This is a comparative study of French versus British approaches to aid.In the humanitarian field those we rather mockingly call French doctors seem always to be in the vanguard, the first to arrive in any critical situation. If they hold such a position in modern humanitarian intervention it is because M?decins Sans Fronti?res, and its 'little sister' M?decins du Monde, have drawn on the experiences of other organizations gradually to develop their particular brand of intervention; France was after all the last to join the group of so-called founder democracies in the humanitarian field.This detailed study of the comparative history of humanitarianism reveals that it was by learning from forms of action devised by agencies in the United States, Great Britain and Switzerland, that MSF, MDM and many others sought to combine relief practices (learnt from the Red Cross) with efforts to mobilize public opinion (using strategies invented by Amnesty International) in the way that they do.The contributors assess the competing French and Anglo-Saxon models of intervention and propose approaches to humanitarianism for the twenty-first century.The Bishop's Diagonal Versus the Axis of Evil: Strategieson the Geopolitical ChessboardKarl Blanchet and Boris MartinPART 1: Maturity CrisisCrises of Maturity and Transformation in French NGOsPhilippe RyfmanEstablishment Radicals: An Historical Overview ofBritish NGOsHugo SlimFrench or Anglo-Saxon: A Different Ethical Perspective?Egbert SondorpPART 2: Should Humanitarian Action be Evaluated?Evaluation for Change: How Can We Improve the Impactof Humanitarian Action?Fran?ois GrunwaldLearning, Monitoring and EvaluationHugh GoyderPART 3: NGOs on the New Geopolitical ChessboardInternational NGOs Under Fire: Caught Between theGlobal Fight Against Terrorism and Neo-LiberalApproaches to Security GovernanceSami MakkiPatronage or Influence? International Politics and theChanging Role of Non-Governmental Humanitarian OrganisationsJames DarcyPl³¿