UN-CMCoord principles, in conjunction with the guidelines, support effective humanitarian-military interaction and promote and protect the humanitarian space necessary for unbiased humanitarian action. Upholding the principles is vital to ensure the safety and security of both humanitarians and those affected by the crisis who are accessing aid. 

The principles function as a ‘moral’ compass for one's behaviour necessary for effective humanitarian civil-military coordination. They strive for the highest independence standards from political, economic, and security agendas.

1. Humanity - human suffering must be addressed whenever it is found. The purpose of humanitarian action is to protect life and health, and ensure respect for human beings. Neutrality – humanitarian actors must not take sides in hostilities or engage in controversies of a political, racial, religious or ideological nature. Real and perceived neutrality of the humanitarian organizations like MSF and OCHA could be compromised by military actors approaching them.
   Impartiality - humanitarian action must be carried out on the basis of need alone, giving priority to the most urgent cases of distress and making no distinctions on the basis of nationality, race, gender, religious belief, class or political opinions 

2. Humanitarian access –concerns humanitarian actors' ability to reach populations affected by crisis, as well as an affected population's ability to access humanitarian assistance and services. Access is therefore a fundamental pre-requisite to effective humanitarian action.  

3. Perception of Humanitarian Action- a conflict always traumatizes the entire society. If people see armed soldiers collaborating (physically meeting) with humanitarian aid workers, they might become skeptical about the purpose of humanitarian assistance.

4. Need based Assistance free of discrimination  - identify beneficiaries of assistance based on their needs without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status 

5. Civil - Military Distinction – undertaking a civilian task to do humanitarian needs assessment

6. Operationally independent – the NGO loses operational independence if it cannot access the people affected by the crisis without the military. In any civil-military coordination, humanitarian actors must retain the lead role in undertaking and directing humanitarian activities.  The independence of humanitarian action and decision-making must be preserved at the operational and policy levels at all times.  Humanitarian organizations must not implement tasks on behalf of the military nor represent or implement their policies.  Basic requisites such as freedom of movement for humanitarian staff, freedom to conduct independent assessments, freedom of selection of staff, freedom to identify beneficiaries of assistance based on their needs, or the free flow of communications between humanitarian agencies and the media must not be impeded.

7. Security of humanitarian workers - in any case, where security services are provided for inter-governmental organizations, this service should be extended to their operational NGHA partners where it is so requested. The decision to seek military-based security for humanitarian workers should be viewed as a last resort option when other staff security mechanisms are unavailable, inadequate or inappropriate. We should prefer the dialogue to reach negotiated outcomes and not forcefully disburse the aggressive local workers. if deciding to have armed escorts, there needs to be an established and managed process to ensure that all appropriate parameters are in place to ensure safety and security. Is this possible in the timeframe here? The approach must be balanced against the primary concern for ensuring staff safety, and therein a consideration of any real or perceived affiliation with the military.

8. Avoid reliance on the military – humanitarians must avoid becoming dependent on peacekeeping missions. On several occasions, host governments asked the peacekeepers to leave. The service will cease as soon as the peacekeeping forces start packing, the service will cease, even if the threat remains.

9. Respect for international legal instruments – does IHL apply?  This constrains military activities and sets parameters for how the military identifies itself within a scenario.

10. Respect for culture and customs – NGO has compromised established culture and customs, such as paying workers fairly and promptly. A socially widely accepted person should open the dialogue with the aggressive mob (mob is even the wrong expression).  distribution of inappropriate food items. Often we build our first aid stations, e.g. based on the norms and standards applied back home. These standards might significantly differ from where we implement our aid programmes. Many times we experience that resource-driven assistance is counterproductive and harms the beneficiaries.

11. Consent of parties to the conflict – cultivate a greater understanding of why these attacks are taking place – criminality vs actions of non-state armed groups? The risk of compromising humanitarian operations by cooperating with the military might be reduced if all parties to the conflict recognize, agree or acknowledge in advance that humanitarian activities might necessitate civil-military coordination in certain exceptional circumstances. Negotiating such acceptance entails contact with all levels of the chain of command. peacekeepers are present because of a political mandate from the Security Council. Ultimately, they reinforce or reestablish the host state authority. Humanitarian action is independent of civic action, which is sometimes referred to as enabling people to make sure legislators hear their voices, and also a military force operating in favour of civilians, including dental, engineering, medical, and veterinarian activities

12. Last resort - use of military assets, armed escorts, joint humanitarian-military operations and any other actions involving visible interaction with the military must be the option of last resort.  Such actions may take place only where there is no comparable civilian alternative, and only military support can meet a critical humanitarian need. Getting into an arrangement with the peacekeepers might be easy. Another question is whether they are a perceived and real deterrent for JUSM and SIF. Even if they are seen as a robust military force, and act like one, one should explore all other options for the safe delivery of humanitarian aid. 

13. Do no harm – raising expectations within the community, potentially placing people at risk by them being seen to be speaking to the armed forces.  Any activity must aim at strengthening the society and not bringing them further apart as the disaster did. Sometimes, big calamities unite the local population; ill-crafted aid programmes could bring them apart again.