[Senate Hearing 107-235]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 107-235
AFGHANISTAN'S HUMANITARIAN CRISIS:
IS ENOUGH AID REACHING AFGHANISTAN?
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NEAR EASTERN
AND SOUTH ASIAN AFFAIRS
AND THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL
OPERATIONS AND TERRORISM
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
OCTOBER 10, 2001 AND NOVEMBER 15, 2001
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
senate
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
75-946 WASHINGTON : 2002
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, Jr., Delaware, Chairman
PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland JESSE HELMS, North Carolina
CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska
RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
PAUL D. WELLSTONE, Minnesota BILL FRIST, Tennessee
BARBARA BOXER, California LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island
ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia
BILL NELSON, Florida SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
Virginia
Edwin K. Hall, Staff Director
Patricia A. McNerney, Republican Staff Director
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NEAR EASTERN
AND SOUTH ASIAN AFFAIRS
PAUL D. WELLSTONE, Minnesota, Chairman
ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
BARBARA BOXER, California GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland BILL FRIST, Tennessee
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia
Virginia
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL
OPERATIONS AND TERRORISM
BARBARA BOXER, California, Chairman
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
BILL NELSON, Florida BILL FRIST, Tennessee
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, Jr., Delaware JESSE HELMS, North Carolina
CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Afghanistan's Humanitarian Crisis--October 10, 2001
Bacon, Ken, president, Refugees International, Washington, D.C... 42
Prepared statement........................................... 43
De Torrente, Nicolas, executive director, Doctors Without
Borders, New York, New York.................................... 35
Prepared statement........................................... 39
Kreczko, Alan, Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Population,
Refugees and Migration, Department of State, Washington, D.C... 21
Prepared statement........................................... 22
Natsios, Andrew S., Administrator, United States Agency for
International Development (USAID).............................. 9
Prepared statement........................................... 12
Responses to Additional Questions Submitted for the Record... 15
Rocca, Christina, Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia,
Department of State, Washington, D.C........................... 17
Prepared statement........................................... 19
Smeal, Eleanor, president, Feminist Majority, Arlington, Virginia 46
Prepared statement........................................... 49
Humanitarian Crisis: Is Enough Aid Reaching
Afghanistan?--November 15, 2001
Bartolini, Mark, vice president of Government Relations,
International Rescue Committee, Washington, DC................. 85
Prepared statement........................................... 87
Charny, Joel, vice president, Refugees International, Washington,
DC............................................................. 80
Prepared statement........................................... 82
Devendorf, George, director of Emergency Operations, Mercy Corps,
Washington, DC................................................. 77
Prepared statement........................................... 78
Kreczko, Alan, Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Population,
Refugees, and Migration, Department of State, Washington, DC... 68
Prepared statement........................................... 69
McConnell, Bernd, Director of Central Asian Task Force, U.S.
Agency for International Development........................... 64
Natsios, Hon. Andrew S., Administrator, U.S. Agency for
International Development, prepared statement.................. 64
Oxfam International submission of 3 articles for the record:
``Rebuilding Afghanistan: An Agenda for International
Action''................................................... 97
``Food Has Now Run Out for Many Afghan People''.............. 99
``Between A Rock and A Hard Place''.......................... 101
Rogers, Leonard, Acting Assistant Administrator for Humanitarian
Response, U.S. Agency for International Development............ 72
(iii)
AFGHANISTAN'S HUMANITARIAN CRISIS
----------
Wednesday, October 10, 2001
U.S. Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations,
Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian
Affairs, and the Subcommittee on International
Operations and Terrorism,
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittees met at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-419, the
Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Paul Wellstone (chairman
of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Senators Wellstone, Biden, Dodd, Boxer, and
Nelson.
Senator Wellstone [presiding]. This hearing, which will be
a joint Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee, Near Eastern and
South Asian, and International Operations Committees will come
to order.
Let me thank all for being here. We will have brief opening
statements, and then we will go to Mr. Natsios who is the
administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development, and then Christina Rocca, who is Assistant
Secretary of State for South Asia, and then Alan Kreczko,
Acting Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Population. We will
go in that order by protocol.
The second panel will be Mr. Nicolas de Torrente, Executive
Director of Doctors Without Borders; Ken Bacon, president of
Refugees International, and also Ms. Eleanor Smeal, president
of the Feminist Majority.
Let me at the outset--and I think each of us will try to
keep our statements brief. I want to thank Senator Boxer for
agreeing to co-chair this hearing with me, and I want to thank
all of the participants who have taken time away from pressing
work to be here to testify today.
The September 11 attacks in New York and Washington require
our country to respond assertively and effectively against
international terrorism. As the administration takes military
action inside Afghanistan, I believe we must also take urgent
steps now to address the humanitarian crisis there.
Even before the world focused on it as a sanctuary for
Osama bin Laden and other terrorists, Afghanistan was on the
brink of a humanitarian catastrophe, the site of the greatest
crisis in hunger and refugee displacement in the world. Now the
worsening situation on the ground is almost unimaginable. After
four years of relentless drought, the worst in three decades,
and the total failure of the Taliban government in
administering the country, 4 million people have abandoned
their homes in search of food in Pakistan, Iran, Tajikistan and
elsewhere, while those left behind eat meals of locusts and
animal fodder; 7.5 million people inside the country are
threatened by famine or severe hunger as cold weather
approaches, according to the United Nations.
As President Bush made clear, we are waging a campaign
against terrorists, not ordinary Afghans, who are some of the
poorest and most beleaguered people on the planet and were our
allies during the Cold War, when it suited our interests. We
abandoned Afghanistan then--we can never afford to do so again.
I have said before that I believe any military action must be
targeted against those responsible for the terror attacks and
those harboring them, planned to minimize the danger to
innocent civilians on the edge of starvation, and prepared to
address any humanitarian consequences immediately.
Osama bin Laden is not a native of Afghanistan, but of
Saudi Arabia. Most Afghans do not support bin Laden. Instead,
ninety percent of the Afghan people are subsistence farmers
struggling simply to grow enough food to stay alive. War
widows, orphans, and thousands of others in the cities are
dependent upon international aid to survive.
Now, fearing the effects of the military attacks and
forcible conscription by the Taliban, almost a million Afghan
civilians are on the move, fleeing the cities for their native
villages or for the borders.
We all agree that there is a humanitarian disaster on the
ground. We all agree that we--the United States--cannot turn
our backs again on the people in Afghanistan as we did after
the defeat of the Soviet Union; and we also, I think, agree
that the terrorists are our enemy, not innocent civilians in
Afghanistan.
Inside Afghanistan, the United Nations World Food Program
aid, much of it U.S.-donated wheat, was the sole source of food
for millions. UNWFP announced yesterday that it was stopping
all food shipments to Afghanistan, citing the danger the
fighting posed to its truck convoys. Our first priority must be
to enhance security for these convoys to get food immediately
to the maximum number of people inside the country. Let me
repeat that. Our first priority must be to enhance security for
these convoys to get food immediately to the maximum number of
people inside the country.
To get needed aid in and slow the outflow of Afghan
refugees driven by lack of food at home, the United States must
urge the Pakistani government to immediately relax its border
restrictions enough to allow the flow of food and other
humanitarian into Afghanistan, while maintaining border
security.
There is no easy solution to this building crisis, and yet
our Government must aggressively seek solutions to the critical
needs of Afghan civilians. As one of its most urgent tasks, the
United States must do its part to shore up relief operations
and help to again get aid flowing to the people inside
Afghanistan now.
While food deliveries inside Afghanistan must be the
priority, air drops of food are not enough and will not
necessarily reach those in need. We also must prepare for an
already critical situation to worsen as Afghanistan heads into
its notoriously harsh winter. We must prepare now for huge
numbers of refugees and humanitarian problems in the aftermath
of military strikes, prepositioning in the region the people
and resources that we need to deal with.
Particular concern must be paid to the special nutritional,
health, and shelter needs of women and children who will make
up the bulk of the refugees. The United States must do
everything it can now to alleviate the suffering of ordinary
Afghan civilians. While President Bush pledged $320 million,
the need is immense. The United Nations has said that $584
million will be needed to protect and assist 7.5 million
Afghans from now until the winter snows melt. We have agreed to
participate in U.N. efforts to raise funds more quickly.
The United States and our allies must lead this effort,
especially now as we seek to build a coalition of moderate Arab
and non-Arab Muslims around the globe for our anti-terror
efforts. If the humanitarian catastrophe in Afghanistan is
attributed to our military operations, it could pull apart our
international coalition to fight terrorism, radicalize more
people who might be sympathetic to the terrorist views, and may
even make the American people more vulnerable in the end.
Finally, any successful operation against terrorism in
Afghanistan requires that we help the Afghan people establish a
legitimate government there and to rebuild their country. I
join my colleague Senator Biden and appreciate his fine work in
calling for a $1 billion long-term economic reconstruction
program for the region. Such a package must target the
restoration of a woman's right that was destroyed by the
Taliban by providing secular schools for girls, including the
creation of full-scale hospitals and clinics.
As we have seen in the case of the schools, the absence of
basic social services creates a vacuum to be filled by radical
extremist groups. Moreover, we must work to rebuild the
shattered infrastructure by laying roads, drilling wells for
clean drinking water, and providing a range of developmental
projects. We as a country have a great challenge before us; and
for our sake and for the sake of the Afghans, we must match our
words with strong, generous actions.
I thank again all of you for being panelists, all of you
for being here, and I now turn this over to Senator Boxer.
Senator Boxer. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. This is a
rare time when we do join hands in subcommittees, because there
is a lot of oftentimes duplication; and we so much wanted to
work together on this situation, this humanitarian crisis that
is developing, so we teamed up today.
I want to thank Senator Biden, our chairman, for
encouraging us to do this; and I want to thank my colleague,
Chris Dodd who in 1997 was really the first one to call
attention to the horrors visited upon the women of Afghanistan
from the Taliban.
And my last thank you for the moment is to the Fund for a
Feminist Majority who came to me in about 1998 and helped me
get through the Senate and sign into law a resolution which I
co-authored with Senator Brownback, urging the Clinton
administration at that time not to recognize the Taliban as a
legitimate government of Afghanistan; and I was happy that we
did that resolution again, and the Bush administration and the
Clinton administration both followed through. I am just
thanking you, Mr. Chairman, for supporting us in this hearing.
The events of September 11 and this weekend's military
action have focused the world's attention on what was visited
upon our country and our people. The sheer terror of what
happened is seared into our brains, and it has also focused
attention on the people of Afghanistan; and I think that this
administration is doing everything it can to get the message
across that this military action is not aimed at the people.
The people are our friends.
We want to help them. It is such an amazing thing to
remember the bombs dropping and the food dropping, but we are
on a two-track path here to defeat the Taliban who are
harboring terrorists and yet to feed the people and make the
people whole once again.
The other thing the Fund for a Feminist Majority did is to
come to me way before any of this this year and say, we have
got to do more for the people there; we have the humanitarian
crisis there. And that was before, Mr. Chairman, before
September 11, and we were trying to wrap our arms around the
size of the package, and it was so big that it was
unbelievable. I am so glad, Mr. Chairman, that you stepped in.
I think there is probably great agreement on the driving forces
behind this crisis.
First, the nearly continuous war that for more than 20
years has decimated Afghanistan and killed an estimated 1.5
million people; second, a devastating drought that has affected
much of Afghanistan's population, killing livestock, destroying
crops, and creating the worst famine in decades; third, the
illegitimate Taliban regime that forces its extreme
interpretation of Islam on the people of Afghanistan.
Through its Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and
Prevention of Vice, the Taliban carries out punishment such as
stonings, hangings, floggings, and amputation of limbs. They
use food as a weapon. The Taliban is very harsh on women who
may not go to work, go to school, and must black out the
windows of their homes. In my office, I have a burqa that women
must wear that was given to me by my friends from California. I
have it hanging there as a reminder of what women go through.
They are made invisible. They are not human, and in many ways
really don't exist. That burqa says it all. If you put that on,
you can barely breathe.
It is an incredible situation. The women can't go to work;
they can't go to school; they can't see a male doctor.
Since the schools are closed, who are they going to go to
for their health care? They die in tremendous numbers giving
birth. The infant mortality rate is impossible to imagine.
The final cause is the fact that the United States turned
its back on Afghanistan following the Cold War.
Again, this is something I think everyone in both parties
has agreed on. It was a mistake we must now take action to
correct. It is also a reason why a strong U.S. humanitarian
response is crucial to prove without a doubt what I said about
the Bush administration's dual track, that we are fighting
terrorism, not the Afghan people, and also certainly not Islam.
In closing, I want to tell you that in Time Magazine last
spring--and so that is before all of this--there was a story
about an 8-year-old boy who died in a refugee camp.
Prior to the boy's death, his father had waited in line in
the camp clinic from dawn to dusk with hundreds of others
stricken with tuberculosis, measles, bronchitis, and other
diseases.
This child had pneumonia, and when the boy's father finally
reached the front of the line, he received 12 aspirin. That is
all, and the child died.
We must do better. We can do better, and we will do better.
I am looking forward to our two panels. I am so happy that, Mr.
Chairman, you have joined us. It means a lot to both Paul and
to me. Thank you.
Senator Wellstone. Senator Boxer, we will try and go, if it
is okay with Senator Dodd and Senator Biden, we will each try
to keep under five minutes, because we have two panels. Senator
Dodd.
Senator Dodd. Well, Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank you
for doing this, along with Senator Boxer. It is very valuable.
We have wonderful witnesses to hear from. I appreciate Senator
Boxer entering the 1997 resolution in February of that year,
which the Senate Foreign Relations Committee passed, I think,
unanimously. The House didn't act on that resolution. Not that
the resolutions are necessarily going to change things, but
this is not a recent phenomenon. We identified, in the language
I wrote then, not only the human rights condition but also the
harboring of terrorists and the potential problems the Taliban
posed.
It has been said over and over again here now by Senator
Wellstone and Senator Boxer, and it needs to be repeated, and
that is, of course, our quarrel, to put it mildly, is with the
Taliban and with the terrorist organizations they support, and
not with the people of Afghanistan. It is vitally important
that be repeated as often as possible so that message may get
through to the millions of people who are suffering.
The map here that you are going to have before you outlines
some of the drought areas, the worst drought in memory. Many
people say literally millions of people's very lives are
hanging in the balance. It has been recommended by Senator
Biden among others to have a significant humanitarian
commitment to the people of Afghanistan.
The pressures are huge. The ebola virus--or something like
it--may have broken out in the camps in Pakistan. They are
closing down borders, creating even more pressures on this
desperate population seeking to avoid the hostilities in their
countries, seeking some security, some sustenance in these
camps. The pressures on Pakistan as well as on the people
operating these camps are going to be tremendous. They already
are.
So, while we are pressing the conflict against the Taliban
and the terrorist organizations, it is going to be critically
important--the success of the military campaign, in my view,
will bear directly on our ability to succeed in humanitarian
campaign, and if we wait to complete one before starting the
other, we will fail. This has got to be as much an effort as
the military campaign is, or we run the risk of millions of
people losing their lives, not because of what we are doing,
obviously, but because of what the Taliban is doing.
But you can fill the ranks of those who would become the
foot soldiers of these organizations if we don't understand the
dimensions of the human problem that exists, so I am grateful
for the hearing and look forward to hearing from the witnesses.
Senator Wellstone. We will first hear from Chairman Biden.
The Chairman (Senator Biden, chairman of the full
committee). I just want to thank my colleagues for being
willing to do this and explain my absence. I am chairing the
hearing on the new drug director, drug czar, downstairs in the
Judiciary Committee, and both Senators Wellstone and Boxer have
done a great deal of work in this area for a long time, and so
it is not only appropriate. It is a bit unusual for two
subcommittees to hold a joint hearing, but the two of them have
been so deeply involved and concerned about this area of the
world, Afghanistan and particularly the Taliban precisely, that
it is appropriate that this be done.
Let me begin by saying that you are going to be preaching
to the choir here. I have had the chance to meet with the
administration extensively on this, and I must tell you, and I
will say publicly, I am extremely pleased by the way in which
the Secretary of State has led in this area, and I not only
have not gotten resistance to the proposal I have made.
Quite frankly, it was a little bit of unofficial
collaboration that went on here in terms of the proposal, so I
don't want anyone to think I am making that speech on the floor
and talking about an immediate billion dollars and a long-term
commitment is necessarily an abridgement with me. I don't want
to get anyone into trouble, but there are a significant number
of people in the administration in high positions who feel very
strongly that this is not only the short-term commitment but
long-term commitment.
I had the opportunity, I would say to our co-chairs,
yesterday to spend a little over an hour with the President on
this very subject. I am absolutely convinced the President
understands the need for this to be a long haul, and I think
this may be the first time in the history of warfare where
literally as we are dropping bombs, we are dropping food, not
follow-on, but as we are dropping bombs, we are dropping food.
We are dropping 350,000 meals. There would be enough
sustenance for an individual person for one day and 350,000 we
have also committed. I think it is too little, but I think it
is great that is has begun over $350 million toward what Kofi
Annan has suggested is needed for the next six months of
roughly $450 million. Through the leadership of the
administration, the rest of our friends around the world have
pledged the remainder of that money up front.
I met today with Lord Robertson of NATO, and one of the
issues we talked about--and everyone understands this is the
guy heading the NATO operation--the arrow is in the talon, and
not the peaceful side of this equation, and that the only
discussion was about what we do after we, quote, win. That is
after the hostilities cease, and so there is an overwhelming, I
think, understanding on the part of most of the members of
Congress, I hope, and most of the members of the
administration, I know, for the need for this to be a long-term
operation, and it is not only when the last Russian troop
crossed the Afghan border heading north.
Not only did they leave Afghanistan, but Afghanistan left
the consciousness of all but a few here in the United States
Congress. I was here, so--and I am not laying this on anyone
else. I was here. There was not nearly enough attention paid,
but because of my three colleagues here, including Senator
Dodd, they tried to keep a focus on it, and the truth of the
matter is not enough of us listened as well as we should have,
and the world surely didn't. We kind of hoped this would go
away.
So that I just want to say I know you are going to be
preaching to the choir a little bit. I know we are not going to
use words like ``nation-building,'' because that scares the
hell out of the Republicans, and you beat up the former
President for years on it, and you are about to do it, thank
God. But what I want to make clear here is we are talking about
draining the swamp. That is a phrase that has become almost a
cliche these days, draining the swamp, where these terrorists
are able to breed, if you will. Well, once we drain the swap,
we had better plan something in that swamp.
There had better be something that is put in its place. It
better be something that fills the swamp, again what was the
swamp.
And so, I think that the long-term solution includes such
important items as secular education for both boys and girls in
Afghanistan. It will serve two purposes. It will break the grip
the radical religious academies have on that part of the world,
because of the void that has been left. I mean, as you all
know--and I know this, again, is preaching to the choir--the
administration witnesses know half the reason why half these
young men are in these academies, it is the only place their
parents could put them, knowing they would get three square
meals a day and get clothed, and the choice was an easy one for
them to make.
But it has had a devastating impact upon the mentality and
attitude of the region, and so I think that no wonder this is a
nation that is in ruins, when you keep half your population,
the women of a population, in such a subservient position,
there is no possibility of you progressing. And so one of the
things we can do is literally with the rest of the world see to
their secular education.
We could be involved extensively in demining operations.
We can be involved in crop substitution for the narcotics,
because they are the world's foremost producer of opium, and
basic infrastructure projects like wells, water purification
and hospitals, village hospitals, village clinics, et cetera,
and this cost is going to be very, very high. We should not kid
each other. We are talking about billions of dollars. we are
not talking about $100 million or 200 or 500.
We are talking about $585 million just to keep people from
dying in these camps over this winter, so this is a gigantic
cost, and my plea to the administration and to my colleagues--
and I don't have to plead to these three, because they are
ahead of me on this--is that the same fervor with which we put
together this coalition to take on this cancer that we were
awakened to in a horrible manner on one month ago today is the
same coalition we have to keep together to see to it that we
don't allow the same swamp to fill up again, coming out of our
naked self-interest.
If anything is going to demonstrate to us that we cannot
stand alone, that we cannot unilaterally dictate the outcome of
our future, it is what has happened in Afghanistan. What has
happened in Afghanistan, we are bearing the brunt of now, right
now in terms of us being under siege. And so just as the fight
against terrorism is truly a fight for all nations, I think the
fight against destitution and despair that breeds terrorism is
the fight of all nations.
Again, thank you, both of you, for doing this, and thank
the administration. I am going to tell you what I said--and I
have said this straight out--I kid with the Secretary. He says,
For God's sake, don't compliment me too much; it hurts my
reputation. But all kidding aside, I think the administration
has stepped up to the ball here in a way that I must tell you,
I did not expect. And for that I publicly apologize for not
expecting it.
But you have stepped up to it. You have stepped up to it in
a way that I think has thus far been absolutely first rate, and
I have never once had a conversation at State--and I have had
many, as you know--I have never once had a conversation at
State where anybody ended the sentence by saying, And when we
get Al-Qaeda, we leave. Nobody is thinking that way now.
Although there are a number of people in the administration
who do think that way, who you have not--thus far have not been
able to convince, the President--your view has been the one the
President seems to have embraced, and so as Jim Eastland once
said to me back in 1978 when I was running a tough reelection
campaign, I walked into the Senate dining room one afternoon as
we were about to adjourn sine die, and the old conservative
chairman of the Judiciary Committee on which I served looked at
me. I must have been flunking what I called the slope-of-the-
shoulder test, and that is, I was running, and I guess I was
looking like this.
And when anybody says, How are you doing in your race, and
you go, Oh, I am doing great, you know you are losing. If you
stand up and say, I don't know, okay, you know they are
winning. I must have been flunking that test. He called me
over, and he said, Do you need help in Delaware. I said, Mr.
Chairman, I do need a lot of help. He said, What would Jim
Eastland do for you in Delaware. I said, In some parts you
would help me, Mr. Chairman, and in some parts, you would hurt.
And he took that cigar out of his mouth and--This is an
absolutely true story. You used to be able to smoke in the
dining room then. And he looked at me, and he said, Well, Joe,
I will come and campaign for you or ag'in' you, whichever will
help the most. I want the administration to know, I will say
bad things about you and good things about you, whichever will
help the most in you continuing this process.
Excuse me. I have just been corrected. Not 350,000; 35,000
meals have been dropped so far, but that is just the very
beginning. So at any rate, I thank you for what you have been
doing. Keep up the work. You have got a lot more to do, and
together we have got to convince the American people that what
the President says, he means. This is not going to be done in a
short time, and part of this process is the very thing my
colleagues are working.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wellstone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Natsios, again, Administrator, United States Agency for
International Development.
STATEMENT OF MR. ANDREW S. NATSIOS, ADMINISTRATOR, UNITED
STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Natsios. Thank you, Senators. Thank you for inviting me
and my colleagues here for this extremely important and timely
hearing on the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan. Afghanistan
truly is a country in crisis, a crisis that well predates the
events of September 11 by many years.
Three years of drought and 22 years of conflict and five
years of brutal Taliban misrule have brought untold suffering
to millions of people. The long drought has caused the near
total failure of rain-fed crops in 18 of the 29 provinces in
the country. Only 10 or 12 percent of the country is now
arable, and much of that land cannot be used due to mines and
fighting that has raged about the country since the Soviet
invasion in 1979.
Thirty percent of the Afghans' irrigation infrastructure
has been damaged or fallen into disrepair, rendering about half
of the irrigated land completely unusable. In 1979, Afghanistan
was able to feed itself. Last year, the food deficit was 1.8
million metric tons. The Food and Agriculture Organization
estimates the country will only produce 10,000 of the 400,000
metric tons of seed that it will need for this fall's winter
wheat crop, and next spring's planting, and we know the reason
why.
Most of the seed has already been eaten by farmers who fear
that they may not survive until the next crop. That is the
typical famine coping mechanism. It is where people consume
their feed if they do not think they are going to survive to
the next crop.
Approximately 12 million people, almost half of the
nation's inhabitants, have been affected by the drought.
Between the fighting and the drought, upwards of 3 million
people have been driven from the country and are living as
refugees. Another million are internally displaced, and many
thousands more are unable to move due to sickness, injury,
disability or hunger.
The WFP, the World Food Program, distributes on a wholesale
basis into the country, and then the NGOs distribute to people
directly inside the country. Estimates are that food stocks in
the country are critically short, and they are aggressively
seeking to move food into the country.
As of this morning, I talked with Catherine Bertini, my
good friend who is the director, the executive director of the
World Food Program, and she told me that WFP had just sent
convoys out from four countries with 3,300 metric tons of food
from Iran, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, and Pakistan into the
country so the food deliveries that were suspended on Saturday
have resumed, and Catherine and I agreed we needed to push
those deliveries before the snows arrive in the high mountain
areas of the Hindu Kush, among the highest peaks in the world.
Many people don't realize the terrain in central
Afghanistan is very similar to Tibet's. There is a high plateau
very similar to those in Tibet, and the highest peak is 25,000
feet high. Mt. Everest is 29,000 feet. These are not small
mountains; these are huge mountain ranges, and there are
millions of people who live in those mountains.
Although WFP wasn't able last week or as of Monday to hire
commercial truckers to take food in, its operations
nevertheless have proceeded as of this morning, as I just
mentioned. The international community who I understand is here
today has been able to maintain the programs in many parts of
the country. We met with the major NGOs last night, the
American NGOs that are doing the retail food distributions,
individuals, and a number of them told me there has been no
disruption to their operations at all.
The conflict is really confined to certain areas of the
country. There are large parts of the area in which
distributions have continued and aid programs have continued.
There are, however, 1.5 million Afghans who are seriously
at risk of starvation this winter, and there are another 5 to 7
million Afghans facing critical food shortages and are
partially or fully dependent on outside assistance for their
survival.
One of the first actions I took when I was confirmed
administrator of USAID at the beginning of May this year was to
order an assessment conducted by the Office of Foreign Disaster
Assistance, working with the State Department's Bureau of
Population, Refugees, and Migration. They did an assessment
with U.N. agencies inside the country, and they came to the
conclusion that Afghanistan was on the verge of widespread and
precipitous famine.
Based on this and other information and with the support of
Secretary Powell, I ordered the disaster assistance response
team into the region in June. It has been there ever since, and
it has continued to work with NGOs. We have also increased by
100,000 tons the food commitments. This was in early June. This
was preceding, well preceding September 11.
Our aid program in Afghanistan in the last fiscal year,
again preceding this event, the events in the United States,
was $184 million, 300,000 tons of food. It was one of our
largest humanitarian relief operations. It was based purely on
need, need of the Afghan people because of the civil war and
the drought.
There is a terrible need inside Afghanistan. I am not going
to go through the entire testimony I provided, but I want to
focus on five key strategies that we are pursuing to deal with
this emergency. The first and primary response is to reduce the
death rates. That is our first principle in all that we do. How
can we drive the death rates of this famine down?
The famine has not peaked. Famines move in chronological
cycle, and if you look at famines, you will see rising death
rates. They peak; then they begin to diminish, and they get
down to a normal level after a year or two. We have not yet
peaked. In fact, we are at the beginning of the rise in these
death rates. In the assessment that was done in May, we noticed
in some villages six, sometimes eight people were dying per
10,000 people each day.
In the OFDA doctrine and public health doctrine, usually in
our public health schools, if more than two people a day die
per 10,000 people, it means there is a severe food emergency.
In most of our cities and towns in the United States, half a
person dies--or a person dies every other day. If you took a
town of 10,000 people, and you did the statistics for a year,
you would notice one death every other day. So if you have two
every day, you know that the rate has gone up dramatically. If
you have six to eight, you have a famine.
And, in fact, in some villages, those rates were--had
reached that level last spring, and if you add the numbers up,
that means 30 percent of the village would be dead within a
365-day period. So you can see how severe it was in certain
areas. It had not spread across the whole country. We were
seeing it begin to appear, and that is the typical pattern in
famines.
The second thing we are doing is to minimize population
movements. People move for two reasons: one, for security, and
they cross international boundaries because of that, to refugee
camps, to displaced camps inside the country. But they also
move because they are hungry, and that is generally a post-
famine indicator in certain regions. People leave their village
when they have absolutely no options left, when there is no
food on the way. That is when they start dying.
They have no other way of surviving.
We do not want population movements in a famine, simply
because when people are acutely malnourished, they do not last,
particularly when it gets cold. Complicating this dramatically
is the severe winter in much of Afghanistan. If this were a
tropical climate, we would not have as high death rates this
winter, but these are arctic regions. In some of the regions of
the Hindu Kush, the snow is 20 to 30 feet deep and is
completely inaccessible the entire winter.
So we do not want population movements. Fifty percent of
the people will either die during the movements, or when they
arrive in the camp, they will be so debilitated they cannot be
revived, so we do not want population--to the extent that we
can avoid them by moving food into people's villages, into
their neighborhoods, the famine reason for moving will be at
least dealt with. If they are moving for security reasons, that
is another matter.
The third thing we are doing is something that is not
commonly known publicly, but we do this all the time in
famines, and that is to deal on the commercial side, not
through the aid agencies, although the aid agencies help us do
this, is we sell food in specific markets to get the price
down. A lot of Afghans survive on remittances. The Afghan
diaspora of educated Afghans in the United States is very
large. They send remittances back to their relatives, and
extended families of 100, 150 people will survive on those
remittances. We see this in famine after famine.
If food prices go up 30 to 50 percent, which they have
since September 11 in many cities in Afghanistan, it means they
can buy half as much food for their extended families.
So what we want to do is get the food prices down to a
stable, normal level, and keep it there for the remainder of
the famine. So we will use what we call contra-famine market
strategies to keep food at a normal level.
The fourth strategy is to make sure food gets to where it
is intended to go. We do not want it diverted. We do not want
it manipulated, and there are some strategies, if you are
interested, that I can go over that we are assuming to do that.
Fifth, we are beginning most importantly what we call
developmental relief, another term we don't use publicly, but
for many years the NGOs--and I was with one for five years, and
I was with the first Bush administration where we did this very
effectively. We used relief resources to do development work in
the middle of civil wars and famines and emergencies.
And we do that, for example, through food-for-work
projects.
In Somalia in 1991, we repaired almost the entire
irrigation system of the lower Shebele Valley, using food-for-
work in a famine to keep people alive. It was also the same
farmers who will get the water from the irrigation systems that
were being repaired. There was a dramatic increase in food
production as a result of this developmental relief
intervention.
The NGOs we met with, and the U.N. agencies, have agreed
that the best strategy to pursue is to use the food-for-work
incentive for people who are able-bodied, to do food for work,
to increase family incomes, to increase the resources in the
village so that we can begin the reconstruction of the country
now and not wait until the end of the civil war is over or the
end or the end of the military campaign.
Senator Wellstone. Mr. Natsios, can I ask you to finish.
Mr. Natsios. Anyway, that is our strategy, and we are
pursuing that right now, and we will aggressively pursue it in
the future. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Andrew S. Natsios follows:]
Prepared Statement of Andrew S. Natsios
Madam Chairman, Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee, thank
you for inviting me here for this extremely important and timely
hearing on the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan.
introduction
Afghanistan today is a country in crisis, a crisis that predates
the events of September 11 by many years. Three years of drought, 22
years of conflict, and five years of brutal Taliban misrule, have
brought untold suffering to millions of people.
The long drought has caused the near-total failure of rain-fed
crops in 18 provinces. Only ten to twelve percent of the country is
arable, and much of that land cannot be used due to land mines and the
fighting that has raged about the country since the Soviet invasion of
1979. Thirty percent of Afghanistan's irrigation infrastructure has
been damaged or fallen into disrepair, rendering about a half of the
irrigated lands unusable.
In 1979, Afghanistan was able to feed itself. By last year, 2.3
million metric tons (MT) of food had to be imported. The Food and
Agricultural Organization (FAO) estimates that the country will only
produce 10,000 of the 400,000 MT of seed that it will need for next
year's planting. We know the reason: most of the seed has already been
eaten by farmers who fear they may not survive until the next crop.
Approximately 12 million people, almost half of the country's
inhabitants, have been affected by the drought. Between the fighting
and the drought upwards of 3 million people have been driven from the
country and are living as refugees. Another 700,000 are internally
displaced. Many, many thousands more are unable to move, due to
illness, hunger, injury, or disability.
The World Food Program (WFP), which distributes most of the food
within Afghanistan, estimates that food stocks in the country are
critically short and they are aggressively seeking to move food into
the country. Although WFP was unable to identify commercial truckers to
take food in on Monday of this week, its operations are otherwise
proceeding as planned with deliveries yesterday and today going on
schedule. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) have been able to maintain their
programs in many parts of the country, especially those areas where
there is no military activity, through the efforts of thousands of
dedicated local Afghan staff, many of whom have worked for these
organizations for decades.
Still, we believe that 1.5 million Afghans risk starvation by
winter's end and that between five and seven million Afghans face
critical food shortages and are partially or fully dependent on outside
assistance for survival.
actions prior to september 11
One of the first actions I took as the Administrator of USAID was
to order an assessment conducted by a team from our Office of Foreign
Disaster Assistance, working with the State Department's Bureau of
Population, Refugees and Migration. Their conclusion was inescapable:
Afghanistan was ``on the verge of widespread and precipitous famine.''
Based on this and other information, and with the support of
Secretary Powell, I ordered a Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART)
to the region. They arrived in June and have been operating in the
region ever since. Since then, we have focused on Afghanistan's
humanitarian needs as never before. Through closer cooperation with the
UN specialized agencies and the NGOs with whom we work, we have been
able to target our efforts more precisely toward those who need it
most.
The United States, of course, has been monitoring and helping the
people in Afghanistan for many years. In the fiscal year that just
ended and in the few days since, the U.S. Government donated $184
million in humanitarian assistance for the Afghan people. This includes
a variety of programs run by the Department of Agriculture, the
Department of State and USAID.
Our country has long been the largest donor to the World Food
Program's Afghan humanitarian assistance program. Approximately, 85
percent of the WFP food aid in the pipeline now--45,000 MT stored in
Pakistan and another 165,000 MT on the way comes directly from the
United States.
The President has now added another $320 million of new money to
this humanitarian effort.
humanitarian situation inside afghanistan
According to our DART, the conditions in many areas of Afghanistan
are well beyond the ``Pre-famine'' stage. As best we can judge, the
situation will only get worse with the coming winter.
While most people comprehend famine as a dramatic increase in death
rates due to starvation and hunger-related illnesses, there are a
number of famine indicators that relief experts look for when reliable
information on death rates or malnutrition levels is not readily
available. These indicators include the following:
Seed shortages due to increased cost of seed and/or
consumption of seed stocks;
Widespread sale of family assets, including land, homes,
domesticated animals, and family possessions, to raise money to
buy food;
Rising prices of f6od staples and hoarding of grain stocks
by dealers;
Consumption of wild foods, domesticated animals, and
inedible materials;
Increased rates of wasting due to malnutrition and other
nutritional disorders;
Declining birth rates;
Mass migration in search of food and employment; and
Increased deaths from starvation and related diseases.
In Afghanistan, NGOs, UN agencies, and the media are reporting
evidence of nearly every one of these indicators. The Afghan people are
tough, seasoned by many years of war and conflict. But many have
exhausted their ability to cope. Their resources are exhausted, their
animals dead, sold or eaten. They enter this crisis in an
extraordinarily weakened state. Apart from the many sick, weak and
disabled, the most vulnerable population lives in remote regions, often
at very high altitude, cut off from most efforts to provide food or
seed.
We are now seeing whole communities on the move, and many villages
abandoned altogether. Although precise statistics are hard to come by,
many families have resorted to desperate measures, selling their draft
animals, mixing their food with inedible substances, selling off their
last possessions, or marrying off their daughters to strangers at an
abnormally young age.
While we have not been able to collect data on food prices fully,
there are ample signs that prices have risen rapidly in certain places,
even as family income plummets. In major Afghan cities, food prices
have increased between 30 and 50 percent in the past month. Most
alarmingly, there is evidence of abnormally high death rates in some
parts of the country.
humanitarian response strategy
President Bush's strategy to deal with this vast and complicated
humanitarian crisis is designed to accomplish five critical objectives:
reduce death rates;
minimize population movements;
lower and then stabilize food prices so that food in markets
is more accessible;
ensure that aid reaches those it is intended for; and
begin developmental relief programs, in which we can move
beyond emergency relief, where possible, to begin long-overdue
reconstruction projects.
reduce death rates
Our primary goal, of course, is to prevent as many people from
dying as possible. Winter is fast approaching, so time is clearly of
the essence. We must get as much food as possible into the country as
soon as possible, particularly to the mountain areas of the Hindu Kush.
