Posted on 04/12/2003 3:13:02 PM PDT by DannyTN
Whatever “vital” role the United Nations plays in reconstructing Iraq when the war ends, one thing is certain: the international body will first have to feed much of the country’s 27m people
AFP
EVEN before coalition forces invaded Iraq three weeks ago, some 60% of the country’s population of 27m depended on aid under the oil-for-food programme administered by the United Nations. When hostilities broke out, the UN pulled its staff out of the country. Since then, the supply of food and other essentials has dried up. The Iraqi regime has refused to let all but a handful of aid shipments reach those who need them. The International Red Cross and UNICEF, the UN’s children’s charity, are among the few to have got trucks through from Kuwait.
Until the fighting ends and security is restored across the country, aid agencies will not want to endanger the lives of their employees by bringing in fresh supplies. Last week, the Iraqi authorities impounded two trucks carrying aid from Amman, the Jordanian capital, for a French charity. As a result, most shipments by other agencies were suspended. (On Wednesday, the Red Cross temporarily halted its operations in Baghdad after one of its workers was killed in the capital.) Nor are the agencies keen to see vital supplies of food and water distributed by the coalition forces. Soldiers, they say, are not trained to do the job and such work is best done by independent parties.
The UN's Iraq section reports on the activities of the UN agencies involved with Iraq and details the oil-for-food programme. The White House posts President Bush's statements on Iraq. See also the US State Department. USAID, the American government's aid agency, posts information on aid and reconstruction efforts. Agencies involved in the relief efforts include the International Committee of the Red Cross and Médecins Sans Frontières.
So, are increasing numbers of Iraqi civilians in danger of starving? Not for the moment. Aid agencies estimate that most families have stockpiled enough food to last them until early May. After that, Iraq’s population, half of it children under the age of 18, many of whom are already under-nourished, could face deprivation unless essential supplies reach them in time.
However, the timing remains uncertain, particularly if fighting continues to the north of Baghdad and in the eastern parts of the country, where much of the population is concentrated. To date, far fewer Iraqis have been displaced by the war than during the first Gulf conflict. But there is no room for complacency, says James Morris, executive director of the UN World Food Programme (WFP), which is co-ordinating the bulk of the food aid. A large part of the population is vulnerable, he says.
The WFP faces a huge task. It reckons Iraq will need 1.6m tonnes of emergency food over the next six months, on top of existing stocks. For the foreseeable future, Iraqis will need about 480,000 tonnes of food each month. That is equivalent to more than 20,000 truck loads. It is also four times as much aid as was shipped to Afghanistan in the immediate aftermath of the fighting there, says Maarten Roest of the WFP’s office in Amman.
The WFP is expected to rely heavily on Umm Qasr, a deep-water port in the south of Iraq through which most of the supplies imported under the oil-for-food programme were shipped before the fighting broke out. But this is unlikely to be plain sailing. Although British forces have cleared mines laid at the mouth of the port, enabling the Sir Galahad, a naval vessel, to dock recently with some supplies, Umm Qasr remains tricky to navigate. Large vessels carrying bulk cargoes will still find it difficult, if not impossible, to use the port. And these are the types of ship that will be carrying most of the supplies.
Around 100,000 tonnes of wheat donated by the Australian government is already en route to Iraq in two vessels. Other supplies will be channeled towards several ports or collection points in the region, including Aqaba in Jordan and Aleppo in Syria. Aqaba alone can cope with two or three vessels unloading emergency supplies around the clock. From there, shipments will have to be divided into smaller lots, bagged up and loaded on to trucks for the journey to Iraq.
A difficulty for the aid agencies is judging where food and other supplies will be most needed and so where to build up their stocks. For that reason, the WFP’s planning must be flexible. There could be large, destabilising population movements if the distribution of food becomes uneven. At the moment, the route from the north, through Turkey, presents the least problems, but even here the security situation could change—especially if Turkey sends more troops into Iraq in response to advances by Kurdish fighters.
Aid agencies hope to be able to use the 44,000 or so distribution points across Iraq, many of them small shops, which handled food and other supplies under the oil-for-food programme of the past eight years. But that may prove to be a forlorn hope. Many outlets were associated with the ruling Baath party and will now be shunned. Others may be closed or damaged because of the fighting. Building up a new network from scratch, if it were necessary, would take months. And ensuring the security of food outlets could prove tricky. Many of them have been ransacked in the looting of the past few days.
Another problem is that the WFP may run short of money. Last week’s appeal for $1.3 billion, the organisation’s biggest appeal to date and part of an estimated $2.2 billion in humanitarian aid that the UN reckons will be needed in Iraq over the next six months, got off to a reasonable start: the United States contributed $260m and pledges in cash or in kind by other western governments have since brought the total to more than $300m. The remaining $1 billion or so may be reduced by the value of existing contracts under the oil-for-food programme. Officials are still reviewing the contracts but doubt that they will amount to the original estimate of $270m. The worry then is that the shortfall may prove difficult to fill, not least because, as yet, in the eyes of many would-be donors there is no humanitarian crisis
Getting local security in place and making sure the people have enough food and water is primary.
Then getting basic utilities, the oil sector, banking and agriculture operating again are the key sectors in my view.
With regard to banking, should they dump the Dinar? and replace it (perhaps with Registered's version :)? It seems to me like the people who would have accumulations of dinar's now would be saddam crony's and dumping it and starting over with a new currency would be the most fair.
|
|
 |
|---|
| Our troops give so much of themselves, and we all benefit from their efforts. The next time you look at your bank balance, why not find some way to take some money and put it towards supporting the members of our armed services in some way? Maybe find a family who has someone serving, and buy them dinner, or some groceries, or a gift for their children? Maybe find a way to contribute to a fund for the memory of any of those who have fallen? Our armed forces deserve our support in tangible ways.
|
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.