基于需要的人道主义行动互不相容”。81 事实上，这类政策对人道主义和发展干预工作的直接和间接影响既是结构性的，也是业务性的。从结构方面而言，制定方案时会以特定的“风险”目标群体和社区为着眼点，而非采取基于需要的办法；从业务方面而言，各组织会调整方案，将防止和打击暴力极端主义列为重点，严重扭曲与受援对象的关系和方案的成果。此外，将人道主义组织视为政府安全议程分包商的情况越来越多，例如，有合同和要求规定，人道主义组织在分发援助时须开展持续的安全审查，这种审查方式与人道主义核心任务背道而驰。
81 Indeed, the direct and indirect impacts of such policies on humanitarian and development interventions can be felt structurally, when programmes are developed with specific “at-risk” target groups and communities in mind, rather than on a needs-based approach, and operationally, when organizations modify their programmes to include a focus on preventing and countering violent extremism, profoundly distorting the relationship with recipients and the outcomes of programmes. Moreover, the increased emphasis on humanitarian organizations as the subcontractors of government security agendas is evidenced by contracts and requirements that such organizations engage in sustained security vetting in the distribution of aid, in ways contrary to the core humanitarian mission.