This means doubling the amount of tonnage going in, at the very least,
from approximately 25,000 MT per month to 50,000 MT. We are opening all
possible pipelines to move food, seed, and other emergency commodities
such as blankets and health kits into the country to increase the
volume of aid. Health care, nutritional surveillance, and water and
sanitation programs are also vital to the success of the aid effort.
minimize population movements
When people have sold all their assets for food. and have run out
of options, many leave their villages to find food or work. In other
famines, we know that as many as 50 percent will die along the way or
in famine-induced refugee or internally displaced persons (IDP) camps.
So we must do everything we can to encourage people to stay in their
villages by moving as much food as possible into the villages and rural
areas. The million or more refugees that the UN High Commissioner for
Refugees has predicted has not materialized thus far. One of our
objectives is to see that it never does.
lower and stabilize food prices
We also need to do what we can to drive down the cost of food, so
that ordinary Afghan citizens can buy what they and their families
need. Many people die of hunger during famine not because of a shortage
of food, but rather because of an inability to purchase food that is
available due to skyrocketing prices. The best way to counter this is
to sell significant amounts of food to local merchants in order to
bring down prices and discourage hoarding. These merchants have their
own means of protecting their goods even in the midst of general
insecurity, and the incentive of profits to be made ensures that the
food will reach the markets. Experience from other famine situations
has shown this to be a particularly effective strategy, especially in
smaller markets where even limited amounts can have a significant
effect on prices.
ensure aid reaches the intended beneficiaries
It will be necessary to do our utmost to keep U.S. Government
humanitarian assistance out of the hands of the Taliban or other armed
groups. Part of our strategy to do so is linked to our second goal,
limiting population movements. By moving as much food as possible to
remote villages and towns, we can help discourage people from
concentrating in refugee and IDP camps, where the risk of manipulation
by the Taliban and their supporters is comparatively high.
All such camps should be managed, and all food distributed, by
experienced expatriates; to permit Afghan refugees or IDPs to
distribute supplies or manage the camps, on the other hand, is to
invite their manipulation by the Taliban or other extremist networks
such as al-Qaeda.
At the same time, we must be prepared to shut down any program if
the Taliban begins to loot or manipulate the aid. Where the security of
the food is an issue in refugee or IDP camps, we should avoid
distributing dry rations. Wet feeding programs in which prepared food
is distributed directly to beneficiaries, rather than uncooked or dry
rations, should be the norm wherever possible, even for adults, because
cooked food spoils quickly, is heavier to move and harder to store,
making it more difficult to steal and more likely that the intended
beneficiaries will receive their rations.
By opening as many food pipelines into the country as possible, not
only will we be able to move more food quickly to where it is needed,
we will also minimize the distance any given aid convoy must travel to
reach its destination, thereby reducing the opportunity for diversion.
We will also make it our policy that no more than two weeks' worth of
food is warehoused in areas the Taliban controls so as not to create
attractive targets for looting.
Finally, we will also implement a humanitarian public information
campaign so the Afghan people know aid is on the way. This will have
the dual effect of helping to discourage further population movements,
and will provide a check against diversion or manipulation of aid since
people will know what they are supposed to receive through this
information effort.
developmental relief
The constant conflict that has plagued Afghanistan has kept people
from rebuilding their homes and villages, their farms, their markets
and their businesses. We intend to structure our relief programs so
that they can begin this long-overdue process of smallscale
reconstruction at the community level where conditions will allow. Our
food-for-work programs, for example, will focus on practical sectors,
such as agriculture. Distribution of seed for the winter wheat crop or
even small-scale repairs of irrigation systems and wells can make a
profound difference in the country's recovery from this crisis. If
enough crops can be planted and livestock rebuilt, next year will not
have to resemble this one.
commitment to the people of afghanistan
The President and the Secretary have made very clear that the
Afghan people are not our enemies. The President said on October 4 when
he announced his new $320 million initiative for the Afghan people:
``We are a compassionate nation . . . We will work with the U.N.
agencies, such as the World Food Program, and work with private
volunteer organizations to make sure this assistance gets to the
people. We will make sure that not only the folks in Afghanistan who
need help get help, but we will help those who have fled to neighboring
countries to get help as well.''
With the new funds the President has added, we can redouble our
efforts to get relief to those who need it most. Despite the events of
September 11, and the fact that we have no diplomatic relations with
the Taliban, and despite their refusal to hand over bin Laden and
dismantle al-Qaeda, our humanitarian assistance policies will not
change. Food aid distribution will be based on need. The President has
made this very clear.
Accomplishing our humanitarian objectives under the current
circumstances is a huge task, but I am confident that, if we follow the
President's strategy, we can save many, many lives and help Afghanistan
begin to rebuild itself. Let me assure you that we at the Agency for
International Development are fully committed to doing everything we
can to work with you in Congress, the other Executive Branch agencies,
and the international community to accomplish these objectives.
______
Responses to Additional Questions Submitted for the Record by Senator
Biden to USAID Administrator Andrew Natsios
Question. How exactly is the $320 million dollars President Bush
pledged going to be spent? How much money is given to each agency, how
is it spent and when does the pledge of money turn into the reality of
assistance for people on the ground?
Answer. The $320 million is allocated as follows:
$100 million in supplemental funding for Migration and
Refugee Assistance (MRA), to be managed by the State
Department's Bureau for Population, Refugees and Migration
(PPM). These funds will be used to provide support for refugees
from Afghanistan resident in neighboring countries such as
Pakistan and Iran, for their repatriation when the opportunity
comes, and for support to the International Committee for the
Red Cross. They may also be used to support coordination of
United Nations operations through the UN's Office of the
Coordinator for Humanitarian Assistance.
$25 million in already appropriated funds from the Emergency
Refugee and Migration Assistance account for the same purposes
as the MPA funding, to be managed by State PPM.
$95 million of supplemental funding for P.L. 480 food aid to
procure U.S. agricultural commodities such as wheat, vegetable
oil, pulses and corn-soy blend and for transportation and
distribution costs. These resources will be managed by USAID's
Office of Food for Peace, working through the World Food
Program (WFP) and U.S. private voluntary organizations.
$96 million of supplemental funding for the International
Disaster Assistance account. These funds will be managed by
USAID's Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance. They will be
used to provide relief to the destitute victims of conflict and
drought inside Afghanistan, including the internally displaced.
They will be used to provide health, water and sanitation,
blankets and children's warm clothes for winter, and necessary
local food procurement. They will also support the logistical
capacity of organizations such as the World Food Program. Most
of the funds will be implemented by private voluntary
organizations and the United Nations.
$3 million of supplemental funding for humanitarian
demining, to be managed by the State Department's Bureau for
Political and Military Affairs.
$1 million of supplemental funding for USAID's Operating
Expenses.
Most of these funds will be managed through grants to implementing
partners such as private voluntary organizations and the United
Nations. The resources have been provided for humanitarian assistance
through the winter. Much of it has already been obligated and is in the
process of being expended.
Question. How much of our efforts should be aimed at increasing the
supply of food for purchase as opposed to helping increase the amount
of food aid? Should we task trucks and drivers with delivering food to
markets for sale instead of channeling all available resources towards
delivering the over 50,000 tons a month of relief commodities the World
Food Program projects it needs to feed people in Afghanistan that can't
purchase food?
Answer. According to the humanitarian community, food is available
for purchase in most urban markets. Prices are back to pre-September 11
levels, except in areas of extreme insecurity where movement of market
items has been disrupted (such as Kandahar) . However, a lack of
purchasing power in many areas means that some segments of the
population are unable to purchase the food on the markets, even at
``reasonable'' prices. USAID is evaluating methods to increase the
purchasing power of the poorest through micro-credit mechanisms and
cash for work activities. This will stimulate the demand for commercial
market development.
Question. You pointed out in your testimony that the tonnage of
food going into Afghanistan should be doubled at the very least, and
that all possible pipelines must be opened wide. How can we help the
international aid agencies deliver double the amount of food that they
are currently sending into Afghanistan?
Answer. From October 14 to November 14, the World Food Program
moved 52,075 metric tons of food into Afghanistan, reaching the monthly
goal of 52,000 MT. WFP is using all open corridors into Afghanistan.
Therefore, the humanitarian community is now getting the monthly amount
needed into the country. Due to insecurity, once the food is inside
Afghanistan, it is not distributed to the beneficiaries as quickly as
needed despite heroic efforts. Some areas are currently inaccessible.
As the security situation stabilizes, we expect the internal
distributions will meet the requirements.
Question. What plans is the Agency for International Development
making for longer-term relief and development in the region?
Answer. USAID has developed an economic recovery plan in the
context of a larger U.S. Government strategy for Afghanistan. The
President has emphasized that U.S. involvement in longer-term
development in Afghanistan must be part of a larger multilateral
effort.
The key elements focus on restoration of essential services at the
community level and reintegration of refugees and internally displaced
persons (IDPs) in the near term, and on longer-term economic recovery.
There will be a primary focus on women. Other target groups will
include returnees and demobilized combatants. The primary sectors are:
Livelihoods and Income Generation: community public works
programs that generate labor as well as put in place critical
community infrastructure (schools, potable water systems,
health facilities, etc.); skills training; access to credit;
and micro-enterprise development programs.
Basic Education: support for community-based basic education
programs, with specific attention to girls; and basic adult
literacy programs.
Food Security and Agriculture: distribution of seeds and
tools; rehabilitation of critical irrigation facilities and
rural feeder roads; distribution of breeding stocks of
livestock; and re-establishment of local markets.
Basic Health Needs: provision of immunizations and vitamin
A; prevention and treatment of diarrheal disease and acute
respiratory infection; infant and young child feeding; maternal
health; and basic water and sanitation.
Rule of Law, Democracy and Governance: assistance to local
authorities in responding to the needs of citizens through
service provision; encouraging the participation of women and
minorities in government; training of female leaders in civil
society development; supporting the establishment of select
national and administrative procedures that promote
accountability and participation; legal training and the
effective administration of justice; and the re-establishment
of Afghan-managed radio broadcasts and other means of
information dissemination.
Question. Is there any effort underway to use Voice of America
broadcasts to inform people about our airdrops of humanitarian daily
rations?
Answer. USAID's program through the Office of Transition
Initiatives (OTI) supports the development of relevant and timely
information on humanitarian assistance for the Afghan population,
particularly internally displaced persons (IDPs), other vulnerable
groups, and refugees. OTI is working with international and local
partners to produce and broadcast relevant information in local
languages, disseminate radios, and explore alternative media. The
objectives of the program are to:
Create awareness of existing U.S. Government and
international relief efforts inside Afghanistan, including
availability, location and rules of entitlement for food aid,
shelter and primary health care activities.
Prevent migration of large populations inside Afghanistan to
neighboring countries when humanitarian assistance programs are
functioning within the country.
Increase access by vulnerable Afghan populations to relevant
information via radio and alternative media so that
international relief efforts are transparent and those involved
in diversions are exposed.
OTI activities include:
Afghanistan Emergency Information Project: An agreement with
the International Organization of Migration (TOM) to prepare a
regular humanitarian information bulletin for radio
dissemination, develop additional radio programming, and make
small grants to local organizations to support information
dissemination. Also, TOM will procure and distribute up to
30,000 radios to vulnerable Afghan populations, taking into
account security considerations.
Voice of America Enhanced Programming: An agreement with
Voice of America (VOA) to significantly increase its news and
information-gathering capacity in the Central Asia region to
provide information to Afghans affected by the crisis. VOA,
which broadcasts in both Dan and Pashto, will increase the
number of reporters from two to ten. Support began in early
November and will run for ninety days, with the possibility of
an extension as conditions permit.
Senator Wellstone. Thank you for your testimony. I only do
that, because we do want to have questions. We have a number of
different perspectives, and I also worry about those later on,
and so we want to make sure we keep the hearing going along.
Thank you so much.
Ms. Rocca.
STATEMENT OF MS. CHRISTINA ROCCA, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE
FOR SOUTH ASIA, DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, D.C.
Ms. Rocca. Well, Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the
subcommittee, I am honored to appear before you with Mr.
Natsios and Mr. Kreczko to discuss the humanitarian crisis in
Afghanistan. Andrew and Alan will speak to you on the details
of the above crisis. I will restrict my remarks to providing an
overall political perspective. I will describe for you the
context in which this crisis has fomented and grown.
It is important to bear in mind that the humanitarian
crisis in the region did not begin on September 11. Its causes
lie in the tragic history of Afghanistan over the last two
decades. Twenty-two years of conflict have steadily devastated
the country, destroyed its physical and political
infrastructure, shattered its institutions, and wrecked its
socio-economic fabric.
The crisis has been exacerbated by severe and prolonged
drought, now in its fourth year. Average life expectancy in
Afghanistan has been reduced to 46 years. According to the
World Health Organization, the infant mortality rate at birth
is 152 per 1,000 births. The mortality rate for children under
five is 257 out of 1,000.
The Taliban have done nothing to alleviate the suffering of
the Afghan people. Rather, they have done much to intensify the
anguish of Afghans by pursuing policies that victimize their
own people and that target women and girls and ethic
minorities, as Senator Boxer pointed out. They have shown no
desire to provide even the most rudimentary health, education,
or other social services expected of any government.
Instead, they have chosen to devote their resources to
waging war on the Afghan people and exporting instability to
their neighbors. Instead, they have welcomed terrorists to
provide them a safe haven and allowed Afghanistan to become the
hub of international terrorism.
In contrast, the United States has been the largest
provider of humanitarian assistance to the Afghans. As the
President has said, our quarrel is not with the Afghan people;
quite the opposite. President Bush announced last week a
package of $320 million in humanitarian assistance for
Afghanistan. This brings our food and non-food assistance to
about $680 million since 1999.
As the United States began military action this weekend
against terrorists and Taliban defenses in Afghanistan, the
military air-dropped tens of thousands of humanitarian
assistance packages for the Afghan victims of this crisis.
Mr. Chairman, the United States has played its role in
helping to ease the suffering of the Afghan people. Following
the September 11 terrorist attacks, the U.N. predicted that the
situation would deteriorate even further.
We anticipate 5 to 7 million people will be at risk of
famine, as Mr. Natsios pointed out, and that there will be a
large scale of displacement of Afghans. Once again, we need to
be clear. The blame for this lies squarely on the Taliban.
Their failure to comply with the international community's
demands to hand over Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants, to
close down the terrorist training camps, and to release the
foreign aid workers has resulted in further suffering for the
Afghan people. They have continually obstructed the delivery of
humanitarian assistance by the U.N. and other international
agencies.
The Taliban and foreign terrorists they harbor bear
responsibility for the political decay, economic devastation,
and international isolation of what was once a proud, tolerant,
and fiercely independent land. Immediate humanitarian efforts
have been directed at getting as much humanitarian assistance
as possible into Afghanistan before the onset of winter, as
Andrew was just talking about.
We are also preparing for the possible flow of refugees
into neighboring countries. Alan Kreczko will elaborate on the
refugee situation, but there are already 3 million Afghan
refugees in Pakistan and Iran. The U.N. estimates there will be
hundreds of thousands more as the result of the current
tensions. Most of these refugees are expected to come to
Pakistan. We also expect smaller movements to Iran and other
Central Asian countries bordering Afghanistan.
To minimize displacement of people, we will provide
assistance inside to the extent possible and for as long as
possible. However, we are also urging all neighboring countries
to allow entry of fleeing refugees.
Let me note that Pakistan has been a generous country of
first asylum for millions of Afghans since 1979. we acknowledge
that they have borne a heavy social and economic cost for this
generosity. It has legitimate political and security concerns
as a result of the large-scale refugee inflow. Yet Pakistan has
given its unconditional cooperation to the international
community in combating terrorism. we will work with Pakistan
and the U.N. agencies to help them shoulder the economic and
social costs of the current crisis.
We have already lifted many of the sanctions and are now
assembling a package of economic assistance for Pakistan.
Iran, too, also has been a traditional host of Afghan
refugees. We will work through U.N. agencies and others to make
sure that resources are available for Afghans in Iran as well.
President Bush has taken the lead in responding to the
Afghan humanitarian crisis, but other countries are also
pledging to do their share, and Alan will be able to provide
more details on this.
Finally, let me refer to President Bush's radio address
this weekend. He raised the prospects of a future
reconstruction and development package for Afghanistan. we are
beginning the discussions with other potential donors,
international financial institutions, and the U.N. to examine
what the reconstruction needs will be for a future Afghanistan.
We hope the internal situation will stabilize so that we can
move forward on such a program.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Christina Rocca follows:]
Prepared Statement of Assistant Secretary Christina Rocca
Mr. Chairman, distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, it is my
privilege to appear before you with Mr. Natsios and Mr. Kreczko to
discuss the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan. Andrew and Alan will
speak to you on the details of the evolving crisis and the U.S.
response. I will be brief, and restrict my remarks to providing an
overall political perspective. I will describe for you the context in
which this crisis has fermented and grown.
It is important to bear in mind that the humanitarian crisis in the
region did not begin on September 11. Its causes lie in the tragic
history of Afghanistan over the last two decades. Twenty-two years of
conflict have steadily devastated the country, destroyed its physical
and political infrastructure, shattered its institutions, and wrecked
its socio-economic fabric. The crisis has been exacerbated by a severe
and prolonged drought, now in its fourth year. Average life expectancy
in Afghanistan has been reduced to 46 years; according to the World
Health Organization, the infant mortality rate at birth is 152 per
1,000 births; the mortality rate for children under 5 is 257 per 1,000.
The Taliban have done nothing to alleviate the suffering of the
Afghan people. Rather, they have done much to intensify the anguish,of
Afghans by pursuing policies that victimize their own people, and that
target women and girls and ethnic minorities. The Taliban have shown no
desire to provide even the most rudimentary health, education, and
other social services expected of any government. Instead, they have
chosen to devote their resources to waging war on the Afghan people,
and exporting instability to their neighbors. Instead, they have
welcomed terrorists, provided them with safe haven and allowed
Afghanistan to become the hub of international terrorism.
In contrast, the United States has been the largest provider of
humanitarian assistance to Afghans. As the President has said, our
quarrel is not with the Afghan people. Quite the opposite. President
Bush announced last week a package of $320 million in humanitarian
assistance for Afghans. This brings our food and non-food assistance to
about $680 million since 1999. As the United States began military
action this weekend against terrorist and Taliban defense sites in
Afghanistan, the military air dropped tens of thousand of humanitarian
assistance packages for the Afghan victims of this humanitarian crisis.
Mr. Chairman, the United States has played its role in helping ease the
suffering of the Afghan people.
Following the September 11 terrorist attacks, the U.N. predicted
that the situation will deteriorate even further. The U.N. anticipates
5-7 million people will be at risk of famine, and that there will be
further large scale displacements of Afghans. Once again, we need to be
clear. The blame for this lies squarely on the Taliban. Their failure
to comply with the international community's demands--to hand over
Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants, to close down the terrorist
training camps, and to release the foreign aid workers--has resulted in
further suffering for the Afghan people. They have continually
obstructed the delivery of humanitarian assistance by U.N. and other
international agencies. The Taliban and the foreign terrorists they
harbor bear responsibility for the political decay, economic
devastation, and international isolation of what was once a proud,
tolerant, and fiercely independent land.
Immediate U.S. humanitarian efforts have been directed at getting
as much humanitarian assistance as possible into Afghanistan before the
onset of winter. AID Director Natsios will elaborate on our efforts and
those of the World Food Program to feed the Afghan people. We are also
preparing for the possible flow of refugees into neighboring countries.
Acting Assistant Secretary Kreczko will elaborate on the refugee
situation. There are already over 3 million Afghan refugees in Pakistan
and Iran. The U.N. estimates there will be hundreds of thousands more
as a result of the current tensions. Most of these refugees are
expected to come to Pakistan. We also expect smaller movement to Iran
and other Central Asian countries bordering Afghanistan. To minimize
displacement of people we will provide assistance inside Afghanistan to
the extent possible. However, we are also urging all neighboring
countries to allow entry to fleeing refugees.
Let me note that Pakistan has been a generous country of first
asylum for millions of Afghans since 1979. We acknowledge that Pakistan
has borne a heavy social and economic cost for its generosity. It has
legitimate political and security concerns as a result of large scale
refugee inflows. Yet, Pakistan has given its unconditional. cooperation
to the international community in combating terrorism. We will work
with Pakistan and U.N. agencies to help Pakistan shoulder the economic
and social costs of the current crisis. We have already lifted many of
the sanctions, and are now assembling a package of economic assistance
for Pakistan. Iran, too, has also been traditional host to many Afghan
refugees. We will work through UN agencies and others to make sure that
resources are available for Afghans in Iran.
President Bush has taken the lead in responding to the Afghan
humanitarian crisis, but other countries are also pledging to do their
share. The UN has estimated that $584 million will be required to meet
humanitarian needs over the next six months. This past weekend in
Geneva, the United States and major donor countries pledged more than
$600 million in response to the humanitarian crises.
Finally, let me refer to President Bush's radio address this
weekend. He raised the prospects of a future reconstruction and
development package for Afghanistan. We are beginning discussions with
other potential donors, international financial institutions, and the
U.N. to examine what the reconstruction needs will be for a future
Afghanistan. We hope the internal situation in Afghanistan will
stabilize so we can move forward on such a program.
Thank you.
Senator Wellstone. Thank you very much, Ms. Rocca, and also
Chairman Biden mentioned our appreciation for the ways in which
Secretary of State Powell has focused on this question,
including the whole issue of food relief for people and the
humanitarian crisis. Please do convey our thanks to the
Secretary for his fine leadership.
Mr. Kreczko.
STATEMENT OF MR. ALAN KRECZKO, ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY,
BUREAU OF POPULATION, REFUGEES AND MIGRATION, DEPARTMENT OF
STATE, WASHINGTON, D.C.
Mr. Kreczko. Thank you, Senator. I will just say a few
words on the refugee front.
When the President announced his $320 million humanitarian
initiative, he stressed that it would be available to meet the
needs of Afghans inside Afghanistan and also for those who have
to flee to neighboring countries. As Mr. Natsios explained, our
most immediate current humanitarian priority is trying to
provide assistance inside Afghanistan, but we are also, as a
second priority, trying to prepare for potential refugee flows
to neighboring countries, and in doing that, we have to take
into account the context and acknowledge that Pakistan and Iran
have been very generous hosts to millions of Afghan refugees
for years.
There are some 3 million Afghan refugees in neighboring
countries with Pakistan hosting 2 million and Iran a million
and a half. As Christina noted, the U.N. high commissioner for
refugees has estimated that there could be an additional 1.5
million Afghans seeking to enter neighboring countries in the
current crisis. Their estimate is that roughly 1 million of
those could seek to go to Pakistan, 400,000 to Iran, and 50,000
each to Tajikistan and Turkmenistan.
I need to stress that these are planning figures. At this
time, the actual flow of refugees is quite small. UNHCR
estimates that between 20,000 and 30,000 refugees have entered
Pakistan in the past several weeks, and there have not been any
significant new movements to Iran or the other bordering
countries. Future flows will be affected by a number of
factors, including whether the Taliban continues to limit the
ability of people to leave Afghanistan, how bordering states
view arriving refugees, how much relief we can get in to
Afghanistan, and the course of how the military activity
unfolds.
As an official matter, all of Afghanistan's neighbors have
closed their borders to refugee flows. However, as a practical
matter, both Iran and Pakistan are working with UNHCR to plan
for refugee flows, including through the prepositioning of
supplies and the identification and preparation of camp sites.
Particularly given the large number of refugees that these
countries already host, the international community needs to be
in a position to assure Iran and Pakistan that it will absorb
the economic costs if there are additional refugee flows.
President Bush's $320 million initiative puts us in a strong
position to do so.
And I want to just say a word with respect to Senator
Biden's stressing the fact that we need an international
humanitarian response that mirrors the military response.
This past weekend, the U.N. convened in Geneva a meeting of
donors, as well as Iran and Pakistan, to discuss the Afghan
humanitarian situation. The meeting strongly endorsed the view
that we should do everything possible to get assistance into
Afghanistan and also endorsed contingency planning for refugee
flows.
Senator Biden noted that the U.N. has commented that $580
million will be needed to address refugee and humanitarian
needs over the winter. Overall, the U.N. announced today that
they have pledges of $730 million of humanitarian assistance
with over 25 countries responding, so I think the international
humanitarian response has been strong, and hopefully we will
have the resources needed to address the humanitarian
situation.
Thank you, Senator.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Alan Kreczko follows:]
Prepared Statement of Acting Assistant Secretary Alan Kreczko
President Bush has provided firm leadership in the international
campaign to eradicate terrorism worldwide. A key part of his efforts is
directed at both the immediate and the longer-term problems plaguing
the people of Afghanistan, and on this front, too, the United States is
providing leadership.
Compassion is an integral component of the President's foreign
policy, and it motivates America, even in these trying times, to lead
the international humanitarian relief effort for those most vulnerable.
As the President has asserted, ``We have no compassion for terrorists,
or for any state that sponsors them. But we do have great compassion
for the millions around the world who are victims of hate and
oppression including those in Afghanistan. We are friends of the Afghan
people. We have an opportunity to make sure the world is a better place
for generations to come.''
The President announced last week a $320 million initiative to
provide additional humanitarian assistance for Afghans--for both those
inside Afghanistan and for those who flee to neighboring countries. The
United States has consistently been the largest donor to international
humanitarian efforts. With vital help from a number of countries around
the world, our goal is to alleviate the suffering that Afghans have
endured for more than two decades, as a result of war, severe drought,
and the brutal, repressive rule of the Taliban regime.
The United States believes that all of Afghanistan's neighbors
should be prepared to accept new Afghan refugees as needed, and that
the international community must be prepared to shoulder the economic
costs incurred by the flight of desperate Afghan people.
Some 3 million Afghan refugees already reside in neighboring
countries. The bulk of those are in Pakistan and Iran; about 2 million
in Pakistan and some 1.5 million in Iran. As with its contributions to
relief efforts overall, the United States has consistently been the
largest donor to support those refugees. At the same time, it is
important to acknowledge the remarkable generosity of the neighboring
countries in providing relief and refuge to so many Afghans for nearly
two decades.
The UN High Commissioner for Refugees has estimated that as many as
1.5 million additional Afghans could seek to enter neighboring
countries as a result of the current situation. It estimates that, of
these, roughly 1 million Afghans could seek to enter Pakistan; 400,000,
Iran; 50,000, Tajikistan, and 50,000, Turkmenistan. I need to stress
that these are planning figures. At this time, the actual flow of new
refugees is relatively small. UNHCR estimates that 20-30,000 refugees
have entered Pakistan in the past two weeks, and has not reported any
new refugee movements into Iran. Future flows will be affected by a
number of factors, including whether the Taliban continues to limit the
ability of people to leave Afghanistan, how bordering states view
arriving refugees, how much relief can be delivered into and
distributed within Afghanistan, and, of course, how the military
activity unfolds--not just against the terrorist networks but between
the Northern Alliance forces and the Taliban.
As an official matter, all of Afghanistan's neighbors have closed
their borders to refugee flows. However, both Pakistan and Iran are
working with UNHCR to plan for refugee flows, including through the
prepositioning of supplies, and campsite identification and
preparation. Particularly given the large numbers of refugees they
already host, the international community needs to assure Pakistan and
Iran, and other neighboring countries, that the international community
will help shoulder the economic costs incurred in providing assistance
and protection.
This past weekend, the UN convened in Geneva a meeting of major
donors, as well as Iran and Pakistan, to discuss the Afghan
humanitarian situation. Attendees of this meeting expressed high praise
to President Bush for his humanitarian initiative. The meeting strongly
endorsed the view that we should make maximum efforts to provide
assistance inside Afghanistan, so that people are not forced to leave
in search of assistance. The meeting also endorsed contingency planning
for refugee flows, and provided assurances to Pakistan and Iran of
burden sharing to care for all new arrivals from Afghanistan. Overall,
the donors pledged $608 million of humanitarian response, of which
President Bush's announcement of $320 million represents over half.
The unambiguous message of the meeting was support for the Afghan
people. That certainly represents the attitude and endeavors of the
United States as well. We are not at war with the innocent people of
Afghanistan, and we are doing all we can to ameliorate the conditions
under which they have long been suffering. Our campaign against
international terrorism is multi-faceted, comprising political,
military, economic, and humanitarian aspects. The President's
announcement last Thursday and our continuing efforts to assist the
Afghan people demonstrate that our words are true harbingers of our
actions.
Senator Wellstone. Thank you so much. I think if it is okay
with my colleagues, we will each go five, and then we will do
follow-up questions if we need to.
Let me ask you, first of all, Mr. Natsios, to go to Senator
Biden's--he wanted to correct himself. He had initially talked
about 350,000 daily drops, and then he said actually that it
would be 37,000 to 39,000 now. With these figures, each HDR
could be two meals if the people want to divide it up, but
even--but there are two questions I want to ask you.
There are many who are saying that few of the HDRs actually
reach their targets, number one, and even if every packet
reached its target, this would serve less than 1 percent of the
Afghans who are now at risk of starvation. And I wonder--I
suppose what we would say is, this is just but a start. And I
wonder if you could respond to this.
Mr. Natsios. Sure. This, by the way--I brought it with me,
just because people are wondering what it looks like.
This is a humanitarian ration. There have been some media
reports that the U.S. military is dropping soldiers' rations,
military. We are not doing that. This was designed in mid-
1990s, specifically for internally displaced people, refugees
and people who are hungry, for diets that are appropriate for
people in the developing world.
It does not have the level of fat content we have in a
military ration. I used to have to eat them as a soldier. I can
tell you, these are actually better than the military rations,
but that is a matter of opinion. I had to taste these in the
mid-'90s when they were developing them.
These are dropped in large packages. The packages break
apart, and then these sort of--they are called flutters,
because they flutter to the ground, and they say on them that
they are a gift of the American people. There is also a picture
on them, because a lot of people don't read any language, let
alone their own. It has a picture of a person eating, so they
can see that this is something to eat.
In terms of the actual drops, it is about 35,000 to 36,000
of these are dropped a day, and we are up to about 111,000 as
of today, as of a couple of hours ago. I checked what the
number was this afternoon, and that will increase as the days
move on. We use two standards in helping the military target
where they would be dropped, and AID helped them do that, based
on our data from the ground.
One is since in a month the snows will begin in the Hindu
Kush, that we wanted to send these packages to areas that were
inaccessible by ground, either in remote areas or in the Hindu
Kush, so inaccessibility by ground transport is the first
condition, and the second condition is extreme nutritional
distress.
You noticed this map. By the way, you may note that you
have this chart and that chart, and they are different. That is
from May; that is the drought in May. This is the drought as of
today. You can see things have deteriorated substantially since
May of this year, but you can tell from this map, in the dark
green areas, where the areas of the most severe nutritional
distress, because the drought was most severe. Most Afghans
are, in fact, farmers or herders, and so that is how we target
this.
This is a very small portion. It is one--when it is
finished--and I am not going to tell you when it is going to
finish, because that compromises what we are doing or
specifically where it is happening. The air drops are one-half
percent to a percent of what we require totally for the whole
country. The great bulk of food in any famine is always
delivered on the ground, in this case by trucks mostly. In some
areas of the mountains, we will deliver it by donkey.
Senator Wellstone. Sir, your point is that this is just but
a small part.
Mr. Natsios. It is a small point.
Senator Wellstone. Let me ask you one other quick thing
about the air drop. There has been--I want this to be kind of a
rigorous hearing, so I put questions to you that are from a
critical perspective. There has been, as you know, some
criticism that actually the air drop, the military's air drops,
are potentially harmful. There are NGOs--the NGOs that have
been working on the ground in Afghanistan for decades have
argued, some have, that combining the military and the
humanitarian agendas basically endanger their independent and
impartial work on the ground. And I wonder how you respond to
this criticism. I have heard this; I have seen some of it
expressed. I wanted to get your reaction.
Mr. Natsios. Well, the first thing I would say is that
while our main purpose in any humanitarian relief operation
under any circumstances is to save people's lives, the fact of
the matter is all food that we distribute in a famine in a
highly complex political and military situation has political
statements that are made by it. When you feed people in a
conflict like this, you are making a statement that the Afghan
people are not our enemies.
Now, that is not the primary purpose of it, but it is the
reason--you know, it is the secondary message that is being
sent. I don't think that is bad. I think it is good. we don't
want the great bulk of Afghans to be involved in this conflict.
We want it to be directed to the people who are responsible.
The Afghan people never elected the Taliban.
Sixty percent of the Afghan people belong to tribes that
regard the Taliban as an occupation force, 60 percent of the
population of the country.
The State Department did a poll this summer among the
Pushtu population, which is the ethnic base of the Taliban.
Seventy-five percent of the Pushtu people do not want
Taliban running even any of the country, so they have a very
small base of support in the country, and we want to send a
message that that is fine.
Senator Wellstone. You don't think--I will come back to the
food later, but you don't--I mean, I always put a lot of
emphasis on what NGOs tell me. I have always had such
admiration for their work. You don't think this is endangering
their own independence?
Mr. Natsios. No. Number one, we are not distributing these
through NGOs. They are through military air drops. It is not a
normal ration that is distributed, so it is a very different
kind of ration that is being distributed. I have to say I don't
see any downside in any way to--we are not asking the NGOs to
compromise their neutrality at all.
Senator Wellstone. Thank you.
Senator Boxer.
Senator Boxer. Thank you. I just want you to know that I
believe it is very important that the people know that food is
coming from us and from our allies in this fight against
terrorism, because I think that is essential. And as my friend
Ellie Smeal taught me and will teach us all later, the life of
a lot of the Afghan people is that they bury their radios and
televisions, because they are really not allowed to pick up
anything, and a lot of them may not know anything except what
the Taliban are telling them, so the fact that they can see
this is from us, I think, is important.
But Senator Wellstone certainly has pointed something out.
This is a very complicated situation here, and what I want to
ask anyone who is competent to answer it: From what I know
about the area, how do you make sure that this food, whether it
is on the ground or coming from the air, is going to the right
people? Are the Taliban in the refugee camps?
Is there any control over that, or are they getting the
food drops? And I read somewhere they were, and they were
burning it. I don't know if that is accurate or inaccurate.
What is it like for a family here? You say you don't want
them to move, but if I was a mom over there and I knew that
winter was coming and there was just a day's food dropping and
maybe I could get it and maybe the Taliban would beat me to it,
I think I would get out of the freezing places, and then go to
the border. And then how do you deal with the fact that there
are some skirmishes going on on the Pakistani border, either
with the Taliban themselves, or with Taliban sympathizers?
I am just trying to picture in my mind: Where do these
people go? Where do they go to get this food for their family,
to be left in peace? If you had the chance to answer that
question for someone who is looking for an answer, what would
it be?
Mr. Natsios. The first is that people leave for a complex
set of reasons, and when you have a civil war and a famine at
the same time, it is difficult. Some people leave for both
security reasons and for nutritional reasons, because they
leave out of coping mechanisms. The reason people die in
famines is that food prices go up dramatically, and their
coping capacities collapse. They have no assets left to sell;
they have no animals left to sell or to eat. They don't have
remittances for whatever reason. They are in a remote area;
their crops have failed.
Senator Boxer. Okay. So let's say that all happens.
Mr. Natsios. Right.
Senator Boxer. Where would you advise them to go?
Mr. Natsios. Well, we are trying to get people to stay,
because the options are not very good if they move. The reality
is that the neighboring--
Senator Boxer. That is an interesting thing that you just
said, but it is, I think, an honest answer.
Mr. Natsios [continuing]. Yes. The reality is that we have
had experience for two decades in famines. If people move,
their incidence, their risk of dying dramatically increases.
Alex de Walt wrote a book called, Famines that Kill. It is
about the Sudanese famine in 1985. And what he found is that
one of the major reasons people were dying was not because of
hunger, but because they were severely malnourished, and when
they got to the camps, they are displaced. And they are so
close together, the sanitary conditions are so bad, they were
dying from disease.
In fact, most people actually never starve to death. They
die of communicable disease before they actually starve to
death, because their bodies, their immune systems have been
weakened from the hunger. So we don't want them to leave for
health reasons, nutritional reasons, and survival reasons.
Senator Boxer. That is really an important point. Is there
truth to what Senator Dodd said? I had read it also, about
ebola.
Mr. Natsios. It is not called ebola, but it is similar.
It causes severe internal bleeding, and there appears to be
an outbreak in one of the areas. Although we are investigating
that now, it is not on a massive scale, but there are some
right along the Pakistani border, I think, in the northern
area.
Senator Boxer. Would you keep our subcommittees informed on
that front?
Mr. Natsios. We certainly will. Let me answer the question,
Senator, that you asked, though, about targeting.
How do we know where the food goes? It is not just that the
World Food Program does a large-scale logistics. They move the
food in large tonnages inside the country. There is now 50,000
tons of food inside Pakistan destined for Afghanistan. 65,000
tons were in high seas from the United States, and we just
ordered two weeks ago another 100,000 tons.
