--from Serambi Indonesia, Thursday May 21, 2009
Banda Aceh - The Central Government, through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Deplu), will temporarily relocate the Rohingya migrants to Pulau Galang in Kepulauan Riau. “Deplu has three options, namely: deporting them, uniting the migrants in Idi, Aceh Timur with those who are in Sabang or finding a third country wanting to accept them,” said the Head of Kesbangpol and Linmas, Djakfar Djuned, M. Si, on Wednesday (20/05). Djakfar said it is difficult to return those immigrants to Myanmar because the Myanmarese government has not confirmed whether they will accept them or not, meanwhile, the immigrants do not want to return to their home country due to safety reasons. Therefore, the government will likely relocate them to Pulau Galang, Kepulauan Riau. In the 1970s, the central government made this island a temporary relocation site for thousands of Vietnamese boatpeople.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Copy of an email I sent to my JMD/BBF associates yesterday . . .
. . . that I'm angry enough to post here.
Dear All:
D called me this morning and I asked her to prepare a written report on what she told me which is below. I also talked to her about what our next steps should be and they are also listed on the report. I cannot tell you how angry and betrayed I feel by this. People have just sat back and watched us work like dogs and knew we never had to do all that. The local leader has been stealing since day one and no one cared. We have said it over and over. We have begged everyone for help, even IOM, who said they did not have the money and in the meantime they are making a mess of the camp. Where were they when we started ???? Anyway, enough bitching and complaining. Here is where we are now. We are further back than we were before. We have a camp that is not being run at all. There has been a lot of stealing and we cannot stop it since we have no authority. Now we are in a position where everyone who worked on the camp from the locals to the few Internationals have all pulled their support out. Now, if IOM doesn't keep its support up we have no fish. We have no drinking water, we have nothing since the people handling it all are insulted, as well they should be. But now who is going to buy all this? IOM??? WE NOW HAVE A VERY SERIOUS PROBLEM ON OUR HANDS.
D and I discussed what we wanted to do. I guess we could try to rebuild the relationships we had going and get things back to normal but I am not sure we want to do that since as we had no authority we were not given any respect. We also do not have the contacts to get in touch with people at IOM, UNHCR etc and complain. And even if we did complaining it would do us no good. I’m waiting to see what Dina has to say after her meetings, then we can decide if we want to just pull up stakes and leave or if we want to make a go of it. If IOM had so much money why weren't they building latrines and barracks???? I am too angry to go on. PLEASE READ D'S REPORT (BELOW) AND FEEL FREE TO COMMENT.
Sara:
N told me the following on the first night I met him, it will be more tomorrow, I believe, when I'm meeting Assistant I, seeing the camp, and calling up people (IOM, JRS, and HELP).
· IOM had been in the camp for the last 1,5 months or so since they came the first time to undertake the first stage of the verification mandate.
· They had been supplying the camp with many things; hygiene kits, fresh fish, canned food, etc without asking the camp for any donation report.
· So, IOM basically was supplying same things that other NGOs had done for the camp. There double supplies in the camp.
· FPRM, with the funds transferred from us, supplied water (for drinking and cooking) to the camp every day. Suddenly, IOM started supplying water for drinking last week. So, N decided only to supply water for cooking then, instead of doubling everything.
· It seems that IOM gave money to the camp for paying the drinking water. Today, they just found out that the camp had been cheating them. The camp reported they paid for 7 trucks of drinking water every day, while there were only 4 trucks delivered to the camp. The same thing with rice, IOM gave money to buy 10 sacks of rice (you know they have plenty of rice), but there are only 6 sacks delivered to the refugees. Save the children supplied 400 packs of hygiene kits to the camp before UNHCR team arrived, and suddenly IOM delivered toothpaste and soaps to the camp on the same week.
· There's a group of fishermen in Idi, headed by 'Panglima Laot' - the commander, who collected fish from every boat that came back from the sea, and delivered fresh fish to the camp every day either for breakfast, lunch or dinner. N didn't supply fresh fish, he only delivered salted fish to the camp which is fine. That's why N didn't spend so much on fish for the refugees, other than fresh fish, they still have canned sardines in the warehouse
· IOM also supplied fresh fish to the camp without checking if anyone from the village had done so. The group who had been supplying fish to the camp since day 1, was very offended and decided to stop supplying fresh fish, since they believed IOM took that over.
