United Nations reveals aid plans for war in Iraq

Abstract

In the face of criticism that it is poorly prepared to cope with the scale of suffering that would be unleashed by a war in Iraq, the UN has broadened its focus from disarmament and enforcement action to humanitarian planning. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan convened a closed session of the Security Council on Feb 13 to discuss relief operations in the event of conflict and agreed to an open meeting on Feb 18 at the insistence of South Africa, which was frustrated at the veil of secrecy. Neutral Switzerland also convened a “technical” meeting of donor governments, Iraq neighbours, and UN aid agencies, on Feb 15–16, to try to push forward the humanitarian agenda. “At last people are talking more about people and less about oil”, said Swiss Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey, who convened the Swiss talks. The USA boycotted the Geneva meeting, saying it would be of little benefit. Iraq was not invited for fear of politicising the event, although its Red Crescent society attended. Conference chairman Walter Fust, head of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, said war could cause “a catastrophe never seen in any country”. After more than 12 years of sanctions, he said, there was consensus that Iraq had exhausted its capacity to absorb more hardship. Iraq's 24 million people receive government handouts of flour, oil, rice, beans, milk, and cooking oil, paid for by UN-supervised oil sales. “If the oil-for-food programme were to break down, the crisis would be of tremendous proportions”, said Fust. “60% of the population would be cut off from their daily lifeline.” Chronic malnutrition is estimated at 23·1% in central and southern Iraq, with acute malnutrition at 4·0%. The rates are slightly lower in the north. After the Security Council meeting, UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Kensho Oshima indicated that relief agencies have been preparing—albeit discretely—for months. But he also revealed that much more needed to be done. The UN has appealed for US$120 million. The USA has pledged $65 million and the UK $15 million, with other countries promising smaller amounts. Oshima said UN agencies were working with a “medium-case” scenario: the conflict would severely disrupt critical infrastructure and the Iraqi government's capacity to deliver basic services. There would probably be power shortages in urban areas, resulting in the closure of water and sewage treatment plants. About 50% of the population might be without access to potable water. Household food stocks would last about 6 weeks, and up to 10 million people might require food assistance —including a predicted 2 million internally displaced people and between 600 000 and 1·45 million refugees, he said. Oshima added that UN agencies had prepositioned stocks in Iraq and neighbouring countries. These stocks included food for 250 000 beneficiaries—against an initial target of 900 000; emergency water and sanitation supplies for about 300 000; high-protein biscuits for 240 000 children; and emergency health kits for 240 000. He said that winter kits including shelter were in place for 118000 refugees, and supplies for more than 350000 were ordered—still below the UN refugee agency's target of 600 000. Countries like Jordan and Turkey want more help than they had during the 1991 Gulf war in coping with any influx of refugees, and it is far from clear to what extent borders will stay open. Officials said that the most likely scenario would be for the US military to handle initial humanitarian relief efforts and then gradually yield responsibility to aid agencies. Under UN contingency plans, UNICEF would be in charge of water and sanitation; the World Food Programme would handle food distribution; the UN High Commissioner for Refugees would take over refugee services; and the UN Development Programme would be responsible for postconflict reconstruction. In addition to the UN efforts, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)—one of the biggest and best established agencies in Iraq—also disclosed the size of its emergency planning. It said it had material to keep major hospitals functional and aimed to guarantee water supplies in large towns. It had food and blankets for 150 000 internally displaced people and could increase this to 400 000–500 000 people in the event of conflict. The ICRC logistical effort is of crucial importance given that Red Cross staff tend to stay in areas of conflict after UN workers have been evacuated.