
I'm Imogen Folks.
Thanks again for listening.
This is Inside Geneva .
I'm your host, imogen Fowkes,and this is a production from
Swissinfo, the internationalpublic media company of
Switzerland.
Speaker 3 (00:20):
In today's program when I was young, I very quickly
realized that there were many,many people who did not have
this equal opportunity, who didnot have equal chances, and for
me that was fundamentally wrong.
Speaker 1 (00:36):
The Israelis claim that Gaza has been quiet for the
last few years because theyrounded up or drove out all the
active Palestinian guerrillas.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
In the mid-80s.
Gaza was already bad at thattime.
There were curfew every night.
There were raids by the Israeliarmy.
They would break into houses,arrest mainly young people, the
young people.
Speaker 4 (01:06):
In Yugoslavia, an EC-led convoy heading for the
besieged town of Vukovar hascome under mortar fire.
Speaker 3 (01:12):
The idea that we would have a conflict in the
middle of Europe.
I think we're not ready forthat and we're not ready to see
the violation.
So it was a very awful conflict.
We had a real ethnic cleansing.
Speaker 4 (01:30):
The Serbs conquered several areas of Croatia,
notably bordering on Bosnia.
Here was the self-declaredRepublika Srpska Krajina.
Speaker 3 (01:38):
I think that was for me.
The exact definition of thehumanitarian work is that you
are dealing with incredibleviolation, but you can still do
something to help and support.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Hello and welcome again to Inside Geneva.
I'm Imogen Folks, and today webring you the fifth in our
series of summer profiles.
A few weeks ago, we brought youan aid worker who is in Gaza
right now.
Today we'll talk to someone whostarted his career as an aid
worker in Gaza 40 years ago.
(02:14):
A lifetime's work forhumanitarian organisations
followed in all sorts ofdifferent places.
Speaker 3 (02:21):
I'm Stéphane Jacquemé and I'm currently working for
the International CatholicMigration Commission, ICMC, as a
Chief Operating Officer, butbefore that I worked 25 years
for UNHCR and five years for theInternational Committee of the
Red Cross.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
So really a life's work in the humanitarian sector.
Speaker 3 (02:45):
Something like 40 years.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
yes, what did you think when you were a child?
What was it like when you weregrowing up?
Is that something you alwayswanted to do?
Speaker 3 (02:54):
I was born in Switzerland, in the Canton du
Valais, in a small town calledSaint-Maurice.
My parents had a small groceryshop.
They were not rich, but theywere, let's say, ambitious.
They wanted their children tostudy not to become rich, but to
study.
They wanted us to have a betterfuture than themselves, and I
(03:17):
think that was really very, very, very important for me.
For me, and despite the factthat my parents were not rich, I
was able to study first highschool and then university.
Of course, my parents investedin it, but there was also a
system which basically gaveequal opportunity to all the
(03:38):
children, and I think I wasreally when I was young, I very
quickly realized that there weremany, many people who did not
have this equal opportunity, whodid not have equal chances, and
for me, that was fundamentallywrong.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
You went to university in Switzerland, yeah,
and that was when you thoughtI'd like to be a humanitarian
worker yes.
How did that happen exactly?
Speaker 3 (04:08):
I mean, I studied law and just realized through my
law studies that in reality noteveryone was equal before the
law, that inequality was part ofwhat we have in almost every
single society.
Probably quite a bit better inSwitzerland than in other
(04:32):
countries, but even inSwitzerland I saw people who
were marginalized and I foundthat not right, that we had to
do something about it and thatif I had the privilege to be
(04:52):
able to study, to be successfulin my studies.
But I believe that if you areprivileged, one of your
responsibility is to support andhelp the people who are less
privileged.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
But your first posting was Gaza, that's quite a
difference, switzerland to Gaza.
Speaker 3 (05:12):
It's very, unfortunately, very, very
different.
And that was 40 years ago, inthe mid 80s, and Gaza was
already bad.
At that time there were curfewevery night.