· Now, IOM realized they had been fooled by the camp, and R (the person in charge in the camp) went back to Banda to report about this to his office. N said it seems they're not going to stop supplying the camp after this incident. It is horrible for us to clean the mess they made.
· According to what N said, it sounded like IOM was trying to work with FPRM in the camp, but N refused because IOM has ignored their suggestions since the beginning. IOM will keep one staff placed in the camp--I don't know what for.
· N had tried applying the inventory system in the camp. He has put locks on the warehouse, and record keeping, so anyone taking out supplies from the warehouse needed to sign, and be checked by the refugee representative. But the records between the logistic person, the kitchen coordinator, and the refugee representative on the inventory supplies were never balanced. The lock had been damaged intentionally a couple of times, and things were missing from the warehouse.
· JRS tried to come and offered to work together with FPRM on the camp, but N refused to do it. I'm glad that N never said no to work with us on the refugee camp like he has done to JRS and IOM.
· Other than IOM and this fishermen’s group, no one delivers donations to the camp anymore. They still have plenty of rice, and canned sardines, but the instant noodles are spoiled already.
· Camat now has no idea how to take care of these refugees since he has run out of money (which I believe been donated to the camp, but never recorded and reported properly). He actually contacted me on Sunday but he didn't ask for anything, just asking when I'm coming down to Idi.
· IOM had donated a refrigerator to the camp to store fresh fish, so I'm not going to buy a refrigerator.
Therefore, my plan is:
· I'm going to meet with assistant I first, check with him about what he knows about the camp situation. I will ask him again to ask the camat to make an accountable report.
· I'll call R, the IOM guy in charge in the camp for the last two months. Getting information on donations IOM had delivered to the camp, and asking them if they want to continue. They should work with us.
· I'll call L from JRS to find out the status of their plan to help the refugees, and how we can actually work together on this.
· I'll go to the camp and see how it's going on there. If the Camat asks me for any money, I'll pretend the money we received had been returned a month ago. We can ask for other NGOs to donate in-kind to the camp, but only if a proper report is available. You may not agree with this strategy, but we're not giving any money to the camp or deliver any fresh food directly without confirming with N, or else FPRM will not work for us anymore.
Dear All:
D called me this morning and I asked her to prepare a written report on what she told me which is below. I also talked to her about what our next steps should be and they are also listed on the report. I cannot tell you how angry and betrayed I feel by this. People have just sat back and watched us work like dogs and knew we never had to do all that. The local leader has been stealing since day one and no one cared. We have said it over and over. We have begged everyone for help, even IOM, who said they did not have the money and in the meantime they are making a mess of the camp. Where were they when we started ???? Anyway, enough bitching and complaining. Here is where we are now. We are further back than we were before. We have a camp that is not being run at all. There has been a lot of stealing and we cannot stop it since we have no authority. Now we are in a position where everyone who worked on the camp from the locals to the few Internationals have all pulled their support out. Now, if IOM doesn't keep its support up we have no fish. We have no drinking water, we have nothing since the people handling it all are insulted, as well they should be. But now who is going to buy all this? IOM??? WE NOW HAVE A VERY SERIOUS PROBLEM ON OUR HANDS.
D and I discussed what we wanted to do. I guess we could try to rebuild the relationships we had going and get things back to normal but I am not sure we want to do that since as we had no authority we were not given any respect. We also do not have the contacts to get in touch with people at IOM, UNHCR etc and complain. And even if we did complaining it would do us no good. I’m waiting to see what Dina has to say after her meetings, then we can decide if we want to just pull up stakes and leave or if we want to make a go of it. If IOM had so much money why weren't they building latrines and barracks???? I am too angry to go on. PLEASE READ D'S REPORT (BELOW) AND FEEL FREE TO COMMENT.
Sara:
N told me the following on the first night I met him, it will be more tomorrow, I believe, when I'm meeting Assistant I, seeing the camp, and calling up people (IOM, JRS, and HELP).
· IOM had been in the camp for the last 1,5 months or so since they came the first time to undertake the first stage of the verification mandate.
· They had been supplying the camp with many things; hygiene kits, fresh fish, canned food, etc without asking the camp for any donation report.
· So, IOM basically was supplying same things that other NGOs had done for the camp. There double supplies in the camp.
· FPRM, with the funds transferred from us, supplied water (for drinking and cooking) to the camp every day. Suddenly, IOM started supplying water for drinking last week. So, N decided only to supply water for cooking then, instead of doubling everything.
