Email 
Print 
HAVE YOUR SAY: Should international aid agencies do more in Iraq?
Written by: AlertNet
Iraqi women wait for food from a private humanitarian aid organisation helping widows who've lost their husbands in the violence, Baghdad, April 2008. REUTERS/Mohammed Ameen
Iraqi militias have filled the vacuum created by the failure of the international community and the government to help displaced and vulnerable people, a report from Refugees International says this week. "Through a 'Hezbollah-like' scheme, the Shiite Sadrist movement has established itself as the main service provider in the country. Similarly, other Shiite and Sunni groups are gaining ground and support through the delivery of food, oil, electricity, clothes and money to the civilians living in their fiefdoms," it says. The U.S.-based research and advocacy group is urging donors, the United Nations and international aid agencies to step up their humanitarian support, despite the security risks. It says the international community needs more dialogue with local actors to gain access to communities in need, and should give more funding to trusted Iraqi NGOs to help them reach people. What do you think? Have international aid agencies shirked their responsibilities towards Iraqis? Do the dangers justify their absence on the ground? Is their reluctance to work in Iraq storing up trouble for the future? Further reading:
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
8 responses to “HAVE YOUR SAY: Should international aid agencies do more in Iraq?”
Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
Unlike some other content on this website, the written content in this article may be republished or redistributed by any means free of charge. Any use of photographs and graphics on this website is expressly prohibited. You must check whether written content contained in other articles on this website may be republished or redistributed without the express permission of Reuters or the relevant third party provider.
18 Apr 2008 12:47:09 GMT
George Bush personally created the current crisis in Iraq. He was elected and re-elected by the voters of the United States. It is the responsibility of the U.S. government, and the U.S. government alone, to help resolve the problems in Iraq. And that could be best accomplished by a total withdrawal of U.S. forces. The best thing that ever happened to Vietnam was the withdrawal of U.S. forces. Now Vietnam is a successful country where U.S. citizens go on vacations.
18 Apr 2008 13:49:08 GMT
Sure the conflict in Iraq and the enormous humanitarian crisis has its roots in the invasion, but just like the tsunami, the public has to show states like the US and UK that we're prepared to contribute to the aid effort, as maybe we can embarras governments into helping.
I've donated to support the work of the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in Iraq and neighbouring countries via their appeal: http://unhcr-iraqcrisis.org/ My friends who are working in Iraq as journalists and aid workers say that aid can be delivered, but security problems complicate direct assistance and high-visibility efforts. But more needs to be done also in Syria and Jordan, that shelter millionsof refugees. Agencies like the UN, the Red Crescent and others are trying to help, despite the problems and the lack of interest amongst governments. I think more should be done and more attention is needed in regards to the huge refugee/displacement problem the whole region faces due to the invasion and chaos.18 Apr 2008 14:14:18 GMT
My own organisation, International Medical Corps, is one of the few international aid agencies to have remained operational and fully present throughout Iraq over the past five years. Our position is in line with the calls from Refugees International. The humanitarian situation in Iraq merits a major international response which has, unfortunately, been notably limited. Darfur and Afghanistan, to name two, are also very hostile operating environments that have also seen direct targeting of humanitarian staff, but aid agencies have, on the whole, been far more willing to remain engaged. There is a need to untangle the politics from the debate on Iraq. There is an unquestionable need. The experience of my own colleagues on the ground has been that, despite major challenges related to security, it has been possible to operate within a safe enough humanitarian space. Furthermore, our presence on the ground has enabled the development of strong, productive relationships with those Iraqi institutions responsible for the care, development and well being of the population. These relationships are now slowly leading to opportunities for a wide range of development and relief programmes that we hope and expect will facilitate the re-establishment of effective and accessible social services, economic opportunities and civic participation as the security situation stabilises in future. These are potential results that would be far less likely without engagement and partnership now. To see a recent example of our work in Sadr City, Baghdad, visit http://www.imcworldwide.org.uk/IMC-UK-in-iraq-002.asp