There were raids by the Israeliarmy.
They would break into houses,arrest mainly young people.
Speaker 4 (05:35):
Israelis are not going to pull out.
That's the point.
There's no chance of theinhabitants of Gaza having their
freedom to do anything.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
The Israelis are worried that without their army
here, the Palestine LiberationOrganization will be back in
strength.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
But what shocked me was that very often they would
humiliate elderly people infront of young people and of
course, the young people werearrested.
Icrc at that time I was workingfor ICRC.
At that time ICRC was the firstorganization to have access to
the people under interrogation.
(06:12):
That was two weeks after thearrest.
Most of the people had beenbeaten up and they were really
in a very bad shape.
But it was very important to bethe first contact with these
people and then, immediatelyafter seeing the detainees, we
would visit the family and ofcourse, this first meeting with
(06:37):
the family was something very,very special.
It was extremely emotional.
I mean, the families wereextremely upset, but the idea
that we had seen their childrenwas so important for them.
So I think that was for me, theexact definition of the
humanitarian work is that youare dealing with incredible
(06:59):
violation but you can still dosomething to help and support.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
And when you look at Gaza now what do you think Just
awful?
Speaker 3 (07:08):
I mean, look at the number of deaths on every single
day, look at the number ofviolations, look at what almost
60,000 people killed, and what Ifind shocking is, generally
speaking, the lack of reactionof the international community.
(07:30):
It's probably even moreshocking than the violations.
Speaker 2 (07:34):
When you were there 40 years ago.
I mean, this is perhapshindsight, but you talk about a
community which was disrespected, I guess to a point where
violations could take placeeasily.
Could you have predicted what'shappening now?
Speaker 3 (07:54):
I don't think we could predict the level of
violations that we have today,but I think we could predict
that things would just get worse.
So when you have a pattern ofviolations and it just continues
and there is no realaccountability for those
(08:14):
violations, where you had moredecent political parties in
power, but that those moredecent political parties had a
pattern of violations, whatwould happen if you had other
political parties?
Couldn't care less about eventheir own reputation.
(08:37):
So yeah, I think we could atthat time predict that the
situation would deteriorate.
I don't think that everyonewould have expected to reach the
point where we are today.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
Gaza is, of course, the conflict that everybody is
talking about, sometimes to theneglect of other conflicts, and
you, of course, have been postedto many conflict and crisis
zones, to many conflict andcrisis zones.
You were also in formerYugoslavia, which interests me
because I actually also, asstarting out in my career, spent
(09:12):
some time there and also foundit quite something that I don't
forget, because we moved fromthis hope of Europe in 1989 to
war quite quickly.
Tell me about your experiencethere.
Speaker 3 (09:27):
Yes, I was posted in Krajina, which was the part of
Croatia which at that time wasbasically controlled by Serbian
militias, and I stayed there oneyear and I think it was indeed
a very, very difficult situation.
(09:48):
It was the first conflict inEurope after World War II.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
Astonishingly, on the Croatian side, civilians are
still up there with the soldierseither unable to leave their
homes or trying to get back tothem.
Speaker 4 (10:02):
Croatian President, franjo Tudjman, together with
military leaders, launchedOperation Storm to rid Krajina
of Serbs.
Speaker 3 (10:09):
And I think I had been posted in the Middle East,
in Africa, and then just theidea that we would have a
conflict in the middle of Europewas, I think we're not ready
for that and we're not ready tosee the exactly the same kind of
violation.
(10:30):
So it was a very awful conflict.
We had a real ethnic cleansing.
I mean the expression ethniccleansing was applied to the
conflict in former Yugoslavia.
I don't know whether it was thefirst time, but at least it was
really a kind of defining theconflict.
(10:51):
Again, it was a conflict wherethere were many, many violations
, but there was also the feelingas a humanitarian actor that
there was something that couldbe done.
We were not able to addressmost of the violations, but I
(11:12):
think we were able to supportpeople and to empower a number
of the refugees in particular.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
Did that give you comfort at the time?