That was actually--the decision was made in June, long
before September 11, so over 200,000 tons is either in country
or on the way. I might add 85 percent of the food distributed
in Afghanistan last year was from the United States, 85
percent, and it will be that high this year as well, and that
is fine.
How do we distribute it once it gets inside the country?
WFP then gives it to the private voluntary organizations,
and they have networks. Some of them have been around 20 or 30
years. They know who is in all the communities. They have lists
of people. Some of them have Afghan staffs of 1,000 to 2,000
people on their staffs for one NGO that distributes the food
from lists based on targeting, based on their income levels and
the resources and hunger levels.
If they are malnourished, if they are in displaced camps or
refugee camps, and they don't have any alternative way of
feeding themselves, then UNHCR would--I will let Alan talk
about that, but there is a way of targeting that the NGOs and
U.N. agencies use that ensures that the food goes to the right
people. And by the way, that has continued even now, with all
of what is going on, because that is still in place within
Afghanistan.
Senator Boxer. I was just going to say--and I don't need
another round, but other challenges, to make sure those good
people don't get hurt. We lost some U.N. volunteers, so this is
another horrific challenge for us against this tough situation,
this dual-track situation.
Mr. Natsios. What we did the week after the catastrophe in
the United States is we knew privately there was going to be a
problem in Afghanistan, because the reports were that bin Laden
and al-Qaida was involved in this. We told--and there was--
there actually had been a withdrawal of humanitarian troops,
NGO workers, prior to this, because of the arrest of those
eight workers. This departure of expatriates took place before
September 11, I might add.
It accelerated after September 11, and the instruction we
sent downstairs to OFDA and Food for Peace and the AID network
within the U.S. Government is, Continue to pay the Afghan
staff, because we do not want them leaving their post. we want
them to stay, to the extent they are physically staff, but we
don't want them to stop the salaries. So we told the NGOs,
Please, even though you can't do your program immediately in
some areas, continue to pay the staff, so these very talented,
very dedicated Afghans stay in place, because we are going to
rely on them to help reconstruct the country at some point.
Senator Wellstone. Senator Dodd.
Senator Dodd. Thanks. Let me ask two or three quick
questions, because the time frame is small. One, I noticed
major riots at least recently in Quetta, if that is the correct
pronunciation, the Pakistan community in the southwest. That
shows a tremendous increase in the number of refugees in the
last 25 days, and 20,000 people have come in to that one area,
and I am curious as to whether or not you have any information
that a lot of the anti-U.S. rallies may be by Taliban
supporters who have come in to destabilize in Pakistan, number
one.
And, number two, where is the source of heat or fuel that
the Afghan population will get in the winter months? What is
that situation?
Whether or not you have any information as to whether or
not the Taliban themselves are interfering with any of the
efforts of people to get these food supplies, and I guess it is
early.
But last I am just curious. I said almost facetiously this
committee should have been conducted by the Western Hemisphere
subcommittee. This food package is in Spanish and in English,
and I presume we have it--it is being dropped in the Afghan
tongue. Is this the language on the package?
Mr. Natsios. No. They didn't have time to print those,
Senator, so that is what was dropped.
Senator Dodd. That is hard for--you know, English and
Spanish----
Mr. Natsios. Most of the people who receive this cannot
read, Senator. About two-thirds of the population does not
read, and the poorest people are the ones who are most likely
to die, and they are the least educated.
Senator Dodd. I would rather have you drop it. I don't
care, but I hope at some point we get creative on how we
communicate.
Mr. Natsios. On the bags of wheat we are sending in, of
which there will be hundreds of thousands, we had it printed in
Hazarah and Kushnu, the two--Pushtu and Dari, the two principal
languages, on the bags with a giant American flag.
And what it says is, Gift of the American people. And so
that is being printed by the United States Department of
Agriculture, which does all the shipping of this food, in the
big wheat bags, which will get to a huge number of people, so--
--
Senator Dodd. There is no way you can put anything on this,
a quick stamp, to say it is safe?
Mr. Natsios. It takes a while to produce that, and
September 11 is just a few weeks ago.
Senator Dodd. I understand, but you understand the point.
How could we have this stuff out--and I realize only 30 percent
of the population is literate, but presumably there would be
people around who could help people read something.
Mr. Natsios. The big thing that makes people know it is the
American flag on it, where it came from, and the picture.
But in the bags, they will be in the local languages. Those
are being printed right now as we speak.
Senator Dodd. And the food supplies that are coming from
the international community, I would like to see obviously that
we get some credit here. It might also be important to know
that food supplies are coming from other nations, including
other Arabic countries.
Mr. Natsios. Every country that is sending food puts their
flag and their bona fides on the bag.
Senator Dodd. An important message is that our efforts are
being joined by the responsible moderate Arab world, and that
is--the U.S. flag, it seems to me, is critically important.
Anyway, if you could respond to the other two or three
questions.
Mr. Natsios. You asked the question on fuel. There are
three ways.
Senator Dodd. And the mining, too, whether we have had any
cooperation on the demining efforts, whether we are dropping
these food supplies in areas where we know there is a
proliferation of mines that we helped plant.
Mr. Natsios. In terms of the fuel, there are three ways in
which Afghans heat their homes. One is through wood. the second
is charcoal, and third, if the cattle herds were still in good
shape, the manure is dried, and they use that principally in
the highlands and in the cattle-growing areas.
However, a lot of the cattle have died, and so they are
relying more and more on wood unfortunately. The manure is much
more sustainable obviously, but in this case, we can't use
that, because many of the animals have died. So that is the way
they cook their food and that is the way they heat their homes
in the wintertime.
In terms of demining, we are very much aware of this, and
that was taken into account during the plotting of where these
drops are made. The Taliban may well have gotten one or two of
these things, but I have got to tell you, they were not dropped
in areas that have much Taliban presence, and that was just a
coincidence. The areas that we dropped them in were, in fact,
based on the two standards I mentioned earlier, so I don't
think they are getting them.
Senator Dodd. How much specific information do we have
about where the mines are?
Mr. Natsios. There was a large-scale NGO/U.N. demining
effort that has been going on since the end of the Soviet
period, and they have maps of the areas. There are, I think,
two or three big NGOs that do nothing but demining and contract
firms, and so there is a lot of data. I have not personally
seen it all, but the staffs have, and there are discussions
within DOD with these people on this issue, because it has been
a concern and we don't want to drop these in mined areas.
Obviously that would be terrible if we did that.
Senator Dodd. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wellstone. Thank you.
Senator Nelson.
Senator Nelson. Did the Senator from Connecticut need to
have more time? I would certainly yield to him.
Senator Dodd. No.
Senator Wellstone. He is being very good. He knows we have
another panel.
Senator Nelson.
Senator Nelson. Thank you as well. Thank you.
Last week, our committee went and had a wonderful exchange
of ideas with the Secretary of State. Secretary Rocca was
there, and one of the things that I shared was that I am given
to believe that we have had a tremendous success with our food
distribution in North Korea, that the fact that the food is
distributed in sacks that the people know that it came from the
United States, that they use the sacks for other things, and if
we are about trying to win friends and the hearts and minds of
the people, that that is an important lesson for us to learn.
So in addition to dropping the little packets like this, you
mentioned sacks of food. Tell us about that, and what will the
sacks say on them.
Mr. Natsios. I have to tell you, I was involved with an NGO
when we did that in North--when I say, we, when the United
States did it, and I have done some writing on the North Korean
famine, and I interviewed refugees up on the Chinese border
with North Korea, and I interviewed one who said he saw the
sacks, and he said, Our Government didn't tell us, but it
said--for the first time--we had never put in local language
until the North Korean time. We put it in Korean, Gift of the
people of the United States, with a flag.
We have always done it previously in English. This is the
first time we did it. And the reason we did it in Afghanistan
is because it was so divisive in North Korea and so successful.
I will tell you a story. The first food shipment that went out
to Chongjin, which is up in the northeast region in North
Korea, in the famine--no food had been delivered for two-and-a-
half years by the central government. There was mass
starvation.
The first ship that came into the harbor was an American
ship. The North Korean military required the U.S. Government to
take the flag down, because they didn't want riots in the
streets. They took the flag down, because they couldn't deliver
the food otherwise, but I talked to several WFP logisticians.
They said everybody in the city knew where it came from,
because it said it on the bag, and they said one of the
refugees said to me, We now know who our real enemies are.
We were taught all along it was the United States; it is
not the United States; it is our own government. That is what
the refugee told me.
That one bag he saw said a lot of things to him. the only
food that got in there in two-and-a-half years was from the
United States. It is a very powerful message.
Senator Nelson. And so from that success--and it is my
understanding that they not only get the value of the food, but
they use the sacks for things.
Mr. Natsios. Absolutely, they do.
Senator Nelson. So what are we going to do in addition to
those little packages?
Mr. Natsios. All of the sacks that go in--and we expect
between 300,000 and 400,000 tons of food to be delivered from
the United States to Afghanistan in this current fiscal year,
this period. The bags will say on it in the two principal
languages, Pushtu and Dari, Gift of the American people, and
there will be a flag, an American flag, on the bags, and that
is how the food will be distributed. They are bags about this
big. (Indicating.)
Senator Nelson. It is 110-pound sack generally.
Mr. Natsios. Fifty kilos, 110. You are right.
Senator Nelson. All right. Now, you need to know what I
just saw last Friday in the Port of Pensacola. I went there for
a different reason. I went there on port security. I was
gratified when I saw a whole warehouse of 110-pound sacks of
flour going to Tajikistan, but the sacks just had USA in red,
white and blue. They don't read, USA, so they need to say in
the native language so we are getting the credit for it.
Mr. Natsios. Senator, I learned some lessons from the North
Korean famine. We are beginning to enforce that, and we are
going to continue to do that.
Senator Dodd. Soon. You have got to do this quickly. That
is important.
Mr. Natsios. We gave this order three weeks ago, Senator,
in terms of the printing of the bags.
Senator Dodd. This doesn't take much.
Mr. Natsios. We would have brought a copy of the North
Korean bag so you could see it.
Senator Nelson. Other than red, white, and blue, there was
no flag; there was nothing except, USA. And for somebody who
doesn't read English, they wouldn't have any idea where it came
from.
Mr. Natsios. There are other means by which we will be
making known how large the aid program is, who is distributing
the aid, what countries are involved, where the food is moving
to, because we believe for humanitarian purposes, it is
important that the Afghan people know when shipments are coming
in, what their ration is they are going to get, and it will
become clear that is not the Taliban that is feeding them. The
Afghan people already know that. The Afghan--it is not even a
government; it is a movement. We shouldn't even call it a
regime; it is just a movement.
They have not been feeding the people. Last summer, I
said--before September, What is bin Laden doing. He is supposed
to love the Afghan people so much. You know what the NGOs told
me? Absolutely nothing. The Taliban is doing nothing.
Senator Wellstone. I am going to be abrupt and try to
finish this up, because I am worried about that we won't give
the other panelists a chance.
Mr. Natsios. I apologize.
Senator Wellstone. No, no. You have done fine work.
Senator Nelson. Mr. Chairman, I just want to make sure that
somebody is going to check this out. Why was a whole warehouse,
of which I am just so grateful that it is going to Tajikistan,
but with this phenomenal success that we have had in North
Korea, you would think that that would be one of the first
things that we would think of when we are sending sacks of
flour to Tajikistan.
Mr. Natsios. Those particular sacks are for--there is a
drought and a famine--not a famine but a severe food emergency
in Tajikistan now. Those actually weren't for Afghanistan. They
were for another problem, but you are right on your point. I
take it well.
Senator Dodd. Korea was the first country?
Mr. Natsios. That I am aware of.
Senator Dodd. What genius has thought about this? I am
stunned to hear that. This is not terribly difficult, and it
is----
Senator Nelson. And it is just so incredibly great for our
country that here we have got a Communist dictator that is
constantly trying to tell the people of North Korea how bad we
are, and here the people are just so grateful to America as a
result of what they are getting.
Senator Wellstone. The Senator from the Florida and the
Senator from Connecticut have been heard.
[General laughter.]
Senator Nelson. I want to know, who are we going to hear
from and when are we going to hear.
Senator Dodd. You ought to drop some of those in Cuba.
[General laughter.]
Senator Wellstone. Believe me, there will be follow-up from
the Senator from Florida. We thank all three of you.
Let me call the next panel up. Mr. Nicolas de Torrente,
executive director of Doctors Without Borders; Mr. Ken Bacon,
president of Refugees International; and Eleanor Smeal,
president, Feminist Majority. And I would ask unanimous consent
that Senator Enzi's statement go in the record, and a statement
from Human Rights Watch be included in the record as well.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Michael B. Enzi follows:]
Prepared Statement Submitted by Senator Michael B. Enzi
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to have this opportunity to express my
support for President Bush and the actions he has taken in Afghanistan,
especially in the area of humanitarian aid. As we are all too aware,
the people of Afghanistan have suffered over two decades of turmoil,
nearly four years of drought, and the oppressive and illegitimate rule
of the Taliban regime. I am pleased that the United States has been a
staunch supporter of the Afghan people and the largest contributor of
humanitarian aid. In fact, since 1979 the United States has contributed
more than $1 billion in humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people.
I believe President Bush is continuing our strong support with his
proposal to contribute an additional $320 million in humanitarian
assistance. The aid is on its way and the United States has already
begun to airlift food. In just two airdrops, nearly 75,000 daily
rations were distributed to various locations in Afghanistan. Two days
ago World Food Program convoys carrying 1,000 tons of wheat left
Pakistan and a convoy carrying 100 tons of wheat recently left Iran.
While there are millions more in need of food, this is just the
beginning. The United States currently has over 165,000 tons of wheat
on ships headed for the region. We are working with neighboring
countries to distribute food within Afghanistan. Although international
relief workers are no longer in the country, local workers are
continuing the effort to distribute food and medicine. Winter, however,
is quickly approaching and the need for immediate assistance for the
Afghan people is as crucial as ever. The mountainous country with
little remaining infrastructure leaves too many communities stranded
for the long winter months.
It is important to reiterate, we are not fighting the Afghan
people, we are fighting terrorism. While we oppose the terrorists
within Afghanistan, we must proceed with our aid efforts throughout the
country. I am confident that President Bush and his Administration will
continue to support and aid the people of Afghanistan as we fight
terrorism.
[The prepared statement of Human Rights Watch follows:]
Prepared Statement Submitted by Human Rights Watch
afghanistan and refugees: need for humanitarian action
Twenty years of civil war, political turmoil, continuing human
rights violations and recent drought have already displaced more than
five million of Afghanistan's population. Some four million refugees
are displaced in neighboring countries and across the world, while
another one million people are internally displaced within Afghanistan.
Before September 11, severe drought had brought the country to the
verge of famine and existing Taliban restrictions on relief agencies
had severely hampered the delivery of assistance and civilian access to
basic services.
Now that U.S. and British air strikes have begun, the humanitarian
situation is even more urgent. Unfortunately, the recent strikes killed
four workers involved in demining operations inside Afghanistan, which
is considered one of the most heavily mined countries in the world.
Landmines are concentrated in the border regions to which refugees are
likely to flee.
If the situation was bad for Afghan civilians, displaced persons,
and refugees before the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington
D.C., it only worsened in the three weeks afterwards. Conditions inside
Afghanistan as of early October have deteriorated dramatically and aid
agencies are warning of a humanitarian disaster of epic proportions.
The withdrawal of all international relief agency staff after the
September 11 attacks when the Taliban declared that it could no longer
guarantee their security has exacerbated an already dire situation.
Border closures have severed the supply of aid into Afghanistan. At the
same time the Taliban are reported to have confiscated food supplies
from the United Nations and relief agencies and shut down U.N.
communication networks. Many relief agencies report that they have been
unable to contact their local staff since the September 11 attacks and
thus information about conditions inside the country is scant. The
World Food Program (WFP) warned shortly after the attacks that food
supplies inside the country could only last two to three weeks. Limited
food deliveries were resumed to the borders of northern and western
Afghanistan at the end of September, but as of October 8, WFP announced
that all food deliveries inside and outside the borders of Afghanistan
had been stopped in response to the U.S. military air strikes. Airdrops
by the U.S. military of food and medical supplies have been met with
skepticism by aid agencies outside the U.N. system, because of the lack
of in-country staff to deliver the supplies and to properly administer
medicines to needy populations.
After the September 11 attacks, fear of retaliatory military action
and forced conscription by the Taliban, politically motivated attacks
by the Taliban against particular ethnic groups believed to be
sympathetic to the opposition, as well as the ongoing humanitarian
crisis in Afghanistan have caused tens of thousands of Afghans to flee,
most of them towards Pakistan.
All six countries neighboring Afghanistan, including Pakistan,
Iran, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and China, officially
closed their borders to refugees both on security grounds and citing an
inability to economically provide for more refugees. Like Pakistan and
Iran, Tajikistan's borders had been closed to Afghan refugees for the
past year. Pakistan's actions were reportedly in direct response to a
request from the U.S. to strengthen security in an effort to apprehend
those responsible for the U.S. attacks. Although tens of thousands of
refugees have been able to cross into Pakistan, thousands more--most of
them women and children--have been trapped at the border with no
shelter, food, water, or medical care. UNHCR has reported that several
women have given birth while waiting to cross the border into
Afghanistan.
While countries in the region do face legitimate security concerns
at this time, measures must be found to address these concerns without
denying refuge to those fleeing civil conflict, human rights
violations, the fear of military threats and conscription, and the
looming humanitarian crisis inside Afghanistan.
Host and donor governments, in collaboration with the United
Nations, should keep all borders open to fleeing refugees in line with
neighboring countries' international obligations, while simultaneously
developing a coordinated strategy to effectively identify and separate
militants and armed elements from civilian refugees.
Pakistan
Pakistan is host to some two million Afghan refugees, and despite
having officially closed its borders, many more Afghans are crossing
into Pakistan each day. Pakistan's border with Afghanistan is 1,560
miles long, making it difficult to control. The current humanitarian
crisis in Afghanistan and impending U.S. military action has led to an
increased influx of refugees, particularly at the Chanam border
crossing near Quetta in Balochistan province. Approximately 15,000
refugees have reached the Chanam border; attempts to prevent thousands
more Afghans from crossing have led to clashes between border guards
and refugees. Concerned about deteriorating humanitarian and security
conditions for refugees trapped at the Chanam border crossing, UNHCR
was negotiating with the Pakistan authorities to allow the refugees
entry into Pakistan. In a report on October 1, however, UNHCR stated
that thousands of the refugees had left the border area, supposedly
retreating back into Afghanistan and seeking other ways into Pakistan.
Since then, each day several hundred refugees arrive in Pakistan via
mountain roads, but as of October 8, Pakistan continues to officially
refuse to re-open its borders. The Taliban have also established
checkpoints along routes to Pakistan to prevent those without passports
and visas from leaving the country.
UNHCR is preparing to provide relief to those fleeing the country
and the Pakistan government has stated that it will provide assistance
to those refugees who manage to enter the country. Some 100 new refugee
sites have been identified by the Pakistan authorities in the North
West Frontier Province, which could accommodate up to one million
people. The sites are located in what are known as Pakistan's Federally
Administered Tribal Areas--largely lawless territories close to the
Afghanistan border. The new sites lack adequate water supply and
infrastructure and Human Rights Watch is concerned by reports that
refugees may be held under detention-like conditions. Location of
refugee camps in these areas could seriously endanger the well-being,
safety and security of the refugees. International standards stipulate
that refugee camps should be located at a safe distance from
international borders to avoid cross-border attacks or military
incursions and that refugees should not be held in detention-like
conditions. In addition, all sites currently identified lack adequate
water, an issue that promises to plague internally displaced and
refugee populations throughout the region. On October 8, UNHCR offices
were stoned and personnel were unable to travel to border regions
because of demonstrations in Quetta and Peshawar. The UNICEF office in
Quetta was burned by protesters, as were the offices of two NGOs
working with refugees located in the northwest border regions.
Iran
Iran's frontier with Afghanistan is 560 miles long. In the wake of
proposed U.S. military action in Afghanistan, Iran has closed its
border expecting large numbers of Afghan refugees to attempt to cross.
Iran has indicated that it wishes to provide humanitarian assistance
only inside Afghanistan with the consent of the Taliban. To this end,
seven refugee camps have been proposed for the border region between
Afghanistan and Iran, but on Afghan soil. These camps will be designed
to hold a maximum of 200,000 refugees between them. Iranian newspapers
have reported that the interior ministry called upon Iranian relief
organizations to provide emergency aid, although relief workers have so
far reported that few refugees have reached the Iranian border. The
Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reported that
the Iranian Red Crescent moved tons of relief items to the border in
preparation for possible new arrivals. So far, Iran has not responded
to calls from UNHCR or international NGOs to officially reopen its
borders, although reportedly small numbers of refugees are being
allowed to cross. Recent reports indicate that hundreds of Afghans
seeking refuge from the military air strikes were unable to cross into
Iran because of border closures. Iran has sent extra troops into the
eastern border region to maintain security and keep the borders closed.
Tajikistan
Recovering from its own 1992-1997 civil war, the situation in
Tajikistan is still unstable. The war, which caused massive internal
displacement, has compounded the country's problems. Tajikistan's
frontier with Afghanistan has been closed since September 2000. The
Tajikistan government, unable to adequately defend the border itself
has been relying on thousands of Russian Federal border guards to guard
its frontiers.
There are currently over 10,000 internally displaced Afghans on
islands in the Pyanj River, waiting for an opportunity to cross into
Tajikistan, some of whom receive assistance from aid agencies. UNHCR
has estimated that as many as 50,000 Afghans in neighboring provinces
close to the border may also leave their homes should the current
crisis escalate. Other estimates put this figure as high as 120,000. On
September 20, the President of Tajikistan, Emomali Rakhmonov, stated
that the country would not be prepared to let a single refugee into the
country. He cited a threat of infiltration by Islamic militants as well
as serious economic problems as his major concerns.
China, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan
All three other countries have also closed their borders. China's
relatively narrow border with Afghanistan is the least accessible route
out of the country. Uzbekistan's frontier has been reinforced, with the
government citing concerns about Islamic militancy as the
justification. Turkmenistan's foreign minister indicated a willingness
to work with UNHCR, although it is not clear whether this means that
the border would reopen in the event of an influx of refugees.
Policy Recommendations
There is an urgent need for international cooperation to address
the humanitarian crisis inside Afghanistan, to assist countries in the
region to cope with large-scale refugee flows, and for western states
to take their share of Afghan refugees. Countries should not use
legitimate security concerns in the face of the September 11 attacks as
an opportunity to close their borders or introduce legislation that
further restricts the rights of all refugees, asylum seekers, migrants,
or other non-citizens.
Afghanistan's neighbors should work quickly to establish
procedures, in conjunction with UNHCR and donor governments, to
separate armed elements from refugees. In this way they can keep their
borders open and comply with their obligations under international
refugee law, as well as their humanitarian obligations, while
maintaining national security. Urgent steps should be taken to help
these countries to cope with the potential mass influx of refugees.
Human Rights Watch makes the following recommendations.
To the Taliban authorities
As a matter of urgency allow international relief and U.N.
agencies full, free, and unimpeded humanitarian access to all
civilians inside Afghanistan, including the internally
displaced, with full security guarantees.
Cease immediately the confiscation of humanitarian supplies
from relief and U.N. agencies and restore to the extent
possible full communication networks for U.N. and relief
agencies.
To neighboring countries
Re-open borders to refugees from Afghanistan and provide
them with adequate protection.
The deportation of Afghan refugees must cease immediately.
As a matter of urgency and in collaboration with donor
governments and United Nations agencies, develop a coordinated
strategy to effectively identify and separate militants and
armed elements from civilian refugees. Separation should take
place inside host countries at the border and involve an
international monitoring presence.
The establishment of cross-border camps, safe havens, or
humanitarian zones within Afghanistan should not be considered
as an alternative to refuge in neighboring countries.
Refugee camps should be established in safe, accessible
areas in neighboring countries and located at a safe distance
from international borders in accordance with international
refugee protection standards. Camps should be set up in areas
with adequate infrastructure and water. supply and humanitarian
agencies should have full, free and unimpeded access to the
camps. Refugees should not be held in camps under detention-
like conditions.
To governments in industrialized countries
Continue to allow asylum seekers access to fair and
efficient asylum determination procedures. Tougher immigration
controls, including anti-terrorist and anti-smuggling measures,
should not infringe on the rights of all asylum seekers to
access fair and efficient asylum determination procedures, and
should in no way undermine government's international
obligations prohibiting arbitrary and indefinite detention and
the return of refugees and asylum seekers to territories where
their lives or freedom may be threatened.
Urgent measures must be taken to counteract and prevent
growing xenophobic and racist attacks against nationals,
immigrants, asylum seekers, and refugees on the basis of their
ethnic origin, nationality, religious and political beliefs and
backgrounds. Increased protection should be provided to these
groups, and government leaders should take the lead in
countering racial, religious, or ethnic discrimination.
Immigration control measures must include procedural
safeguards in conformity with international standards for
migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers arrested, detained, and
in the process of deportation.
To donor governments
The Bush Administration's commitment of $320 million in
immediate humanitarian aid both for refugees and the population
inside Afghanistan is a good start, but clearly more is needed.
International responsibility-sharing measures should be
urgently put in place to respond to the humanitarian crisis
inside Afghanistan and potential refugee flows.
Immediate humanitarian assistance must be provided to
civilians inside Afghanistan to prevent further humanitarian
disaster and options for ensuring that assistance reaches those
most in need, especially the internally displaced, must be
urgently explored.
Urgently provide international assistance to neighboring
countries and countries in the region to cope with the
potential outflow of refugees from Afghanistan.
Governments outside the region, particularly industrialized
states, should explore emergency resettlement possibilities for
Afghan refugees.
Senator Wellstone. If I could bring the hearing to order,
we have got a very important panel to hear from, and we will
start with Mr. de Torrente.
STATEMENT OF MR. NICOLAS DE TORRENTE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS, NEW YORK, NEW YORK
Mr. de Torrente. Thank you, Senator Wellstone. Ladies and
gentlemen, I am very grateful to Senator Boxer.
Senator Wellstone. Mr. de Torrente, excuse me. As those of
you who leave the room, if you could please keep your
conversation out of the room, it would be very, very helpful to
us.
Mr. de Torrente. I am very grateful to you, Senator Boxer
and Senator Wellstone, for convening this important hearing
today and for giving me the opportunity to present Doctors
Without Borders' perspective on the humanitarian situation in
Afghanistan.
Before doing so, I would first like to express the deep
shock of all of MSF's staff felt around the world following the
September 11 attack on the United States and extent our
condolences to the friends and families of the victims here.
These deliberate attacks which indiscriminately targeted
civilians were really an all-out assault on the fundamental
values and principles that we as a humanitarian organization
hold so dear.
Turning now to the very severe humanitarian crisis in
Afghanistan, I think for the sake of the short amount of time
we have in front of us, it has been very well described by
others before me. Suffice it to say that even before September
11, we were very concerned about the situation.
Doctors Without Borders has 70 international volunteers and
over 400 Afghan staff present in all areas of the country. we
are running hospitals, clinics, providing essential health care
services, and responding to emergencies there.
With the epidemics and health care problems resulting from
population displacement and malnutrition, through our
intervention we witnessed a clear deterioration, especially in
nutritional terms, which Mr. Natsios has described. we
witnessed also increasing population displacement and very
severe medical problems leading to malnutrition such as scurvy
epidemics in the north of the country earlier this year,
cholera epidemics, and other problems of the like.
Since September 11, the rising tensions and the grave
uncertainty about the security situation led to the withdrawal
of MSF and other international humanitarian staff. This is
jeopardizing the programs that are providing a lifeline to the
vulnerable Afghan population. It also makes it very difficult
to know what is actually going on right now inside the country.
Today our main goal is to bring our teams back up to full
capacity. To do this, we require that all parties to the
conflict guarantee safe and unhindered access to the Afghan
civilians in need.
Up until very recently, convoys of food and medical
supplies were resupplying our programs in Mazar-i-Sharif,
Herat, and Kabul. Our staff remains able and committed, and we
are able to monitor the situation through some of them, and so
although the supplies and the size of the teams are still
insufficient, these programs remain important sources of
medical and nutritional assistance to the Afghan population.
The main point I would like to raise today is our concern
regarding the impact that military actions have on humanitarian
actions inside of Afghanistan and why we at MSF feel it is so
important to maintain a clear distinction between these two
endeavors. The United States has stated clearly that the
delivery of aid is an integral component of its comprehensive
anti-terrorism strategy, and we have heard a lot about that
this afternoon.
President Bush's recently announced aid package is a
reflection of this approach, and it builds on the longstanding
generosity of the U.S. Government and people for assistance
programs toward Afghanistan. One of the key objectives of the
strategy is to win over public support in Afghanistan and
elsewhere for the United States's comprehensive assault on
terrorism by conveying the message that the U.S. strikes at the
Taliban leadership and Osama bin Laden network, but reaches out
to the Afghan civilians.
Now, clearly there is an enormous need for assistance,
especially as winter approaches. However, we have a number of
concerns about the blurring of lines between the current
military and humanitarian actions. First of all, I would like
to make a quick point about the air drops themselves. Air drops
of food by the U.S. military, even if they are well-
intentioned, they are not really the most effective means of
meeting the enormous humanitarian needs of the Afghan people.
To be effective, air drops should include the clear
identification of beneficiaries, careful monitoring of the
distribution of assistance, and transparency and implementation
of the operation. Our experience has taught us that delivering
untargeted and unmonitored relief is generally ineffective and
can even be potentially harmful. Most importantly, however, we
believe that the military and humanitarian agendas and
activities should be clearly separated.
Now, this is not about semantics or abstract principles,
but it has really very direct implications in terms of the
security of humanitarian staff and access to populations in
need. The Geneva conventions define humanitarian action as
neutral, independent, and impartial. This means that
humanitarian actors should not take sides and should be free
from political influence so that they can go after their
objective single-mindedly, to impartially help people solely
based on the criteria of need.
Now, if aid is not perceived to be entirely neutral and
independent of political objectives, it can be claimed by one
or both sides as a part of the war effort. Aid and aid workers
can then become targets of war. When aid is delivered by
military actors, it becomes increasingly difficult to convince
armed factions on the ground of the impartial objectives of
western humanitarian organizations in these very volatile and
politically charged environments.
Recent attacks on U.N. offices in Quetta, Pakistan, are
just one reflection of this problem, and it is not a new one.
In Somalia, the confusion of roles and agendas of the political
and military actors with those of the humanitarian
organizations resulted in ultimately neither side being able to
reach their objectives and with dramatic consequences for both.
What is really needed now is a large-scale independent
humanitarian relief effort aimed at directly reaching those
most in need in Afghanistan and neighboring countries. I will
come back to that in a short while.
Finally, I would just turn to the situation of Afghan
refugees in recent months. In addition to the approximately 4
million of refugees in neighboring countries, hundreds of
thousands of Afghans have fled their country in search of
security and assistance abroad. We have seen over 400,000
people moving to Iran in the last six months and some 200,000
to Pakistan over the last year or so.
Our work with a large number of these refugees has shown
that fear of violation and persecution have been a key factor
in this population's decision to leave the country, and many
also seek to escape the ravages of the drought. Knowing the
dire medical and nutritional consequences of massive
displacement--and, again, Mr. Natsios explained this very
well--we understand why one important reason to inject food
into Afghanistan may be to prevent further displacement.
But it is important to remember that these necessary aid
efforts, even if they are successful, cannot provide a
guarantee of protection for the civilian population. the right
of the Afghans to seek safe asylum must be respected.
MSF is extremely concerned with the closing of all
international borders with Afghanistan and the containment of
the population that results from it. Non-refoulement, which is
the right not to be forcibly returned to an insecure area, must
also be upheld. Currently we have not witnessed the expected
mass influx of Afghans across international borders in recent
weeks.
There has been much speculation as to the reasons for this.
Have Afghans abandoned the more exposed larger towns and taken
shelter in the countryside? Have they been blocked along the
roads? We don't know for sure, but what is certain is that
borders remain officially closed with even tighter controls
than before. Only those who can afford the high price of
smugglers can flee, leaving the poorest and most vulnerable
behind.
We are also very concerned that despite the ongoing
preparations of aid agencies that are led by UNHCR and others,
and including MFS, that despite these preparations, were
refugees to arrive in big numbers today, they would not be
adequately protected and assisted in host countries. For a
number of years, despite their longstanding hospitality,
Pakistan and Iran have been increasingly reluctant to accept
newcomers.
New signs that have been now identified for refugee camps
in Pakistan are situated in insecure and inaccessible areas
very close to the border. In these locations, the safety of the
refugees and of the aid workers who would try to assist them is
very far from assured. Moreover, these are desolate areas where
water and shade are in very scarce supply.
So to conclude, what is critical for MSF is in the midst of
this conflict, that as many dimensions, the fundamental needs
of protection and relief for the Afghan people are met, we
would like to underline the following points:
The rights of the Afghan civilian population to safety and
humanitarian assistance should be assured by all parties to the
conflict by maintaining a clear distinction between military
actions on the one hand and aid operations on the other. The
U.S. Government will contribute to the future involvement of
the independent and impartial humanitarian actors in
Afghanistan.
The U.S. Government should also insist on the opening of
borders of neighboring countries to Afghan refugees on a large-
scale and independent humanitarian relief operation, and we
have heard about it as well in some of the testimony earlier
today. That should be led by international, nongovernmental
organizations. It is needed inside and outside Afghanistan.
This large-scale, independent effort would provide effective
assistance and protection to the civilian population solely on
the basis of assessed needs in an impartial. In neighboring
countries, the conditions for refugees current and future must
be substantially improved.
Mr. Chairman, I am very grateful for this opportunity to
express our concerns today in front of the Senate Committee on
Foreign Relations. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nicolas de Torrente
follows:]
Prepared Statement of Nicolas de Torrente, Ph.D.
Ladies and Gentleman: I am grateful to Senator Wellstone and his
staff for convening this hearing today and for giving me the
opportunity to present Doctors Without Borders/Medecins Sans Frontieres
(MSF)'s perspective on the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan.
First of all, I would like to express the deep shock that all MSF
staff and volunteers around the world felt following the September 11
attacks on the United States and extend our condolences to the friends
and families of the victims. These deliberate attacks, which
indiscriminately targeted civilians, were an all-out assault on the
fundamental values and principles that we as a humanitarian
organization hold so dear. We have been extremely impressed by the
rescue and recovery operations in New York, and, in a modest way, were
able to contribute to this effort by providing an MSF mental health
team experienced in mass trauma to support New York's own excellent
mental health professionals.
I would also like to take this opportunity to clarify, up front,
some confusion regarding MSF's stance on the U.S. actions taken since
Sunday. As a humanitarian organization, our concern with any military
actions, including those undertaken by U.S. forces in Afghanistan, is
with their impact on the civilian population. Our intention is also to
raise concerns regarding the blurring of lines between military and aid
activities--such a mixing of roles has the potential to undermine the
provision of larger-scale humanitarian assistance by independent, non-
governmental actors to the most vulnerable populations in Afghanistan,
as I would like to explain, below.
First, please allow me to briefly share with you the salient
features of the severe humanitarian crisis currently facing
Afghanistan.
the severe humanitarian crisis in afghanistan
MSF has been working in Afghanistan for over 20 years. In fact, I
just returned from Faizabad, in the Northern Alliance-held territory,
in late August. At that time, MSF had over 70 international volunteers
and over 400 Afghan staff present in all areas of Afghanistan. MSF
volunteers were running hospitals, clinics, providing essential health
care services and responding to emergencies, particularly epidemics,
and health problems resulting from population displacement and
malnutrition.
Over 20 years of war and three years of uninterrupted drought have
combined to force hundreds of thousands of Afghans from their homes,
exposing them to increasing insecurity, disease and hunger.
Today, due to internal conflict and regional tensions, civilians
are trapped within the cycle of violence, and are suffering from
persecution, repression and other violations of international
humanitarian law from different sides.
The drought has compounded the effects of the ongoing conflict by
gradually depleting people's coping mechanisms. Our surveys show a
consistent deterioration of the nutritional situation in all areas, now
reaching emergency levels for millions of people (more than 10 percent
of children under 5 were measured as being acutely malnourished). There
have recently been outbreaks of scurvy (vitamin C deficiency) and
epidemics of diseases (cholera, measles, diarrhea) that easily kill
malnourished children. We are concerned that with high levels of
malnutrition, these people face a long winter before there is even the
chance of a new harvest.
Throughout Afghanistan, war and drought has resulted in massive
displacement. In recent months, hundreds of thousands of people have
been leaving their lands, homes and families out of fear or hunger or
both, and fleeing to vast makeshift camps around the major cities or to
neighboring countries.