· It seems that IOM gave money to the camp for paying the drinking water. Today, they just found out that the camp had been cheating them. The camp reported they paid for 7 trucks of drinking water every day, while there were only 4 trucks delivered to the camp. The same thing with rice, IOM gave money to buy 10 sacks of rice (you know they have plenty of rice), but there are only 6 sacks delivered to the refugees. Save the children supplied 400 packs of hygiene kits to the camp before UNHCR team arrived, and suddenly IOM delivered toothpaste and soaps to the camp on the same week.
· There's a group of fishermen in Idi, headed by 'Panglima Laot' - the commander, who collected fish from every boat that came back from the sea, and delivered fresh fish to the camp every day either for breakfast, lunch or dinner. N didn't supply fresh fish, he only delivered salted fish to the camp which is fine. That's why N didn't spend so much on fish for the refugees, other than fresh fish, they still have canned sardines in the warehouse
· IOM also supplied fresh fish to the camp without checking if anyone from the village had done so. The group who had been supplying fish to the camp since day 1, was very offended and decided to stop supplying fresh fish, since they believed IOM took that over.
· Now, IOM realized they had been fooled by the camp, and R (the person in charge in the camp) went back to Banda to report about this to his office. N said it seems they're not going to stop supplying the camp after this incident. It is horrible for us to clean the mess they made.
· According to what N said, it sounded like IOM was trying to work with FPRM in the camp, but N refused because IOM has ignored their suggestions since the beginning. IOM will keep one staff placed in the camp--I don't know what for.
· N had tried applying the inventory system in the camp. He has put locks on the warehouse, and record keeping, so anyone taking out supplies from the warehouse needed to sign, and be checked by the refugee representative. But the records between the logistic person, the kitchen coordinator, and the refugee representative on the inventory supplies were never balanced. The lock had been damaged intentionally a couple of times, and things were missing from the warehouse.
· JRS tried to come and offered to work together with FPRM on the camp, but N refused to do it. I'm glad that N never said no to work with us on the refugee camp like he has done to JRS and IOM.
· Other than IOM and this fishermen’s group, no one delivers donations to the camp anymore. They still have plenty of rice, and canned sardines, but the instant noodles are spoiled already.
· Camat now has no idea how to take care of these refugees since he has run out of money (which I believe been donated to the camp, but never recorded and reported properly). He actually contacted me on Sunday but he didn't ask for anything, just asking when I'm coming down to Idi.
· IOM had donated a refrigerator to the camp to store fresh fish, so I'm not going to buy a refrigerator.
Therefore, my plan is:
· I'm going to meet with assistant I first, check with him about what he knows about the camp situation. I will ask him again to ask the camat to make an accountable report.
· I'll call R, the IOM guy in charge in the camp for the last two months. Getting information on donations IOM had delivered to the camp, and asking them if they want to continue. They should work with us.
· I'll call L from JRS to find out the status of their plan to help the refugees, and how we can actually work together on this.
· I'll go to the camp and see how it's going on there. If the Camat asks me for any money, I'll pretend the money we received had been returned a month ago. We can ask for other NGOs to donate in-kind to the camp, but only if a proper report is available. You may not agree with this strategy, but we're not giving any money to the camp or deliver any fresh food directly without confirming with N, or else FPRM will not work for us anymore.
After the Spotlight Fades . . .
Sad.
--from Tempo Magazine No. 36/IX05-11 May, 2009
ACEH With BRR's mission complete, foreign donors have begun to leave Aceh. Two regents have also declined assets. ATJEH Market next to the Baiturrahman Mosque, Banda Aceh, was one of the hot spots during the tsunami on December 26, 2004. With bodies scattered between ravaged stalls, Aceh's landmark gate was buried beneath piles of rubbish brought on by the waves. Four years have passed and now Atjeh Market has become a modern market. The Rp33 billion renovation was funded by the Japan International Cooperation System. The new Atjeh Market, a half-hectare building with clear glass windows which houses 300 merchants, was officially opened last week. "I bet people would rather hang out in the market than in roadside stalls," a local youth commented.