Because I have quite a fewcolleagues in journalism and in
the humanitarian sector who cameout of the wars in former
Yugoslavia quite traumatised andquite frustrated that they went
(11:40):
either to report on atrocitiesand think that this might help
or to try to bring humanitarianrelief and found themselves
actually virtually helpless.
Speaker 3 (11:51):
You know, I guess it also depends on where you were
posted.
I mean, for people who wereposted, for example, in Sarajevo
, there was indeed frustrationabout convoys not being able to
have access to the population inBosnia, Several convoys were
(12:11):
delayed, etc.
Etc.
Speaker 1 (12:12):
He says you don't have permission to travel this
way, tell him I don't need hispermission.
He wants to check your vehicle.
Speaker 4 (12:20):
No, he's not checking my vehicle.
Un.
The refugees came through in 11covered trucks.
One truck was full of wounded.
It went straight to thehospital, the doctors stunned by
what they found inside.
Speaker 3 (12:34):
Some convoys were targeted, some of the drivers
were wounded, etc.
Etc.
So I guess that the people whowere in Sarajevo were indeed
deeply frustrated, and I hadother colleagues who were even
more traumatized.
Those were the people who were,for example, in a place like
Banja Luka, where they were thewitnesses of ethnic cleansing
(12:58):
without any possibility tosupport them.
Krajina was a bit of a forgottenpart of former Yugoslavia.
There was not much reportingabout it.
There were indeed violations.
I would not say that we weresuccessful all the time, but
there was, let's say, at leastsome willingness from the part
(13:21):
of the de facto authoritiesthere to at least facilitate
some of our work.
So I would say you know,humanitarian work you can be,
and in that sense I feel that Iwas privileged all my career
because I was never posted in aplace where I had the impression
(13:46):
that I was unable to do my job,my job with limitation, my job
with failure, etc.
But there was still thepossibility to influence the
authorities and to be able toprovide support to most of the
(14:06):
people.
By definition, humanitarianwork has failures, has
frustration work has failures,has frustration.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
You have been posted in many different places.
Is there one place, event, thatreally stands out, that you
don't forget or can't forget?
Speaker 3 (14:23):
Nepal.
Nepal was maybe the mostpositive one in the sense that
we had a large camp populationof Bhutanese who had been 15
years without any hope to return, any hope of resettlement In
the past decade, tens ofthousands of Bhutanese have
(14:46):
escaped what they claim to betyranny, torture and ethnic
cleansing.
Speaker 1 (14:51):
The government's clampdown sparked an exodus from
the kingdom to refugee camps inNepal In the early 90s.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
tens of thousands left, most not by choice.
Speaker 3 (15:01):
And suddenly a US official visited Nepal and
basically offered resettlementto the government of Nepal and
to UNHCR the government of Nepaland to UNHCR and after back
sound force, it was decided thatthe resettlement program for
Nepalese would start.
(15:21):
And then, during the time I wasUNHCR representative in Nepal,
we managed to resettle over50,000 Bhutanese to the US, but
also to Australia, canada, theNordic countries, and it has
been a remarkable resettlementprogram with a very large number
(15:46):
of the people being able tostart really a new life, to have
jobs, et cetera, et cetera.
It's a population, veryresilient population.
As soon as we started theresettlement program, they all
switched off, they all startedto learn English.
(16:06):
Well, that was remarkable.
I mean, six months later almostthe entire camp population was
speaking English, including theelderly.
So I mean that was justremarkable.
And you know, resettlement issomething so positive.
There are failures, there arepeople who cannot adjust, there
are people who have difficulties, but I would say, largely you
(16:30):
go from a camp situation whereyou really don't have any hope
of any form of integration, intoreally providing real
opportunities.
Speaker 2 (16:42):
You speak about that program of resettlement as one
of the most positive memoriesyou have of your career, and yet
this kind of program isscarcely happening anymore.
The United States hascompletely stopped its
resettlement program In Europe.
