ABSTRACT
This chapter explores five of the most common: That preventing diversion is just a matter of screening; that it is a donor and regulatory compliance issue; that any given International non-government organisations won’t be prosecuted and that no incidents of diversion means no problem exists. It also include: that the humanitarian imperative means that we must tolerate diversion – or even that the anti-diversion agenda itself is contrary to the imperative. The key to reducing the risks of terrorist diversion as far as is reasonably possible is to take a holistic approach. By taking a context-by-context approach, any one agency can reduce diversion risk in the areas within its circles of control, in turn lowering aggregate risk and enabling it to entertain specific risks in more challenging places. All sector actors must recognise that when the three factors of proximity, capability and intent, and value are in place, the risk of diversion cannot be fully mitigated.
