Tsunami: Delivering Aid Stymies UN

[onedomino]

Highlighted below, check the assessment of Dutch diplomats who have visited Aceh.

TSUNAMI -- Delivering Aid Stymies UN
Francis Till

http://www.nbr.co.nz/print/print.asp?id=11040&cid=5&cname=Asia

While the United Nations appears to be adept at having meetings, the organization is hopeless on the ground say career foreign service officers in tsunami-affected regions.

As news media are increasingly dominated by footage of US, Australian and regional military forces actually delivering aid to stricken survivors of the Boxing Day tsunami, UN officials are carping about housing in major cities far removed from the front lines and passing around elaborate business cards.

Organizing to organize seems to be the word of the day for the UN, say career US foreign service officers anonymously, who fault the international organization for taking credit where none is due and proving hopeless at actually delivering relief.

A blog (The Diplomad) run by "career US Foreign Service officers" -- many serving in what they call the "Far Abroad" as a euphemism for what appears, often, to be Sri Lanka -- is loading the internet with accounts of UN ineptitude in the wake of the tsunami disaster.

In one instance, the bloggers laud efforts by nations that have used military resources to deliver aid in an efficient -- and highly effective -- manner: Aussies and Yanks continue to carry the overwhelming bulk of the burden, but some other fine folks also have jumped in: e.g., the New Zealanders have provided C-130 lift and an excellent and much-needed potable water distribution system; the Singaporeans have provided great helo support; the Indians have a hospital ship taking position off Sumatra. Spain and Netherlands have sent aircraft with supplies. But, they say, the UN has shone only in its willingness to send bureaucrats with grandiose titles and patently unrealistic missions to the devastated areas.

The blog says: "Just today the city's Embassies got a letter from the local UN representative requesting a meeting for 'Ms. Margareeta Wahlstrom, United Nations Deputy Emergency Relief Coordinator and the Secretary-General's Special Coordinator for Humanitarian Assistance in Tsunami-affected countries'" -- an astonishing title that seems to hold great administrative power. But, the blog says, what Ms Wahlstrom wanted from her short (January 4-5) visit was to arrange "high-level consultations with the concerned governments in order to facilitate the delivery of international assistance" and to thereby "provide leadership and support to the international relief effort."

Just who is Ms Wahlstrom and what has she accomplished on her mission? According to one news source, Ms Wahlstrom is the bringer of very blurry news. In Sri Lanka, when asked when UN reconstruction aid would be raised and, eventually, arrive, she told reporters: "The period and timing is not fixed. It could be few months down the line." She then went on to say psychiatric assistance for survivors was "the key thing as people have lost everything." And, finally, she admitted that the UN response had been slow -- but said that was for a reason. The United Nations was overwhelmed in the first few days by the wide and unique nature of the disaster, Wahlstrom said adding "we did take time to understand the nature of the disaster."

Meanwhile, American and Australian military operations had moved into the area and begun massive aid operations, being joined in quick time by contributions from other countries with the capacity to project a military presence in the area, including New Zealand.

According to the news item, a special UN team is "already in the island to assess the scale of the damage to Sri Lanka's infrastructure facilities" -- but Ms Wahlstrom had no word about concrete actions.

A close reading of the UK's Department for International Development's (DFID) brilliantly detailed daily reports of activity in the affected regions also reveals that UN officials are working hard at planning to work -- and estimating the need for work -- rather than actually delivering aid on the ground. All of which is a bit chilling, since the UN is positioning itself as the primary carrier of aid relief to the region and has been critical of the "core group" response led the the US and Australia.

Not all the criticism of the UN effort reported on Diplomad originates with the authors of the blog. In an excerpt from a January 2 report written by local Dutch diplomats who had visited Aceh, Diplomad reports: The US military has arrived and is clearly establishing its presence everywhere in Banda Aceh. They completely have taken over the military hospital, which was a mess until yesterday but is now completely up and running. They brought big stocks of medicines, materials for the operation room, teams of doctors, water and food. Most of the patients who were lying in the hospital untreated for a week have undergone medical treatment by the US teams by this afternoon. US military have unloaded lots of heavy vehicles and organize the logistics with Indonesian military near the airport. A big camp is being set up at a major square in the town. Huge generators are ready to provide electricity. US helicopters fly to places which haven't been reached for the whole week and drop food. The impression it makes on the people is also highly positive; finally something happens in the city of Banda Aceh and finally it seems some people are in control and are doing something. No talking but action. European countries are until now invisible on the ground. IOM staff [note from Diplomad: this is a USAID-funded organization] is very busy briefing the incoming Americans and Australians about the situation.
The US, Australia, Singapore and the Indonesian military have started a 'Coalition Co-ordination Centre' in Medan to organize all the incoming and outgoing military flights with aid. A sub-centre is established in Banda Aceh. Yesterday, the blog noted that nobody wants to be "coordinated" by the UN. The local UN reps are getting desperate. They're calling for yet another meeting this afternoon; they've flown in more UN big shots to lecture us all on "coordination" and the need to work together, i.e., let the UN take credit. With Kofi about to arrive for a big conference, the UNocrats are scrambling to show something, anything as a UN accomplishment. That apparently includes taking credit for actions performed well outside the UN umbrella.

