04/28/2005

Contacts: Michelle Brown and Keegan Kautzky
ri@refugeesinternational.org or 202.828.0110

As the 60-nation Oslo donor conference for Sudan concluded two weeks ago, the success of the meetings underscored an alarming disparity among international humanitarian response efforts. While the Sudan and the tsunami-affected countries are receiving strong financial support, the response to most humanitarian crises around the world remains severely under-funded and neglected.   

Far exceeding the initial aid request of $3.6 billion for emergency relief and recovery efforts, donors have now pledged an impressive $4.5 billion to Sudan for 2005 to 2007.  Even more remarkable has been the response of the international community and donor governments to the devastating Indian Ocean tsunami.  With more than $2 billion already committed, the international community has pledged $6.7 billion in aid to the tsunami-affected countries.  

The United Nations Consolidated Appeal for 2005, developed prior to the December 26 tsunami, requested $1.7 billion in aid to provide basic survival and protection services to an estimated 26 million people in 14 targeted emergencies around the world. While the Appeal for all humanitarian emergencies, including the tsunami, is currently 36% funded, the severe shortfall for most emergencies is hidden by the magnitude of aid directed to Sudan and the tsunami response. Absent the response to those two appeals, only 9% of the requested funds had been committed for all other emergency appeals in the first quarter of 2005, nearly 25% lower than funding levels for all appeals one year ago.

While the full effect of the global humanitarian response to the Indian Ocean tsunami will not be known for some time, widespread concern that personnel, resources and international aid have been diverted from other crises now appears to be justified. On a recent mission to assess the condition of Sudanese refugees fleeing violence in Darfur, Refugees International found that vital personnel had been removed from short-staffed refugee camps in Chad in order to assist the over-subscribed relief efforts in Indonesia and Sri Lanka. Crucial to the protection and assistance needs of the displaced and vulnerable, the loss of scarce protection officers, nutrition specialists, psychosocial counselors, water and sanitation consultants, and medical staff significantly threatens the welfare of these refugees and all afflicted populations that lost personnel and services as a result of the tsunami response.

Despite repeated guarantees from donors that pledges to tsunami relief were made above-and-beyond prior commitments, national legislative restrictions and capped budgets may have forced some governments to divert funds intended for other emergencies in order to fulfill their highly-publicized obligations. Although a short-term fiscal measure, the diversion of funds has deprived the international response to other humanitarian crises.

To bolster the international community’s ability to respond effectively to complex emergencies, the United Nations established the Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) following the 1991 Gulf War. The CAP effectively brings together, UN agencies, the Red Cross Movement, NGOs and local authorities to analyze context, assess needs, and plan a prioritized response. Together, the UN and its partners then appeal for funds to provide essential protection and response services to populations affected by a wide range of humanitarian crises, including war and conflict, instability, disease, displacement, famine and natural disaster. The amounts requested in the various Consolidated Appeals are a “bare bones” assessment of funds required to cover the most critical needs of those most affected.  

The severity of funding shortfalls is particularly pronounced in individual country appeals. While exact funding data is difficult to access due to institutional delays and failures to publicly report up-to-date pledges and contributions, the shortage of humanitarian assistance to certain countries is clear. As of today, financial tracking records show the appeals for Somalia and the Central African Republic have garnered only 4% of the humanitarian assistance needed to provide basic emergency relief.  Cote d’Ivoire, Eritrea, Burundi and Uganda are each severely under-funded at a meager 8%.  Chechnya and neighboring republics have reached 13% of their appeal for emergency assistance, while Guinea, West Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are under-funded at 15%, 16% and 16%, respectively.  The absence of funding restricts provision of basic services in these countries, specifically affecting food security, education, agriculture, health, water and sanitation, shelter, economic recovery, security and protection efforts.

The funding shortfall for the 2005 Consolidated Appeal is not a new phenomenon. Since 2000 humanitarian funding levels for the Consolidated Appeals have ranged from 52% to 65% of the amount requested.  

In order to compensate for these critical shortfalls, new commitments must be made in the second and third quarters of the funding cycle. The impressive global humanitarian response to support the Sudan peace process and provide relief and reconstruction support to communities devastated by the Indian Ocean tsunami must not overshadow the needs of the forgotten millions afflicted by war and natural disaster elsewhere. Progress on one front does not justify losing sight of commitments to others.

A core principle of good donorship, endorsed by the United States and other major aid donors, is that of allocating funding in proportion to needs. Time is short in 2005 for donors to demonstrate this commitment and provide adequate, equitable assistance to the vulnerable in all emergencies.