Banda Aceh is like a girl who just put her makeup on. A four-year reconstruction process which involved hundreds of organizations from all over the world has left luxurious buildings and facilities throughout Aceh. Bridges, houses, schools, public health clinics, subdistrict offices, mosques, airport, hospitals, and roads all look shiny-at least on the outside. The lavish physical condition added flavor to the completion of the Aceh-Nias Rehabilitation & Reconstruction Agency's (BRR) mission on April 16. Many other NGOs and donor institutions-both local and foreign-have also completed their missions in Aceh. The world spotlight that shone on Aceh in the post-tsunami period hasfaded.BRR chief, Kuntoro Mangkusubroto, breathed a sigh of relief at the completion of his agency's mission. "The government considers that we have done a good job," he told Adi Warsidi from Tempo. In the last four years BRR has implemented various post-disaster recovery projects in Aceh and Nias worth around Rp80 trillion. The funds came from the government, public donations and international aid. According to Kuntoro, BRR has reached 94.18 percent of the targets in the master recovery plan formulated by the National Development Planning Board. After it was dissolved, BRR was replaced by the Aceh Sustainable Reconstruction Agency (BKRA), which is led by the Aceh Governor, Irwandi Yusuf, as ex-officio Chairman.
Until the end of the year, BKRA has been tasked to complete BRR's unfinished works. For example, to ensure the sustainability of the Rp1.3 trillion program which was planned last year. Another task of equal importance is to formulate a master plan for speedy development of Aceh. Iskandar, BKRA's head of daily operations, reminded the public not to put high hopes in his agency. "Our authority is limited," he said. "We only do coordinating activities with various related parties." Local governments and the representative of technical departments from the central government have full authority over the execution of the programs."Our job is to maintain the harmonization," Iskandar explained.
Although generally there have not been any problems, the handover of assets to the local governments still faced a number of obstacles. First is the obscure asset verification process. Two regencies, West Aceh and Southwest Aceh, refused to accept the assets because of the lack of clarity. Ramli M.S., the West Aceh Regent, declined BRR's Rp193 billion for his area."We do not really know what the assets are and what their conditions are," Ramli said. "It is like buying a cat in a sack and we don't want that."In his experience, the condition of the buildings and facilities built by BRR could not be guaranteed 100 percent as fit. The assets often do not meet criteria or are unfit for use. For example, a sea embankment in Ujung Kareung, Meulaboh, does not function properly. There are also buildings with leaking roofs. "Most of the houses of subdistrict heads in West Aceh cannot be used," he said. According to Ramli, the documents detailing BRR's assets should first be verified jointly with the local governments before they are handed over. Such procedure is normally done by the donor organizations and NGOs. "We have requested BRR's project documents for joint verification," Ramli said "But until the end of BRR's term, the request has not been granted."
Iskandar, BKRA head of daily operations, stated that the issue of assets certainly has to be resolved. "A team from the Finance Department will come to evaluate," said Iskandar. After the central authorities have done the verification, the Finance Department will hand over the assets to the local governments. The second issue is the fund. Aceh Deputy Governor, Muhammad Nazar has declared the local authorities' commitment. "We are ready to maintain the assets left by BRR," he pledged. However, the fund has to be requested from the central government. "It is no longer possible to use the fund from the regional budget, Nazar said. So far, the government's response has been good. "But we still do not know how much will be allotted," he said.
The third and main issue is the capacity of the regional bureaucracy. "It's been a public secret that the bureaucracy is not very effective," said Azwar Hasan, head of the Aceh Development Forum, an NGO in the field of microcredit. Many officials only have interest in projects. "Their focus is only on developing, but they forget about maintenance," he lamented. The slow and ambiguous bureaucratic work priority is indeed a national problem. "But, the situation like this is even more cumbersome in Aceh, which has just been freed of conflicts and tsunami," he said. Under such circumstance, it will be hard to maintain the assets left by BRR and donors alike. Facilities are often built without taking into consideration the long-term capability of the locals. For example, many public health clinics or pukskesmas were built in remote villages. "When there were still donors, sending doctors and nurses there was not a problem," Nursiti, a female activist from the Aceh Women's Discussion Center, explained. "Once the donors are gone, how would the villages pay for doctors and buy the medicines?"
Another example is the two public meeting buildings that were built in Banda Aceh. The electricity and cleaning fees are high. In addition, the city administration has to work hard to organize community activities in order to keep the buildings utilized. "I doubt that it can be done," Azwar bemoaned. "Since the beginning, the concept is only to make a building, without involving the community."