For MSF, carrying out effective humanitarian action requires the
constant presence of our teams on the ground so they can assess the
needs of the civilians, provide assistance to the most vulnerable, and
evaluate the impact of our programs on the target population. In
Afghanistan, it has been difficult to gain the necessary conditions for
access and appropriate delivery of humanitarian assistance, especially
to women, but it has been possible. Throughout our 20 years in
Afghanistan, maintaining direct contact with the population and
dialogue with the different actors, as well as demonstrating focused
and clear humanitarian goals has been critical to our operations. This
has become more difficult in recent years for several reasons,
including the increasing restrictions on NGO operations by the Taliban
regime.
Since September 11, rising tensions, and grave uncertainty about
the security situation led to the withdrawal of MSF and other
international humanitarian staff. This is jeopardizing the programs
that provide a lifeline to the vulnerable Afghan population, and also
makes it difficult to really know what is happening inside the country.
Today, our main goal is to bring our teams back up to full
capacity. To do this, we require that all parties to the conflict
guarantee safe and unhindered access to the Afghan civilians in need.
Up until the air strikes, convoys of food and medical supplies were
resupplying our programs in Mazar-i-Sharif, Herat and Kabul. Our Afghan
staff remains in the country, very committed and able, and we are able
to monitor the situation somewhat through communication with some of
them. Although the supplies and the size of the teams are currently
insufficient, these programs remain important sources of medical and
nutritional assistance to the Afghan population. These efforts are
currently suspended due to the military operation.
A main point I would like to raise today is our concern regarding
the impact that military actions have on humanitarian actions inside
Afghanistan, and why we in MSF feel it is so important to maintain a
clear distinction between these two endeavors. Allow me to elaborate
more on this latter point.
concerns regarding integrating humanitarian operations
within a military strategy
The U.S. has stated clearly that the delivery of aid is an integral
component of its comprehensive anti-terrorism strategy. President
Bush's recently announced $320 million aid package is a reflection of
this approach, building on the longstanding generosity of the U.S.
government for assistance programs towards Afghanistan. One of the key
objectives of this strategy is to win over public support in
Afghanistan and elsewhere for the US's comprehensive assault on
terrorism, by conveying the message that the U.S. strikes at the
Taliban leadership and Osama-bin-Laden network, but reaches out to
Afghan civilians. Clearly, there is an enormous need for assistance,
especially as winter approaches. However, we have a number of concerns
about the blurring of lines between the current military and
humanitarian actions.
First, I would like to make a quick point on the airdrops
themselves. As has already been stated by administration officials, air
drops of food by the U.S. military, even if well-intentioned, are not
the most effective means of meeting the enormous humanitarian needs of
the Afghan people. Air drops should include the clear identification of
beneficiaries, careful monitoring of the distribution of assistance,
and transparency in implementation of the operation. Our experience has
taught us that delivering untargeted and unmonitored relief is
generally ineffective and can even be potentially harmful. For
instance, medicines need to be delivered through health structures and
administered by qualified health staff if they are to be effective, and
not risk causing more harm than good. Malnourished persons require
specialized food and care. By packaging individual rations, the U.S.
military's intention is to limit diversion of aid into the hands of
military forces. However, this still does not ensure that the aid
benefits those who need it most. Aid agencies on the ground have done
extensive work to identify and target those most in need, whether they
are displaced persons in camps or widow-headed household in major
cities. Without independent assessments and monitoring on the ground,
it will be very difficult to be convinced that airdrops have reached
these people.
Most importantly, however, we believe that the military and
humanitarian agendas and activities should be clearly separated. This
is not about semantics or abstract principles, this has very direct
implications in terms of security of humanitarian staff and access to
populations in need.
The Geneva Conventions defines humanitarian action as neutral,
independent and impartial. This means that humanitarian actors should
not take sides and should be free from political influence so they can
go after their objectives single-mindedly--to impartially help people
based solely on criteria of need. If aid is not perceived to be
entirely neutral and independent of political objectives it can be
claimed by one or both sides as a part of the war effort. Aid and aid
workers can then become targets of war.
Gaining access and providing assistance to vulnerable populations
under the sway of armed factions in a politically charged climate is
always very difficult. Ultimately, it rests on demonstrating that the
motives for helping the civilians are purely humanitarian. By making
aid delivery an essential means of reaching its political and military
objectives, the U.S.-led effort could well taint those independent and
impartial humanitarian actors whose programs have provided the bulk of
the assistance to Afghans for many years, and whose efforts will be
needed for years more.
In the aftermath of the current events, it will be increasingly
difficult to convince armed factions of the impartial objectives of
western humanitarian organizations in very volatile and politically
charged environments. Recent attacks on UN offices in Quetta, Pakistan,
are a reflection of this problem. And it is not a new one: in Somalia,
the confusion of roles and agendas of the political and military actors
with those of humanitarian organizations resulted in neither side being
able to reach their objectives, with dramatic consequences for both.
What is needed now is a large-scale independent humanitarian relief
effort aimed directly at reaching those most in need in Afghanistan and
neighboring countries. This response could be provided by independent
humanitarian organizations and UN agencies. All parties to the
conflict, including the Taliban, must allow for the delivery of large-
scale convoys of basic foodstuffs and medicines by humanitarian actors
who can ensure that it is delivered to those who need it.
afghan refugees
In recent months, in addition to the approximately 4 million
refugees in neighboring countries, hundreds of thousands of Afghans
have fled their country in search of security and assistance abroad:
over 400,000 to Iran, and some 200,000 to Pakistan. Our work with a
large number of these refugees has shown that fear, violence and
persecution have been a key factor in this population's decision to
leave the country. Many also seek to escape the ravages of the drought.
Knowing the dire medical and nutritional consequences of massive
displacement, we understand why one important reason to inject food aid
into Afghanistan may be to prevent further displacement. But it is
important to remember that these necessary aid efforts, even if they
are successful, cannot provide a guarantee of protection for the
civilian population. The right of the Afghans to seek safe asylum must
be respected. MSF is extremely concerned with the closing of all
international borders with Afghanistan and the containment of the
population. Non-refoulement, or the right not to be forcibly returned
to an insecure area must also be upheld.
Currently, we have not witnessed the expected mass influx of
Afghans across international borders. There is much speculation as to
the reasons for this: have Afghans abandoned the more exposed, larger
towns and taken shelter in the countryside? Have they been blocked
along the roads? We don't know for sure, but what is certain is that
borders remain officially closed, with even tighter controls than
before. Only those who can afford the high price of smugglers can flee,
leaving the poorest and most vulnerable behind.
We are also very concerned that, despite the ongoing preparations
of aid agencies, led by UNHCR and including MSF, were refugees to
arrive in big numbers today, they would not be adequately protected and
assisted in host countries. For a number of years, Pakistan and Iran
have been increasingly reluctant to accept newcomers, and our ongoing
experience working in Jalozai camp in Peshawar shows how difficult it
is to assist Afghan refugees in Pakistan. New sites that have been
identified for refugee camps in Pakistan are situated in insecure and
inaccessible areas close to the border. In these locations, the safety
of the refugees, and of the aid workers who would try to assist them,
is far from assured. Moreover, these are desolate areas, where water
and shade are in very scarce supply.
The borders must be opened to allow refugees to flee warfare and
persecution. The internationally recognized right to seek protection
and receive asylum in neighboring countries must be upheld. Adequate
steps to receive refugees in safe and appropriate conditions must be
taken.
conclusion
To conclude, what is critical for MSF is that, in the midst of
conflict, the fundamental needs of protection and relief for the Afghan
people are met.
Therefore MSF would like to underline the following points:
The rights of the Afghan civilian population to safety and
humanitarian assistance should be assured by all parties to the
conflict,
By maintaining a clear distinction between military actions
and aid operations, the U.S. government will contribute to the
future involvement of independent and impartial humanitarian
actors in Afghanistan,
The U.S. Government should insist on the opening of the
borders of neighboring countries to Afghan refugees,
A large-scale independent humanitarian relief operation led
by international and non-governmental organizations is needed
inside and outside Afghanistan to provide effective assistance
and protection to the civilian population, solely on the basis
of assessed needs and in an impartial fashion. In neighboring
countries, the conditions for refugees--current and future--
must be substantially improved.
Mr. Chairman, we are grateful for the opportunity to express our
concerns today in front of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.
Senator Wellstone. Thank you.
Mr. Bacon.
STATEMENT OF MR. KEN BACON, PRESIDENT, REFUGEES INTERNATIONAL,
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Mr. Bacon. Thank you, Senator Wellstone. I want to thank
you and Senator Boxer for holding this very timely hearing. It
is timely, because it comes at a time when the U.S. is pursuing
two imperatives. One is to attack terrorists and their
protectors in Afghanistan, and, two, to feed the Afghan people.
It is a campaign, as Prime Minister Blair has said, of bombs
and bread.
I want to just make four points in order to leave time for
questions. First, as has been amply documented here,
Afghanistan has been a huge humanitarian crisis for years.
Prior to September 11, the World Food Program of the United
Nations was providing rations to 3.8 million people. It had
planned to step up to 5.5 million people even before September
11, and now, of course, the needs are 50,000 metric tons a
month to meet the population in need of 5.5 to 7 million
people.
Second, the U.S. has played a leading role in responding to
the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan, and that leadership
continues. Since September 11, the U.S. has allocated $320
million to meet the humanitarian needs in Afghanistan and for
Afghan refugees in neighboring countries. It is important to
note that this is new money. It does not rob Peter to pay Paul.
You are not taking money from the humanitarian aid for Africa
or the Balkans. This is new money, and therefore, it is a very
important addition.
The U.S. has acted quickly and generously to meet growing
humanitarian needs in Afghanistan, and they should be applauded
for this. Air drops of food are just one sign that the
administration has incorporated humanitarian needs into its
military, diplomatic, and economic responses to the attack.
While the air drops of food are inefficient and expensive, they
are better than nothing.
To be successful in meeting humanitarian needs, the U.S.
must work with the United Nations and neighboring countries to
resume significant food deliveries to Afghanistan over land.
Refugees International recommends a strategy of letting the
country with food by the most efficient and effective means.
Available cross-border shipping by truck from Pakistan,
Iran and the former Soviet republics in the north offer the
best possibility to transport the maximum amount of food to
areas with concentrations of vulnerable people.
This effort needs to begin at once as winter weather,
especially in the north, will impair road transport. I was very
glad to hear the news today that the World Food Program has
started deliveries from four neighboring countries.
Senator Wellstone. And the question is whether that will be
sustained or not.
Mr. Bacon. That is the question, and only time will tell,
but I think it does show that after suspending the deliveries
on Sunday, that they have moved as quickly as possible to
restart deliveries, and this is a good sign indeed. I might
also point out it is necessary to deliver seeds. Food isn't
enough. We have to do more than just meet the immediate needs.
We have to prepare people to support themselves, and as
Andrew Natsios pointed out, people have been eating their seed
because they have no other food, so it is very important over
the next month, and there is really--this is urgent, because
there is probably only four to five weeks left in time to
deliver seed for planting for the spring wheat crop, very
important to get seeds in there as quickly as possible,
particularly seeds that have been tested to grow in this
climate.
My third point: While the current U.S. commitment is a good
start, it is not enough. Given the magnitudes of the needs in
Afghanistan and the likelihood that reconstruction assistance
will be badly needed in the aftermath of a military campaign,
it is probably best to view the $320 million as a down payment.
We clearly need something of the magnitude of the Biden
proposal. It might even be too small.
Fourth, this is something that Congress, I think, should
pay attention to for this crisis and future crises. the crisis
in Afghanistan is extremely complex. The response involves
military, economic, diplomatic, and humanitarian pieces. A
lesson that clearly emerges from similar crises over the past
decade is the importance of designating a cabinet-level
officer, specifically and solely to take responsibility for
humanitarian issues, in other words, the humanitarian
coordinator.
In recent weeks, the President has announced a coordinator
for homeland defense and a coordinator for counter-terrorism
programs. I think the humanitarian program should have an equal
stature at the table when the decisions are made.
Let me conclude with this very brief summary. Refugees are
a sign of instability. Frequently refugees flee a country where
the government does not work or fails to protect its own
people. The immediate challenge is to meet the humanitarian
needs of millions of Afghans, both those in the country and
those who have already fled. After the current crisis, the U.S.
and its allies with face a longer-term task of helping
Afghanistan to become stable and prosperous.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ken Bacon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Kenneth H. Bacon
At the outset, I want to thank Senator Paul Wellstone, the
Chairman, of the Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs,
for organizing this hearing on Afghanistan's humanitarian crisis. This
hearing could not be more timely, because it comes as the U.S. is
attacking terrorists and their protectors in Afghanistan, while moving
to feed the Afghan people, a campaign of bombs and bread.
Afghanistan was one of the largest crises of displacement in the
world well before the events of September 11, 2001. After more than 20
years of conflict, three years of drought, and the repressive policies
of the Taliban regime, four million Afghans had sought refuge in
neighboring countries, with as many as two million each in Pakistan and
Iran. Inside the country some 800,000 people were displaced. The United
Nations World Food Program (WFP) was providing daily rations to 3.8
million people and were preparing to increase the number fed to a total
of 5.5 million through the long winter season. The United States was
the leading funder of relief efforts for the Afghan people, providing
$183 million in FY 2001.
In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks on New York and
Washington, it became clear that the initial focus of U.S. military
retaliation would be in Afghanistan. Refugees International, joined by
other humanitarian non-governmental organizations, immediately began
pressing the Administration to recognize two imperatives: (1) the
humanitarian imperative to continue to respond to the needs of the
millions of vulnerable Afghan civilians who bear no responsibility
whatsoever for the attacks on U.S. soil, and (2) the political
imperative of ensuring that the U.S. military response did not harm
innocent civilians and thereby jeopardize the moral high ground that
the United States has been able to maintain as the victim of terrorism
that targeted civilians in New York and Washington. We raised these
points in a letter to President Bush and in subsequent meetings with
administration and congressional officials. I have attached a copy of
the letter to this testimony.
RI applauds the administration's decision to allocate $320 million
to respond to humanitarian needs in Afghanistan and for Afghan refugees
in neighboring countries. We are especially glad that this pledge comes
from the extraordinary $40 billion emergency fund approved by Congress
and does not, therefore, reduce U.S. funding for other humanitarian
crises around the world. The amount allocated by the Administration
represents more than a fair share of the $584 million requested by UN
Secretary General Kofi Annan in his appeal to the international
community for Afghan relief.
Nonetheless, given the magnitude of the needs in Afghanistan and
the likelihood that reconstruction assistance will be badly needed in
the aftermath of the U.S. military campaign, it is probably best to
view the $320 million as an initial investment in a lengthy and costly
response to the needs of the Afghan people for peace, reconstruction,
and development.
The most critical need at the moment is for significant food
deliveries to Afghanistan to resume over land. As I have already noted,
WFP had planned to provide daily rations to 5.5 million people in the
coming months. In the immediate aftermath of the September 11 attacks,
WFP evacuated their expatriate staff and suspended food deliveries.
Their extensive network of local staff, however, was able to maintain
feeding programs using existing stocks. Last week they delivered 5,000
metric tons of additional food to Afghanistan, but the weekly
requirement is about 12,000 tons. The WFP briefly suspended food
shipments after military strikes began, but yesterday it announced that
it was resuming overland food shipments through Iran.
Refugees International recommends a strategy of flooding the
country with food by the most efficient and effective means available.
Cross-border shipping by truck from Pakistan, Iran, and the former
Soviet republics in the north offers the best possibility to transport
the maximum amount of food to areas with concentrations of vulnerable
people. This effort needs to begin at once, as winter weather,
especially in the north, will impair road transport.
Airdrops of food are inefficient and expensive, but they are better
than nothing. They should only be used as a last resort. Refugees
International is concerned that the airdrops of individual emergency
food packets organized by the U.S. military at the outset of the
bombing campaign appear to be intended more to send a political message
to the Afghan people and to the Muslim world than to reach large
numbers of people at risk of starvation. The focus of the
Administration should be to apply as much of the $320 million as
possible to getting food into Afghanistan by overland routes through
WFP and non-governmental organizations.
Food deliveries inside Afghanistan will save lives and could also
help prevent a refugee crisis on the borders of Pakistan, Iran, and
other neighboring states. The United Nations High Commissioner for
Refugees (UNHCR) estimates that as many as 1.5 million people could
seek refuge in neighboring states as a result of anti-terrorist
military actions and hunger. A refugee outpouring of this magnitude
would not only be a humanitarian crisis of massive proportions, it
would potentially be politically destabilizing, especially in Pakistan
and Iran, where resentment against Afghan refugees was already growing
well before the events of September 11.
In this context, the preference is clearly to enable Afghans to
remain in their homes and on their farms rather than to have them
embark on a long, difficult, and dangerous journey to neighboring
countries in search of food.
In the event that large numbers of Afghans decide to seek asylum in
neighboring countries, the issue of whether the borders will be open
immediately arises. Both Pakistan and Iran insist that their borders
remain closed to new Afghan refugees. Both countries prefer that the
needs of the displaced be met through cross-border operations to
Afghans held in camps inside Afghanistan. Iran is a signatory to the
1951 Refugee Convention that obligates it to provide asylum to
vulnerable people fleeing persecution, violence, and hunger. The UNHCR
and the international community must insist that neighboring countries
open their borders to Afghan refugees, with the understanding that
under the principle of ``burden sharing'' receiving nations would
receive appropriate financial assistance from the international
community for their decision to honor their obligations.
Refugees International is concerned that UNHCR's public comments on
the issue of opening the borders to refugees at the recent Forum on
Afghanistan Refugees and Displaced Persons (held in Geneva on October
5-6) appear designed to meet the governments of Pakistan and Iran
halfway rather than taking a principled position on the right to
asylum. Ruud Lubbers, the UN High Commissioner, has spoken of the
possibility of establishing camps inside Afghanistan and of opening
borders not for all refugees seeking protection but to assist and
protect the vulnerable ``temporarily.'' While this approach is
presumably designed to advance delicate negotiations with the
governments of Pakistan and Iran, the Afghan people depend on UN14CR to
support their right to asylum at this difficult moment. RI urges the
administration to insist that the borders of neighboring countries be
open to refugees. The U.S. should also intervene with the High
Commissioner to ensure that he is vigorously supporting the right to
asylum for Afghans.
The crisis in Afghanistan is complex. The U.S. response involves
military, economic, diplomatic, and humanitarian elements. A lesson
that clearly emerges from similar crises over the past decade is the
importance of designating a Cabinet-level official specifically and
solely to take charge of humanitarian issues. While all senior members
of the U.S. team should be sensitive to humanitarian concerns, it is
important to have one individual at the table who is responsible for
the complex interplay among military, political, and humanitarian
aspects of the operation. Recently, President Bush appointed
coordinators for homeland defense and counter-terrorism programs.
The over-riding brief for such a humanitarian affairs coordinator
should be to ensure that the interests of the Afghan civilians and
refugees are protected. The humanitarian affairs coordinator can be
either a military or civilian officer. This person could also be the
senior contact point for the UN, other international organizations, and
NGOs involved on the humanitarian front. What is essential is that the
coordinator be in the inner circle of those who are managing the U.S.
part of the decision-making process. To do less will court humanitarian
errors that will affect the lives of many and the overall credibility
of the U.S. government.
In conclusion, let me summarize my three main points:
The humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan predates the
September 11th attack against the United States and the U.S.
military response to that attack.
The international community, led by the U.S., has responded
well and quickly to the humanitarian needs of the Afghan
people.
Nevertheless, more needs to be done to meet the Afghan
people's needs for food, shelter and medical supplies, and
after the current crisis is over, the international community
will face the challenge of helping to rebuild Afghanistan.
Refugees are a sign of instability. Frequently, refugees flee a
country where the government does not work or fails to protect its own
people. The immediate challenge is to meet the humanitarian needs of
millions of Afghans, both those inside the country and those in refugee
camps outside Afghanistan. After the current crisis, the U.S. and its
allies will face a longer term task of helping Afghanistan to become
stable and prosperous.
[The letter referred to by Mr. Bacon follows:]
Refugees International,
Washington, DC,
September 18, 2001.
President George W. Bush,
The White House, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. President:
As you plan the military, diplomatic, and economic responses needed
to destroy the terrorist network that attacked the United States, it is
important that you also plan to meet the humanitarian needs of the
people of Afghanistan, a country that already is the site of the
greatest crisis of hunger and displacement in the world.
Twenty-two years of war, three years of drought, and the
difficulties caused by the repressive Taliban regime have caused nearly
4 million Afghans to flee to Iran and Pakistan. According to the United
Nations, 5 million people still in the country are in danger of
starvation due to a three-year drought. Hoping to escape a U.S.
response to last week's devastation, 100,000 Afghans have fled Kabul
and other cities and the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar is now half-
empty.
Many people in rural parts of the country are on famine rations:
bitter wild roots and grass mixed with wheat flour to make bread. Tens
of thousands of people in the cities, including war widows, the
elderly, and orphans, are completely dependent upon international aid
for their survival. Only food aid--mostly U.S.-donated wheat--stands
between them and starvation.
Yet most UN and non-governmental relief agencies have pulled out of
Afghanistan following last week's attack against the U.S. The World
Food Program says it has only enough food in the country for two weeks
of distribution by local personnel. The borders with Pakistan and Iran
are mostly closed to the flow of people and goods.
The U.S. experience in the Gulf War suggests the importance of
anticipating and minimizing refugee flows and starvation. In the Gulf
War, the U.S. was caught by surprise when over 2 million Kurds fled,
some to neighboring Turkey and Iran, to escape Saddam Hussein,
necessitating an urgent humanitarian response for which the
international community was largely unprepared.
Refugees International recommends that the administration prepare a
humanitarian impact analysis for military operations and contingency
plans to deal with humanitarian challenges. Military operations should
be planned to minimize the impact on people already tottering on the
edge of famine and to repair humanitarian damage as soon as possible.
Considering that the war is with terrorists and their supporters,
not with the Afghan people, the U.S. also needs to find a way to resume
relief operations and food aid to the Afghan people. The first step
should be immediate consultations with the UN Secretary General to find
ways to enable relief workers to return safely to the country and
resume operations. The UN must anticipate huge refugee and humanitarian
problems and, as it did in Macedonia this summer, get the people and
the resources into the region to deal with them.
The most appalling and universally condemned aspect of last week's
attack against the U.S. was the targeting of innocent civilians. The
U.S. cannot afford to be accused of doing the same in its response. The
U.S. requires the support of moderate Muslims around the world and this
necessitates maintaining the moral high ground. A humanitarian disaster
in Afghanistan, if attributed to U.S. military operations, could leave
the American people even more vulnerable to terrorism in the future.
The United States wants to win the war against terrorism--not sow the
seeds of future problems.
Sincerely,
Kenneth H. Bacon,
President.
Senator Boxer. Thank you.
Senator Wellstone, it is my pleasure to introduce Eleanor
Smeal, the president of the Feminist Majority. We already heard
of the plight of these people. We are looking at everything
coming together: drought, famine, no human rights, a place
where terrorism breeds, all of this coming down, and
particularly a place where women just have absolutely no rights
whatsoever, and all this was brought to my attention so long
ago by Ellie Smeal and the grassroots women in California who
work with her.
So it is certainly an honor for me to introduce her, and,
Senator Wellstone, thank you for that honor.
STATEMENT OF MS. ELEANOR SMEAL, PRESIDENT, FEMINIST MAJORITY,
ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA
Ms. Smeal. Thank you, Senator Boxer, and thank you for
being with us for so many years, supporting our efforts, and
also thank your able staff. Sean Moore has been right there,
too. As you know, our campaign to stop gender apartheid has
been working not only at the national but at the grassroots
level, very strong in California, but really in 49 of the 50
states.
I would also like to thank Senator Wellstone for your
efforts here.
We have been involved in this campaign to stop gender
apartheid in Afghanistan since 1997. We got involved because of
the horrific treatment of women, but when we got involved, we
also learned about the terrible humanitarian crisis, so we
immediately tried to get more humanitarian aid to save lives.
In addition, we looked at the situation and realized that
there must be not only nonrecognition of the Taliban by the
United States and the United Nations, but also that there had
to be more pressure on both Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE
to withdraw their support for the Taliban. As we all know, the
United States came out against recognition, and, Senator Boxer,
you played a major part in that. And we also came against the
construction of a major oil pipeline there, and UNOCAL
withdrew, again because the California women played a major
role in that.
We would like to point out that we came out early to have
the Taliban designated as a terrorist organization, and I want
to note that to this date, they are still not designated as a
terrorist organization, and we think that should still happen.
Right now, our grassroots effort has the endorsement of
over 200 women's rights and human rights organizations that are
co-sponsoring it, and Mavis Leno is our chair, our national
chair.
Hundreds of thousands of people now have written letters
and signed petitions and sent e-mails to the Clinton
administration and to the Bush administration, urging help for
the Afghan women and for humanitarian aid. I point this out,
because I want to stress the huge support for this among the
American people. The American people do see a different between
the Taliban and the humanitarian situation, and the Afghan
people and especially the women there, and this constituency is
deep. It is profound, and it has responded even more now in
wake of the tragic events of September 11.
We have now seen an outpouring. People are sending more
help. They are trying to encourage that there be more aid, and
indeed, some 800 different groups at the local level are trying
themselves to raise money to help local Afghan groups and in
the refugee areas to do clinics and schools. I have heard
today--there has been so many different numbers of the millions
of people in trouble.
The one thing I would like to emphasize is that prior to
September 11, millions have fled, and hundreds of thousands in
this year alone. The numbers are so big, they are staggering.
The refugee population is the single biggest in the world,
and so I just want us to try to get our arms around the
numbers, even though they might differ some, because the need
is so great.
Our staff has visited the refugee areas, and they are
horrific. There is little food. Families have only a plastic
sheeting for shelter, and there is virtually no sanitation.
This has been going on. This is a near holocaust situation,
and as far as health care, please, it is so minimal that one
woman every 30 minutes, somebody calculated, is dying from
childbirth, and one in four children are dying before the age
of 5, and the infant mortality rate is soaring. This is
staggering, and that is why we must think big. Yes. America
has--the United States has led in humanitarian aid, but I must
stress, it has been too little, and we believe that the United
Nations' appeals have been very modest. The reason they have
been so modest is because until September 11, all we could hear
about is donor nation exhaustion, because this war had been
going on so long.
Consequently, the appeals have been modest, and even though
the latest appeal, which is for 584 million--and I am thrilled
that we now have 730 million--it too was modest, and let us
point out why.
First, the United Nations only counts as refugees those who
live in the refugee camps, and most people do not live----
Senator Wellstone. Excuse me, Ms. Smeal. Please go on a
little longer.
Ms. Smeal. Also the appeal only had 3 percent in it for
health care and 1 percent in it for education, and we all know
the importance of the education. We are heartened by Bush's
response, but we agree with Senator Biden that we should be
thinking in terms of billions of dollars, and we must be
thinking in terms of really reconstructing this country, and at
the center of it must be women. We are--we were the majority of
the health care workers. We are 70 percent of the teachers. We
must be at the center of it.
And right now, we are urging that funds be set aside and go
directly to women-led, Afghan women-led NGOs. Right now, we
give money to the big international ones, but it is these
little NGOs--and they are only little, because no one gives
them aid. They have the capability; they have the talent.
They have got to be part of the reconstruction effort, so
we must support them. And they are there; they can do more.
They are running the clinics and schools, and we hope that
we will, in fact, support them directly in the reconstruction.
I hear so much about what is going to happen afterwards.
We plead. We think in terms of a constitutional democracy.
They had one. They had one in 1964. By the way, it has an
equal rights amendment for women in there. They had universal
suffrage. Women were in the parliament. We were judges.
There was a separate and independent judiciary, so we don't
have to start from scratch. You can build and build on a very
capable indigenous Afghan women.
We have had the privilege of working with many Afghan
women. Yes, it is true, there is a large illiterate population,
but it is also true there are many educated women.
They have been doctors; they have been engineers, lawyers.
These are people who could and must be at the decision-
making table. And so we are hoping that when we think, we think
in terms of what we did after World War II, that we
reconstruct, we help to build a democracy, that we make sure
that people are at the table, and that, in fact, their rights
are fully restored, and that, indeed, that it is not treated as
a side issue.
I believe in this issue. In many ways, women were the
canaries in the mine. If we had seen, if the world had
responded faster, maybe, maybe more could have been averted,
but in this time, they cannot be ignored. They must be treated
as a major part of the solution of this problem.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Eleanor Smeal follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ms. Eleanor Smeal
Since early 1997, the Feminist Majority and its sister organization
the Feminist Majority Foundation have led the Campaign to Stop Gender
Apartheid in Afghanistan in order to raise public awareness about the
treatment of women and girls in Afghanistan and to urge the U.S. and
the U.N. to do all in their power to restore the rights of women and to
address this humanitarian disaster. Throughout this campaign, we urged
non-recognition of the Taliban by the United States and the United
Nations, designation of the Taliban as an international terrorist
organization, pressure on Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE to
withdraw their support for the Taliban, and that the construction of an
oil and gas pipeline through Afghanistan that would have supplied
millions of dollars in profits to the Taliban be stopped. As you know,
the U.S.and the U.N. did come out against the recognition of the
Taliban in an event at the White House on March 11, 1998 in
commemoration of International Women's Day (March 8) and UNOCAL did
stop the pipeline. But to this date, the U.S. has still not designated
the Taliban as an international terrorist organization. To date, over
200 women's rights and human rights organizations are co-sponsoring our
national campaign chaired by Mavis Leno.
Hundreds of thousands of individuals have written letters, signed
petitions, and sent e-mails to urge both the Clinton Administration and
now the Bush Administration to do everything in their power to restore
the human rights of Afghan women. We have formed over 800 Action Teams
to Help Afghan Women nationwide. These teams, which include girl scout
troops, community organizations, classrooms, and groups of family,
friends, and co-workers, are organizing petition drives and raising
funds to support schools and clinics run by Afghan women in Pakistan
for refugees. In both 1999 and 2000, officials at the U.S. State
Department told us that we had successfully mobilized a U.S.
constituency on a foreign policy issue and that they had received more
mail from Americans on restoring women's rights in Afghanistan than on
any other foreign policy issue.
In the wake of the tragic events of September 11, we have seen an
overwhelming outpouring of public support for Afghan women. People have
responded to our message that humanitarian aid must be dramatically
increased and that Afghan women must be freed. With the nation's focus
on Afghanistan and increased visibility about the plight of Afghan
women, Americans want to know how to help. In the past few weeks, tens
of thousands of individuals have used our website to send messages to
the Administration and to Congress urging that Afghan women not be
forgotten. Action teams are now forming at the incredible pace of more
than 100 per week.
People are outraged about the Taliban's brutal treatment of women.
Women were the first victims of the Taliban, and the public is becoming
increasingly aware of this fact. The public has now seen broadcast on
television again and again film footage of women being beaten and
executed for violating the Taliban's decrees banning women from
employment, from attending school, from leaving their homes without a
close male relative and without wearing the head-to-toe burqa shroud.
Before September 11, the tragic conditions of Afghanistan--
including the worst drought in 30 years, 23 years of military fighting,
and the barbaric treatment of women and minorities by the Taliban--had
resulted in massive numbers of Afghan refugees. Some 3.5 million Afghan
refugees had fled to Pakistan alone, 2 million in the refugee camps and
1.5 million in the cities and villages. Another 1.5 million refugees
are in Iran, and hundreds of thousands more in other neighboring
countries. Since September 11, the plight of refugees and displaced
persons has become even more perilous and the number of people
attempting to flee Afghanistan and its cities has increased
dramatically.
Now the United Nations expects that the total number of Afghans in
need of humanitarian assistance soon will be at least 7.5 million. This
estimate includes 1.2 million who are internally displaced within
Afghanistan and have left their homes to find food and shelter; another
4.2 million who are internally stranded and without adequate resources
to survive; and tens of thousands who have escaped to neighboring
countries since September 11 despite border closings. The estimate of
vulnerable people also includes some 2 million vulnerable refugees
among the 3.5 million Afghan refugees in Pakistan, 1.5 million in Iran,
and at least 200,000 in other neighboring countries. Seventy-five
percent of refugees are women and children.
Our staff has visited the refugee areas in Pakistan. The conditions
in which these refugees fight for survival are horrific with little
food, with many families having no more than plastic sheets for
shelter, and with virtually no sanitation. These conditions have
resulted in widespread disease, death, and regional instability.
According to some estimates, one woman is dying in childbirth every 30
minutes and one in four children are dying before 5 years of age.
The world response to this widespread suffering and near holocaust
situation has been insufficient. Prior to September 11, the USA was
leading all nations in providing humanitarian aid to Afghanistan by
contributing some $70 million in 1999 and $113 million in 2000. In
2001, the U.S. had been scheduled to provide $125 million in aid.
We applaud the work of the United Nations' agencies, especially the
World Food Program, in Afghanistan. But for years they have been forced
to underestimate the needs of Afghan refugees and Afghan people because
of the lack of donor nation response. Prior to September 11, we heard
constantly of donor nation exhaustion. Consequently, the United Nations
appeals have tended to be very modest. Although the most recent
consolidated appeal is considerably more than in the past, we believe
it still underestimates the real needs in several important respects:
First, the United Nations only counts as refugees and
provides assistance to those who live in the refugee camps.
However, almost half of the refugees in Pakistan approximately
1.5 million--live outside of camps. These desperate refugees,
who live in cities and villages in Pakistan, mostly belong to
the Hazara, Uzbek, and Tajik ethnic minorities who have been
most persecuted by the Taliban and who fear the Pashtun
dominated camps in which the Taliban has had influence. These
urban refugees receive virtually no assistance from the UN, and
are in desperate need of food, health care, and education
programs.
Second, the current appeal provides very little for health
or education. Only 3 percent of the United Nations appeal is
devoted to health. Nor are sufficient funds for education
inside and outside of the camps being requested in the appeal.
Education is less than 1 percent of the United Nations appeal.
Education is not a luxury, but a core component of ending
terrorism and promoting democracy. We cannot lose a generation
of Afghan girls and boys. Education for refugee girls is
necessary to make up for the denial of education under the
Taliban, and to make possible the participation of young women
in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. The availability of
education for boys is necessary to counteract the madrassas
(so-called religious schools) which are the source of foot
soldiers for the Taliban.
Finally, the LTN Appeal provides only 6 months of bare
subsistence rations. Of the food and support needs of $188
million, the commodities included are only wheat, vegetable
oil, pulses (lentils), salt, wheat/soy blend, sugar, and high
energy biscuits.
We appreciate that on October 401 President Bush announced a
commitment of an additional $295 million in U.S. emergency humanitarian
aid to suffering people in Afghanistan and to Afghan refugees. This
emergency humanitarian package is a critically needed escalation of aid
that will help save the lives of millions of innocent Afghans,
especially women and children, many of whom are near starvation in pre-
famine condition, without shelter, and without health care.
The United States' leadership in meeting a significant portion of
the United Nations $584 million appeal for emergency assistance is very
heartening. However, we believe that the needs of Afghan refugees are
even more massive and that our government must do even more to meet
them.
We commend and support the call of the Chairman of this Committee,
Senator Joseph Biden, for a multi-billion dollar infusion of
humanitarian relief for Afghanistan and for the surrounding region to
address refugees' humanitarian needs and to sustain long-term
reconstruction efforts. His leadership and vision in this call are
timely and extremely needed.
Our understanding is that of the funds that have recently been
announced by President Bush, a yet to be determined portion will go
towards the UN appeal for UN sponsored humanitarian aid and another
portion of funds will go to programs carried out by other international
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs).
No funds, however, are scheduled to be granted directly to women-
led NGOs. I would like to stress the importance of the U.S. providing
direct funding to Afghan women led NGOs. Humanitarian funds from the
United States and the United Nations also should go directly to Afghan
women-led humanitarian organizations that are delivering desperately
needed health, education, and relief services. These groups are in a
position to help large numbers of Afghan women and girls living as
refugees in Pakistan, and where possible in Afghanistan, if only they
had more resources to survive and to contend with the increasing need.
The future of a peaceful, stable, and democratic Afghanistan depends in
large measure upon the strength of these Afghan women's organizations
and the women and girls to whom they are providing assistance and
educational opportunities.
The removal of the Taliban together with the restoration of the
rights of women, broad-based, multi-ethnic constitutional democracy,
and economic development are essential in the fights to end terrorism
and to free women. In any rebuilding of Afghanistan, women must be in
leadership roles. We have been urging the State Department that Afghan
women not be forgotten in the U.S. strategies to combat terrorism. and
in their planning for a post-bin Laden and post-Taliban Afghanistan.