Going back to statements from the UN on 1 January, in which controversial Under Secretary General Jan Egeland said: "Our main problems now are in northern Sumatra and Aceh. <...> In Aceh, today 50 trucks of relief supplies are arriving. <...> Tomorrow, we will have eight full airplanes arriving. I discussed today with Washington whether we can draw on some assets on their side, after consultations with the Indonesian Government, to set up what we call an “air-freight handling centre” in Aceh.

"Tomorrow, we will have to set up a camp for relief workers – 90 of them – which is fully self-contained, with kitchen, food, lodging, everything, because they have nowhere to stay and we don't want them to be an additional burden on the people there. Diplomad notes that USAID officials said the statement completely distorted the authorship of the actions. The authors of the blog say they showed the claims to USAID officials working in Indonesia and their heads nearly exploded. The first paragraph is quite simply a lie. The UN is taking credit for things that hard-working, street savvy USAID folks have done. It was USAID working with their amazing network of local contacts who scrounged up trucks, drivers, and fuel; organized the convoy and sent it off to deliver critical supplies. A UN “air-freight handling centre” in Aceh? Bull! It's the Aussies and the Yanks who are running the air ops into Aceh. We have people working and sleeping on the tarmac in Aceh, surrounded by bugs, mud, stench and death, who every day bring in the US and Aussie C-130s and the US choppers; unload, load, send them off. We have no fancy aid workers' retreat -- notice the priorities of the UN? People are dying and what's the first thing the UN wants to do? Set up "a camp for relief workers" one that would be "fully self-contained, with kitchen, food, lodging, everything."

One particularly alarming note came in a post yesterday when the blog's authors noted that the WFP (World Food Program) -- a principal agency involved in the distribution of emergency food relief around the world, had arrived in the capital of the unnamed country from which the blog has been reporting (again, most probably Sri Lanka). The team has spent the day and will likely spend a few more setting up their "coordination and opcenter" at a local five-star hotel. And their number one concern, even before phones, fax and copy machines? Arranging for the hotel to provide 24hr catering service. USAID folks already are cracking jokes about "The UN Sheraton." Meanwhile, our military and civilians, working with the super Aussies, continue to keep the C-130 air bridge of supplies flowing and the choppers flying, and keep on saving lives -- and without 24hr catering services from any five-star hotel . . . . The contrast grows more stark every minute. The picture that is emerging from the work on the ground -- where even NGOs such as Oxfam say they are moving around the countries on military helicopters, rather than through self-sourced transport -- is increasingly one in which foreign aid budgets might most effectively be diverted to support military operations, dressed in their own uniforms, rather than "going blue" and falling into line behind UN "leadership."

4-Jan-2005

Australia Pledges $A1 billion to Indonesia
Will administer the aid directly, in bi-lateral process

http://www.nbr.co.nz/home/column_article.asp?id=11044&cid=8&cname=News

US Secretary of State Colin Powell has announced the immediate disbanding of the "core group" -- an effort by the US, Australia, India, Canada and the Netherlands -- to deliver aid directly to Boxing Day tsunami ravaged areas, but Australia says it will not go through the United Nations to administer a pledge to Indonesia of $A1 billion in aid over five years.

The billion dollar pledge comes on top of $A850 million in already committed aid for general purposes.

The billion dollar package consists of $A500 million in direct aid and $A500 million in concessional loans, according to Prime Minister John Howard, and is the single biggest aid donation in Australia's history, ABC News reported.

The money will be handled by a joint commission to be overseen by both John Howard and Indonesia's President, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

Mr Howard told ABC News: "It will in every respect be a partnership between Australia and Indonesia."

The package -- received enthusiastically by Indonesia and most other world leaders -- drew fire from some NGOs.

World Vision Australia chief executive the Reverend Tim Costello told The Age that the move, which did not include aid for Sri Lanka, appeared to be motivated by politics more than a sense of genuine charity.

"Having been there, they are devastated and they are going to need huge help too," he said.

"I understand the politics, the concern that Australia proves it's a great neighbour to 212 million Muslims, 40 minutes flight from Darwin, and proves we shouldn't be the target of fanatical bombs. But I was surprised."

Most of the aid will be directed to war-torn Aceh, the hardest hit area in the hardest hit country.

Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said he hoped the package would promote peace in the region.

"It might not be very well received by the leaders of GAM (Free Aceh Movement), perhaps nothing would please them, but for the generality of the population in Aceh, I think it is very likely they will respond positively.

"That is going to be very important in terms of creating a more peaceful environment in Aceh," he said, as quoted by AAP.

When asked why the Australian government had chosen to administer the aid directly, cutting the UN out of the loop, Mr Downer said the bilateral solution would be the most effective way to deliver the assistance.

"We could use just multilateral agencies, UN or NGO (non-government organisation) agencies but I don't think we're going to get as effective an outcome if we do that as we will get if we operate on a bilateral basis."

6-Jan-2005