This report describes the extent to which the four core principles that underpin humanitarian action have been applied in and are relevant to the ongoing response to people in need in Ukraine.

If humanitarians expect armed forces to respect their mandates and mission, they must be clear on their own agendas, intentions, and objectives. However, in Ukraine, the lines between who is humanitarian and who is not have been blurred. Since the large-scale invasion in February 2022, a range of countries have supported Ukraine with a large aid package, of which humanitarian aid is only a small part. Moreover, organisations providing aid have for various reasons refrained (often inadvertently) from establishing a clear distinction between their humanitarian work and other types of assistance. Essentially, humanitarians can do better in safeguarding their mission and explaining what makes their work humanitarian.

The humanitarian principles are intended precisely to help navigate highly politicised environments, like Ukraine, to address access restrictions and to guide complex relationships. Clearly, such an approach implicates the role of leadership. Importantly, the key factor in assessing the principledness of a response is not necessarily the ‘what’ organisations do, but whether and how agencies have addressed the principles in setting priorities, taking decisions, and managing compromise. The delivery of humanitarian aid in complex environments is by nature a balancing act between often competing priorities, and there is no such thing as a fully principled approach. “Principled compromises” are called for, however, rather than “compromised principles.”