In order to gain regional stability and build democracy instead of
dictatorship, the United States must make a commitment to provide not
only significant emergency humanitarian assistance but also long-range
assistance to help rebuild the economy and infrastructure of
Afghanistan. To fight the Soviet Union, we gave billions to Afghanistan
in the form of arms and training for the mujahedeen that gave rise to
the Taliban. To combat terrorism, we must help rebuild Afghanistan and
restore it to a civil society dependent on neither opium nor heroin
trafficking and smuggling. We realized after World War 11 that the only
way to break the back of fascism was to re-establish constitutional
democracies in Germany and Italy, to establish one in Japan, to provide
rights to women, and to provide economic development assistance.
In the reconstruction, women will be essential. If a Loya Jirga or
any other assembly takes place, there must be representation of women
from each of the different parties and ethnic groups and women's groups
must be included so that women leaders will be decision makers for
Afghanistan's future. Afghan women even in these most difficult times
have been running clandestine schools, health clinics in both
Afghanistan and in refugee areas, and are key in relief programs and
income generation projects in the refugee areas. Despite untold
hardships, Afghan women have been leading NGOs in the refugee areas.
These women must be involved in charting the future of the country.
During the past five years, the Feminist Majority has had the
privilege of working with many Afghan women leaders. We have been
impressed and inspired by their courage, knowledge, and ability to
provide services, work and survive in the most repressive regime
against women in the history of the world. They remind us that women
were leaders, members of parliament, educators, civil servants,
doctors, and technicians before the Taliban. Indeed, with so many men
killed in 23 years of war, women are thought to be 60-70 percent of the
adult population and have managed to keep going the few remnants of
Afghan civil society that exist today. They have risked their own lives
and some have lost their lives to run home schools and health clinics
despite Taliban edicts. These women leaders must be a part of the peace
process and the rebuilding of their country. They must be at the table
as decision makers.
We cannot be fooled by those who would use culture and religion as
an excuse for the marginalization or exclusion of women in the
reconstruction of Afghanistan. The Taliban's decrees are foreign to
Islam, to the culture, and to the people of Afghanistan. Since the
1950s, women and girls in Kabul and in many other parts of the country
attended schools as did boys. Before the Taliban gained dominance in
Afghanistan, women were a crucial part of the workforce. Afghan women
have a history of public service leadership and were believed to be 30%
of its civil bureaucracy. For example, in Kabul, before the Taliban
took over, women were: over 70 percent of teachers were women; 40
percent of doctors and the vast majority of health care workers were
women; and over half the university students.
If civil society is to be rebuilt in Afghanistan and the rogue
state that has been sustained by drug trafficking is to be brought to
an end, all citizens--especially those in the health care and education
fields--must be utilized. The employment of these workers--who are
mostly women--is essential to the rebuilding of the country's social
infrastructure and civilization itself. The restoration of the rights
of women is crucial both for the sake of human rights and to make
possible the return to civil society. The United States would be
repeating a tragic mistake if it again turns to another set of
extremists as it did to repel the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and
chooses a dictatorship as the most expedient strategy to replace the
Taliban. The restoration of a broad-based democracy, representative of
both ethnic minorities and women, with women at the table, is necessary
to break the back of a terrorist and a war-torn existence. We urge you
to think long-term--in this case, the right thing to do is also the
best thing for global security, human rights, and economic development.
In a discussion at the State Department, we were asked would the
U.S. people support a massive reconstruction of Afghanistan or would
the U.S. people rather support simply sustaining a tolerable
subsistence economy in Afghanistan. We often hear today (a la Tom
Brokaw) the World War II generation of Americans referred to as the
``greatest generation.'' We are proud we fought fascism, rebuilt the
economies of Germany and Japan, and helped to establish democracies in
these nations with women's rights. We helped to establish in post WWII,
a United Nations and under the leadership of Eleanor Roosevelt, the
U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. If this declaration is to
mean anything, we must help to restore women's rights in this most
abused nation--Afghanistan--and we must restore its democracy.
Afghanistan first adopted a constitutional democracy in 1964 that
included full universal suffrage, an equal rights amendment for women
that even included equal pay provisions, and a separation of powers
with an independent judiciary. Women were members of the Parliament and
were judges.
We know today that literally millions of Americans are appalled at
the Taliban's treatment of its own people, especially its women. We
know from our work at the grass roots level in 49 states of the union
that Americans want women's rights restored in Afghanistan and for this
society to return to normalcy. We as Americans do feel a moral
obligation to Afghanistan because it was the last stop in the Cold War.
We can be the ``greatest generation'' today. We must meet the challenge
and as our parents, not settle for expediency but strive for the dream
of democracy and human rights for all--and in Eleanor Roosevelt's
memory, we cannot forget the women.
Senator Wellstone. Thank you so much. What I am going to do
is just lay out some of my concerns all at once, and then kind
of have you respond, and that is the most efficient use of
time.
There are people--there is the whole issue of conditions
right now in the refugee camps which are deplorable, and also I
have concerns about the security right now of these camps, and
I want to talk about that with each one of you. Then are the
people left behind, many of whom by definition are elderly,
infirm, more vulnerable, left behind to eat meals of locusts
and animal fodder by reports?
Here are some of the questions I have. Number one, it seems
to me that the convoys--and, Ken, you were talking about this,
the UNWFP--the convoys, the air drops, it is 1 percent, less
than 1 percent, and not all that efficient, and the earlier
testimony was we can't rely on that anyway. I think there is
agreement. You have got to get this in by the convoys; you have
got to get the food in this way. So one question I have is: I
would think that is going to be a priority for our government,
to somehow do what we need to do to make sure those convoys can
continue to be coming in with food. That is a question I have
for you, whether you would agree.
There is the question of--there have been some reports, as
long as we are talking about NGOs and the United Nations, there
have been some reports of UN and NGO offices being burned in
Pakistan by anti-American protesters, and so I want you to
speak to whether or not you think there is sufficient steps
being taken to protect humanitarian workers, including women,
who are associated with these international and local
organizations in Pakistan.
And then finally--I guess those are the first order
questions. At some point in time, I want to get your
perspective. Your organization has been in Afghanistan a long
time, and the Taliban are widely despised for all the right
reasons.
I also understand that there are a significant number of
Afghans that are alarmed or express alarm at the prospect of
the Northern Alliance, that they might return to power, given
their record of serious abuses, including rape and massacres
and indiscriminate bombing that were committed while they were
in power, and I want to ask you whether or not that sentiment--
to what extent that sentiment is widespread or not. That is a
flow of questions, starting with Mr. Bacon.
Mr. Bacon. Sure. On convoys, you are absolutely right.
They have to continue. Andrew Natsios told of a bunch of
NGOs yesterday that the U.S. is totally committed to making
sure the convoys flow as freely as possible. The key here is
many entry points, not just through Pakistan or through Iran,
but also through Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan.
There are efforts underway to open the so-called Friendship
Ridge from Uzbekistan into Afghanistan, and that would be
helpful.
Convoys are obviously subject to attack, and one of the
issues that our government and the UN is looking at is how to
secure the convoys. I don't think anybody has good answers.
Right now there is another question. Once you get the food
into Afghanistan, how do you make sure that it is not taken by
the wrong people, taken by the military or the Taliban forces.
One way to do that would be so-called web feeding, that is,
a sort of hot, prepared meals rather than the giveaway packets
of food. Usually people with AK-47s don't like to stand in line
to get handout dinners in refugee camps.
But these are details that have to be worked out to make
sure that, one, the food gets in, and, two, it goes to the
right people. Obviously security is a problem for humanitarian
workers, and that is something that the UN has never been
particularly good at. It is something that the UN and NGOs are
paying more attention to, but ultimately we have to rely, as
much as possible, on the governments of Pakistan and Iran to
provide the security for the camps and for the humanitarian
workers. The problem has been greater in Pakistan than Iran.
Finally, there is an urgent problem that demands attention,
and that is while Pakistan is preventing refugees from coming
in right now, there are signs that they are preparing to
relent. They are preparing some camps in the northwest frontier
province, which is generally a very hostile area, and camps
there could be very dangerous, both for refugees and for
humanitarian workers. So it is imperative that the U.S., the
UN, and other nations work very hard to try to get Pakistan to
relocate whatever new camps it sets up.
This is a difficult issue, but it is one that could be
crucially important to the protection of refugees and the
people who help them.
Ms. Smeal. On the convoys, one thing I want to point out is
that most of the non-Afghan humanitarian workers have left
Afghanistan, so again it is one of the reasons I think we must
invest in Afghan workers, because they are the only ones that
are there, and even they are discombobulated under these
conditions. Obviously we have to provide security, but, in
fact, we have superior forces and can do that.
But one of the things that I want to emphasize is even the
people in the refugee areas outside of Afghanistan do not have
enough food, and so that also is a serious problem. And, by the
way, the reason so many of the refugees are not in the camps is
because they don't think they are secure. Some of the camps,
the Taliban have been holding sway over, and so many of the
ethnic groups who they have been persecuting, such as the
Hazarahs and Tajiks are afraid to go into the camps, and not
only that. So are women, because, indeed, they have been
harassing and doing things to women in some of these areas.
And so basically you have a lot of people who are afraid to
be in the camps. That is why we are so pleading with our
government and the United Nations to please count who are in
the refugee areas but simply are not in these camps that are
very dangerous for them, because there hasn't been security in
quite a long time.
And I want to just read, because there is so much been done
about this package, that is supposed to be 2,200 calories in
this little yellow package. I want to read what we are giving.
We are giving wheat--and this is now from the World Food
Program, which I totally respect. Catherine Brutini has done
one magnificent job. But this is what we give. It is wheat,
vegetable oil, pulses which is lentils--I assume dry--salt,
wheat soy blend, sugar, and high energy biscuits.
So what does that really boil down to? It is principally
bread and water, and the water isn't clean. I don't want us to
feel so generous and so good here. When I realize what these
folks are surviving on, no wonder the infant mortality is so
high. No wonder children aren't surviving. Couldn't we put some
dry milk in it? Couldn't we get a little ingenious and get some
more food in this? You can't--I don't understand how these
people survived this long, but this is literally from the food
health program, and it is really scary. And there is no
sanitation, remember, in these areas.
And so no wonder, you know, there is unrest in Pakistan.
That is where the bulk of the people are. No wonder there is
unrest, because there has not been enough aid, so we have got
to do far better, and we have got to get with a much bigger
program.
Mr. de Torrente. I think the issue of the convoys has
already been answered clearly. Going through the established
aid operations that are already on the ground and have done the
assessments, that have targeted the people, is the way to go,
and that is what we think should happen, a big effort of
assistance going through these already-established channels and
people who are on the ground, and who can target the
beneficiaries in a good way.
On security of NGOs, I think really there are different
approaches to security. One, you could put them in like two
different camps. One is to say that aid workers should be
physically protected, meaning higher armed guards or the like.
The other is to say that the security relies on the consent
of the people and the authorities of the areas in which you try
to provide relief.
And actually that is the consent, is the consensual
approach is the one that organizations like ourselves who are
unarmed and who go and work in very difficult environments
throughout the world, not only in Afghanistan. It is the one we
rely on, and that is why I stressed before the fact of being
perceived as neutral, as independent, as only concerned with
humanitarian issues is so important for the security of staff.
And this is why this point about separating these agendas is so
critical.
So I think it will go some way. It won't go all the way.
We know there is anti-western sentiment, even before the
U.S. military was dropping food, air drops. I am not saying it
is only due to that. I think there is anti-western sentiment
generally, which is going to be difficult to combat, but it
does contribute to this problem.
For security of refugees, I want to come back to that, for
security of refugees in Pakistan especially. As I said before,
the camps, the sites for new influx that have been determined
so far are really in areas where security of refugees, were
they able to cross, cannot be guaranteed.
These are areas--these are called tribal areas of Pakistan.
There is none under direct control of the Pakistan government.
There are an array of different forces there.
This is an ethnically homogeneous area. If you are from a
different ethnic minority--we heard about Tajiks, Uzbeks,
Hazarahs. If you go to these areas, it will be very difficult
for you to be protected and to be safe. I think this is
important. This is why the people have to be brought further
inland, allowed to come further inland in the areas where they
can be safer and where international staff can have access to
them for assistance.
Your third question had to do with the situation in the
Northern Alliance areas. I was there very recently, in August,
and I would say that conditions are better, but not
significantly better, especially for women. Women--the key
difference--there are two key differences. One is that girls
are allowed to go to school and women can be teachers, can
teach children. The other one is that the Islamic rules are not
enforced by an institution such as the religious police, such
as in the Taliban areas. Therefore, it is more diffuse.
However, the issue of if you are a woman and you go to a
health center, you need to be accompanied by your husband or
male relative. Just like in the Taliban areas, women have to
wear burqas in the Northern Alliance areas. Women in many of
these areas are not allowed to go to the market, for instance.
So the type of situation we do see has similarities with
the situation in the Taliban areas. I think we should recognize
that, and so the health problems of women that we heard about
before are quite similar in these different parts of the
country.
In terms of the general condition, the other point I wanted
to make about that is that throughout the country, the war has
had a big impact. There has been militarization of the society.
The people who have risen to power are military actors, and
they control the economic and the political arena.
The social concerns, health issues, and so on are really at
the bottom of the list. In the Northern Alliance areas, there
are very few health centers, clinics, et cetera. There are very
few Afghan medical staff, and it is really a link through
international organizations such as ourselves that these
structures, these very few remaining structures, can be
maintained.
So this is just to say that we should not see it in terms
of two completely different areas of the country. There are
similarities between them, although I do stress that the
situation in the Taliban areas on a number of counts is
significantly worse.
Senator Wellstone. Senator Boxer?
Senator Boxer. Mr. de Torrente, I think you have proven the
point Ellie Smeal made, that even where the women can go to
school and teach, it is still oppressive with the Northern
Alliance, and when she says that the women should be the
central part of the rebuild, I think this is absolutely what
has to happen, and I am going to dedicate myself to being that
voice, because that is the voice of reason.
That is the voice of moderation, the women's voices, so
that is something we really must keep in mind, so thank you for
talking about what it is like for women to live even with the
Northern Alliance, which is supposed to be the most liberal
compared to the Taliban. We have got human rights violations
all over the place from them toward the women, and so I think
this is key.
Ms. Smeal, do you want to add to that?
Ms. Smeal. Yes. Remember, the Northern Alliance and the
Taliban come from the mujaheddin, which were extremists and
religious extremists, but also who were involved in drug
trafficking, and basically we really shouldn't replace one set
of extremists with another. Although there is no question the
Northern Alliance is better, it is a matter of degree here, and
that is why I keep urging so much that constitutional democracy
and that we return to civil society where we reach out to not
just military commanders who came out of this whole, defeating
the Soviets, but to people who were the part of the Afghan
society prior to all of this.
Now, one other major thing--and it is hard to keep in our
brain, but because of all of this war, the majority of adults
are women. Some people estimate in some areas we are 60 and 70
percent of the adults, and so because they are even--the
Taliban is stepping down to 12-year-olds in their army. There
is no way to rebuild without us, and we have to be at the
center, and I really am grateful for your statement that you
will make this a center focus, because we need it, because we
keep dropping out.
And somehow I think people think, well, there is only two
choices, or we have got to go to one of these military
commanders, and others that are mentioned, too, have horrific
human rights violations in their background.
Senator Boxer. We just have to see beneath the veil to get
a sense of what it is like there. I keep coming back to this
comment made by the USAID leader here on the part of the
administration, and that is that people should stay in their
homes. From what you know about what is planned--and I would
ask this to all of you who care so deeply and who know this so
well: Do you think that is a good message?
Let's say we had an opportunity to talk to those folks
today who are frightened and afraid that they are running out
of options. Would you tell them to stay in their homes?
Ms. Smeal. Well, you know, this is not inconsistent with
what the State Department has been saying now for the five
years I have been involved. In fact, there was a period very
recently where we were putting more effort into having refugees
go back than helping them where they were, even though it was
clear it was unsafe where they were going back to.
I think in some ways it is a message that is even too late.
We were looking at the numbers while he was talking, the number
of the people estimated already displaced from their homes.
There are people--they estimate that 4.2 million are internally
stranded. We asked what that definition meant, and that is a
new definition in the UN which means they are no longer in
their homes, but they are in their village or city areas.
Okay. They have already moved, but they are not really, so
that is internally stranded. Another 1.2 million are internally
displaced within Afghanistan, and they are called internally
displaced, not stranded. That means they have left their
village or city, and they are looking for food and shelter
elsewhere, so that is about 5.4 million, according to the UN,
on the move within the country already.
And then I went through the numbers that are already in the
refugee areas in Afghanistan and Pakistan. It is 3.5 million,
we estimate, and 2 million in the refugee camps, 11.5 million
in the cities and towns, another million and a half in Iran,
and hundreds of thousands in Tajikistan and Ubekistan. There is
a lot of people on the move here, and it is sort of like trying
to close the door after--what is it?--the barn door after the
horse has left.
The other thing that we keep not mentioning, but I think--
and I don't know if even my staff will agree, but, you know, we
have admitted very few refugees into the United States or other
countries. In 1996 and 1997, the United States accepted no
refugees from Afghanistan. In 1998, it was, I think, 88; in
1999, it was 300-some. Last year, it was--I think it was--I am
doing this off the top of my head--about 1,700. We can get you
the numbers. Why did we close the doors, and it wasn't just us?
It is all the world.
Remember, that ship off of Australia of several hundred
Afghan refugees that no one would accept? I think there has to
be some larger acceptance of refugees, especially young people
who could go to college or go to graduate school, because they
could go home and rebuild their countries. we have a
scholarship program, trying to get young women out. We can't
afford to lose a whole generation of women and still think we
are going to rebuild this society, or a whole generation of
people.
So I think part of this has to be thinking in terms of how
we can train and educate while we are also reconstructing, and
it certainly should be opening our doors, especially to those
who are being persecuted because they spoke up. A woman who
speaks out can be targeted for all kinds of abuse. we should be
having more political refugees in this intense situation.
Senator Boxer. I know time is running out. I just want to
make a comment, and then ask both of you to get back to that
question. Ken and Nicolas, the question about whether you could
tell people who haven't left their homes to stay in their
homes, so think about that.
But I just wanted to underscore what you said. More than 80
percent of the world's refugees and displaced persons are women
and children. So whatever happened to the gallant side of our
spirits? Women and children, help them. And I know from what I
can tell, there is not that many special programs to address
the particular needs, and when you say--and it is worth
repeating--Senator Wellstone, 26 percent of the children in
Afghanistan die before the age of 5, 26 percent, and you just--
on a day when we had great news about our life expectancy and
our infant mortality going in the right direction, we have got
to just do something about it.
Senator Wellstone and I were just talking that we really
want to keep our team together here, to take a lot of what you
have already told us, and there is a tremendous sense of
urgency. And if I could be critical only a tiny bit--and it is
not even critical, because this thing happened to us so fast
that we got thrown into everything--it is whether it is air
safety, if you will, or whether it is this abroad, we have to
even go faster. We have to go faster.
How many weeks is it, Nicolas, until the winter, the snows
come?
Mr. de Torrente. Well, it depends where. Certain areas,
certain passes are already starting to get snow, and by mid-
October some passes will not be passable any longer.
Senator Boxer. We're practically at mid-October, so we have
a humanitarian crisis that needs an urgent response, and we
have to think big about it, and I think that is really our
message we have gotten from all the panelists.
If you two can answer that question about, do you stay home
if you haven't left, and then I will stop and turn it back to
Senator Wellstone.
Mr. Bacon. Refugees International has been urging for years
that the best way to deal with the problem in Afghanistan is to
get food to the villages so people can stay there. People are
reluctant to leave their homes. They don't want to leave their
homes and their families, but they will leave if they are not
fed obviously.
The conditions in the refugee camps in Harak, for instance,
in Afghanistan are horrific, and we feel everybody would be
better off for many of the reasons that Mr. Natsios said
earlier, if we could get food to them in their villages.
The problem is it is very difficult to do. There is very
little transportation infrastructure. We are talking about a
country as large as Texas. The topography is challenging, to
say the least, so maybe Nicolas can say more about this, but we
have long advocated this is the best thing to do.
We support the administration's desire to do that. we
question whether it is possible.
Mr. de Torrente. I think people have to have options.
They have two basic needs: security and sustenance, and
being able to survive. And, therefore, clearly from a health
perspective, if people stay in their homes, it is better, and
we know the consequences of moving and being in this displaced
persons camps. These are densely populated areas. It is
difficult to control in terms of epidemic and so on, so it is
clearly--it is better from a health perspective if people stay
in their homes.
However, people move also because of a fear of violence,
persecution, and fear, and we have seen--we did a survey in one
of our refugee programs we are running in Mashad in Iran.
The date is a bit old, but it gives you an indication. This
was in January of this year. We are asking people coming to our
clinic and doing a questionnaire, and there we found that 70
percent of them had fled because of violence and fear, and
either that the war was coming to them. This is the civil war.
They had pockets throughout the country. There were a lot of
local commanders that were opposing the Taliban in different
areas.
It is not only the main front line, but a number of other
areas, and persecution. There has been targeting of distinct
ethnic groups such as the Hazarahs. Therefore, if it is a
perfect world, you can guarantee security to all people.
Then, of course, they should be told not to go, but I think
you cannot tell people to stay in their homes if there is still
a threat of violence that is hanging over their heads, and
violence comes from many different quarters.
Senator Boxer. I so appreciate that. That was my sense,
that in the perfect world, you are only dealing with a famine,
which is awful in and of itself, but if that is the only thing
you are dealing with, and you can have the flat land and the
good weather and the convoys, yes. But my sense is a little bit
of unrealistic talk here with an imagery of people staying in
their homes and just waiting for the truck to pull up, like the
milk truck used to pull up. It just is not right.
Ms. Smeal. Plus the fact that the Taliban are persecuting
women as a class. They are walking around with these religious
police beating people. I mean, the whole atmosphere, plus they
are now conscripting young kids. If they don't go with them,
they shoot them, and so you might leave for that reason alone.
Senator Boxer. To get away from them shooting your youngest
son.
Ms. Smeal. By the way, I wanted to submit--I forgot my
testimony formally, because it has a lot of stuff in it.
Senator Wellstone. Absolutely. That will be a part of the
record, and, Nicolas, we will finish with you and Ken.
Mr. de Torrente. Not to conclude, but just to--just on the
reasons why people leave as a result of drought, just to give
you an indication of how the process happened, I think it is
important to realize this has been ongoing for three years now,
and people--it has eroded their coping mechanisms over time.
Three years ago, people had assets. They had livestock. They
were richer people. There was sharing among them. They were
coping and coping on their own within their communities without
having to rely on outside assistance in a lot of these remote
areas and remote villages.
But over time, they have had to sell off assets. They have
had crops failing time after time, and this has put people to
the brink, and what we have seen in going to rural areas and
doing surveys is that all of a sudden, a village decides, We
can't stay here any longer; it is just not feasible; no options
left; let's take the little we have remaining and move. And
that is what we have been seeing, is people moving from remote
areas in provinces of Herat and these areas, and moving. That
makes it when they move, it is really out of desperation and
really as a means of last resort.
Therefore, we should try to reach out to them if we can,
before they reach that point.
Senator Wellstone. Let me just agree with Senator Boxer
that we thank you. I would like to thank the reporter who has
been working so hard. It is really important to have this on
the record, and I think both of us--and I think I speak for
others who are here--it is hard for any of this to be symbolic.
I mean, we would be less than fully human if we just had
another committee hearing, another discussion. This is all just
so compelling and so important and so before us right now.
Thank you for being here. The committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:45 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
HUMANITARIAN CRISIS: IS ENOUGH AID REACHING AFGHANISTAN?
----------
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2001
U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South
Asian Affairs and the Subcommittee on
International Operations and Terrorism,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittees met, pursuant to notice, at 3:10 p.m. in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Paul D.
Wellstone (chairman of the Subcommittee on Near Eastern and
South Asian Affairs) presiding.
Present: Senators Wellstone and Lugar.
Senator Wellstone. The Senate Foreign Relations
Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs will come
to order. I am going to be joined by Senator Boxer. I want to
apologize to all. We had a briefing from the State Department
and Defense Department that all Senators attended from 2 to 3,
and some Senators are still there, but I would like to
apologize to everyone for the inconvenience of having to wait
an hour.
I want to again thank all of you for participating in
today's hearing, and again apologize for the delay. Angelina
Jolie is not here yet, but I had a chance to meet with her. She
has been a UNHCR goodwill Ambassador, and she has recently
visited the Afghan refugee camps. We want to thank Ms. Jolie
for her fine leadership. She will be coming later on, and we
will recognize her.
Events are moving extremely quickly in Afghanistan, with
the military success by the anti-Taliban forces in the northern
half of the country and with the winter closing rapidly,
threatening the lives and well-being of millions of Afghans
afflicted by drought and war.
The challenge the United States and its coalition partners
now face is to translate the recent military successes into
humanitarian action that delivers assistance to the Afghans
quickly and effectively. The international community must
continue to contribute significant resources to address the
humanitarian needs of the Afghans. There were some delays at
our own agencies, specifically with OMB, in releasing much-
needed funds. That now is going fine. There were some delays,
and this was unacceptable.
We now need to ensure that these resources arrive on the
ground in a timely and efficient manner, and I believe that
will happen. With Northern Alliance control of the area across
from Termez, Uzbekistan excuses are running out for Uzbekistan
not to open the Friendship Bridge. My understanding is that may
have happened today, which would speed crucial supplies into
the country.
Further, the security situation must improve. The
withdrawal of the Taliban--if I am not correct, and I thought
that is what I heard, but I guess I cannot even talk about a
briefing, so you can give me your latest assessment of the
Friendship Bridge.
Further, the security situation must improve. The
withdrawal of the Taliban has not resulted in a secure
environment necessary for humanitarian efforts to move forward.
There are deeply disturbing reports that Northern Alliance
fighters seized UNICEF employees and trucks and that 89 tons of
World Food Program supplies were stolen over the weekend.
It is unclear whether the Northern Alliance has the
capacity to provide security and establish law and order.
Consequently, the United Nations must move quickly to deploy a
multinational force to establish security so that the
humanitarian organizations can do their jobs. We must also
begin planning now for a long-term commitment to the
reconstruction of Afghanistan.
The people of Afghanistan have endured 23 years of war
misery, and the conflict has threatened international stability
and placed enormous burdens on their limited means. The United
States must not just talk the talk, but we must also walk the
walk. We must show Afghans that we are not going to give up on
them this time and turn our backs on them as we did before. We
must show genuine solidarity and real generosity now.
For many of these innocent Afghans you can absolutely count
on the fact that there will be others that will be making all
kinds of offers to them in a very fluid environment, and I do
not think it is at all too late for us to announce a bold
economic reconstruction program, microenterprises program,
microenterprises infrastructure, cash assistance, public
health, you name it. I cannot emphasize strongly enough that
our Government needs to, with the international community, move
forward with this now.
It is time to reverse more than a decade of neglect. We
must be willing to make a multiyear, multinational, and
multibillion effort to rebuild Afghanistan. We must move
quickly to put in place a long-term economic reconstruction
package for this embattled nation, to be administered through
the United Nation or another multinational entity.
We need to target assistance to the north now, which would
have a huge symbolic importance and be a powerful incentive, I
believe, to a push to the leaders in the south to abandon the
Taliban and join the United States-led effort. We know that
many of the Pashtun chiefs, including supporters of the
Taliban, are already on the fence. If the Pashtuns are now
going hungry, and if they were to see significant assistance
enter in neighboring provinces, the seemingly intractable
problem of forging a political consensus in Afghanistan might
become a whole lot easier to solve.
I believe our reconstruction effort must focus on
rebuilding basic infrastructure, repairing shattered bridges
and roads, removing land mines, reconstructing irrigation
systems, and drilling wells. Creation of secular schools will
break the stranglehold of extremism and allow both boys and
girls to make positive contributions to the development of
their society. We must also rebuild the shattered health
infrastructure by establishing base hospital and village
clinics.
Again, I would point out that there is a huge vacuum. You
have got people without means, in desperate economic shape.
Above and beyond the importance of this humanitarian
assistance, I believe this economic package is an absolute
must. The Afghans have been through enough hell. They deserve
to live in a society where they can feed their children, live
in safety, and participate fully in their country's
development, regardless of gender, religious belief, or
ethnicity.
I thank you.
[The prepared statement of Senator Wellstone follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Paul Wellstone
I want to thank all of you for participating in today's hearing,
and I apologize for the delay due to a last minute briefing. I want to
briefly introduce Angelina Jolie, UNHCR's Goodwill Ambassador, who has
recently visited the Afghan refugee camps.
Events are moving extremely quickly in Afghanistan, with the
military successes by the anti-Taliban forces in the northern half of
the country, and with winter closing in rapidly, threatening the lives
and well being of millions of Afghans afflicted by drought and war.
The challenge the U.S. and its coalition partners now face is to
translate the recent military successes into humanitarian action that
delivers assistance to the Afghans quickly and effectively. The
international community must continue to contribute significant
resources to address the humanitarian needs of the Afghans. There were
some delays at our own agencies in releasing much needed funds. This is
unacceptable. We need to ensure that these resources arrive on the
ground in a timely and efficient manner.
With Northern Alliance control of the area across from Termez,
Uzbekistan, excuses are running out for Uzbekistan not to open the
Friendship bridge, which would speed crucial supplies into the country.
Further, the security situation must improve. The withdrawal of the
Taliban has not resulted in a secure environment necessary for
humanitarian efforts to move forward. There are deeply disturbing
reports that Northern Alliance fighters seized UNICEF employees and
trucks, and that 89 tons of World Food Program supplies were stolen
over the weekend. It is unclear whether the Northern Alliance has the
capacity to provide security and establish law and order. Consequently,
the United Nations must move quickly to deploy a multi-national force
to establish security so that the humanitarian organizations can do
their jobs.
We must also begin planning now for a long-term commitment to the
reconstruction of Afghanistan. The people of the Afghanistan have
endured 23 years of war and misery, and the conflict has threatened
international stability, and placed enormous burdens on their limited
means. The United States must not just talk the talk, but must also
walk the walk--we must show Afghans that we are not going to give up on
them this time, and turn our backs on them as we did before. We must
show genuine solidarity and real generosity now.
It is time to reverse more than a decade of neglect. We must be
willing to make a multiyear, multinational and multibillion effort to
rebuild Afghanistan. We must move quickly to put in place a long-term
economic reconstruction package for this embattled nation, to be
administered through the United Nations or another multinational
entity.
We need to target assistance to the north now, which would have
huge symbolic importance and be a powerful incentive to the Pushtun
leaders in the south to abandon the Taliban and join the U.S.-led
effort. We know that many of the Pashtun chiefs, including current
supporters of the Taliban, are already on the fence. If the Pashtuns
who are now going hungry, saw significant assistance entering
neighboring provinces, the seemingly intractable problem of forging a
political consensus in Afghanistan might become a whole lot easier to
solve.
I believe our reconstruction effort must focus on rebuilding basic
infrastructure repairing shattered bridges and roads, removing land
mines, reconstructing irrigation systems and drilling wells. Creation
of secular schools will break the stranglehold of extremism, and allow
both boys and girls to make positive contributions to the development
of their society. We must also rebuild the shattered health
infrastructure by establishing basic hospitals and village clinics. The
Afghans have been through enough hell. They deserve to live in a
society where they can feed their children, live in safety and
participate fully in their country's development regardless of gender,
religious belief or ethnicity.
Thank you.
Senator Wellstone. Now, I know we are going to be joined by
Senator Boxer, but I think since we have already held the
hearing back for an hour we are going to proceed and then when
Senator Boxer comes I know she will want to make an opening
statement.
We are going to start with Bernd McConnell, who is Director
of Central Asian Task Force and has done some wonderful work in
Bosnia and really is, I think, a real expert in the best sense,
Director of Central Asian Task Force, United States Agency for
International Development, and then he will be followed by Alan
Kreczko, who is Acting Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of
Population, Refugees and Migration, Department of State.
Bernd McConnell will make it clear that Administrator
Natsios was more than willing to testify, but when we put the
hearing off for--he is now in the region, and when we put it
off for an hour it just proved impossible, logistics-wise, to
do the communication.
Joel Charny is going to join us in panel 2. This past month
he has also been in the region. Mark Bartolini, vice president
of Governmental Relations for the International Rescue
Committee will also be testifying, and we owe a special debt of
gratitude to George Devendorf, director of Emergency Operations
for Mercy Corps, who I just talked to, and just came back from
refugee camps I think last night, and who is utterly exhausted,
but is here with us as well.
We are going to get a very important report from the ground
and from the people that are responsible for administering
humanitarian assistance. I think this hearing could not come at
a more important time, and I very much again thank all of the
panelists and journalists and others for your interest.
We will start out with Mr. McConnell.
STATEMENT OF BERND McCONNELL, DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL ASIAN TASK
FORCE, UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT,
WASHINGTON, DC
Thank you, sir. First, I must apologize for not being
Andrew Natsios. We were just unable, as you point out, to
connect the electronic dots. He did want to emphasize that he
is most available on his return over the weekend to come and
brief you or anyone you would designate.
We do submit his testimony, the testimony he would have
given for the record.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Natsios follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Andrew S. Natsios, Administrator, U.S.
Agency for International Development
Madam Chairman, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank
you for inviting me to testify before your committee on the rapidly
evolving humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan. I submit this testimony
even as I am leading a White House mission to the Central Asian
Republics on Afghanistan's northern border. This mission signals to the
world the importance President Bush places on a robust humanitarian
response to this crisis. I am also exploring ways to enhance
coordination with our United Nations and nongovernmental organization
(NGO) partners in this historic effort.
background
As you know, Afghanistan is a country in crisis, a crisis that
predates the events of September 11th. Three years of drought have
brought Afghans to the precipice, but this did not have to become a
famine. It was five years of brutal Taliban misrule and neglect that
have pushed Afghanistan over the edge. Nearly 1.5 million Afghans are
now at risk of starving and 5-7 million Afghans are dependent on
outside assistance to survive the combination of a harsh winter, pre-
famine conditions, and the dislocation of conflict.
As I testified before you on October 10th of this year, the US
Agency for International Development is working energetically with the
World Food Program, other international organizations, and
international and Afghan NGOs to implement the President's humanitarian
strategy in that region. Of the $320 million that President Bush
announced on October 4th, USAID will implement $195 million for
emergency humanitarian programs. This includes $96 million of
International Disaster Assistance, $95 million of P.L. 480 Title II
resources, $3 million for demining, and $1 million for extraordinary
operational expenses associated with the Afghanistan crisis. We have
already committed $51 million of the International Disaster Assistance
funds and $58.4 million of the P.L. 480 Title II money for aid
organizations working in Afghanistan.
The U.S. humanitarian strategy is fully in operation inside
Afghanistan. By that, I mean we are working diligently to deliver and
distribute food and relief supplies to reduce death rates. We are
focused on distribution of this food to rural villages to minimize
population movements, because we know that death comes more easily to
those forced to flee their homes. We are devising programs to stabilize
rural food markets by increasing incomes.(i.e., effective demand) so
that commercial suppliers will bring food to those markets. We are
developing humanitarian information for radio broadcasts into
Afghanistan that tell people food is coming, thereby ensuring that aid
reaches the intended recipients. Importantly, we are funding
developmental relief activities--what we call ``spot reconstruction''
to begin the process of recovery even as we are preventing starvation.
Our geographic focus on the north is aimed at reducing the
suffering of the most vulnerable groups in the population, as
identified by the world Food Program vulnerability assessment map. This
means we have been concentrating in the past month on opening entry
points for food flows from the northern and western borders--through
Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Iran. The international aid
community has pre-positioned relief stocks and trucks in these areas to
be ready to open the spigots when circumstances allow.
We are very pleased that the World Food Program has been able to
increase its delivery of food into Afghanistan so significantly--from
an all-time high of 29,000 metric tons in October to 27,000 metric tons
just in the first 11 days of November. The challenge that we now face
is that of the capacity of NGOs to distribute within Afghanistan.
Clearly, the absence of expatriate NGO staff and lack of security have
been the greatest obstacles to getting food into peoples' hands.
current situation
The stunning changes in the war campaign over this past weekend
therefore present important new opportunities to respond to the most
pressing needs of the north and northwest, but only when these military
successes of the Northern Alliance are consolidated and converted into
more secure circumstances within Afghanistan. Already, food is crossing
the Turkmenistan border into Badghis and Faryab provinces, where NGOs
and international organizations like Save the Children and
International Organization for Migration are working.