-- Mardiyah Chamim, Adi Warsidi
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Rohingya Update
Progress Made on Rohingya Refugees – Jakarta Globe 1 May 09
The verification team sent to determine the fate of 193 Burmese Rohingyas sheltered in Sabang, Aceh Province, finished the first phase of the verification process on Friday, Foreign Affairs spokesman Teuku Faizasyah said. The limited availability of translators, however, could mean that the processing of the 198 remaining asylum seekers in Idi Rayeuk, East Aceh, might be stalled. The verification team, consisting of officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, International Organization for Migration and United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, finished their work in Sabang on April 24 after beginning in early April. The asylum seekers were asked a series of standard UNHCR questions to determine whether they were economic migrants or genuine refugees. “The team has identified the pattern and have the numbers figured out,” Faizasyah said, although he could not disclose details until they were given proper access to consular services. “Some of them have expressed their willingness for voluntary repatriation and we will refer their names to their respective embassies, which could then conduct further verification.” Faizasyah said that the ad hoc working groups set up as a result of the Bali Process forum, which was co-chaired by Indonesia and Australia in April, to address the plight of the Rohingyas, have not yet set a date for a meeting. The formation of these ad hoc groups to help identify the root causes behind people smuggling and human trafficking in the region was announced by Foreign Affairs Minister Hassan Wirajuda and his Australian counterpart, Stephen Smith, at the Bali Process forum with refugee source, transit and destination countries present. “Their presence made them morally bound to the statement,” Faizasyah said, adding that it was just as matter of setting out the terms of references before the ad hoc groups could meet. He said the meetings would take place as soon as possible because “this is an urgent matter.” Ismira Lutfia.
Indonesia repatriates Rohingya refugees – Xinhua 1 May 09
Indonesia repatriated Rohingya refugees to their origin country after settling the verification program on refugees sheltered in Aceh province's Sabang, an official said here on Friday. The Indonesian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Teuku Faizasyah said that the voluntarily repatriation program is assisted by the United Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM). "The voluntarily repatriation is underway at the moment. We have contacted officials of recipient countries regarding this issue," he told a press conference. He added that refugees who wished to take part in the repatriation program were those who sheltered in Sabang. He said that verification on the remaining Rohingya refugees sheltered in Idi Rayeuk was underway at the moment. Indonesia provided shelters for 391 Rohingya refugees in Sabangand Idi Rayeuk in the northernmost province of Aceh. The refugees were found drifting over the sea off Aceh waters by Indonesian patrol boats in January and February this year. Rohingya people live in Myanmar, near Bangladesh border area. The Muslim ethnic group has been considered as illegal settlers by Myanmar government. www.xinhua.net
The verification team sent to determine the fate of 193 Burmese Rohingyas sheltered in Sabang, Aceh Province, finished the first phase of the verification process on Friday, Foreign Affairs spokesman Teuku Faizasyah said. The limited availability of translators, however, could mean that the processing of the 198 remaining asylum seekers in Idi Rayeuk, East Aceh, might be stalled. The verification team, consisting of officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, International Organization for Migration and United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, finished their work in Sabang on April 24 after beginning in early April. The asylum seekers were asked a series of standard UNHCR questions to determine whether they were economic migrants or genuine refugees. “The team has identified the pattern and have the numbers figured out,” Faizasyah said, although he could not disclose details until they were given proper access to consular services. “Some of them have expressed their willingness for voluntary repatriation and we will refer their names to their respective embassies, which could then conduct further verification.” Faizasyah said that the ad hoc working groups set up as a result of the Bali Process forum, which was co-chaired by Indonesia and Australia in April, to address the plight of the Rohingyas, have not yet set a date for a meeting. The formation of these ad hoc groups to help identify the root causes behind people smuggling and human trafficking in the region was announced by Foreign Affairs Minister Hassan Wirajuda and his Australian counterpart, Stephen Smith, at the Bali Process forum with refugee source, transit and destination countries present. “Their presence made them morally bound to the statement,” Faizasyah said, adding that it was just as matter of setting out the terms of references before the ad hoc groups could meet. He said the meetings would take place as soon as possible because “this is an urgent matter.” Ismira Lutfia.
