Ken Bacon, RI President
11/03/2001

Addressing Afghanistan’s Humanitarian Crisis
Testimony by
Kenneth H. Bacon, President, Refugees International
To the
House International Relations Committee,
November 1, 2001

Chairman Hyde, I want to thank you and the House International Relations Committee for holding this hearing on Afghanistan’s humanitarian crisis. Your examination comes at a crucial moment. The U.S. is correctly attacking terrorists and their protectors in Afghanistan, while moving to feed the Afghan people. But Taliban obstruction and the military campaign have slowed food deliveries, and the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan will worsen without urgent and imaginative efforts to get more food to the Afghan people.

As you pointed out, Afghanistan was one of the world’s largest crises of displacement well before the events of September 11, 2001. Even before the current military campaign, conditions in Afghanistan were so bad that 25% of Afghan children died before reaching the age of five, according to some estimates, and a woman died in childbirth every 30 minutes.

Prior to September 11, The United Nations World Food Program (WFP) was providing daily rations to 3.8 million people and was preparing to increase the number fed to a total of 5.5 million through the long winter season. Now the WFP estimates that it may have to supply food to as many as 7.5 million Afghans, including 1.5 million who could flee to neighboring countries in response to attacks against Afghanistan.

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 to ensure 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.

However, the increased aid is not getting into Afghanistan fast enough. As a result, hunger and the diseases that go with it could increase dramatically this winter. In Islamabad last month, a UNICEF official estimated that 400,000 Afghan children could die this winter from preventable causes, up from an estimated 300,000 last year.

The WFP says that it must deliver at least 196,000 metric tons of food to Afghanistan by the end of the year, or almost 3,500 metric tons a day. Currently it is delivering about 2,000 metric tons a day. Although this is up sharply from several weeks ago, it is not enough

To boost food deliveries, Refugees International recommends the immediate establishment of Humanitarian Response Zones inside Afghanistan. The proposed zones would be located initially in relatively secure areas in northern Afghanistan that have not been targets of U.S.-led bombing attacks and are close to large concentrations of vulnerable people. International staff of UN agencies and NGOs would work in the Zones, overseeing the distribution of increased quantities of emergency assistance.

The proposed Humanitarian Response Zones would consist of both safe corridors to transport relief goods from the borders of Afghanistan and internal logistical hubs where large quantities of relief supplies would be located for onward distribution either through commercial networks or networks established by international and local NGOs. In the event that certain isolated communities could not be reached by truck, vulnerable people with the strength and means to move would be able reach the zone.

The opening of new delivery routes from Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan is helping to boost food deliveries to the famine-stricken northern half of the country. For example, the WFP estimates that it will eventually be able to deliver up to 16,000 metric tons of food a month through Uzbekistan. Deliveries will increase when the WFP carries out its plans to airlift food into Afghanistan. The flights are supposed to start later this month.

We also recommend the aggressive use of air transport, both airlift to functioning airports and air drops of food by parachute when necessary to get food to people otherwise inaccessible areas. If the WFP and other aid agencies are not able to conduct air delivery, we recommend that military planes be used to head off starvation in remote areas.

More food is most urgent humanitarian requirement, but Afghans also need tents, blankets and medical supplies, as well as seed to help them plant next year’s crops.

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. So far the refugee flow toward Pakistan and Iran has been lighter than expected, although numbers are rising. This may be because both countries have closed their borers to more refugees, although and estimated 80,000 more refugees have slipped into Pakistan since Sept. 11. The office of UN High Commissioner for Refugees just announced that Pakistan has agreed to accept up to 300,000 particularly vulnerable refugees.

It is important that neighboring countries provide refuge to those fleeing Afghanistan. Several thousand refugees on the Iranian border are being sheltered in encampments near the border but just inside Afghanistan. Iran is permitting food and other relief shipments to the refugees, but it is not allowing the refugees to enter.

A new, and disturbing development of the last several days, is that the Taliban has detained several thousand Afghans on their way to Pakistan and placed them in a squalid camp near the border town of Spin Boldak. Men in this group reportedly fear being impressed into the Taliban army.

It is imperative that these and other refugees from Afghanistan be permitted temporary asylum in Iran, Pakistan and other countries of the region in accordance with international humanitarian law. Pakistan is likely to receive the lion's share of new refugees. While the international community is very mindful of the essential role Pakistan is playing in the campaign against terror, the U.S. and other governments should be pressing the government of Pakistan and the other countries of the region to admit refugees temporarily. The UNHCR and other international organizations are prepared to provide full support for the new refugees.

The U.S. must do its part in another very important way. Following September 11, the Administration understandably instituted a review of the program to admit refugees into U.S., and at the same time placed a hold on all refugee admissions. This has not applied to at least some categories of immigrants. Refugees International urges that effective immediately, refugees already approved for admission to the U.S. and in life-threatening situations be admitted without delay.

Further, as soon as the current security review is completed, general refugee admissions should commence. U.S. approval of a refugee for admission to the U.S. is a lengthy and intensive process. Perhaps the least effective method for a terrorist to try to enter the U.S. would be to go through the refugee process.

Congress and the administration already have begun to talk of ways to rebuild Afghanistan after the current crisis ends. The magnitude of the needs in Afghanistan and the need for reconstruction assistance in the aftermath of the U.S. military campaign, suggest that 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 crisis in Afghanistan is complex. The U.S. response involves military, economic, diplomatic, and humanitarian elements. A clear lesson from similar crises over the past decade is the importance of designating a Cabinet-level official 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. He should do the same for humanitarian programs.

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, much more needs to be done—and it must be done quickly-- 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.