When the road from Mazar-i-Sharif to Termez is secure, a high
volume of food can begin to flow into the northern territories because
of the road network radiating from Mazar. Use of barges to cross the
Amu Darya River and the opening of the Friendship Bridge at Termez by
the President of Uzbekistan are essential to this strategy. While barge
traffic began yesterday, we are hopeful that the bridge also will be
opened quickly as it will allow up to 25,000 metric tons a month to
pass into Northern Afghanistan.
The World Food Program and the Russian emergency response agency,
EMERCOM, are working together to expand cross-border deliveries from
Tajikistan. However, reports indicate that the Kunduz-Bahglan area
south of the Tajikistan border remains very much insecure and may take
longer than other northern provinces to open up.
Finally, the resurgence of the Northern Alliance in the Herat-Ghor
areas may enable the World Food Program (WFP) to reach very vulnerable
populations in the Hazarajat central highlands and west more
effectively. In fact, WFP reports that it has already dispatched to the
Hazarajat and Ghor areas more than 13,000 metric tons of food, or
nearly a half of the winter's requirements.
next steps
Upon my return from the region, I will redouble our coordination
efforts with United Nations and NGO partners to ensure that they have
the support they need to capitalize on these openings within
Afghanistan. We have 65,000 metric tons of U.S. wheat being off-loaded
in Iran for transshipment to Mashad and the Central Asian entry points
and another 100,000 metric tons of food being prepared for loading in
the United States. We have just ordered another 55,000 metric tons of
wheat and 17,000 metric tons of oil, pulses and blended foods to ensure
that the WFP and NGO pipelines are filled through February or March,
2002. We have also given WFP a grant of $6 million for procurement of
15,000 metric tons of wheat in Kazakhstan to meet immediate needs, but
most of our food aid will come from the United States.
We will also actively engage with our NGO partners to increase our
focus on spot reconstruction or developmental relief. It will be
critical for vulnerable Afghans not only to eat for survival, but also
to have clean water to drink, improved local roads to markets, seeds
and other agricultural inputs for spring planting--the basic elements
that will begin the rebuilding process from the bottom up. These
programs will also show Afghans the tangible benefits of the ouster of
the Taliban.
Finally, USAID will engage actively with our State and Treasury
Department colleagues in the upcoming dialogue with other donors, IFIs
and Afghans themselves on how best to make the transition from a
crippled Afghanistan to a recovering, rebuilt Afghanistan.
Mr. McConnell. I thought I would just speak briefly about a
couple of things, one of which is his trip, and I would like to
start with a brief anecdote from the trip. One of the reasons
we could not connect those dots is because Andrew Natsios went
to Afghanistan today.
He went south of the Tajik border into a place that,
hopefully, I will not butcher too badly in naming,
Khohabakhodin, where there are a number of IDP areas within the
boundaries of Afghanistan.
The anecdote I would like to share with you he told me just
a little while ago, and that is, he went to what passes for a
school in one of the camps and asked the question of the
children there, what does America mean to you? The answer he
got was, America is where the food comes from. That was in his
words quite a moving moment for him, and that is one of the
messages that we would hope to leave here today, and that is,
food is moving into Afghanistan.
At the risk of giving a commercial here, the World Food
Program has done an absolutely magnificent job of moving food
into the region. Currently, the major obstacle to the final
distribution of that food is the security situation and, as you
point out, Senator, that is something that has got to be better
and got to be clarified.
If I may just throw out a few numbers here, the World Food
Program monthly requirement for the entire country is 52,000
metric tons. This last 30-day period is the first time ever
that that goal has been met. So far, halfway through the month
of November, World Food Program has moved 30,000 metric tons of
food. Before November, the most they had ever moved was 29,000
metric tons for a whole month, and that was in October.
So they are doing an astounding job of moving the food. The
issue is, once the food is in the area, how do you get it
precisely to the areas of most need, and that, of course, is a
function of the security situation. The question of what change
has occurred because of the dramatic events of the weekend and
subsequently, the most obvious example of what is changing is
the Friendship Bridge at Termez. The situation there, as we
understand it, is the bridge is not open.
Senator Wellstone. Is not open.
Mr. McConnell. Is not open. The reason it is not open is
that there has not yet been a U.N. assessment done of the
roadway between Mazar and the border, and as we understand it,
that assessment will inform the Uzbek Government and hopefully
encourage them to make their final decision to open the bridge
at long last.
I would emphasize that yesterday the first barge did, in
fact, move. It was very lightly loaded, 50 metric tons, mainly
of nonfood items. The river is quite low. They were being
cautious in this first barge about making sure it did not run
aground. Yesterday it went without problem. It is about a 18-
kilometer ride on that barge from one port to the other.
Today a second barge has, in fact, made that round trip,
this time 200 metric tons of food, and so barge traffic has
begun. We are hopeful and optimistic that the real key to the
north, which is to say the opening of the bridge, will occur
early in the week. The U.N. intends to run this assessment
mission over this weekend.
Senator Wellstone. Mr. McConnell, before we go on, just
since there are a number of people here in the audience, maybe
you could explain--sometimes those of us who are very focused
on this, we get it at a micro level. Maybe you could put this
in just a little bit broader context as to the importance of
the Friendship Bridge and the food coming in from the north,
and getting the approval of the Uzbek Government, because this
is one of the more positive developments, that we can now bring
in a lot of food from the north.
Maybe you could kind of spell out what is going on here,
and also with the barge traffic, why this is such an important
development, and why we need to do this, if you could just
embellish that point a little bit.
Mr. McConnell. Yes, sir, I will. The World Food Program
surveys show that the areas in most need in Afghanistan are in
the north. Traditionally, food has come in from the south,
southeast kind of access. What is key to getting to the people
in the north, those in most need, both because of geography and
climate and Taliban misrule, the key to that is the so-called
Friendship Bridge, where some estimates are--remember, I gave
the number of 52,000 metric tons a month will feed the country.
Some estimates are, half of that could come across this bridge.
I have not been there, but I am told it is quite an
enormous structure, and this was used by the Soviets for entry
and subsequent exit from Afghanistan.
Senator Wellstone. And again, we have every reason to
believe the Uzbek Government will open it up, I gather, right?
You are optimistic that they will? That is what we are waiting
on. It is U.N. assessment, but then the Government to give its
approval. Can we expect that to happen soon?
Mr. McConnell. I think so. It is more of a State Department
question than one for us, but the concern the Uzbeks have
expressed all along has been the security situation south of
the bridge, and that is why I say that if this assessment
mission can give those assurances, we would expect that the
Uzbek Government would follow through.
Senator Wellstone. Well, we will move right to Mr. Kreczko.
Alan, thank you for being here.
STATEMENT OF ALAN KRECZKO, ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU
OF POPULATION, REFUGEES AND MIGRATION, DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Kreczko. Thank you, Senator. Let me thank you for
convening another hearing on the subject, and express my
appreciation for the support this committee has shown for a
robust humanitarian response in Afghanistan, which, as you
know, has been a major component of President Bush's response
to the situation in Afghanistan.
I also wanted to say that we agree with most of the points
that you identified in your opening comment, including the need
to seize on the opportunity that is presented by the changed
security circumstances to get as much assistance in as
possible, in particular in the north, where the need is the
greatest, and that is what Bernd McConnell and USAID are
working so hard on.
We also agree on the need for the Northern Alliance to
avoid human rights abuses and interference with relief efforts.
We agree on the need for a reconstruction effort, and the U.S.
and Japan will be hosting a meeting November 20 in Washington
on reconstruction. The aim is to seek agreement in principle on
a multiyear, multinational, multibillion reconstruction effort,
and we agree on the need for there to be a broadbased
representative government in Afghanistan, so on all of those
fundamental points that you made we agree.
Senator with your permission, I would just say a few things
about the refugee situation and how it has changed since we
last had an opportunity to brief the committee on that. Overall
the number of refugee flows to neighboring countries has
remained relatively small, far fewer than had been originally
feared. You remember, people were talking about 1.5 million new
refugees. The United States has continued to urge countries to
maintain an open border for those who need to flee persecution
or conflict, but it remains the case that all of the countries
maintain an official posture of a closed border to refugee
flows.
As in October, there have been no significant refugee flows
toward the northern border with Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and
Tajikistan. There have been increased flows since we last
talked toward Iran. Several thousand Afghans may have entered
illegally, and there have been some reports of forced
deportations by Iran back into Afghanistan.
Two camps were established by the Iranian Red Crescent
Society for Afghans moving toward Iran, but they were
established on the Afghan side of the border, and we understand
that the Iranian Red Crescent Society withdrew their support
from one of those camps because the Taliban moved armed
elements into it. That camp is now in an area controlled by the
Northern Alliance.
Iran has done some more contingency planning with the U.N.
High Commissioner for Refugees for future refugee flows, and
has identified some sites for refugee camps that are on the
border, but none of those are opened at this point.
Pakistan remains the destination of choice for most people
seeking to leave Afghanistan. Pakistan generally maintains a
closed border to refugee flows, but has made exceptions for
certain vulnerable individuals. Roughly 4,000 individuals have
been provided assistance at a U.N. High Commissioner for
Refugees transit facility in the southeast, and those people
are now being moved to a new camp in Pakistan that the
Government of Pakistan has allowed to open.
While the number of legal entrants to Pakistan has been
small, the estimates of those who have entered unofficially has
grown from the 10 to 20,000 that I mentioned to you last time
to about 135,000 now. Those individuals have generally gone to
live with relatives or friends and receive little assistance
from the international humanitarian community.
Similar to the Iran situation, some camps have been set up
on the Afghan side of the Pakistani border. The Taliban has
been directing people to these camps, and some assistance has
been provided in these camps, but the United States has not
supported the establishment of these camps out of concern that
they are subject to Taliban control and do not provide adequate
security to refugees or to assistance workers.
The extent of future refugee flows is uncertain. It is too
early to conclude that there will not be additional numbers.
Nonetheless, with our encouragement, the U.N. High Commissioner
for Refugees has shifted to planning, as well, for the return
of refugees to Afghanistan. We encourage this planning. The
return and reintegration of refugees and displaced persons
needs to be a central element in the rehabilitation and
reconstruction of Afghanistan.
Thank you, Senator.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kreczko follows:]
Prepared Statement of Acting Assistant Secretary Alan Kreczko, Bureau
of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Department of State
President Bush is providing firm leadership in the international
campaign to eradicate terrorism worldwide. A key part of his efforts is
directed at both the immediate and the longer-term problems plaguing
the people of Afghanistan, and on this front, too, the United States is
providing leadership.
Compassion is an integral component of the President's foreign
policy, and it motivates America, even in these trying times, to lead
the international humanitarian relief effort for those most vulnerable
in Afghanistan. As the President asserted, ``We have no compassion for
terrorists, or for any state that sponsors them. But we do have great
compassion for the millions around the world who are victims of hate
and oppression--including those in Afghanistan. We are friends of the
Afghan people. We have an opportunity to make sure the world is a
better place for generations to come.''
The President, on October 4th, announced a $320 million initiative
to provide additional humanitarian assistance for Afghans--for both
those inside Afghanistan and for those who flee Taliban oppression to
neighboring countries. The United States has consistently been the
largest donor to international humanitarian efforts. With vital help
from a number of countries around the world, our goal is to alleviate
the suffering that Afghans have endured for more than two decades, as a
result of war, severe drought, and the brutal, repressive rule of the
Taliban regime.
The United States believes that all of Afghanistan's neighbors
should be prepared to accept new Afghan refugees as needed, and that
the international community must be prepared to shoulder the economic
costs incurred by the flight of desperate Afghan people. In working
with neighboring countries on potential new refugee flows, we need to
take into account the existing refugee situation. Over 3.5 million
Afghan refugees already reside in neighboring countries. The bulk of
those are in Pakistan, which generously has taken in some 2 million
refugees, and Iran, where some 1.5 million Afghan refugees reside. As
with its contributions to relief efforts overall, the United States has
consistently been the largest financial donor to support those
refugees. At the same time, it is important to acknowledge the
remarkable generosity of Pakistan, Iran, and other neighboring
countries in providing relief and refuge to so many Afghans for nearly
two decades.
The UN High Commissioner for Refugees originally prepared
contingency plans for the arrival of as many as 1.5 million additional
Afghans in the countries neighboring Afghanistan. Based on information
available at the time of their original plan, UNHCR estimated an
additional 1 million Afghans would arrive in Pakistan; 400,000 in Iran;
and 50,000 each in Tajikistan and Turkmenistan.
Those were planning figures, and the actual flow of new refugees
has been much smaller. UNHCR estimates that 135,000 Afghans have found
their way across the border into Pakistan since September 11,
significantly fewer than originally anticipated. Possible reasons
include: the international community's ability to deliver continued
assistance inside Afghanistan; Taliban restrictions on male departures;
the focused nature of the U.S. military campaign; and the fact that the
borders of all neighboring countries are officially closed. There has
been no significant population movement to the North, toward the
Central Asian states of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan.
Turkmenistan and Tajikistan have, nevertheless, engaged in some
contingency planning with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
and have agreed to facilitate cross-border assistance to Afghanistan.
Uzbekistan has agreed to the prepositioning of relief material at
Termez, and has now allowed relief material to move from barge to
Afghanistan.
Iran also maintains a closed border. Reportedly a few thousand
Afghans have entered Iran in the past several weeks, some of whom may
have been deported back into Afghanistan by Iran. The Iranian Red
Crescent Society had established two refugee camps inside Afghanistan,
with about 8,000 to 10,000 Afghans there. However, we understand that
the Iranian Red Crescent Society withdrew from one of those camps
because Taliban armed elements entered it. That camp is now reportedly
in the control of the Northern Alliance. Iran has done contingency
planning with UNHCR for larger flows of refugees, and has identified
some sites for refugee camps along its border with Afghanistan. Iran
also is facilitating cross-border assistance into Afghanistan.
Pakistan officially maintains a closed border with Afghanistan,
fearing that an open border and the prospect of relief inside Pakistan
could attract hundreds of thousands of new refugees, with attendant
security and economic implications for Pakistan. Pakistan has allowed
some vulnerable groups to cross the border, and acknowledges that tens
of thousands more have crossed unofficially. With Pakistan's
authorization, UNHCR has established a transit center near the Quetta
border crossing, where initial assistance can be provided to new
arrivals who are permitted official entry. UNHCR has begun to move
Afghans from the temporary receiving centers at the Quetta crossing in
the south--to new refugee camps. Those who enter unofficially receive
little assistance and fear deportation if discovered. Pakistan has
identified sites where UNHCR can establish new refugee camps, although
the site locations are in remote areas and security of humanitarian
staff there will be a great concern. UNHCR has prepositioned
substantial relief materials in Pakistan. Camps have been set up on the
Afghan side of the Pakistan border, where individuals denied entry to
Pakistan are getting some minimal assistance. However, we are concerned
that these camps are subject to Taliban control and do not provide
adequate security to refugees or to assistance workers.
The extent of future refugee flows will be affected by the same
factors that currently appear to be limiting outflows and, of course,
how the military campaign unfolds. Recent successes by the Northern
Alliance has changed the dynamic within the country and could provoke
new refugee outflows, especially by those sympathetic to the Taliban.
We will continue to work with UNHCR, relief organizations, and with
Pakistan and other neighboring countries, to prepare for possible
increased refugee flows.
Our ultimate hope, of course, is that Afghans will be able to
return to their homes. We have--despite the current fluidity of the
situation--seen the voluntary return of almost 3,000 Afghans from Iran
to Afghanistan. Afghans in Pakistan are following closely the events in
Kabul and other parts of the country, calling relatives, and thinking
about testing the waters for return. While continuing to prepare for
refugee flows, UNHCR has therefore begun to prepare for the possible
return of refugees to Afghanistan. We encourage this planning. The
return and reintegration of refugees and displaced persons needs to be
a central element in the planning for the rehabilitation and
reconstruction of Afghanistan.
The United States supports a broad-based representative government.
We support the inclusion of Afghan women in the planning and future
reconstruction of Afghanistan. We support their full participation in
the economic, political and social life of Afghanistan. Promoting human
rights in Afghanistan, and particularly the rights of women and girls,
is a high priority for the United States. We have repeatedly called on
the Taliban to lift restrictions on access to health care, employment,
mobility, and education of women and girls.
On October 5th, the UN convened in Geneva a meeting of major
donors, as well as Iran and Pakistan, to discuss the Afghan
humanitarian situation. Attendees at this meeting praised President
Bush's initiative and strongly endorsed the view that the international
community should make maximum effort to provide assistance inside
Afghanistan, so that people would not be forced to leave in search of
aid. The meeting also endorsed contingency planning for refugee flows,
and provided assurances to Pakistan and Iran of burden sharing to care
for all new arrivals. Total offers of humanitarian assistance from over
40 countries--including President Bush's pledge of $320 million--now
total some $800 million. For UNHCR, initial cash receipts were slow to
match pledges, but now (November 15) the refugee organization has
received $57.6 million, of its $268 million request for the six months
from October 2001 through March 2002. The Bureau of Population,
Refugees, and Migration has contributed $14 million of that amount,
part of the Bureau's contribution of over $36 million to the current
Afghan crisis.
The unambiguous message of that meeting was support for the Afghan
people. That certainly represents the attitude and endeavors of the
United States as well. We are not at war with the innocent people of
Afghanistan, and we are doing all we can to ameliorate the conditions
under which they have long been suffering.
Senator Wellstone. Thank you. Just real quickly, Mr.
Kreczko, I appreciate the agreement and the work that you are
doing. Again, on the economic reconstruction, I was pleased to
hear you say that we are really trying to organize the
international community.
I think, again, sometimes you know, these economic
reconstruction plans, they stay abstract for too long. I think
we are going to need to get some action on the ground soon and
some money on the ground soon, because again I think you have
got this vacuum where all sorts of people are going to be
dealing with all sorts of people, and I think it is real
important that we are there.
One very just quick comment, at the very end of your
testimony you talked about repatriation, and I am going to come
back with a question and ask you how we are going to deal with
a lot of people who I would guess are going to want to be
coming back, or going to be coming back. They are not going to
be waiting for any official blessing to do so, and so I would
be interested in your plans there.
The other thing I want to talk about is, I know that the
Pakistanis have opened up another camp, but it is in pretty
awful conditions. I mean, it is remote. There is no access to
water. I would like to talk a little bit more about that and
try and figure out exactly what kind of discussions we have had
with the Pakistanis on the border crossings. Are we encouraging
them to open up the borders, or are we not now, not knowing
whether they are Taliban? I would be interested in that
discussion as well.
Mr. Rogers.
STATEMENT OF LEONARD ROGERS, ACTING ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR
HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE, UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Rogers. I would just like to make a few brief comments.
As Bernd said, the Administrator submitted our written
testimony, but I think it is important to understand the
context in which we are going to have to assess this
humanitarian operation in Afghanistan and also plan for the
reconstruction.
Afghanistan is one of the poorest countries in the world.
UNICEF estimates that even in a normal year 300,000 children
die from preventable causes, and that nearly half the children
in the country have malnutrition, so it is one of the poorest
countries in the world. It is also in the grip of a 3-year
drought. There is nothing we can do except hope that the rains
come normally, but if that drought persists into the next year,
then the reconstruction is going to be hampered severely.
Many of the poorest people have lost all their assets.
Their livestock herds have been liquidated. People have no
ready source of income, as you suggest, and it is going to be
important to get people back to work earning income so they can
buy food in normal commercial markets.
Afghanistan has had 22 years of brutal conflict. There are
4 million refugees outside the country, and Afghanistan is one
of the most heavily mined countries in the world, so security
is going to continue to be a major problem.
The President has provided significant resources for the
humanitarian effort. USAID is responsible for managing $192
million of that. Together with assets from USDA, we believe
that is going to allow us to provide approximately 400,000 tons
of food. Some of that food is already in the country. That
volume of food will allow the United States alone to feed 4
million people through spring.
We are welcoming other donors' contributions which are now
coming in at a reasonably strong rate, so we believe that the
resources are either in hand or coming onstream to allow an
effective humanitarian response.
I would be happy to answer your questions.
Senator Wellstone. Well, thank you for your testimony.
First of all, on the package, the $320 million, one of the
things again I want to repeat, it is past history now, but for
a while OMB was too slow in getting this money out to people on
the ground, and I want to emphasize at this hearing just as a
matter of record I know that a number of Senators had to
contact them, and I just hope we will not have any more
problems with delay.
Of the $320 million committed by the administration, what
portion of these funds--this could be for any of you--will
actually flow inside of Afghanistan as opposed to the
maintenance of the refugee populations in neighboring
countries? Do you have any sense of that?
Mr. Kreczko. Well, Senator, it is hard to answer that with
precision for the following reason. We know how much money was
apportioned to our respective accounts, which is $125 million
came to the State Department refugee account, and the remainder
went to AID, but our money will basically follow the refugees,
so if the refugees return to Afghanistan we will be using our
money inside Afghanistan to help with the return and
reintegration of Afghan refugees.
If more Afghans leave Afghanistan to go to Pakistan, then
our money would be used there, so it is kind of refugee-
specific, but whether it is spent inside Afghanistan or inside
Pakistan depends upon events.
We also use a significant chunk of our money to support the
International Committee of the Red Cross, because that is our
statutory responsibility, and that is activities inside, so I
am afraid it is not as easy to define it with precision.
Senator Wellstone. Mr. McConnell.
Mr. McConnell. It is also important to remind ourselves
that the Presidential initiative was a regional initiative. The
drought that has been described is not peculiar just to the
northern part of Afghanistan. Tajikistan is suffering as well.
Part of this money is being used to address some of the food
needs there.
Senator Wellstone. Well, God knows, I am not trying to play
off one group of desperately poor people against another, but I
would find it hard to believe that probably you are going to
get more people trying to leave to go to Pakistan. My guess is
you are going to have people starting to come back, and
moreover, the people in Afghanistan, this has been like--they
have kind of been living a nightmare, so there is all sorts of
needs there, dire needs, and so the people who could not leave
in the first place were the elderly, the infirm, the poorest of
the poorest of the poor people, and so I guess what I would
want to do is just emphasize that we make that a priority, the
internally displaced people in Afghanistan. I gather there is
no disagreement on that.
Mr. Rogers. I think the simple answer would be that of our
$192 million, excluding the $20 million that will be used for
food in Tajikistan, virtually all of that will go inside of
Afghanistan, and a significant share of the PRM budget will
ultimately wind up in Afghanistan as well, so I think the
priorities are definitely on assisting inside Afghanistan.
Senator Wellstone. Well, I am glad we have that on the
record. Thank you.
Just to go back to Friendship Bridge one more time, if I
understand this the right way, we have got a changed security
situation in the north. I mean, the Taliban are no longer in
charge, so those considerations are no longer paramount, is
that right?
Mr. McConnell. Yes, sir, but the security assessment that
is being anxiously awaited here will also look for evidence of
mining on the roads, but as far as active Taliban involvement,
it is our belief that is gone.
Senator Wellstone. And again, the point being it is a
dramatically different situation, so hopefully the Uzbek
Government, after we get the security assessment, should be
able to grant approval for use of that bridge. Talk a little
bit about the differences it would make having to do it just
with barge traffic, the bridge versus the way we are doing it
now, just so, again, people can have an understanding of why we
keep talking about Friendship Bridge, just what the difference
would make in concrete terms. Right now, we are doing it how,
we are just doing it on the river, across the river?
Mr. McConnell. Even the barge traffic is in a way a
breakthrough. That has just begun, and that is a lot better
than before. We are conducting in some areas airlift of food,
to get food to the, sort of the gaps, the places where we do
not have food coverage.
What this will mean, again, is an unfettered movement
through the Friendship Bridge will essentially provide half the
needs of the country, needs as defined by those people in most
need, those people who are in the most inaccessible areas.
I would like to go back one more time, the World Food
Program [WFP] is doing a superb job in getting food to the
area. The issue is reorienting the food distribution to the
north, which as you have pointed out is the area of most need.
Friendship Bridge is key to that. We do not want to do
airlifts. It is expensive, it is inefficient, and it takes
resources away from the basic needs. This will allow us to use
a well-developed road network in the north that is so far
proving to be perhaps a little better than we had thought in
terms of year-round capability.
Senator Wellstone. Senator Lugar, I would just ask one more
question and then shift to you. Thank you so much for joining
us.
The questions I asked, I was wondering what portion of the
$320 million was going to be committed to actually flow inside
of Afghanistan versus care and maintenance of the refugee
populations, and the reason I ask the question is because I
think a lot of people are going to be coming back, and I also
think, among the elderly and poorest in Afghanistan, it has
sort of been their living hell.
And then the second question I was just asking was about
Friendship Bridge, and when we could see that opened up,
because that is going to make a huge difference coming over
from Uzbekistan.
I guess my last question is, what do you all think would be
required from a security standpoint to reintroduce
international staff in the required numbers into Afghanistan?
How quickly might this happen, and in what regions of the
country?
Mr. McConnell. This weekend a U.N. team is going into Kabul
itself. The intent is, well, to look around obviously, but the
intent is, we are told, to leave a staff of 10 behind in Kabul.
Feyzabad in the north, the U.N. intended--and I do not know
whether this occurred or not--to put their first staff in today
on the ground. Mazar is a big question mark because of some
security concerns and some of the reports you alluded to
earlier, and so I think everybody is anxious to get the
internationals back in as quickly as possible. We ourselves
would like very much to get somebody on the ground to do some
assessing for ourselves, and we are attempting to attach
ourselves to one or two of those missions.
Senator Wellstone. Let me send it over--Senator Lugar,
first of all I cannot tell you how honored I am that you are
here. You are really probably one of the three, four, five
Senators who have been most engaged in international affairs
with the most sophistication in the U.S. Senate, and the other
thing that we have administration witnesses and then we have a
report from people on the ground in the second panel.
The other question I raised, and then I am going to send it
over to you, I said earlier when I asked the question that I
thought today is not too early for us to put together this
economic reconstruction plan, because I think that it is going
to be of key importance.
A lot of people are going to be wandering all around there.
A lot of people are going to be making deals. A lot of people
do not believe, given our history, that we are going to follow
through, and I think we really need to be talking about all the
infrastructure developments, and I especially think it would be
a wonderful message to the Pashtun in the south to see that
happening in the north right now, and that was the other thing
we had talked about.
Senator Lugar.
Senator Lugar. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
apologize for my tardiness. Senator Wellstone has been holding
the fort here and others of us have been over with Rich
Armitage and Paul Wolfowitz and Steve Hadley thinking about the
situations they brought to our attention.
Let me just pick up, however, on Senator Wellstone's point,
and that is that a fairly large sum of money is going to be
required, almost an endowment of this process. We have no idea
how long military action will proceed in Afghanistan, but
hopefully the attention of the American public and our
Government officials will last longer than that. We must
identify the resources in advance, not only from ourselves, but
also our partners, would seem to be essential, an international
fund-raising effort.
I am certain this is part of your portfolio now to identify
who is prepared to step up for the long term with substantial
funds.
I just want to follow through a specific aspect of this,
just to get a feel for how you envision the organization of
this effort. Until fairly recently, a number of our friends
abroad were advising us that, given what they felt was the
halting nature of military operations, that we should stop the
bombing during the holy days and perhaps utilize that period
for some international relief to show our goodwill.
This was rejected by our military people and others, but at
the same time, everyone realized that the problems of winter
and the difficulties were likely to be substantial.
Now, that has not all changed, but nevertheless the on-the-
ground situation in the country has changed, remarkably, in a
week. The bridge that Senator Wellstone was talking about from
Uzbekistan into Afghanistan is apparently open.
Mr. McConnell. Senator, everybody desperately wants that
bridge open, but our information is that Uzbekistan has not yet
agreed to open it. This weekend, a U.N. assessment team will
make the run from Termez up--I am sorry, from Mazar up to
hopefully form a decision, a positive decision by the
Government of Uzbekistan to open the bridge, hopefully next
week.
Senator Lugar. In other words, the bridge is physically OK,
it is the diplomatic situation.
Mr. McConnell. And I think this team will certify that
physical OKness, but it appears to be OK to us.
Senator Lugar. Well, let us say we have good fortune and
that works out, is it true that a thousand metric tons of wheat
can come across the bridge every day?
Mr. McConnell. Yes, sir.
Senator Lugar. That would be your plan, would it not?
Mr. McConnell. Yes, sir. The working number is 25,000
metric tons a month will come across that bridge.
Senator Lugar. Now, just in terms of what happens to that
wheat, is it literally in the form of wheat, or is it flour,
and how, depending upon what it is, do you get it in some other
form, and what is the distribution network? How does it reach
people?
Mr. McConnell. It will reach people in basically the same
way as it does now. World Food Program will get the wheat into
the country. The NGO's, the very fine NGO's and PVO
organizations that have been doing such an incredible job
inside will then do the physical distribution. It is preferable
that be done by truck.
The bridge that we are all so fond of here is sort of the
giant funnel into the north, and I think we are all agreed that
the north is the area of most need. The World Food Program
surveys identify it as such, and the road system that we are
aware of is such that those trucks will be able to feed that
half of the country very efficiently.
I ought to say that it is not the only route. The central
highlands, the Hazarajat, is an area, too, of great
inaccessibility and great need. The World Food Program is,
again, even now, without that bridge being opened, able to,
from newly liberated, apparently, Kabul, bring food in, and
there is almost 13,000 metric tons of food aimed at the central
highlands today, out of a, in order to get through the winter,
requirement of maybe 30,000 for that whole area.
So there are good news parts of the distribution, but I
would certainly agree that the bridge is key to the northern
area of most need.
Senator Lugar. How do you arrive at the 30,000 figure, and
how do you determine how much wheat is necessary for the number
of people that are there?
Mr. McConnell. I will not pretend to be an expert, having
been an employee of USAID for 6 weeks here, but the World Food
Program, through people on the ground, conducts surveys to
develop estimates and for the Hazarajat, that area of the
central highland area, their conclusion is 30,000 metric tons
will feed that population for the winter months, and we accept
their calculation of that.
Mr. Rogers. Senator, a rule of thumb we use at USAID is
that 2,000 tons of grain will feed 1 million people for a year.
You can push the math around a lot of ways, but that is a basic
rule of thumb.
Senator Lugar. That is a very useful figure to begin to
quantify it physically, because you have got a thousand tons a
day across the bridge when it is open, and you have now control
of the area in a way that we did not a short time ago. That
does not mean every pocket of resistance is gone, but the
possibilities of reasonably peaceful distribution by the NGO's
becomes a practical possibility.
Now, we do not have full control of the southern part of
the country, and so that is another story, although we might in
due course. Now, how do you get it into the south? Are there
routes through Pakistan, then, that are more likely at that
stage?
Mr. McConnell. Yes, sir, but the thing we have to
remember--and again, I am going back to World Food Program, in
their assessment of the country as a whole, whereas there might
be hungry people in the south, they are not those that are most
gravely affected.
I mean, there is food in the south. Yes, there is
turbulence, but the traditional route through the Kabul area
from Pakistan is certainly much more available to us now, or to
the NGO's now than it was, but the critical need is in the
north, and that is the significance of the new routes that are
available. There is food in the south, and I think we will not
see the difficulty there.
Senator Lugar. Now, how have all these NGO's survived
during this most recent period, or are they coming back in? I
mean, are they now kind of liberated and can do their thing, or
do they have to come in?
Senator Wellstone. Some of them are smiling. They are going
to tell you, too.
Mr. McConnell. Better the people who do the heavy lifting
tell you, sir, but the expatriates have been out for sometime.
They are jumping at the bit to get back in, and I think you
will hear about that in the next panel.
Senator Lugar. I will not jump ahead in the story. I
appreciate your testimony. Thank you.
Senator Wellstone. I do, too. Thank you, and tell
Administrator Natsios we appreciate his cooperation and effort
to be with us, but I think, Mr. McConnell, we heard a lot from
you. Thank you so much.
Let me call now George Devendorf. We are going to start
with George out of deference, so he does not fall asleep, and
Mark Bartolini, and Joel Charny.
We will start with George Devendorf, who, as I said, just
got back last night from the region. George.
STATEMENT OF GEORGE DEVENDORF, DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY
OPERATIONS, MERCY CORPS, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Devendorf. Senator, thank you very much. Thank you in
particular for your leadership over these several months on
this very important issue.
As the Senator mentioned, I just returned last night from
about 10 days in the region. I was visiting with our staff and
our operations in Pakistan, both in Islamabad and in Quetta, in
Beluchistan, where I had the opportunity to visit a number of
the new refugee camps which have been established over the last
couple of weeks near the border crossing between, the Chaman
border crossing heading up into Kandahar, and as you might
imagine, and as you have heard from us and others for some time
now, the sites which have been identified for these new refugee
camps are inhospitable, to say the least. Nonetheless, you and
agencies and NGO's are doing the best they can, along with
Pakistani authorities, to provide at least the minimum
requirements for the families which have come across.
I would point out these families have come, we have found,
from all over Afghanistan, not just from the southern regions,
but from Herat, from Mazar, even from areas around Takar, and
so they really represent a very wide variety of ethnic groups
and geographic areas and so forth. What they have in common,
clearly, is they have just about nothing left, and that is why
they have come across.
So that said, I know for weeks now and for several months,
in fact, Mercy Corps and her colleague agencies have been
trying as much as possible to highlight the need for a
significant amount of resources to be made available to help
respond to what are extremely broad and severe humanitarian
needs inside Afghanistan today, without at all trying to
diminish the validity of that argument.
What Mercy Corps would like to do, and what we tried to do
in the prepared statement for today, is to try to look ahead a
bit. We do not think it is too early, particularly with the
events of the past week and the dramatic changes in the
geography of the humanitarian effort inside Afghanistan, to
really start thinking about what we can do now, and how we can
perform now in such a way that it will more easily and more
coherently lead to the revitalization of Afghan society, and
what I would like to highlight in particular is the role that
the market can play in that revitalization.
I have attached to our statement for today a photograph,
again a relatively simple example, but nonetheless a photograph
which was taken by our staff members on Monday in Taloqan. This
is 2 days after the Norther Alliance forces had reentered that
city.
That city is traditionally the hub of economic activity in
that sort of north central region between Mazar and the far
east end of the north of Afghanistan, and what it shows quite
simply is a market vendor doing his work, and what we found is
that even during the heaviest periods of fighting during the
last 2 months, by and large markets have continued to operate.
Beyond that, the halala system of informal cash transfers, the
system inside of Afghanistan that enables economic
opportunities and activities to go on is once again working in
many areas.
What we would propose is that whenever possible, let us
look toward revitalizing economic opportunities and economic
activity inside the country as a primary way to help meet the
supply needs. Whether it be food, rebuilding necessary--I
should say, materials necessary for rebuilding, what-have-you,
and there are things we can do to support that, then I would
suggest we focus on that as much as possible.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Devendorf follows:]
Prepared Statement of George Devendorf, Director of Emergency
Operations, Mercy Corps
priorities for humanitarian assistance in afghanistan
Introduction
The stunning pace of the Taliban's withdrawal from many areas of
Afghanistan over the past several days has lent considerable hope to
the ongoing emergency humanitarian effort in the region. With the rapid
advance of opposition forces have come a number of positive
developments that seemed quite unlikely only a few days ago. Several
new access routes have opened up, international relief staff have been
reintroduced in some areas, and limited numbers of internally displaced
families are now beginning to return to their homes areas. This said,
numerous challenges remain--challenges that will severely test the
international community's ability both to meet critical, live-saving
needs during the winter, and to lay the foundation for the longer-term
rehabilitation of Afghanistan, a process that will ultimately come to
define the success or failure of the international community's effort
in Afghanistan. In this respect, the most difficult tasks still lay
before us.
Mercy Corps, a non-governmental humanitarian organization, has been
working in and around Afghanistan since 1986. In the coming months, we
recommend that the following key considerations be taken into account
as the US Government follows through with, and expands upon, it's
significant commitment to assist the people of Afghanistan.
key considerations for the future of humanitarian assistance in the
region
1. Demonstrate A Long Term Commitment to Afghanistan
There is today inside Afghanistan an overwhelming sentiment among
people of all ethnic groups that, after the Soviet occupation ended,
the United States abandoned Afghanistan. Not surprisingly, many Afghans
are uncertain about this government's motivations and wonder what sort
of commitment the United States will make to Afghanistan once Taliban
forces have been defeated. The US Government has already made generous
contributions to assist the people of Afghanistan--from the more than
$178 million that was dedicated to Afghan relief efforts during the
last fiscal year, to the $320 million in additional aid that this
government announced during October. In order to safeguard these
investments, and to successfully address the poverty and oppression
that have directly fueled instability in Afghanistan in recent years,
the United States and other donor governments should take this
opportunity to make a firm, long-term commitment to help the people of
Afghanistan. This commitment should be guided and informed by the
considerations outlined below.