You know the narrative aroundmigration, refugees and asylum
(17:04):
seekers is almost uniformlynegative, and you spent 25 years
working for the UN RefugeeAgency.
What do you think about the waythe debate around this seems to
have shifted?
Speaker 3 (17:18):
It's extremely sad and it could have been avoided.
I believe All illegal entrywill immediately be halted and
we will begin the process ofreturning millions and millions
of criminal aliens back to theplaces from which they came.
Speaker 1 (17:38):
Anyone who comes here illegally should be deported
within hours and days, not weeksand months.
That is the will of the Britishpeople.
Speaker 3 (17:46):
I mean the problem.
If we talk about migrationgenerally speaking, today, the
narrative around migration isnot influenced.
It's dictated by the far right.
You don't see other politicalparties coming with a different
narrative.
They just respond sometimes andI would say most of the time
(18:11):
very weakly to the narrative ofthe far right.
And this is, in my view, themajor problem as long as we will
not have a different narrativeand this narrative should be
realistic, it should be based onfacts, it should be based on
what migration is.
(18:33):
Migration brings incredibleopportunities, but also
challenges, and I think it'simportant to acknowledge that
they are both opportunities andchallenges.
But when you talk to experts,including experts who are
leaning towards the right, theywill all agree that the way
(18:56):
migration is being handled bythe far right or by other
political party influenced bythe far right is wrong.
It doesn't work.
But you know, when you thentalk about the cost of living
and then you convince peoplethat their cost of living is
impacted because of foreignersor migrants, then I think this
(19:20):
is always the twist that youhave with.
You know the far right narrativeand you know, when I was UNHCR
representative for SouthernEurope and I was, in particular,
covering Italy and I was basedin Rome.
One day I was invited by asmall NGO saying do you want to
(19:40):
come to a discussion debate in amunicipality in northern Italy
and this municipality iscontrolled by the Lega the far
right and I was a little bithesitant.
I discussed with my colleaguesshould I go, should I not go?
In the end I took the decisionto go and of course I was in a
(20:02):
kind of in a room where therewere 200 people.
It was obviously not the mostfriendly environment.
I said I think can we agree onsome rules that I will respect
you but you will also respect me?
So I let you talk and you letme talk.
Then it was agreed.
(20:23):
And the conversation startedwith immigration, refugees etc.
And then we just realized thatthese specific municipalities
had been completely abandoned bythe authorities that people had
.
They were not flooded bymigrants and refugees.
(20:44):
Some people had never met arefugee or a migrant, but they
were absolutely convinced thatmost of their problems was
because of migrants or refugees.
In reality, there were no jobs.
The policy of the governmentwhich was to support small
(21:07):
enterprises, small businesses,had failed, that there was
corruption, that if you wanted ajob you needed to know someone.
All that had nothing to do withmigrants and refugees.
But of course, it was mucheasier to say your problem is
refugees and migrants.
(21:27):
And we ended up having a gooddialogue, a good discussion.
I'm not sure that that specificdialogue had a major impact,
but it also showed that there isa possibility.
But that needs to be replicatedseveral times and you need
(21:49):
leadership among the opposition,among the other political
parties, to really dare to speakup and to have a different
narrative and not to just havethe kind of same policies as the
far right.
Speaker 2 (22:07):
Very interested that you mentioned there speaking up
and you're referring topolitical leaders over the
question of immigration.
But I also wonder, because atthe beginning you also mentioned
the silence over Gaza.
Your profession istraditionally neutral, impartial
, to allow aid workers to workwherever and have some
(22:27):
protection, have trust, but doyou think that there are
occasions, given the world we'relooking at now, where
humanitarian leaders also needto speak out?
Speaker 3 (22:40):
Of course, I still believe that there are a lot of
merits to be neutral, impartial,etc.
Etc.
And that a discreet dialoguewith the authorities in a number
of circumstances is very, veryimportant.