Indonesia repatriates Rohingya refugees – Xinhua 1 May 09
Indonesia repatriated Rohingya refugees to their origin country after settling the verification program on refugees sheltered in Aceh province's Sabang, an official said here on Friday. The Indonesian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Teuku Faizasyah said that the voluntarily repatriation program is assisted by the United Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM). "The voluntarily repatriation is underway at the moment. We have contacted officials of recipient countries regarding this issue," he told a press conference. He added that refugees who wished to take part in the repatriation program were those who sheltered in Sabang. He said that verification on the remaining Rohingya refugees sheltered in Idi Rayeuk was underway at the moment. Indonesia provided shelters for 391 Rohingya refugees in Sabangand Idi Rayeuk in the northernmost province of Aceh. The refugees were found drifting over the sea off Aceh waters by Indonesian patrol boats in January and February this year. Rohingya people live in Myanmar, near Bangladesh border area. The Muslim ethnic group has been considered as illegal settlers by Myanmar government. www.xinhua.net
Monday, May 4, 2009
Tsunami aid often bypassed conflict victims: report - Washington Post 24 Apr 09
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Distribution of billions of dollars in aid after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami often ignored victims of conflicts raging in Sri Lanka and Indonesia at the time, a report on the lessons of the disaster said on Friday. The report, commissioned by a consortium of five of the hardest-hit countries -- Indonesia, Thailand, India, Sri Lanka and the Maldives -- said this was due in part to restrictions by aid donors on how their money could be spent. The December 26, 2004, tsunami, caused by an undersea earthquake, killed more than 228,000 people and provoked a huge international response, with some $13.5 billion pledged worldwide to fund recovery.
But the 105-page report, "The Tsunami Legacy: Innovations, Breakthroughs and Change," said that in Sri Lanka and Indonesia's Aceh region, both hard hit, there was a need to aid the victims of conflicts as well as those of the tsunami. "However, most post-tsunami organizations largely ignored the post-conflict context, in part due to donor-stipulated restrictions on how they could use their funds," said the report. This led to local grievances over perceived inequalities in aid provision. "If conflict sensitivity had been more widespread and funds not restricted to tsunami victims only, building back better could have been more equitable all along," the report said. The report was presented to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and former U.S. President Bill Clinton, former U.N. special envoy for tsunami recovery, at a conference at U.N. headquarters. Commissioned by the Tsunami Global Lessons Learned project, the report also faulted authorities throughout the tsunami-hit area for other forms of discrimination, because it said the need to deliver aid fast outweighed the need for equity. "Many tsunami-affected communities were still unable to adequately access assistance immediately after the disaster because of barriers associated with their gender, ethnicity, age, class, religion or occupation," it said.
The report, however, also found much to praise in the aid operation, including a willingness by governments to delegate the task to local organizations and a determination to combat corruption. "Despite the influx of billions of dollars in tsunami-affected countries, corruption levels across the board were kept remarkably low," it said. "Key to this success was a commitment to view corruption, not as a nuisance or unfortunate side effect of the recovery, but as a core threat to the reconstruction effort as a whole." Since the tsunami, governments and international agencies have set about creating national and regional early-warning systems, with 24 early detection buoys placed in the Indian Ocean. In addition, 250,000 new permanent houses and more than 100 air and seaports have been built, 3,000 schools constructed and hundreds of hospitals rehabilitated. Ban and Clinton told the conference lessons from the tsunami were important because the number and intensity of weather-related disasters were increasing. Experience with the tsunami reinforces the importance of sealing a deal at a Copenhagen climate change conference in December aimed at setting new targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions, the U.N. chief said. Editing by Xavier Briand. Patrick Worsnip. Reuters
UNITED NATIONS - DISTRIBUTION of billions of dollars in aid after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami often ignored victims of conflicts raging in Sri Lanka and Indonesia at the time, a report on the lessons of the disaster said on Friday. The report, commissioned by a consortium of five of the hardest-hit countries - Indonesia, Thailand, India, Sri Lanka and the Maldives - said this was due in part to restrictions by aid donors on how their money could be spent. The Dec 26, 2004, tsunami, caused by an undersea earthquake, killed more than 228,000 people and provoked a huge international response, with some US$13.5 billion (S$20.1 billion) pledged worldwide to fund recovery. But the 105-page report, 'The Tsunami Legacy: Innovations, Breakthroughs and Change,' said that in Sri Lanka and Indonesia's Aceh region, both hard hit, there was a need to aid the victims of conflicts as well as those of the tsunami. "However, most post-tsunami organisations largely ignored the post-conflict context, in part due to donor-stipulated restrictions on how they could use their funds,' said the report. This led to local grievances over perceived inequalities in aid provision. 'If conflict sensitivity had been more widespread and funds not restricted to tsunami victims only, building back better could have been more equitable all along,' the report said. The report was presented to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and former US President Bill Clinton, former UN special envoy for tsunami recovery, at a conference at UN headquarters. Commissioned by the Tsunami Global Lessons Learned project, the report also faulted authorities throughout the tsunami-hit area for other forms of discrimination, because it said the need to deliver aid fast outweighed the need for equity. 'Many tsunami-affected communities were still unable to adequately access assistance immediately after the disaster because of barriers associated with their gender, ethnicity, age, class, religion or occupation,' it said. REUTERS.
