| |
May 2006
In response to a report by the United Nations announcing dramatic cuts to food rations for Darfur refugees in the coming month due to a shortage of donor contributions, the House Hunger Caucus and the Congressional Human Rights Caucus co-sponsored a legislative briefing on the issue. The briefing was sponsored by the Congressional Hunger Center Board Co-Chairs, Representative James P. McGovern (D-MA) and Representative Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO) on May 11, 2006. Witnesses at the hearing included Michael Hess, USAID’s Assistant Administrator for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance/USAID, Jonathan Dworken, Acting Director for USAID’s Office of Food for Peace, Dana Ott, Acting Director for USAID’s Office of Sudan Programs in the Africa Bureau and Kenn Crossley, the US Relations Officer for the U.N. World Food Program. Congresspersons in attendance included Representatives McGovern (MA), Payne (NJ), Schakowsky (IL) and Osborne (NE).
Representative Jim McGovern
Panelists Ken Crossley and Mike Hess
For over three years the conflict in Darfur has continued. Labeled as “genocide” two years ago by international community, and decried by countless private and religious organizations, the conflict is still far from being resolved. Sudanese government and rebel groups are having great difficulty reaching a peace agreement. Because of the conflict, great numbers of Sudanese have been forced from their homes, unable to plant crops. Over two million people, some internally displaced and some living in refugee camps in Chad, are surviving on UN food rations, which will soon be cut in half if donor contributions do not rise in the immediate future. The rations will be cut from 2,100 kilocalories per person to 1,050 kilocalories per person. These cuts in food rations come at a particularly inopportune time, as the “hungry season” is looming and rates of child malnutrition, according to UNICEF, are already on the rise even before these ration cuts have been made.
Food ration cuts are scheduled even though donations to WFP have been rising. The donor pool has risen from 60 to 80. Libya, for example, recently made its first donation to the World Food Program, and each donor is giving more than in years past. Despite the increase in contributions, however, the global need is rising at a faster rate than donations are received. While the last three years have seen a one billion-dollar increase in funding to the WFP, there has been a $1.5 billion-dollar increase in need. Though Sudan is one of the WFP’s best funded operations in 2006, five months into the year, the WFP has only received about 1/3 of their total food-aid request for Sudan. Most of the funding is from the US government.
Panelists stressed the importance of the relationship between the United States and the World Food Program. The United States is the largest donor to the World Food Program in general, and also to Sudan, specifically. Last year, the US was responsible for 80% of the food aid for Darfur. While donations are far below the WFP request, the US has funded 27% of the appeal, which is 85% of the donations up to this date. Moreover, the President announced on May 8th that the US will provide $225 million in emergency supplemental funding as additional food assistance to Darfur. The supplies from that emergency supplemental request will most likely not reach Darfur before November, however. In the meantime, the US is redirecting approximately 50,000 metric tons of food aid that will arrive to the region from May through September.
These efforts on behalf of the US government, however, will not meet the food aid needs of the Sudanese people. Together, USAID and WFP are strongly encouraging other countries to increase their contributions so that the WFP can meet the food and nutritional needs of the refugees and displaced persons in Sudan and Chad. Both USAID and the UN are pressing the government of Sudan, in particular, to contribute their national grain and cereal reserves to WFP.
If rations are to be restored to their full amount, donors must act quickly. Among the WFP’s greatest challenges is the time lag between the donor contribution and the final distribution of the food, as this process can take 4-6 months. Donations in the Darfur region are particularly time sensitive because when the rain begins in mid-July, the roads wash out and transportation of food and other supplies becomes difficult if not impossible.
Unfortunately, there are no signs that the situation in Darfur and Chad will be ameliorated in the near future. A lasting peace agreement has not yet materialized, and even if an agreement should be reached soon, experience in the South of Sudan suggests that it could take some time for displaced persons to test the peace before returning home. Mike Hess emphasized the governance issues that need to be addressed in Sudan, as he and other panelists view the crisis in Darfur as a long-term problem. He expressed that a critical issue in restoring lasting peace in Sudan and other unstable countries is to ensure that the government understands representation of small groups of people, as well as looking to sustainable development projects, such as water availability, and increasing support for market systems. The United States is currently re-establishing USAID presence in Sudan after fifteen years, since USAID has been operating from Nairobi, Kenya and Washington D.C.
At several points in the briefing, panelists pointed out that Darfur is not the only region in desperate need of food aid. According to Mr. Hess, 600,000 MT of food is needed in the Horn of Africa, in addition to what is needed in Sudan and elsewhere in the world. He and Mr. Dworken both noted the importance of pre-positioning food stocks in Africa not only to ensure a timelier response to emergencies, but also to prevent food from being taken from other operations. As of now, Mr. Dworken said, assistance to those in Sudan and Chad will not take away from the food aid currently being distributed for other food emergencies in Africa. He foreshadowed potential problems, however, when he noted that there is no new money, and “there will be a time in the near future when our coffers will be empty,” as Darfur is one of many crises to consider.
Addressing larger food aid concerns, Cindy Buhl from Representative McGovern’s office made the point that the P.L. 480 Title II funding is never enough to cover both ongoing operations and crises when they erupt. She asked whether it would not make sense to increase Title II funding so that more money is allocated for these situations, rather than being held hostage to emergency supplemental requests when crises inevitably arise. It is not possible to predict emergencies, said Mike Hess, and it is necessary to have the flexibility of supplementals. Furthermore, he noted, the US and other countries need to work on long-term governance issues in Sudan and elsewhere in order to prevent crises, rather than spend more money on emergencies. “The cure,” as Representative Jim McGovern said, “is to end the genocide.”
|