If you openly criticize theauthorities, you may lose a bit
(23:00):
of leverage to obtain more fromthe same authorities, but that
will apply only if you aredealing with authorities where
there is still a minimum ofdecency.
When you have lost that kind ofdecency and Gaza is a very good
example I don't think there isany decency in the Netanyahu
(23:25):
government, I think in that kindof situation, I think it is the
responsibility of humanitarianactors, and not only of human
rights actors, to speak up.
Speaker 2 (23:38):
You have really spent your life working in this
sector.
But now here we are in 2025,the world does look quite bleak.
We're seeing big funding cutsto humanitarian work.
We've seen, particularly in theMiddle East, a brutal year for
(24:15):
aid workers.
Speaker 3 (24:16):
So many have been killed.
If you were talking to your own20-something self back in the
1980s, somebody now whointernational organizations like
UNHCR, icrc a little bit less,but IOM, for example, is the
case losing between 25 and 50percent of their funding.
(24:38):
So today we have thousands ofhumanitarian workers being laid
off and looking for a job.
So it means that thecompetition in the humanitarian
field is really very, very, very.
I think it's a very sadsituation.
So I would say you are a youngguy, you are motivated, you want
(25:04):
to have an impact, you want tobe able to fight for a better
world.
It's very complicated and yourchances to get a job is really
minimal.
So that's the reason for my no.
The yes is because I believethat, in spite of what happened
with is because I believe that,in spite of what happened with
(25:28):
the US cuts, with what we see interms of disrespect for the
rule of law, etc.
We are in a very negativesituation.
At the same time, I belong tothe generation who started
humanitarian work before thefall of the Berlin Wall and we
(25:49):
also realized that in the Istarted in the mid 80s, in the
mid and late 80s, but alsobefore you had the Cold War, you
had guerrillas being financedand basically these guerrillas
not only were financed, butbasically whatever violation
(26:12):
they would commit would betolerated.
So it was the end of a verynegative cycle and then, I would
say, in the 90s, 2000, 2010, wesaw a lot of improvement.
There was really a belief inhuman rights.
(26:33):
So I would say, based on thefact that maybe I started in the
late 80s and that I witnessed Iwouldn't say the golden age of
humanitarian work, but to someextent, some very positive
development, including on thehuman rights side, I still
believe that we will be able tosee a new, more positive cycle
(26:59):
and that's why I would encourageyoung people to remain
interested in humanitarian work.
Speaker 2 (27:07):
And you'd do it all again.
Speaker 3 (27:09):
Yeah, I would, I would.
I'm still motivated.
Speaker 2 (27:20):
And that brings us to the end of this edition of
Inside Geneva.
My thanks to Stéphane Jacquetfor his time and his fascinating
perspectives.
After a lifetime inhumanitarian work, Now about to
take a well-earned retirement,we wish him all the very best
for the future.
Join us again next time onInside Geneva where, ahead of
(27:48):
the UN General Assembly in NewYork, we ask how the United
Nations, now 80 years old, canreassert its relevance.
Speaker 5 (27:55):
We do sometimes forget that the UN still has
60,000 peacekeepers around theworld.
It's still running enormoushumanitarian operations.
Speaker 2 (28:05):
So the UN is not dead but I think the UN is drifting.
Richard Gowan of theInternational Crisis Group
brings us an in-depth assessmentand warns of the risks of
bypassing the UN.
Speaker 5 (28:18):
Donald Trump actually says that he wants the UN to
focus back on peace and security.
We prioritise globalpeacemaking, but the reality is
that the US and other powers arenot working through the UN on
any of the big crises of the day, which leaves the UN with the
crumbs.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
That's out on September 16th.
Do join us, then.
A reminder you've beenlistening to Inside Geneva, a
Swiss Info production.
You can subscribe to us andreview us wherever you get your
podcasts.
Check out our previous episodeshow the International Red Cross
(28:57):
unites prisoners of war withtheir families, or why survivors
of human rights violations turnto the UN in Geneva for justice
.
I'm Imogen Folks.
Thanks again for listening.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.