18 Apr 2008 16:30:39 GMT
These questions are framed in a manner that downplays (at best) the important work that national and international aid agencies are currently undertaking in extremely difficult circumstances where 94 aid workers have lost their lives. It is clear that humanitarian assistance has not kept pace with growing needs in Iraq. Short of waving a magic humanitarian wand, the problems that have reduced humanitarian access and led to a fragmented response - insecurity, compromised neutrality, weak coordination systems, a shortage of independent partner organisations, rapidly evolving needs, and a heavily politicised context - are not going to disappear overnight. Aid agencies have found ways of working within an operating environment that is and will remain highly constrained in the near future. There is an urgent need to move beyond vague commentary about lack of engagement and focus on the fact that aid agencies have found ways of working amidst substantial challenges. A better question to pose is how can more be done to learn from and scale up these programmes and at the same time assist local independent actors and communities, who generally provide the bulk of relief in any setting. There is a need for flexible and consistent humanitarian funding and for those on the ground to establish a common dialogue on priorities. More concerted action is possible in Iraq, but there is a problematic lack of consensus, particularly between donors and NGOs, on needs and on the scope for safe access. As for militias conducting humanitarian assistance activities, international aid agencies hardly have a monopoly on providing assistance ââ¬" for better or worse.
For more analysis of these issues, see http://www.odi.org.uk/hpg18 Apr 2008 16:32:12 GMT
It is the responsibility of the USA to completely compensate Iraq and help it get back on its feet. There is a very crude saying here in the USA "you break it, you own it."
18 Apr 2008 21:16:21 GMT
I warmly believe that there should be a more solidified partnership between international aid agencies and security forces--which should be provided by the Coalition (i.e. mainly U.S.) military--to make sure that humanitarian considerations, as well as infrastructure, medical relief, etc., is provided. It is not helping the United States to NOT be on the front lines in terms of providing or facilitating aid to those populations who need it most. There is a military reality--and inordinate risk in many cases--but to allow any humanitarian crisis to continue under the auspices of occupation is not just counter-productive in a public relations sense, and in terms of the goodwill of the overall population or in the interests of future security, but because, simply, it is the right thing to do. Unfortunately, if it's not presented in the context of self-interest, not much is going to be done to provide such security. Too much of this wa! r has devolved many notions of what is right and what is self-serving. In this case, to provide aid, or to facilitate it in whatever ways possible, in very real terms, serves both considerations.
In terms of the aid agencies themselves, to serve this end, they should be more publicly asking the help of the U.S. Military to provide security to go in to those areas. Unfortunately, and as we in the HMF are coming to know all too well, if it's not in the news, or not being given voice in a large, public forum, then not much is going to be done. At the moment, it takes alerting the public to galvanize public opinion for anything in particular to happen.21 Apr 2008 13:45:25 GMT
This 14 minute video on the situation facing many of the some half million Iraqi refugees in Jordan (Life for Iraqi Refugees Increasingly Desperate) on this link may be of some interest:
http://www.unhcr.org/static16 May 2008 16:07:55 GMT
The iraqi refugee and IDPs crisis is a fast growing humanitarian crisis. A recent report by UNHCR EX-COM stated: - That there is an info gap between reality and perceptions (internationally)ââ¬"we are underestimating needs and severity . - Numbers great plus increase in prices make things worse - No possibility for quick return in short-term, this is a long-term problem . - Issues still very politicized . - Need to increase financial commitments It is a significant step to address this deepening crisis. However, more must be done. As we face a global food shortage coupled with diminishing resources available to meet the daily needs of Iraqi refugees and IDPs, urgent support is needed to handle this situation. Even though the highly politicized situation and the sectrarian violence in Iraq can hamper aid to reach most vulnerable people and those who are in destitute. More aid must be provided and delivered for those whose lives have been turned upside down and who may never get the life they once lived back. Irrespective of one's views on the war, people need help and more aid provided by the international organizations and NGOs with the partnership of the UN agency beside the help of US.