In more than 70 countries, Médecins Sans Frontières provides medical humanitarian assistance to save lives and ease the suffering of people in crisis situations.
We set up the MSF Access Campaign in 1999 to push for access to, and the development of, life-saving and life-prolonging medicines, diagnostic tests and vaccines for people in our programmes and beyond.
Based in Paris, CRASH conducts and directs studies and analysis of MSF actions. They participate in internal training sessions and assessment missions in the field.
Based in Geneva, UREPH (or Research Unit) aims to improve the way MSF projects are implemented in the field and to participate in critical thinking on humanitarian and medical action.
Based in Brussels, MSF Analysis intends to stimulate reflection and debate on humanitarian topics organised around the themes of migration, refugees, aid access, health policy and the environment in which aid operates.
This logistical and supply centre in Brussels provides storage of and delivers medical equipment, logistics and drugs for international purchases for MSF missions.
This supply and logistics centre in Bordeaux, France, provides warehousing and delivery of medical equipment, logistics and drugs for international purchases for MSF missions.
This logistical centre in Amsterdam purchases, tests, and stores equipment including vehicles, communications material, power supplies, water-processing facilities and nutritional supplements.
BRAMU specialises in neglected tropical diseases, such as dengue and Chagas, and other infectious diseases. This medical unit is based in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Our medical guidelines are based on scientific data collected from MSF’s experiences, the World Health Organization (WHO), other renowned international medical institutions, and medical and scientific journals.
Providing epidemiological expertise to underpin our operations, conducting research and training to support our goal of providing medical aid in areas where people are affected by conflict, epidemics, disasters, or excluded from health care.
Evaluation Units have been established in Vienna, Stockholm, and Paris, assessing the potential and limitations of medical humanitarian action, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of our medical humanitarian work.
MSF works with LGBTQI+ populations in many settings over the last 25-30 years. LGBTQI+ people face healthcare disparities with limited access to care and higher disease rates than the general population.
The Luxembourg Operational Research (LuxOR) unit coordinates field research projects and operational research training, and provides support for documentation activities and routine data collection.
The MSF Paediatric Days is an event for paediatric field staff, policy makers and academia to exchange ideas, align efforts, inspire and share frontline research to advance urgent paediatric issues of direct concern for the humanitarian field.
The MSF Foundation aims to create a fertile arena for logistics and medical knowledge-sharing to meet the needs of MSF and the humanitarian sector as a whole.
A collaborative, patients’ needs-driven, non-profit drug research and development organisation that is developing new treatments for neglected diseases, founded in 2003 by seven organisations from around the world.
The MSF Science Portal is a digital platform for Médecins Sans Frontières to share the medical evidence we gather as part of our medical humanitarian work aiding people and communities affected by conflict, epidemics, disasters, or exclusion from health services.
Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) has launched the Transformational Investment Capacity (TIC) to transform our ability to address the most pressing medical and humanitarian challenges around the world.
The Telemedicine program provides secure solutions designed to support the needs of healthcare professionals across MSF, while building a community of knowledge-sharing and clinical collaboration.
Launched in 2012, the MSF Sweden Innovation Unit deploys a human-centered approach for promoting a culture of innovation within MSF, in order to more effectively co-create innovations that save lives and alleviate suffering.
Warning: Undefined variable $active_link in Drupal\msf_navigation\Plugin\Block\SOCSSectionNavBlock->build() (line 52 of modules/custom/msf_navigation/src/Plugin/Block/SOCSSectionNavBlock.php).
L’étude de cas 'MSF et Srebrenica 1993-2003' s’intéresse aux contraintes, questionnements et dilemmes posés par les prises de parole publiques de MSF concernant l’enclave musulmane de Srebrenica, qui fut assiégée à partir de 1993 puis conquise en juillet 1995 par les forces bosno-serbes. 8000 hommes et adolescents de plus de 16 ans y furent massacrés malgré la présence des forces de maintien de la paix des Nations-Unies, censées protéger la population de cette enclave déclarée « zone de sécurité ». MSF, dont les équipes ont été présentes dans l’enclave pendant toute cette période, témoigna des évènements et demanda ensuite publiquement que des enquêtes soient menées par les différents Etats impliqués afin de déterminer les responsabilités politiques et militaires dans la chute de l’enclave et l’abandon de sa population.
Dilemmes et questionnements:
En acceptant d’apporter des secours a minima à une population assiégée, est-ce que MSF a contribué à la stratégie des assiégeants ?
Fallait-il demander l’évacuation de la population civile qui le souhaitait au risque de cautionner la politique d’épuration ethnique menée par les assiégeants ?
Ayant fait confiance à l’engagement de protection de l’enclave et de sa population par les Forces des Nations unies, est-ce que MSF doit assumer une part de culpabilité ou de complicité dans l’abandon de l’enclave par l’ONU et le massacre de la population qui s'en est suivi ?
Est-ce que MSF a donné à la population, la fausse impression que rien ne pouvait lui arriver tant que ses équipes étaient présentes ?
Est-ce le rôle d’une organisation médicale humanitaire de lancer un appel à une commission d’enquête parlementaire puis, celle-ci mise en place, d’en assurer un suivi actif critique ?
A l’inverse, est-ce que MSF pouvait ne pas chercher à comprendre les circonstances et les responsabilités qui, au niveau international, ont mené à l’abandon et au massacre d’une population à laquelle ses équipes portaient secours ?
Est-ce que MSF pouvait se contenter de lancer un appel à une enquête parlementaire sans s’assurer que celle-ci se pose des questions susceptibles d’apporter des réponses éclairantes sur les événements ?
Le cas de Srebrenica doit-il être conçu comme un accident de l’histoire ou comme un modèle irréductible de l’impossibilité des mandats internationaux de protection des populations développé par l’ONU ?