But the 105-page report, "The Tsunami Legacy: Innovations, Breakthroughs and Change," said that in Sri Lanka and Indonesia's Aceh region, both hard hit, there was a need to aid the victims of conflicts as well as those of the tsunami. "However, most post-tsunami organizations largely ignored the post-conflict context, in part due to donor-stipulated restrictions on how they could use their funds," said the report. This led to local grievances over perceived inequalities in aid provision. "If conflict sensitivity had been more widespread and funds not restricted to tsunami victims only, building back better could have been more equitable all along," the report said. The report was presented to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and former U.S. President Bill Clinton, former U.N. special envoy for tsunami recovery, at a conference at U.N. headquarters. Commissioned by the Tsunami Global Lessons Learned project, the report also faulted authorities throughout the tsunami-hit area for other forms of discrimination, because it said the need to deliver aid fast outweighed the need for equity. "Many tsunami-affected communities were still unable to adequately access assistance immediately after the disaster because of barriers associated with their gender, ethnicity, age, class, religion or occupation," it said.
The report, however, also found much to praise in the aid operation, including a willingness by governments to delegate the task to local organizations and a determination to combat corruption. "Despite the influx of billions of dollars in tsunami-affected countries, corruption levels across the board were kept remarkably low," it said. "Key to this success was a commitment to view corruption, not as a nuisance or unfortunate side effect of the recovery, but as a core threat to the reconstruction effort as a whole." Since the tsunami, governments and international agencies have set about creating national and regional early-warning systems, with 24 early detection buoys placed in the Indian Ocean. In addition, 250,000 new permanent houses and more than 100 air and seaports have been built, 3,000 schools constructed and hundreds of hospitals rehabilitated. Ban and Clinton told the conference lessons from the tsunami were important because the number and intensity of weather-related disasters were increasing. Experience with the tsunami reinforces the importance of sealing a deal at a Copenhagen climate change conference in December aimed at setting new targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions, the U.N. chief said. Editing by Xavier Briand. Patrick Worsnip. Reuters
UNITED NATIONS - DISTRIBUTION of billions of dollars in aid after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami often ignored victims of conflicts raging in Sri Lanka and Indonesia at the time, a report on the lessons of the disaster said on Friday. The report, commissioned by a consortium of five of the hardest-hit countries - Indonesia, Thailand, India, Sri Lanka and the Maldives - said this was due in part to restrictions by aid donors on how their money could be spent. The Dec 26, 2004, tsunami, caused by an undersea earthquake, killed more than 228,000 people and provoked a huge international response, with some US$13.5 billion (S$20.1 billion) pledged worldwide to fund recovery. But the 105-page report, 'The Tsunami Legacy: Innovations, Breakthroughs and Change,' said that in Sri Lanka and Indonesia's Aceh region, both hard hit, there was a need to aid the victims of conflicts as well as those of the tsunami. "However, most post-tsunami organisations largely ignored the post-conflict context, in part due to donor-stipulated restrictions on how they could use their funds,' said the report. This led to local grievances over perceived inequalities in aid provision. 'If conflict sensitivity had been more widespread and funds not restricted to tsunami victims only, building back better could have been more equitable all along,' the report said. The report was presented to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and former US President Bill Clinton, former UN special envoy for tsunami recovery, at a conference at UN headquarters. Commissioned by the Tsunami Global Lessons Learned project, the report also faulted authorities throughout the tsunami-hit area for other forms of discrimination, because it said the need to deliver aid fast outweighed the need for equity. 'Many tsunami-affected communities were still unable to adequately access assistance immediately after the disaster because of barriers associated with their gender, ethnicity, age, class, religion or occupation,' it said. REUTERS.