2. Help Afghans to Help Themselves
Humanitarian efforts, including those meant to provide urgently
needed relief assistance, should be firmly based upon strategies that
help Afghan families and communities to restore their productive
capacities as quickly as possible--in short, to help Afghans help
themselves. Massive amounts of both food and non-food aid are currently
being assembled in the region. Given the scale and severity of relief
needs inside Afghanistan, these commodities represent a necessary
response that will form the backbone of the international community's
emergency assistance effort over the coming months. However, prolonged
distributions of ``free'' food and non-food aid is clearly not in the
best interests of the Afghan people. ``Free'' aid is, in fact, rarely
free. Over time, it promotes apathy and a feeling of helplessness that
directly undermines the sense of self-reliance and initiative that
affected communities have traditionally relied upon. As a result, Mercy
Corps strongly believes that free distributions of aid should be
limited to immediate, life-saving efforts and that, as quickly as
possible, humanitarian assistance should seek to promote the capacities
of Afghans to reinvigorate their own society and economy. Towards this
end, we would recommend particular attention be paid to helping Afghans
revitalize both economic markets and individual livelihoods.
3. Restore Livelihoods and Revitalize Markets
In a small but significant way, the photograph attached to copies
of this testimony serves to underscore the resilience of Afghan
markets. Taken two days after the city of Taloqan fell to Northern
Alliance forces, it depicts a small-scale vendor offering vegetables
for sale on the streets of the city. Throughout Afghanistan, markets
have continued to operate during the on-going conflict. Prices for most
staple foods have increased, but not dramatically, thus indicating that
economic supply lines have remained viable in many communities. In
addition, the informal method of moving money into and around the
country--the Hawala system--is once again working in several areas.
These developments illustrate a simple fact--if the international
community can help Afghan families to rebuild their asset bases and
thus restore their purchasing power, the marketplace can and will
provide much of what is needed in the way of food, non-food items, and
reconstruction materials, etc. Mercy Corps therefore recommends that
humanitarian efforts focus on interventions such as cash for work,
access to credit, and infrastructure repair projects that target vital
economical sectors, including transportation, agriculture, and
livestock, etc. By re-injecting cash into Afghan society through these
means, aid agencies can help families and communities to more quickly
regain self-sufficiency, and thus minimize their dependence on
international aid in the years ahead.
4. Ensure Security for Humanitarian Operations
Recent incidences of looting in Mazar and Kabul, among other
places, underscore the need to ensure the safety of humanitarian
workers, facilities and operations. The United Nations and major donor
governments should continue to impress upon both Taliban and opposition
forces that they are directly responsible for the safety of relief
workers operating in areas under their control. Towards this end, UN-
sanctioned international military forces should be deployed as soon as
possible to help ensure law and order until such time as a post-Taliban
governmental structure is firmly established.
5. Don't Forget the Refugee Populations
Even under the most optimistic scenarios, it will be months if not
years before many of the nearly 4 million Afghan refugees in the region
feel that it is safe to return to their homes inside Afghanistan. The
United States and other major donor governments should ensure that
sufficient resources are made available to assist these groups and that
governments within the region do not adopt policies that force or
encourage refugees to return home before it is clearly safe for them to
do so.
Mercy Corps exists to alleviate suffering, poverty and oppression
by helping people build secure, productive and just communities. Mercy
Corps has 15 years of experience in Afghanistan/Pakistan. This year
Mercy Corps has assisted more than 500,000 people with drought relief
and rehabilitation services, food aid, agricultural support programs,
veterinary care for livestock, engineering and drilling wells, health,
and sanitation projects. Since 1986, the agency has provided more than
$20 million in assistance to Afghanistan.
Senator Wellstone. That is very helpful.
Mr. Charny.
STATEMENT OF JOEL CHARNY, VICE PRESIDENT FOR POLICY, REFUGEES
INTERNATIONAL, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Charny. Thank you. I would like to echo the comments of
appreciation for the work of this committee and the way you
have been really providing leadership on the necessity of
providing humanitarian assistance in Afghanistan. I really do
honestly believe, as an American citizen, that generosity of
the U.S. in this crisis is exceptional. In a way, it has been
ironically underplayed by the administration. To make a large
commitment, as we did at the outset of this crisis, has been
critical, and I think if we can stay the course and stay for
the reconstruction phase, that will be extremely significant.
Many of the points that were made in my written testimony
have already been discussed in some detail, so I will just
highlight a few issues. One, on security, we have not really
talked about the mechanics of how security should be provided
at this stage. In other words, the issue is law and order, and
Mazar-i-Sharif right now, the security situation is still very
uncertain, and that begs the question of what options do we
have to achieve security immediately so that the opening of the
bridge between Uzbekistan and Afghanistan will really make a
difference, so that whole northern tier can be reached.
It seems to us at Refugees International you have on the
one hand the Northern Alliance perhaps could assure security.
That seems to be rather dubious, given what has happened over
the last few days, and the fact that they still have an ongoing
conflict with the Taliban in the southern part of the country.
The second option is providing security under basically the
mandate or rubric of the coalition itself, and I read today in
one communication that there is an idea being floated that
maybe the French and the Jordanians, I assume with a coalition
mandate, would go into Mazar and try to assure law and order in
the short term.
The third option, which is the one that I think we would
prefer, is to have a U.N.-mandated force, not a U.N. force, but
one, as Ambassador Holbrooke, who is a member of our board of
directors, as he argued yesterday in the Washington Post, the
Security Council can mandate a force, a coalition of the
willing, as it has been called, and I think the advantage is
that if the Security Council does it, it gives a more
international character to the operation, rather than relying
on something that might be interpreted as unilateral.
The second point I want to make is to stress the importance
of the commitment to reconstruction, and the fact that
additional funding will be required beyond the $320-million
commitment. Refugees International is an advocacy organization.
We are not an operational NGO, but I hope our colleagues who
are operational can look forward to receiving funding for the
reconstruction effort that will be badly needed.
Even with the gains on the ground, however, I do want to
point out that this central highland area, the Ghor province in
particular, the Hazarajat region, is still very vulnerable
because of the onset of winter, and it still may be necessary
to do airlifts into this region.
WFP is said to be organizing or preparing for these
airlifts, and I just want to signal that it is really critical
that we get an operational plan from WFP as soon as possible.
In other words, do they really have the capacity to get food
into this region in time. We do not want to rely on ground
transport and hope for airlift plans only to find in December,
well, sorry, we are not ready and it cannot happen. I think we
need to get on top of this situation as soon as possible.
The fourth point I want to make is to point out--I know you
are all sympathetic on this issue, but I have to point out the
incredible irony of Taliban fighters crossing into Pakistan
unimpeded, when refugees are blocked at the border.
Unfortunately, this is typical in crises in the midst of
conflict, but nonetheless, it is a stark irony that Taliban
fighters with their guns can cross into Pakistan, but refugees
with legitimate reason to cross cannot.
Finally, we are concerned that----
Senator Wellstone. Excuse me. Maybe you could tell me, why
is this the case? It is counterintuitive when I first hear it.
The Taliban cross with weapons, refugees cannot.
Mr. Charny. Well, I hope my colleagues agree, but I mean,
basically there is a long history of partnership and
collaboration along the border region between the Taliban and
local commanders and local government officials on the
Pakistani side, and when I was at the border crossing just a
couple of weeks ago I was told unequivocally by U.N. workers,
Bangladeshi U.N. workers who had been based in Kandahar, the
Taliban were going back and forth, no problem, even at the end
of October.
Now that the force is disintegrating and the Taliban may
need shelter, they are going to get that shelter from
commanders on the other side that they have been collaborating
with. That is the real life--I mean, that is the truth of what
is happening in the border area, and we know that the crossing
of refugees and the fear of large numbers was something that
Pakistan was worried about from a political standpoint, that
Musharraf did not want to jeopardize his standing with the
Pakistani people, but it does seem ironic from a refugee rights
standpoint that refugees cannot cross.
Finally, we are concerned about the situation for
internally displaced people inside Afghanistan due to lack of
access. Now that access is improving, it is critical that there
be some central mechanism to get an overview of the situation
for internal displacement. UNHCR has capacity that has been
underutilized, because the refugee crisis that was predicted
has not in fact taken place. It may be possible for UNHCR to
provide leadership and even respond to the situation of
internal displacement inside Afghanistan in cooperation with
NGO's that they might wish to partner with.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Charny follows:]
Prepared Statement of Joel R. Charny, Vice President for Policy,
Refugees International
I want to thank Senator Wellstone and Senator Boxer for organizing
this hearing on the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan and for
inviting me to testify on behalf of Refugees International. I was
recently in Pakistan, where I had the opportunity to monitor the
situation in Afghanistan as viewed by the aid agencies based in
Islamabad and to travel to the Afghan border at the Chaman border
crossing with Pakistan. RI, which has been covering the humanitarian
crisis in Central Asia for the past year, presently has an advocate in
Peshawar, the other main border crossing point; he is monitoring the
impact of current events on the movement of people in the eastern part
of Afghanistan. My testimony will draw both on our experience on the
ground and on RI's on-going analysis of the overall humanitarian
situation in this highly complex emergency.
The capture of the northern half of Afghanistan is a military
victory for the anti-Taliban forces that should translate into a much-
needed humanitarian victory for the United States and others trying to
fight famine and give hope to the Afghan people. Specific, immediate
actions are required, however, to translate the recent military
successes into humanitarian action that delivers assistance to Afghans
in a timely and effective manner.
Aid agencies estimate that as many as 7.5 million Afghans will need
food and other assistance this winter. Two decades of civil war, three
years of drought and five years of repressive Taliban rule have made
Afghanistan one of the world's most acute humanitarian disaster zones.
Between four and five million people had fled the country as refugees
or been displaced within Afghanistan before Sept. 11, and six weeks of
bombing have increased the displacement.
Approximately 75% of the Afghan people afflicted by famine live in
the northern half of the country, the area liberated by the Northern
Alliance. Winter is closing in on much of this area, so there is
literally a race against time and snow to get aid to vulnerable
populations in the next few days and weeks.
Three steps must be taken now to head off a humanitarian disaster
in northern Afghanistan.
First, Afghanistan's northern neighbors--Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan
and Tajikistan--must move quickly to enable an increased flow of aid
across their borders. These three former Soviet states tried to stop
traffic to and from Afghanistan prior to September 11. After the
attacks against the U.S. they started to allow aid to flow into
Afghanistan, but the relief is not yet moving quickly enough. It is
absolutely crucial that Uzbekistan open the Friendship Bridge that
crosses the Amu Darya River between Uzbekistan and Afghanistan. The
U.S. has been trying to secure access to the bridge for weeks. Now that
the Taliban has been driven out of Mazar-i-Sharif, 40 miles south of
the bridge, Uzbekistan has no excuse to keep the bridge closed. Andrew
Natsios, the head of the U.S. Agency for International Development, has
just completed talks with Uzbek government in Tashkent about increasing
the flow of aid, and RI hopes that his efforts will lead to a speedy
opening of the Friendship Bridge.
If this bridge is open, the World Food Program says that it should
be able to move at least 16,000 metric tons of food a month across the
river--almost one-third of the food the WFP needs to move into
Afghanistan each month--and much of this would reach Afghanistan's
hungriest people. In contrast, with the bridge closed, food and other
badly needed supplies have to be loaded onto barges on the Uzbek side
of the border and then off-loaded onto trucks on the Afghan side.
Further, due to the three-year drought, the Amu Darya River is so
shallow that barges are limited to transporting small quantities of
cargo in a single crossing. The sheer inefficiency of this operation
would greatly reduce the amount of supplies that the World Food Program
and other agencies would be able to ship into the famine-stricken
northern central part of the Afghanistan.
Second, the security situation must improve. The withdrawal of the
Taliban has so far not resulted in the establishment of a secure
environment for the humanitarian relief effort, especially in Mazar-i-
Sharif. Since its capture one week ago, conflict has continued in the
city. UNICEF has reported that one of its drivers was killed in Mazar
and WFP reports that 89 tons of oil, sugar and high energy biscuits
were stolen from a warehouse there over this past weekend. Overall WFP
reports that their food shipments across the border have slowed to a
trickle in the past three days, underscoring the urgency of the need to
establish law and order.
The situation in Kabul appears to be more stable and Medicins sans
Frontieres/Doctors without Borders announced two days ago that a four-
person international medical team has returned to the capital for the
first time since September 11. The International Committee of the Red
Cross has also re-established its international presence in Kabul.
In the long, violent history of Afghanistan, murder and banditry
often follow liberation. U.S. advisers working with Northern Alliance
troops must discourage such lawlessness in the strongest possible
terms. The question remains, however, whether the Northern Alliance has
the capacity to provide security and establish law and order,
especially given the need to continue to pursue remaining Taliban
forces.
The options available to the international community to provide the
security required to increase the strength and effectiveness of the
humanitarian aid effort are limited. With time of the essence, RI
believes that the best option is for the United Nations Security
Council to authorize the deployment of police units and soldiers from
Islamic nations that have expressed a willingness to serve in a
peacekeeping capacity in Afghanistan. Countries believed to be
interested include Turkey, Bangladesh, and Indonesia. Their duties
should be focused primarily on establishing law and order in the
capital and in provincial towns, such as Mazar-i-Sharif and Herat, that
can serve as hubs for the aid effort. RI would like to stress that the
world continually pays the price for the refusal of the UN and its
major donors to establish a standing, well-trained police force that
could move quickly to establish rule of law. Creating such a force
should be a longterm goal. Now, the UN should identify a multinational
force to establish secure and stable conditions so that aid agencies
can do their work.
Third, the U.S. must accelerate the disbursal of aid funds and
increase the amount of money it has set aside to support relief
organizations working in Afghanistan. President Bush has pledged $320
million for humanitarian aid to Afghanistan. Most of that money will go
for the purchase of food, but about 10% is slated to support the work
of relief agencies in Afghanistan. Until recently that money flowed
slowly to the agencies, hampering their efforts to prepare for just the
type of humanitarian opportunities that have resulted from continuing
military victories. The disbursements began to accelerate last week
after complaints from Senators Wellstone and Boxer, strong proponents
of aid to Afghanistan. With more opportunities to deliver food,
shelter, medical care and, eventually, educational services, the
government should consider increasing funds for relief organizations.
Even in the midst of this crisis, funds devoted to agricultural
rehabilitation can start the process of achieving food security for
many more Afghans. Educating Afghan girls and women, who were largely
denied schooling by the Taliban, is essential if they are to play a
role in the reconstruction of their country.
Prior to the recent military advances by the Northern Alliance, two
locations in northern Afghanistan were of special concern. In Bamyan,
Ghor, and eastern Badghis provinces snowfall and sporadic conflict will
cut off 500,000 people by the end of November. It is now too late to
reach many of the affected communities by organizing overland
distribution of emergency food. In Jawzjan, Sar-e Pul, Balkh, and
southern Samangan in the north central portion of the country the
battle for the pivotal town of Mazar-i-Sharif limited humanitarian
access throughout the region. The UN Office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) estimated that there were some 500,000
internally displaced people in this region alone, many facing another
winter without proper shelter.
If security can be rapidly established in the area around Mazar-i-
Sharif the aid effort should be able to reach the vulnerable and the
displaced in the north central region of the country. For the
vulnerable people of the central highlands, however, winter weather is
the main obstacle to humanitarian access and air transport is the only
option to provide the estimated 20,000 metric tons of wheat required
once overland shipment becomes impossible. The UN World Food Program
(WFP) is organizing the logistics for air lifts into this region and is
attempting to identify NGOs with provincial networks that might be able
to assure adequate preparation of the landing sites and distribution to
vulnerable people. The United States should press WFP to present its
exact implementation plan to ensure that it is credible and will go
forward on schedule. If WFP is not able to present a credible plan to
get assistance into the central highlands, then other alternatives for
air lifts may need to be considered, including the use of coalition or
other military aircraft in support of a WFP-managed operation.
The focus on the wheat pipeline and the delivery of this staple
inside Afghanistan, while fully justified, should not detract from the
importance of other urgently needed items. Supplementary foods such as
lentils, beans, oil, and sugar are also essential. Nonfood items such
as blankets and shelter materials are needed to help vulnerable Afghans
survive the bitter winter. With Afghan women experiencing the highest
rate of maternal mortality in the world (860 per 100,000 live births,
compared to 12 in the United States), RI wishes to highlight the
availability of low-cost clean delivery kits, consisting of a plastic
sheet, soap, and a new razor blade to cut the umbilical cord. These
kits, available from the United Nations Population Fund, should be
included in aid distributions to help reduce the terrible rate of
maternal mortality in the near-total absence of a system of basic
health care in rural Afghanistan.
The impact of the developments of the past week on the movements of
displaced people and refugees is difficult to assess. The borders of
neighboring countries continue to be closed to Afghans seeking
protection and asylum. Since the outset of this most recent crisis, RI
has continuously called for these borders to be opened, to no avail.
Afghanistan's border with Pakistan is lengthy and porous and thus at
least 135,000 Afghans have been able to cross the frontier illegally.
These refugees, however, have no official status and very few of them
can be reached by UNHCR and non-governmental organizations. Many are
living with families in urban areas in Peshawar or Quetta, while others
have managed to sneak into existing refugee camps where they scramble
to obtain access to food and shelter. The apparent compromise achieved
in late October between the High Commissioner and the Government of
Pakistan to allow vulnerable people into the country on a temporary
basis has so far not resulted in substantial numbers of Afghans being
able to access protection and sustenance legally.
Reports today indicate that Taliban fighters have been crossing
into Pakistan in large numbers with their arms. Thus, the Pakistani
border is open to the Taliban but not open to legitimate refugees. This
stark irony is typical of crises of displacement in the midst of
conflict and underscores the political underpinnings of Pakistan's
decision to keep the border closed.
Interviews in the past several days with Afghans who recently
crossed into Peshawar in Pakistan indicate that they feel abandoned in
Pakistan but are uncertain if and when security will permit their
return. A number told RI that they left after their homes or fields
were bombed; others left when they lost their jobs or means of
livelihood. They gave the impression that incentives in the form of
economic support or reconstruction assistance will be required for them
to opt to return.
Since the start of the bombing campaign new displacement has
primarily taken the form of people fleeing cities and towns, where the
bombing had been most intense until the end of October, to the
countryside, either to live with relatives or to find temporary shelter
in their village of origin or other safe location. With almost all
urban areas in Afghanistan now in the hands of the Northern Alliance,
we assume that most of these people will now opt to return to their
homes, if security can be assured. Along the border with Pakistan RI
staff report that there are no longer large concentrations of displaced
people. They may already have begun to return to their homes in the
light of the changing military situation.
RI would like to underscore that it has been practically impossible
to obtain an accurate and comprehensive picture of the situation for
internally displaced people inside Afghanistan due to the lack of
access. Now that parts of the country may become more secure, a
strategy for identifying the location of the newly displaced and the
scope of their needs is urgently required, followed by a rapid targeted
response. To address the potential gap in providing this assistance, RI
recommends that UNHCR, in cooperation with experience NGOs, should play
the leading role in responding to their needs.
Hunger, poverty and lawlessness afflict Afghanistan, a country
where hundreds of thousands of people could die of starvation and
exposure this winter. The significant advances in the coalition
military effort over the past week, while promising from a humanitarian
perspective, do not in and of themselves create the security required
to mount the effort needed to save lives. Urgent action is needed more
than ever to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe for the Afghan people,
who after two decades of suffering deserve nothing less than security
and the means to survive.
Senator Wellstone. Mr. Bartolini.
STATEMENT OF MARK BARTOLINI, VICE PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENT
RELATIONS, INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Bartolini. Thank you, Senators, for inviting me to
present the International Rescue Committee's view on the crisis
in Afghanistan. I particularly want to thank you, Senator
Wellstone, for your really exceptional leadership on this
issue.
A week ago, the International Rescue Committee--and Senator
Lugar, you asked this question about what the NGO's were doing.
We have been active in the region for 21 years. We have been in
Afghanistan right after the Soviets left for about 12 years. We
have about 1,500 staff that we work with through our local
partners, and they really have been doing heroic efforts over
the last 2 months. We do not have any expat staff in yet, but
we probably will in the next few days. I know Mercy Corps and a
few other organizations are going to send their expat staff
back in.
A week ago we were working in all-Taliban-controlled areas
of Afghanistan. We were in the north, the southwest, and the
east. Today, we are working in no Taliban-held areas of
Afghanistan. We are working in some areas in the east where it
is hard to tell who is in control. Paktia and Lowgar are two
regions which are too difficult right now to tell who is in
control.
I want to touch on five areas that I think are critical,
and one I hope the other panelists have touched on is access
and security. While there certainly seems to be a very
favorable turn in the situation, we are waiting for the
situation to resolve itself. I spoke to our staff this morning
up in Mazar-i-Sharif. It is very uncertain. There is still
fighting going on.
We have been asked by the Northern Alliance commanders in
the region to continue to suspend our operations until
Saturday, while they set up a garrison, and they will put
military forces in the region to try to create some sort of law
and order, but it is still anybody's guess whether or not--the
Northern Alliance obviously have some political imperatives to
demonstrate that they can create a situation for humanitarian
assistance to proceed and for law and order, but having been in
these situations in the past, it is possible we will face
harassment, bribes, many of the things we were facing under the
Taliban, and for these reasons I would echo Joel Charny's call
for some sort of multinational force to go into Afghanistan to
assure that humanitarian assistance can continue.
Also, I think another critical dimension of this is the
type of displacement that could occur, and this was a big fear
of many Afghans. There was a fear of bombing, which made many
flee, but there was also a fear of what would happen if the
Northern Alliance moved back in. They have very stark memories
of the early nineties during the civil war.
And through our work, especially in Eastern Congo, where we
have done dramatic studies on the link between displacement and
mortality, if we see this population in Afghanistan, which is
so decimated, displaced in large numbers, we will see
significant mortality, and I do not think we are out of the
woods on the question yet, so we really think security is the
key to this situation now.
Let me turn to the political equation, which is, of course,
directly linked to this, and there is concern that events of
the last week have outstripped the political process in terms
of establishing a viable unity government, and we cannot stress
too much the importance, we think, of moving forward on some
sort of framework government that we can put in place as soon
as possible to help stabilize the situation.
Third, I want to touch on something Senator Wellstone
raised earlier, and that is resources. The U.N. appeal has been
oversubscribed for the crisis in Afghanistan in terms of
pledges, but there can be a difference between pledges and the
actual contributions that arrive in cash, and so we cannot
stress enough the importance of governments coming forward with
their pledges and fulfilling them.
Also, there is still moneys out of the $320 million
supplemental that need to go through the appropriations
process, and we would urge that that is streamlined as much as
possible, because while there are, I think, sufficient
resources for the short term, I think within a few months we
are going to be looking at--out of this $320 million we are
going to need new resources to continue our work.
Fourth, I would like to touch on the issue of refugees, and
there are some 4 million refugees scattered between Iran and
Pakistan, and clearly there is an opportunity here to create an
Afghanistan that these people can return to, and we all saw the
dramatic repatriation in Kosovo, some 800,000 people. I do not
think we are going to see the speed, because of the conditions
inside of Afghanistan, that we saw in Kosovo, but certainly we
can work quickly to try to effect that repatriation which will
not only give these people who are living in really deplorable
conditions, most of them, a new lease on life, but it will
also, I think, go far to stabilize the region.
The other issue we have since this crisis began, we
continue to call for open borders. We think that is crucial. It
is mandated under the refugee convention and under
international humanitarian law, but having said that, we also
want to point out the danger, and I think it was--I am not sure
if it was George or Joel who touched on this, but the danger of
Taliban and their fighters crossing into Pakistan. We have been
seeing that over the last few days.
In these tribal areas there are Pashtu, and they are going
to be very sympathetic to the population, and they could be an
extremely destabilizing factor in Pakistan, and so while we
call for open borders, we also recognize--and this is very
difficult to do. There are some 2,000 kilometers of border that
Pakistan has with Afghanistan, but some sort of screening
mechanism.
The camps that have been set up inside Pakistan in the
northwest province frontier, frontier province, are very close
to the border, within 10 kilometers. This really provides an
ideal staging area for troops. It is one of the reasons that we
have been opposed to transfer of refugees out of some camps
into these newer camps, aside from the fact that they are also
very difficult to service.
Finally, let me touch on the long-term response. The
withdrawal of the United States development assistance in the
early 1990's was a contributing factor in the deteriorating
conditions that led to the rise of the Taliban. To ensure that
the massive efforts we currently have underway can be
sustained, Congress will need to appropriate something on the
scale that you are talking about, Senator, a dramatic economic
package for the region. I think that is a really critical
priority.
Rehabilitation needs include a health care system, the
agricultural system, and we are not talking in some cases
massive projects. Even on a very local level, a simple
irrigation system at relatively minor cost, that could make a
dramatic difference on the Afghans' ability to feed themselves.
We need to remove land mines. It is the most heavily mined
country in the world. I had a report from our staff last week.
We work in a camp up in the north, in Mazar-i-Sharif, called
the Stoki camp. There is about 15,000 families in that camp.
Six children went out--it has gotten very cold up there--went
out to search for firewood. Three of them were killed when they
stepped on a land mine, and the other three were severely
injured. This is an unbelievably common occurrence in
Afghanistan, so clearly mine clearance is one of the
priorities.
Rehabilitating orchards. The livestock in the famine belt
region in the northwest of the country, the people have sold
virtually everything. They are literally eating grasses and
roots. The livestock in some of these areas has been depleted
up to 80 percent, and the livestock is critical to the economy
of the region for farming, for their very livelihood. Seeds are
going to be another critical need.
We did get some seeds up into the Mazar-i-Sharif area about
2 weeks ago. There was some rainfall, and so that was
encouraging, but people have eaten their seeds. There is less
than 10 percent of the viable seed left in Afghanistan. They
are going to need massive seed programs come spring for
planting.
Finally, after 22 years of war, as Senator Wellstone said,
the Afghans deserve to live in an Afghanistan where they can
feed themselves--we need to help them to do that--to live in
safety, to educate their children, and to participate in
society, no matter their gender, their ethnicity, or their
religion.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bartolini follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mark Bartolini, Vice President, Government
Relations, International Rescue Committee
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting
me to present the International Rescue Committee's (IRC) views on the
humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan.
Mr. Chairman, the IRC would like to express its deepest sympathies
to the victims and their families of the 11 September attacks. These
attacks, and the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan which predated 11
September, are now inexorably linked. There is a clear imperative to
prevent future attacks against civilians and to bring the perpetrators
to justice.
The methods the United States employs to meet these objectives
defines us as a people. The President has stated that the Afghan people
are not our enemy. The Administration and Congress have appropriated
$320 million dollars to respond to immediate humanitarian needs in the
region. And the President has stressed that the United States will
assist Afghanistan over the long-term, helping the country rebuild
after 22 years of war. In the final analysis, it will be the United
States' adherence to these promises, and not any one action, that will
determine to what extent Americans can expect to win the ``hearts and
minds'' of the people of the region, and the extent to which, in this
time of great national trial, we live up to our own highest ideals.
In my testimony today, I will provide a brief overview of the
humanitarian situation and touch on five issues that are key to
ensuring that the needs of the Afghan people are met.
overview
The IRC implements programs in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. In
concert with local partner agencies inside Afghanistan, the IRC employs
over 1,500 Afghans who are heroically endeavoring to assist 750,000
vulnerable individuals, 75-80% of whom are women and children. We are
in contact with our staff on a daily basis from our office in Peshawar,
Pakistan. In Afghanistan we are working in the North, Southwest and
East, in a total of eight provinces, including the cities of Mazar-i-
Sharif, Herat, Kabul and Jalalabad. We are distributing food, shelter
materials, clothing, medical supplies as well as seeds, firewood,
stoves and hygiene kits. Other sectors in which we work include health
care, water and sanitation, education, agriculture and infrastructure
rehabilitation.
Afghanistan suffers from one of the lowest rated indices for the
human condition in the world. Prior to 11 September the World Food
Program had identified some 5.5 million people in need of food aid. The
infant mortality rate at 18% is the highest in the world. A quarter of
all children die before they reach their fifth birthday. 1,700 mothers
out of every 100,000 die in childbirth, life expectancy is 46. And
approximately 90% of girls and 60% of boys that are of school age are
affected by illiteracy. Many civilians, especially women, suffer from
persecution and other violations of their human rights.
The country has suffered from 22 years of war and 3 years of a
severe drought. Fighting and drought has internally displaced over
900,000 people, most having sold everything they owned before taking
flight. Some have even sold their children seeing this as the only way
for their children to survive. The drought has seriously degraded the
condition of millions of civilians caught in this 22-year cycle of
violence. Nutritional surveys reveal an increase in malnourishment with
some areas approaching famine levels.
In parts of the ``famine belt'' 80% of herds of sheep and goats
have died due to the drought. Farmers have been forced to sell or eat
their seed for food. Crops have failed and not produced seeds. Only 10%
of Afghanistan's seed needs are currently viable. Children can be seen
pulling grasses and roots for food, at great personal risk as the
country is littered with the largest concentration of landmines in the
world. Just last week three children were killed and three injured by a
land mine explosion as they searched for firewood outside of the Sakhi
refugee camp near Mazar-i-Sharif.
The situation deteriorated even further after 11 September. In fear
of coalition bombing and a power vacuum following a fall of the
Taliban, Afghans fled the cities of Kandahar, Khowst, Kabul and
Jalalabad. Taliban and lawless elements raided aid warehouses, stole
vehicles, blocked convoys, demanded bribes and harassed staff. Given
the displacement and disruption in food supplies, the World Food
Program is now estimating some 7.5 million Afghans who are in need of
food, clean water and shelter this winter.
Recent surveys inside Afghanistan revealed famine and prefamine
conditions in several areas of the country. And some refugees entering
Pakistan have exhibited signs of severe malnutrition. Under such
conditions people, especially children, succumb more readily to easily
treatable diseases such as respiratory infections, vitamin A
deficiency, measles and diarrhea. The harsh conditions of winter also
will fall hardest on these vulnerable individuals.
Despite all these obstacles humanitarian agencies continue to work.
In the last two weeks the level of aid reaching the most vulnerable
populations was increasing. The World Food Program has set a target of
52,000 metric tons a month. Already in the first two weeks of November
they have moved in 27,000 metric tons. In one area most in need, the
Hazarajat, WFP has moved in 13,000 metric tons and the requirement for
the entire winter is approximately 30,000 metric tons. The secondary
distribution of this food to the beneficiaries will be done by NGOs
like IRC still operating in Afghanistan. Supplementing these deliveries
are NGOs who are contracting with local traders to bring food from
neighboring countries into designated areas. Several American NGOs are
just now ramping up their operations after having received USG funding.
Will it be enough? That is a very difficult question to answer, and is
dependent on a number of variables. In all likelihood we will avert an
escalating humanitarian crisis in some, hopefully most, regions of the
country. But there still exists the very real possibility of changing
conditions that will make access to some areas difficult if not
impossible.
access and security
The dramatic fall of Taliban-held areas over the past several days
presents both opportunities and dangers. Our staff in Mazar-i-Sharif
reported on Monday a chaotic scene with bodies in the street, revenge
killings, and looting of aid agencies. Many IDPs have expressed fear
that the country could return to the chaos and brutality that marked
the civil war years of the early 90s.
Over the coming weeks the security situation will determine the
success or failure of aid operations. Some agencies have already begun
to return expatriate staff to Afghanistan. They are to some extent the
``canaries in the mineshaft.'' The extent to which they can carry out
their programs unhindered and in safety will determine how many more
agencies are able to return staff and to what degree operations can
continue to be expanded.
If the security situation allows, there are opportunities to do
significant airlifts into the most vulnerable regions, including the
Hazarajat and Mazar-i-Sharif. Convoys from the Central Asian Republics
can better access vulnerable areas of western Afghanistan. Efforts
should be redoubled to urge the Uzbek government to open the Friendship
Bridge at Termez, a vital link to northwestern Afghanistan. One
estimate is that up to 25,000 metric tons a month can cross that
bridge, half of Afghanistan's monthly requirement. And as that bridge
provides the most ready access to the north, where the need is
greatest, its opening would be a significant boost to aid efforts.
With most of the significant vulnerable populations in the
southwest and northwest falling out of Taliban hands, there is an
opportunity to rapidly increase the level of aid reaching the most
vulnerable populations. Steps should rapidly be taken to deploy a
multilateral security force sanctioned by the United Nations Security
Council to provide some level of security to territory now held by the
Northern Alliance. Such a force could provide protection against
ethnicity-based retribution, support a transitional government and
protect against lawlessness and banditry that could potentially cripple
aid efforts.
There is a danger that further displacement could occur if the
security situation is not stabilized. In a population as stressed as
that now found in much of Afghanistan, displacement will almost
certainly lead to higher mortality rates. Epidemiological studies the
IRC has conducted in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo expose a
clear link between displacement and increased mortality. This has led
us to prioritize our efforts to try and sustain people in their homes.
And with the threat of bombing now over, this strategy becomes all the
more imperative.
The severity of winter will also play a significant part in the
humanitarian equation. It will determine access to many higher
elevation areas and it will pose the additional requirements of
providing shelter supplies and clothing to keep people alive. In the
north, we are trying to provide IDPs with a three months supply of food
so that they can return to their villages rather than try and survive
in a rudimentary shelter or tent.
resources
The United States government, in combination with other donors, has
contributed significant resources to address the short-term needs of
the Afghan people this winter. The imperative now is to ensure that
those resources arrive in a timely manner. Despite a United Nations
appeal that has been oversubscribed, pledges do not always translate
into actual contributions. There were some delays in getting the first
tranche of money from the supplemental out to the agencies that needed
those funds. The remaining supplemental funds for humanitarian response
will need to go through the appropriations process. As with the first
tranche, speed and flexibility of use will be key to ensuring they are
most effectively spent.
the political equation
There is concern that with the dramatic events of this past week,
military action has gotten too far out in front of the political
imperative of constructing a coalition government. The long-term
success of this humanitarian intervention will largely depend on the
viability of whatever coalition government is formed and the ability of
such a government to act independently of neighboring states. The fact
that this process is still in its infancy, augers for the rapid
deployment of a security force to ensure stability while this process
moves forward.
refugees
Pakistan and Afghanistan's other neighbors should respect the right
of first asylum and allow refugees fleeing the conflict to cross their
borders. Refugees should not be forcibly repatriated back to
Afghanistan in violation of the Refugee Convention and international
humanitarian law.
This being said it is important to point out a potential threat to
Pakistan's security with respect to the border areas. The border with
Afghanistan is roughly 2,000 kilometers long. Much of the border areas
are ``Tribal Areas'' where the Government of Pakistan faces legal and
political limitations in exercising its control. These areas are
predominantly Pashtun. It is possible that Taliban and Arabs fleeing
the south could be a destabilizing influence if they infiltrate these
areas in Western Pakistan. For this reason, we see the need for careful
screening at the border to ensure that Afghans entering Pakistan are
bona fide refugees.
The new camps in Pakistan's Northwest Frontier Province are
extremely difficult for aid agencies to work in. They are located in
insecure areas, the water table is in some case over 1,000 feet down,
they are close to the Afghanistan border, susceptible to manipulation
both by tribal leaders and belligerents entering from Afghanistan. The
United States should continue to advocate for their relocation with the
Government of Pakistan and the UNHCR.
long-term response
The withdrawal of United States development assistance in the early
1990s was a contributing factor in the deteriorating conditions that
led to the rise of the Taliban. To ensure that the massive efforts
currently underway are sustainable, Congress will need to appropriate
further funds in order to address longer-term rehabilitation and
reconstruction needs in Afghanistan. Priority rehabilitation needs
include rebuilding the health care system, reconstructing irrigation
systems, removing land mines, rehabilitating orchards, increasing
livestock, providing seeds, and assisting in education.
After 22 years of war, ten of which were fought with United States
support against a brutal Soviet occupation, Afghans deserve to live in
an Afghanistan where they can feed themselves, live in safety, educate
their children, and participate in society to the fullest extent--
regardless of ethnicity, religion or gender.
Mr. Chairman thank you for allowing the IRC to provide its views
today before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
Senator Wellstone. Thank you. Just superb testimony, and I
just want to thank each of you for your wonderful work. People
like you inspire me.
I have three questions. I will go through them quickly,
then we will move to Senator Lugar. I was--I guess, Mark, you
were the one that said this, and it got me thinking.
Originally, and I want to talk, the recent press makes it
appear as if, now that the Northern Alliance has taken back
many key cities in the north, that the security situation is
good and humanitarian relief will flow easily, and I want to
ask you about the security situation on the ground and also
your assessment of the Northern Alliance's ability to establish
security and promote law and order, and then I want to add a
couple of things.
Because of what you said, it sounds like a number of you
have said already that we need some kind of U.N.-mandated
force, not just for the sake of bringing the relief in, the
humanitarian assistance in, but it seems like, Mark, what you
said, I thought, was very interesting, which is that if we have
a repeat of what happened before with the Northern Alliance,
and you have all sorts of people fleeing the Northern Alliance,
they are going to die, they are going to be internal refugees.
