Informing humanitarians worldwide 24/7 — a service provided by UN OCHA

Somalia + 1 more

Q&A: Africa's gathering storm - Somalia

With floodwaters rising and war clouds gathering in the Horn of Africa, Mercy Corps has a small team on the ground in northern Kenya preparing to assist Somali refugees fleeing devastation and conflict.

Flooding has displaced approximately one million people in the region, mostly in southern Somalia and northern Kenya, where the humanitarian situation was already dire as a result of drought and unrest in Somalia.

Somalia has not had an effective national government since 1991, and although a transitional federal government was established with international support in 2004, it finds itself struggling to hold power against rival Islamists.

Recently, troops representing the Islamists, which control most of the country, have surrounded the transitional government's garrison town and threatened to attack if soldiers from neighboring Ethiopia, which have come to defend the government, do not withdraw.

Mercy Corps' initial assessment identified that Liboi, Kenya, home to thousands of displaced Somalis, had significant unmet humanitarian needs: homes had been destroyed and clean water is in short supply.

Three Mercy Corps staff members, in partnership with a local organization and government officials, are in Liboi and hope to distribute shelter and water supplies in the coming days.

Randy Martin, who directs Mercy Corps' global emergency operations, answered our questions about the evolving crisis.

Humanitarian officials along the Kenya border are girding for more refugees from Somalia, but around 170,000 are already living in camps there. Under what circumstances did they arrive?

These are people who left Somalia because it's been an awful mess for a generation - their lives are in danger, or they simply can't make ends meet because the economy is in ruins. The country's basically been thrown asunder.

You get a sense of the desperation in southern Somalia when you consider the conditions these refugees now endure. It is absolutely horrible. They are living in conditions that fall below the minimum Sphere standards that we use (widely used standards for humanitarian agencies covering things like water quality, the availability of latrines, access to food and potable water). It is illegal for them to work in Kenya, so they don't have jobs. They've been languishing in these camps since the early 90s.

For such a large number of refugees who've been refugees for nearly 15 years, they've garnered remarkably little attention.

That's right. It's a forgotten situation. It's been going on so long, and seemingly so intractable, and so far out in middle of nowhere, that it's not been on anyone's radar screen. Other humanitarian crises have risen to the surface.

So what drew us there?

We've been working on various civil society and economic development projects in Puntland, in northeastern Somalia, for over a year. Back in February, our agricultural livelihoods expert visited southern Somalia to explore ways we could help people there increase their financial security. Most of the people raise crops and graze animals, and the pressures on land and natural resources in that region are enormous. Part of the exodus is related to those tough conditions.

So we've wanted to search out ways to help people in that part of Africa even before the recent flooding and the gathering war clouds. But those have only underscored the need for immediate humanitarian assistance. And Mercy Corps' philosophy is when there's crisis, there's also opportunity to create lasting, positive change. Look at where we're working in Aceh, Indonesia, where the tsunami and the rebuilding have curtailed generations of warfare. Crises often coincide with sweeping changes that create opportunities to make a real difference in people's lives.

And this Kenya-Somali border region where we intended to help is now home to a brewing refugee crisis.

Actually, right now the flow of people has slowed tremendously. Since January, an estimated 35,000 to 40,000 Somalis have crossed into Kenya, but not many recently because of the flooding, which has stymied movement, and because Somalia's Islamist courts are trying to persuade people to stay.

But there's general agreement that when flooding subsides, and if there is an outbreak of conflict, we're going to see a pretty significant number of refugees. The U.S. State Department predicts 200,000, and the UN's High Commissioner for Refugees is using a planning figure of 250,000.

That's a problem, because right now there are 170,000 in three camps. And like I said, these places are far from hospitable, and the recent flooding destroyed one of the camps. So it's really a horrible time to contemplate another quarter of a million people crossing the border.

What do we hope to accomplish by intervening?

In the short term, we want to save lives and reduce suffering. In the long term, our aims really depend on other factors.

Initially, when we did our assessment earlier this year, the idea was to stem the flow of refugees by addressing the economic needs of people departing. Now it's a combination. If we can stem flow of people escaping Somalia, fine. If can't, we'll look for ways we can address their humanitarian and economic needs in Kenya. Either way, we'd like to establish a presence in that region so we can begin working with Somalis on the problems they face.

How hopeful are you that conflict can be avoided and peace and security will prevail?

I have a lot of trepidation. I think in northern regions, there's real promise. But 15 years of chaos is a long, long time. I don't know what it will take to overturn that and instill more security and normalcy in that area, but we'd like to help Somalis in their efforts.

Do you sense reluctance from Americans and even humanitarian agencies to respond to crises that involve Somalia?

Yes, and it's too bad. From a strictly humanitarian sense, our intervention to avert widespread starvation in 1992 saved tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of lives. The whole thing got a bad name through the "Blackhawk Down" - understandably so, since losing 18 of our military was horrible, of course. But that has overshadowed the impact of that humanitarian intervention and really colored the way Americans look at Somalia.

That said, it is a very difficult environment, and many people would just as soon not get engaged in it. I think we must engage if we don't want Somalia to turn into another pre-9/11 Afghanistan, where you have unchecked lawlessness and opportunities for terrorist groups to exploit an anarchic situation.

How could U.S. policy end up complicating our ability to head off what is shaping up as a humanitarian crisis?

Basically the problem is we're taking sides instead of using diplomacy to bring the warring parties together. The U.S. should not support, but instead should seek to delay implementation of the UN resolution calling for a peacekeeping force in Somalia, which is perceived as supporting one side to the current conflict. No external military force should be deployed without the consent of both the Transitional Federal Government and the Council of Somali Islamic Courts.

We want to give diplomacy a better chance. We think by isolating the Islamic courts, it's going to make things considerably worse. A political solution is the only way to avert a humanitarian crisis, and any political solution must include all parties.