So let me get some sense of Northern Alliance has taken
over these key cities, ipso facto, security situation is good,
humanitarian relief will be able to flow easily, or what is
your assessment of where we are at right now?
Mr. Bartolini. I think we are really in a waiting period
right now. Clearly, the Northern Alliance has a political
imperative to demonstrate that they can control the situation,
but it is very unclear whether they will have the command and
control down to their soldiers to actually effect that, and in
Mazar-i-Sharif we saw aid organizations looted by the Northern
Alliance. It was not just the UNICEF convoy. There were other
aid organizations that suffered from this.
In Herat we have not seen that problem. It has been calm
down there, but I think it is really too early, and clearly the
government, the Northern Alliance has moved very quickly into
Kabul. There is no Pashtun representative in this coalition,
and I think that is going to create very serious security
problems unless it is worked out quickly.
Mr. Devendorf. I would just echo that. It would indeed be
truly ironic if, with withdrawal of Taliban from these areas,
the international community was, in fact, not able to expand
humanitarian assistance.
Senator Wellstone. George, to a certain extent--I know this
will sound odd to some people, but to a certain extent you had
some cooperation from some of the Taliban, did you not? I mean,
I am not saying 100 percent, but is that not true, that you had
built up some kind of working relationships with them?
Mr. Devendorf. Sure. Every agency that was continuing to
run operations in Taliban-held territories had at least the
acquiescence of those authorities, if not the outright support.
What the Taliban brought to the areas which they controlled was
law and order. It was a very severe form of that, but of course
that has broken down in recent weeks, further complicating
operations inside, and just the basic assurances that any
agency would want to have before undertaking large-scale
operations, simply to support what Mark was just saying, the
Northern Alliance forces are the de facto responsible entities
in the entire north of the country right now and, as such, I
believe major governments and the U.N. should hold them
responsible for the safety and security of the humanitarian
operations ongoing in their areas.
We have seen a couple of examples where Northern Alliance
forces have offered to safeguard or help provide protection to
some humanitarian compounds. Of course, while that was going
on, there were also lootings taking place of humanitarian
compounds by Northern Alliance forces.
What is clear is that, more so than even any normal
military force, the Northern Alliance is an alliance in name
only, very disparate levels of command and control based upon
the different individual personalities across their ranks, but
again, I think that the same measures should be held with the
Northern Alliance, and that is, are they cooperating and
providing assistance, and if they are not, clearly we would
seek the assistance of the U.N. and the major donor governments
to try to encourage that as much as possible.
Senator Wellstone. And just a quick reaction from any one
of you all, and then I will go to Senator Lugar, and I will put
my last two questions together.
To me, in my mind there are three things to do, and I want
this to be a working committee, and we want to be helpful, and
one of them is working with our Government and from this
committee as well to communicate a very emphatic message to the
Northern Alliance that this is now your responsibility, to make
sure that the relief work goes on and that people are to create
the conditions on the ground for security so that this
humanitarian relief gets to people. That is No. 1.
Second of all, to think about or to propose that we really
do need some kind of, along the lines of what Richard Holbrooke
was talking about, and what you have talked about, not an
actual U.N. force, but a United Nations-sanctioned force,
international force to go in to help create these conditions on
the ground.
And then the third thing, everybody today, everybody has
talked about the importance--and this is the first thing you
started talking about--of reconstruction, that it is not too
early for us to think about how we walk our walk when it comes
to an economic reconstruction package, that that is terribly
important for all sorts of reasons, so we do not repeat what we
did in the past, because the people in Afghanistan deserve a
different life than a living hell, and also, from very real
politic reasons, as you have this huge vacuum, and all sorts of
people are going to be wheeling and dealing in there, and
people can go in any number of different directions, and this
is going to have a lot to do with whether or not we can create
the kind of conditions for stability.
Those are the three things to work on, at least as I see
it.
Mr. Charny. That sounds like a good agenda. What I want to
stress, because as you know, a lot of people in Washington get
awfully nervous when you start talking about U.N.-mandated
forces, I think what is needed immediately is basically police
who can try and ensure stability and law and order in some of
these key towns, so I do not want to raise the specter of
200,000 U.N.-sanctioned troops fanning out all over
Afghanistan, because that is when people understandably begin
to get nervous.
The idea is to either help the Northern Alliance assure
security and stability, or, if they cannot do the job, replace
them at the level of assuring basic law and order. Just to
underscore the necessity of this, I heard an interview with the
WFP spokesperson in Islamabad this morning, and he said that
virtually no WFP convoys had crossed into Afghanistan in the
last 3 days because of concern about the security situation,
and so while the overall picture that Bernd McConnell painted
is accurate, that major progress is being made, they have
almost suspended operations in this uncertain time, and we
just--we need every day. Every minute is critical to get food
in and to get other supplies in in the coming days.
Senator Wellstone. Senator Lugar.
Senator Lugar. Thank you. I salute you, as the panelists
have, for focusing our attention on this. Our powers, whatever
they may be in this committee or in the Senate, are often what
we are doing today, and that is trying to illuminate a
situation and provide some oversight but also a forum for
people well-informed, as you are on the ground, and with
associates.
There is a very steep learning curve for each one of us in
the Senate, and to think through what is happening in the
region as the Northern Alliance proceeded, toward Kabul, there
was anxiety as to whether they should enter before the southern
Afghans were to join them. On the other hand, anxiety was
expressed, as to who will police the situation while the
Taliban pulls out and before a new government is in place.
So apparently, some Northern Alliance people came into the
city to hold things down to a dull roar. This created great
anxiety with the Pakistanis, and as we heard President
Musharraf and his press conference with President Bush
describing atrocities in the past, and the reasons why Pakistan
has great anxiety, but if not the Northern Alliance, who?
So the idea that Secretary Holbrooke has presented makes a
lot of sense, but it requires some implementation. It would
require our State Department and foreign ministers of other
countries to coalesce with that suggestion, with Secretary
General Annan or somebody to implement what we are discussing.
This is a public forum, with well-informed people
attempting to get the word out, and an agenda that needs to be
met. Meanwhile, as you have all suggested, because the policing
powers are uneven, perhaps better in some places than in
others, the problems for the NGO's or for those who are
offering humanitarian relief are substantial. The risks remain
even if the military situation is improving.
Our own military people are not in a position to do this
job. They are at best auxiliaries to the Northern Alliance, or
whoever is involved in ground fighting. Our forces pass
messages back through the chain of command of what they
observe, and that is helpful, and we found this with the
testimony of Mr. Wolfowitz and Mr. Armitage and Mr. Hadley this
afternoon, as the Senators queried them for the last hour and a
half about all sorts of things, including the humanitarian
situation, including this bridge and the wheat and so forth.
So for whatever comfort it may be, they are reasonably
well-informed, but becoming more so because we are interested
in this situation and continue to pursue it with the
administration.
I suppose what I finally come to is, there is this whole
problem of nation-building, who reconstructs, or who even
constructs for the first time an Afghanistan that works. This
is a situation in which there would be, ideally, some coalition
of forces, who in the past have not moved along well, and in a
country that, as you have described in the testimony today,
with the highest infant mortality rate that I have ever seen--
180 per 1,000, as opposed to 12 in the United States. This is
an awesome dilemma, long before we got into the war, and
nutrition problems likewise--5.5 million people I think one of
you pointed out in your testimony, even pre-war, quite apart
from this situation.
So whose responsibility is this? How does the world assist
in the rebuilding of Afghanistan. There are a good number of
Americans who feel that that is well beyond our ability, and
furthermore, many people in the rest of the world would agree
we ought not to be the major factor, although a contributor to
this.
Do you have any suggestion as to who does try to do the
nation-building, who tries to bring together these coalitions
of people who might be able to provide governance? How do we
put this together in a fairly short period of time, so that
there is some hope?
Our military objective is still al-Qaeda, and the terrorist
cells. The Taliban came into this simply because they refused
to cough them up. They were in the way, so they are paying the
penalty for shielding the terrorists, but the military effort
is the terrorists.
Now, the collateral damage is obviously the rest of the
country, and the problem is how you continue to prosecute the
war, and at the same time bring about some reorganization in
the area that has been affected.
I am just curious, after this long preamble, whether anyone
has some thoughts on this subject.
Senator Wellstone. That was a preamble well worth listening
to.
Mr. Devendorf. If nothing else, I think it aptly summarizes
just how complex this situation is, and Senator, in answer to
your question, I wish I had a short one. What I can say is that
I firmly believe that if the U.S. Government tries to take upon
its shoulders the full weight of rebuilding Afghanistan, it
will fail. There is no way around that. It will fail in
humanitarian terms, economic terms, political terms.
Afghanistan has always been an area of the world adverse to
centralized rule. It has long been the scene of conflict, both
internecine and international. I do not think we can hope to
change those overnight.
What the international community can do is play a
supportive role, supportive in terms of our diplomacy and in
terms of our economic strength, to assist Afghans to try during
this moment, which is perhaps one of the most optimistic
moments in Afghanistan's history, at a time when the
international community is more than ever focused upon trying
to be constructive and assist people in that region to help
them move forward the task of identifying what sort of
governmental structure it is that is going to work for their
people in their area of the world.
Not necessarily to come with a preconceived notion of what
that might look like, but be ready in good faith to meet good-
faith efforts by the Afghan people and their leaders, both the
current ones and those that we hope will develop in the current
weeks and months and years, to reward them for honest progress
made toward that objective.
Senator Lugar. That is a very good point. This is a
situation in flux now, because of these crisis situations. A
year ago, the situation was very bad in terms of infant
mortality, but it would have been totally inappropriate for us
suddenly to decide in a hearing like this that Afghanistan has
enormous problems and we ought to get in there and wrench it
around.
But now, with the whole situation in flux, the
international community in there, there are opportunities, even
out of the crisis, to improve the situation for the people of
Afghanistan.
Mr. Charny. To me, I have done a lot of work in Cambodia,
where the international community faced not an identical but a
similar challenge of reconstructing a country while
reconstructing a viable political framework for the country to
go forward, and I think, based upon my Cambodian experience, I
would make a few points.
One is that it is not necessary for the political process
and the reconstruction process to be lockstep together. There
will be opportunities to do reconstruction work even before the
political dispensation is clear, and I think we should seize
those opportunities.
We have to be really patient on the political side. I mean,
I have never in my career seen a country as riven and as
politically complex as Afghanistan, and if anyone tries to play
God and create a new structure that does not have the support
of the Afghan people through a participatory process that
includes women, that includes all ethnic groups, that
government will fall so fast, no matter how much international
support it has, so again, for what it is worth, and again in
the spirit of almost having a seminar discussion, I advise
incredible patience on the political side while seizing
opportunities to rebuild, even starting at the local level.
I mean, if you have got an area of Afghanistan that is
safe, where local people can participate in their own
development, go for it. Put money into that place while
patiently working on the political process at the same time.
Mr. Bartolini. First of all, I agree with George. You
clearly outlined the complexity of the situation. There are no
easy answers, and I agree that the U.S. cannot do this on our
own. However, we are doing quite a bit on the humanitarian
side. We are providing the bulk of the assistance going into
Afghanistan, and we have been for the last few years, and I
think we obviously need to do that.
But on the political side, I do think that there is a road
map that we can look at as to what we do not want to follow,
and your question as to the American people, and their question
as to why we should do this at all, I think of you look at
Afghans, they really were our proxies in one of the most
important battles of the cold war.
They did have very much a functioning society prior to the
Soviet invasion in the seventies, and we did try to help them
after the Soviet withdrawal, but I think the U.S., it was not
only on the U.S.'s shoulders, but we became frustrated with the
intervention from the surrounding countries, and we basically
just gave up on them, and I think that is the point that we
cannot do again, when we look at the situation that we are in
today, and it will not be an easy process, and I do not have
any easy solutions.
It does seem that the U.N. will have to get involved at
some point in terms of the nation-building aspect of this, but
my plea today is that we do not do what we did in the past, and
that is for whatever trials and tribulations we have to go
through on the political side, that we stick it out.
Senator Wellstone. We should finish, and I think Professor
Lugar has really raised the key question. I have here a
statement from Senator Boxer, who was at the briefing and then
could not come over, and I almost--I feel like--I know that if
Barbara was here she would want to talk a lot about the role of
Afghan women in economic reconstruction, and I wonder whether
you all might comment on the ways in which that could become a
priority.
[The prepared statement of Senator Boxer follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Barbara Boxer
Thank you Senator Wellstone, I am grateful that we are teaming up
to co-chair this, our second hearing on the tragic situation in
Afghanistan.
And, thank you so much for your leadership on this crucial issue of
providing humanitarian aid to Afghanistan. You have been a strong and
forceful advocate for Afghan people who are suffering not just in
Afghanistan, but also in neighboring countries as refugees.
The United States, and indeed the international community, must
understand that the military operations in Afghanistan are only part of
the strategy in ensuring that Afghanistan is no longer a safe-haven for
Osama bin Laden and other terrorists.
While the Taliban has lost a lot of ground--especially in the
northern part of the country--it does not mean that the humanitarian
situation will be easily solved.
In fact, it was repeatedly pointed out in our last hearing that the
humanitarian crisis did not start with U.S. and allied airstrikes. It
is the product of over 20 years of war and a historic and horrific
drought.
Of course, this crisis is exacerbated by the harsh policies of the
Taliban. And, I hope that during today's hearing we will learn how
recent events on the battlefield will help facilitate aid to regions of
Afghanistan that were previously controlled by the Taliban.
I also hope we can examine the longer term humanitarian needs of
the Afghan people.
If we are to ensure that Afghanistan ceases to be a haven for
terrorists, we have to provide for the long term reconstruction needs
of that country. We need to help Afghans set up a broad-based
government that represents all groups--including women.
And, we need to provide for the long-term security of Afghanistan
that will likely include an international force to keep the peace
during the post-Taliban transition.
After the Soviets left Afghanistan in the late 1980s, we did not do
enough to help bring stability and lasting security to the Afghan
people. We can not make that mistake again.
I look forward to hearing from our two panels of witnesses this
afternoon to hear their ideas on providing for the short-term
humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan, as well as the long term
reconstruction effort.
Thank you.
Senator Wellstone. I think it is an important question in
and of itself, and I have got to ask that in behalf of my good
buddy, Senator Boxer as well. Just real quickly, could you do
that--not as an aside. I just do not want to keep you a real
long time. George just got back in last night. Any kind of
reflections or comments you all might want to make?
Mr. Bartolini. Well, I laid out in my testimony some of the
potential problems I see in the coming months in terms of
providing aid, but I also agree with statements that have been
made, and you mentioned, Senator Lugar, that there are
incredible opportunities here for Afghanistan, and clearly this
is one of them.
Of all the civilians that have suffered under the Taliban
rule, I do not think anybody has suffered more than women, and
as to the mechanism of more directly involving them in the
political process, I really cannot offer too many specifics. I
think it is a difficult thing to do in that part of the world,
but clearly there are a number of organizations at grassroots
level in Pakistan that have been working on this for sometime.
The IRC has an adjunct, the Women's Commission for Refugee
Women and Children, and this has been an issue that they have
really focused on, and so there are nascent efforts, not so
nascent, actually, now. They have been working for years to
incorporate women's views, to build them into the political
system, and with the events of the last few days I think we
have a real opportunity there.
Senator Wellstone. George, did you want to say anything?
Mr. Devendorf. Maybe very brief ones. I agree completely
with Mark's statement. This is a society which has been getting
by, to use that term, with the creativity and productivity of
half its people for far too long now, and in order to try to
rectify that belief, agencies such as ours and the U.N. will
really need to focus on education first and foremost for Afghan
women, but then also look at ways to improve their productivity
through credit schemes, through vocational training, health
training and other things, that really should not come as add-
ons to existing projects, but should, in fact, be thematic and
cross-cutting for all the activities that we engage in.
Senator Wellstone. I think Senator Boxer would love that
word, not add-ons.
Let me just tell you that I think this was a superb
hearing, a superb hearing because you are here, and also
because we had excellent testimony from the administration, and
I think the next hearing the subcommittee is going to have
after--we are going to be gone for a week--is going to be on
economic reconstruction, and what the key components of that
will be, and get some people, Dick, that can think through--as
you said, this is part of what we want to use the committee for
is an educational forum.
I mean, no one wants to be arrogant, and God knows, it does
not work anywhere, and it does not work there, in Afghanistan,
but you just provided us with so much helpful information. I
thank you so much.
And Senator Lugar, it is an honor that you have joined us.
Thank you.
Senator Lugar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman--great hearing.
Senator Wellstone. The committee will stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:35 p.m., the subcommittees adjourned.]
----------
Additional Statements Submitted for the Record
[Oxfam International--10 October 2001]
Rebuilding Afghanistan: An Agenda for International Action
The international community has begun to respond to the urgent
humanitarian needs in Afghanistan. These efforts need to continue and
intensify. But the needs of the country and its people will go beyond
this immediate humanitarian crisis. Afghanistan will require a
sustained international commitment to achieve peace and to rebuild the
country after more than 20 years of war. This is not a short-term task;
the international community will need to stay engaged, both politically
and financially, for many years to come.
Despite the current climate of fear and uncertainty, many Afghan
citizens continue to work for peace and reconstruction in their
country. Oxfam partners are working today to provide education to
girls, to provide clean water to villages, and to remove landmines left
behind by war. These groups and many others are continuing this
important work and are ready to be part of an effort to rebuild their
country.
It is not too early to begin making the political and economic
commitments that will be required to rebuild Afghanistan. To this end,
Oxfam recommends the following.
1. an intensified effort to address widespread humanitarian need in
afghanistan and in neighboring countries
All efforts must be made to get food to Afghan people inside the
country. Food is most likely to reach people in need if the aid effort
is impartial and separate from military action. Assistance should be
delivered through the UN and partner agencies, using existing
distribution mechanisms (truck and donkey convoys) and local
organizational capacity (local professional and traditional groups) to
the extent possible. The USA, the European Union, and neighboring
countries should ensure that borders are opened; respecting people's
right to seek refuge, and that adequate assistance is provided, meeting
the standards established under international humanitarian. law and as
set out within the Sphere framework. Particular attention should be
given to the protection of women in a context where there is greater
vulnerability to gender-based violence.
2. a un-led effort to establish a broad-based political coalition in
afghanistan
A UN mission in Afghanistan should draw lessons from previous
experience in East Timor and Mozambique in order to ensure an effective
transition to national governance. This process should be guided by the
following principles:
Responsive and accountable governance, which gives space to
civil society to participate in the political process.
Recognition of all ethnic, religious, and regional groups in
any process of transition.
Representation of women in structures of government and
political dialogue.
Adherence to international human rights and humanitarian law,
and to the international conventions on rights to which
Afghanistan is a signatory.
Ensuring support for these principles will only be possible if
there is a sustained commitment by global powers to put aside historic
enmities and alliances, to cease supporting single factions, and to
invest in a broad-based national coalition.
3. controls on arms supplies to the region
The continued flow of arms to Afghanistan is a major cause of
destabilization. As part of a longer-term strategy, the UN and
neighboring countries should develop a comprehensive disarmament plan
for Afghanistan and the region.
4. a reconstruction plan for afghanistan
An ambitious plan is required to resolve the chronic poverty,
displacement, and damage caused by over 20 years of war. A
reconstruction plan for Afghanistan will require strong leadership from
the UN, in order to ensure real and perceived impartiality in the
delivery of assistance. This plan should incorporate a regional
strategy for addressing the grave conditions of poverty, displacement,
and humanitarian need suffered by Afghanistan's neighbors. Critical
needs will be in the areas of:
Health and Education
Long-term development for Afghanistan requires that resources be
focused particularly on education and health. Educated women who have
been restricted from working in their profession (especially in the
health and education sectors) must be re-integrated into society and
allowed to contribute to the rebuilding of Afghanistan. An equitable
education system for boys and girls, minority and Pashtun, urban and
rural populations, must be developed.
Women's rights and representation
A specific strategy to address women's exclusion will be required
in any reconstruction plan. Development plans should recognize the many
existing women's organizations in the country, and those operating from
neighboring countries. The UN Gender Advisor post for Afghanistan
should be filled immediately, and should participate in the highest
levels of decision-making. Afghanistan should be supported in carrying
through its commitments as a signatory to the Conventions on Civil and
Political Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the
Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam. Afghanistan should also be
encouraged to ratify CEDAW.
Support to Afghan civil society
Afghanistan has been largely portrayed as having no organizational
structures outside of religious extremism and military factions. But
there is an important professional, non-sectarian civil society that
will ultimately determine the success of any efforts to rebuild the
country. Afghanistan has also been home to some of the most important
and courageous women's organizations in the region. These groups should
be acknowledged and supported as part of any reconstruction effort.
5. donor coordination
This will be crucial, given the significant amount of funding
coming into the country. Donors should support the leadership of
Lakhdar Brahimi in his new role as UN Special Envoy to Afghanistan in
charge of the UN's overall humanitarian and political work in the
country. A starting point for this mission should be the important work
that was done on the 1999 Strategic Framework for International
Assistance document, which went through wide consultation with
international and national organizations. Donors should be committed to
providing sustained and substantial funding.
6. the role of the european union
This will be increasingly important in ensuring that there is
adequate monitoring capacity of the political transition and
reconstruction efforts. The EU should demonstrate its long-term
interest by setting out a comprehensive strategy in support of the UN
effort. The EU should extend the Common Foreign and Security Policy
from its current focus on the Balkans and the Middle East to include
Afghanistan and its neighbors.
conclusion
In 1995, Boutros Boutros Ghali said that Afghanistan had become one
of ``the world's orphaned conflicts--the ones the West, selective and
promiscuous in its attention, happens to ignore.'' The current climate
of war has again brought attention to Afghanistan's historic suffering.
It is time now to ensure that it receives the attention it deserves,
and does not once again slip into the realm of forgotten crises that
the world has left behind.
For more information about Oxfam's work in Afghanistan, please go
to www.oxfamamerica.org; for more information about Oxfam's advocacy
and policy work in Washington, please contact Bernice Romero or John
Ruthrauff at 202-496-1180.
______
[Oxfam Briefing Note--1 November 2001]
Food Has Now Run Out for Many Afghan People
For over four weeks Oxfam International has been increasingly
concerned about the deteriorating humanitarian situation in
Afghanistan. We have been calling on all parties for a pause in
military action and for the World Food Programme urgently to step up
the trucking of food into Afghanistan before winter sets in. We now
fear that time is running out for some communities. For others, time
will run out if food deliveries do not dramatically increase in the
next weeks and months.
This failure by the international community to deliver enough food,
combined with growing insecurity, has left hundreds of thousands of
people suffering acute food shortages. In some areas of acute need, the
bombing and the increased fighting from the Taliban and Northern
Alliance has added to a climate of fear that has made many truck
drivers and aid workers too frightened to work.
Given the significant differences across Afghanistan, both in terms
of need and access, any options must be specifically designed to meet
the conditions on the ground. This may require a range of actors
negotiating access to different areas of the country, and different
approaches according to local conditions. They must reach all Afghans
in need including those who may become trapped in their villages by the
coming snows and spreading violence. This will require a flexible
approach that draws from the local knowledge of Afghan organisations
and international agencies operating on the ground.
We are therefore calling for:
1. The trucking of food to be dramatically increased to areas
where access is still possible (including most of the central
provinces of Bamyan, Uruzgan and Wardak). There are still
thousands of people that can and must be reached by a
significantly increased delivery of food into Afghanistan by
land, and by air drops and lifts into secure zones. Greater
diplomatic pressure is required to ensure that neighbouring
countries are facilitating trucking into Afghanistan by easing
bureaucracy at borders. This is a priority option for zones
considered accessible and will require increased efforts by WFP
to move higher quantities of food into the country.
2. The United Nations, the ICRC, and the coalition
governments to consider more radical options for some regions
(including parts of Faryab, Ghor, Balkh and Badghis) where food
is already running out. This could include the negotiation of
safe routes and safe zones for food delivery, and air drops. We
know that some of these options are not the most effective way
to get food to people, and that trucking would have been
better. But given the level of the crisis in some areas, all
options must now be considered. It should not be forgotten that
the Geneva Conventions clearly establish the obligation of all
warring parties to ensure that food and medical supplies reach
civilians.
3. A pause in all military action, including air strikes, at
least in some zones so that food stores within the country can
be replenished. The specific areas and timing should be
negotiated and co-ordinated by the United Nations. We believe
that this would remove an important fear that is preventing
truck drivers from working in some areas of acute need.
New food aid is moving into some parts of Afghanistan. But seven
provinces in the north, north-west and centre of Afghanistan include
areas of acute concern. Reports of deteriorating security, and the
rapid onset of winter in mountainous areas, come on top of the existing
need for substantial food aid. Oxfam draws this conclusion from WFP
estimates in July predicting that food would run out within 3-6 months
in these selected areas. While there is no reliable information about
population movements since September, there are also no reports of
significant numbers of refugees from these provinces. This suggests
that the majority of people are still in their homes and may have even
been joined by people fleeing the cities.
At the start of November, some but limited new food is entering the
country, and winter is closing in. WFP's earlier projections suggest
that parts of Afghanistan are on the threshold of a far deeper crisis.
It is now likely that:
In the north and north-west, in parts of the four provinces
of Badghis, Faryab, Ghor, and Balkh, 400,000 people are already
suffering acute food shortages. At least 1,300,000 will
probably have little or no food by the end of December. At
least 700,000 of these live in Faryab.
Around 350,000 people in Badghis, Ghor, and Faryab are
located in areas soon to be largely cut off by the onset of
snows during November. After that, aid will only be able to get
through with extraordinary measures to keep overland routes
open or supply by air:
In the north-east, in parts of Badakhshan, around 260,000
people will be largely cut off by the onset of winter this
month, and will have little or no food by the end of December.
They too will need especial efforts to get aid to them.
In the central provinces of Bamyan, Uruzgan and Wardak, 13 of
the 25 districts may be largely cut off during winter because
of their high terrain, affecting over 540,000 people.
Oxfam and its partner organisations continue to deliver assistance
in some of these areas, where security allows. Our current aid is
mostly food purchased locally through Oxfam grants, and distributing
food supplied by WFP in the central highlands and north-east. In Ghor,
Badghis and the mountainous parts of Herat and Farah, we will be doing
everything possible to support partners to keep roads open during the
winter.
The war further complicates this picture, because even in the zones
that are not cut off by winter snows, accessibility for aid workers is
severely limited by insecurity. Taliban soldiers and other militias
have looted aid offices in Kandahar, Mazar-i-Sharif, Ghana, Kunduz and
other areas. Insecurity in Kandahar and Herat is due to a break down of
law and order; in Ghor and Badghis it is due to increased fighting
between the Taliban and Northern Alliance. Continued bombing in most
parts of north and central Afghanistan, and the use of cluster bombs,
have created a climate of fear that severely limits the ability of WFP
and other agencies to continue food deliveries. Islamic NGOs that are
currently delivering food into the east believe that they could do much
more if fear by truckers could be diminished.
______
[Oxfam Briefing Note--9 November 2001]
Between a Rock and a Hard Place: The Plight of Those Seeking Refuge
from Afghanistan
War and drought in Afghanistan have generated the second largest
exodus of refugees in the world. Before the current military campaign,
there were 3.6 million refugees in neighbouring countries and abroad;
now tens of thousands more have fled towards Pakistan and Iran. The
conditions faced by internally displaced people and refugees are far
below any acceptable standards. Oxfam is calling on the governments of
the region and the international community to take urgent action to
ensure that basic needs are met and that people's rights are respected
within international humanitarian law.
Although the numbers of people who have fled across or towards
borders are uncertain, it is clear that people are on the move, fleeing
food shortages, bombardments, and violence. The UN estimates that 80
per cent of the population of the southern city of Kandahar has left.
Thirty per cent of the population has left Herat in the west, and
several other towns are also nearly empty. Many have simply fled to the
countryside, but others have sought to cross into neighbouring
countries, although relatively few have been allowed to cross the
borders.
According to the UN, the Taliban is actively preventing people from
leaving Afghanistan, even those in need of urgent medical attention.
Gross human rights abuses by the Taliban against people fleeing east
from Kabul have been reported. Abuses by uncontrolled forces will
inevitably increase with a breakdown of law and order in many places.
The humanitarian situation in camps inside the Afghanistan border
is appalling. In some places conditions are deteriorating rapidly, with
cases of malnutrition and disease on the rise because essential, life-
saving conditions such as access to food, clean water and medicines
cannot be provided. Camps in Pakistan are inadequate; new sites do not
meet standards of safety nor allow conditions for life with dignity.
Neighbouring countries, particularly Pakistan and Iran, have been
generous in hosting millions of Afghan refugees in recent years, but
these countries have now stated that it is against their national
interests to open their borders. While their concerns may be valid, it
is clearly their responsibility, with sufficient financial and
institutional backing from the international community, to ensure that
refugees are granted due protection and assistance.
Oxfam fears that the growing tensions around refugees are leading
to an environment in which measures may be taken to round up and return
refugees to Afghanistan. If refugees were to be turned away at the
borders and pushed back into Afghanistan, where their lives are in
danger, this would amount to refoulement--forced repatriation--and
would contravene the 1951 Refugee Convention. Nearly all the countries
in the region have signed and ratified this document, which has
acquired the force of a customary international law over all countries.
The breakdown of the fundamental principles of international
humanitarian law inside Afghanistan, and the collapse of the
international refugee asylum system in the region, amount to a profound
failure by the international community to uphold those measures
introduced in the aftermath of the Second World War to ensure that
massive abuses of human rights would never be allowed to happen again.
The failure of the coalition governments to campaign sufficiently for
the protection of civilians inside Afghanistan and the opening of
borders to provide asylum for legitimate refugees in neighbouring
states is a particularly alarming aspect of the current crisis.
There are immediate steps that can be taken to diminish the
obstacles and fears faced by neighbouring states. Arguments to keep the
borders shut could be more easily countered if a proper system of
refugee status determination was in place, with refugee camps located
at a suitable distance from international borders, and with an
assurance of their civilian nature guaranteed by the host countries and
the UNHCR. To meet the financial burden of this crisis, donors must
provide prompt and adequate funding and institutional support for host
governments. These pledges must be quickly fulfilled, since these
countries are already among the poorest in the world, and facing the
same devastating three-year drought as Afghanistan.
Oxfam is therefore calling for:
1. States neighbouring Afghanistan to open their borders to
refugees without further delay. Neighbouring states should
remove all obstacles to granting immediate protection and
assistance to all those fleeing Afghanistan. This must include
the agreement to respect the principle of non-refoulement.
Protection would also include the establishment of secure and
habitable living areas (camps), with adequate provision of
shelter, food, water and sanitation, health care, and other
basic necessities according to recognised minimum standards
(e.g. Spheres \1\). Given the time it is taking to establish a
proper system of refugee status determination, temporary
protection should be granted, but only as a very interim
measure that does not impede people from seeking full refugee
status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Sphere standards establish a set of universal minimum
standards in core areas of humanitarian assistance. They are ascribed
to by most major humanitarian agencies, and are endorsed by ICRC,
InterAction, VOICE and ICVA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The international community, the United Nations and the
U.S.- and UK-led coalition must make clear and public
statements in favour of open borders. Insufficient pressure and
incentives have been applied to countries in the region to
address the refugee situation seriously. Coalition governments
have a particular role to play in ensuring that humanitarian
law is upheld, and that diplomatic efforts in the region
include explicit agreements on addressing the needs and rights
of refugees.
3. Neighbouring states should provide secure access for
impartial humanitarian agencies to refugee camps and should
themselves offer whatever assistance they can. This is likely
to be the only way in which the welfare of refugees can be
assured. Measures should be taken to preserve the civilian
nature of the camps, such as providing policing, ensuring camps
are at an adequate distance from any military zone, and
preventing camps being used to recruit refugees into militia.
4. Donor countries must ensure adequate funding. While
pledges for the Afghanistan appeal have been high, donors must
deliver the cash as soon as possible in order to reassure host
countries that the financial burden of humanitarian support is
indeed being shared among donor and host countries. Early
pledges will also increase flexibility in the delivery of
relief into Afghanistan and throughout the region. Funding
should be sustained for the medium- to long-term, supporting
development projects in the host countries as well.
5. UNHCR must fulfil its protection mandate. In this charged
climate, the UNHCR must strongly denounce any moves to
repatriate refugees forcibly. In addition, the UNHCR's own
guidelines and standards for the protection of women should be
implemented. Humanitarian agencies should deploy women in their
planning and front-line staff, so that access to refugee girls
and women is increased.
6. Human rights and protection observers should be deployed.
Staff of the UN's Human Rights Commission should be engaged in
any assistance situation, whether inside Afghanistan or in
neighbouring countries. They would play an important role as
witnesses of, and deterrents for, further abuses. They could
also address specific concerns relating to gender violence and
dislocation. International donors should contribute
specifically to this purpose.
conditions faced by refugees fleeing afghanistan
Afghanistan
There are rising health concerns at the makeshift camp in Spin
Boldak (near the Chaman crossing, but inside Afghanistan and under
Taliban control). For example, there have been increasing cases of
malnutrition and dysentery among children. According to the UNHCR, the
camp's population is about 3000 people, or some 700 families. At least
100 families are reported to be sleeping in the open without any
shelter or aid.
Pakistan
Up to 100,000 people are thought to have entered Pakistan through
Baluchistan and the North West Frontier Province since 11 September,
even though the border has remained officially closed except for
``exceptionally vulnerable'' persons. Even so, it is believed that an
average of 2500 Afghans a day cross the border. According to the UNHCR,
an estimated 135,000 refugees have fled to Pakistan between 11
September and 7 November in spite of the dangers, restrictions, and
costs of this journey. Many of these people are described by the
Pakistan authorities as ``invisible,'' blending in with established
refugee communities in the hope of not being deported.
There are clearly not enough camps in place to receive, process,
and assist populations in need. Killi Faizo staging camp in Pakistan,
near the Chaman border, currently holds some 2400 people and, according
to the UN, is over-capacity. The site was filled and further
registration closed in just over a week after opening. Longer-term
refugee camps have still not been properly established. Conditions in
those areas designated as camp sites will almost certainly be
extraordinarily harsh and inhospitable.
Iran
Iran has not opened its borders, even though it is a signatory to
the 1951 Refugee Convention. Instead, it has offered to assist
displaced people on the Afghan side of the border through the Iranian
Red Crescent Society. This decision removes any recourse for refugees
to international legal protection.
Tens of thousands of desperate refugees have reportedly crossed
illegally into Iran, many having paid smugglers for their passage. The
border with Afghanistan is heavily mined and the risks of death or
injury from landmine explosions are very real. Records from visiting
medical teams, cited in the UK's national Guardian newspaper on 6
November, indicate that 43,000 refugees have arrived in the country
since 11 September, although authorities suggest that the number could
be closer to 60,000.
There are currently two established camps near the Iranian border,
inside Afghanistan. NGOs have only restricted access to Makaki camp,
which receives 900-1000 new arrivals each day. It currently hosts some
7000 refugees. A second camp, ``Mile 46,'' hosts some 144 families,
despite the fact that there is very little food or water in the area.
Iran provides electricity and a small clinic to test for communicable
diseases, such as malaria, cholera, and TB. These camps have filled
very quickly since opening.
The Iranian authorities are considering opening a third camp at
Pashmakeh. However, conditions here might be even worse than at the
other two camps, with particular concerns about water.
Turkmenistan
There are mixed groups of combatants and civilians living in
difficult conditions along Turkmenistan's border with Afghanistan.
Screening and disarmament would be necessary in order to provide
protection to civilians. The border is officially closed to people
wishing to enter the country. Importantly, the government of
Turkmenistan has agreed to facilitate visas for foreigners working with
Afghans across the border, but has expressly forbidden emergency work
with newly arrived refugees.
Uzbekistan
Uzbekistan hosts approximately 30,000 Tajik refugees, but very few
Afghan refugees. It is unlikely to see a large number of refugees at
its small border with Afghanistan. However, the government has agreed
actively to facilitate cross-border assistance. It has also allowed the
establishment of a forward UN logistics base on the border at Termez.
Tajikistan
Tajikistan hosts some 5000 officially registered refugees. The
borders to Tajikistan are open for humanitarian access but not for
general population movement. There are an estimated 10-15,000 Afghan
refugees living on islands in the Pyandzh River which separates the two
countries. The Taliban front line is about one mile from some of these
islands, and combatants have not been separated from genuine refugees.
Conditions on these islands are poor, with limited access to water and
a great need for clothing and shoes for children. Last winter many
refugees died of hypothermia, malnutrition, and disease.
-