Restore humanitarian access in Ethiopia!

Michael Thomas Knaak, a first-year Conflict Management master’s student at Johns Hopkins/SAIS, writes:

CSIS February 22 convened a discussion of restoring humanitarian access in Ethiopia’s Tigray province, the scene of recent fighting between local forces and the Federal government. Panelists included:

Judd Devermont, Director of the CSIS Africa Program

Daniel Bekele – Ethiopian Human Rights Commission, Chief Commissioner

Catherine Wiesner – Head of External Engagement at the UNHCR Regional Bureau for East Africa, Horn of Africa, and the Great Lakes

Jan Egeland – Secretary General of the Norwegian Refugee Council

Jacob Kurtzer – Director of the Humanitarian Agenda at CSIS, who moderated

Key Points

• The humanitarian crisis in the Tigray region of northern Ethiopia is substantial, chaotic, and unlikely to improve without increased access for humanitarian personnel.
  
• There is a general dearth of detailed information on the situation in Tigray, as access to humanitarian personnel and journalists is severely restricted.
  
• Such access is currently being denied due to a lack of political will in the Ethiopian government and in international state-level or higher actors.
  
• Significant civil-military and Federal-regional governance coordination problems are further hindering access by humanitarian assistance personnel.     

Judd Devermont

The humanitarian crises is one of many problems afflicting Ethiopia, but is the most acute flashpoint at this time. Other sources of conflict include the significant governance reforms ongoing within the Federal government, the government’s apparent mistreatment of dissidents, the contentious redrawing of political borders, and the formation and growth of unregulated militias. The continuation of the humanitarian crises complicates the overall political landscape within Tigray and across states.

In addressing the crises, the main difficulty is political will, rather than technical issues or capacity. Rectifying the limited accessibility to the region by humanitarian aid workers is critical. One idea towards this end might be appointment of a US special envoy. The envoy would need to have a close relationship with the State Department and have access to real power and resources, enabling her or him to own the process and act as a main driver for US action in the region.

Daniel Bekele

There are three key points that need immediate attention. First, local governance and administration must be reestablished to secure the restoration of critical services within the region. Second, restrictions on media access must be removed to allow for a free flow of valuable information reported in a timely manner. Third, the bureaucratic and political hurdles delaying humanitarian assistance must be overcome.

On this third point there is at least engagement between the Ethiopian government and aid organizations on the need for civilian protection and the applicability of international humanitarian law. However, they disagree on implementation of civilian-military coordination. The government lacks the will to permit regional access to assistance personnel.

Increased United Nations access and involvement through a special rapporteur has been floated as an idea for addressing the crisis. While such a step might be viewed positively, it would be important for the international community to recognize that the international process should complement rather than displace existing national processes, institutions, and efforts. A “fly-in and fly-out” type effort could fail to be coherent with the domestic Ethiopian led response.

Catherine Wiesner

Scattered reports and satellite imagery confirm that two refugee camps were assaulted by armed militants, and many thousands of refugees and IDPs are now unaccounted for. Migration from the destroyed camps to new ones has strained capacity in safe spaces. Other priority needs are unaccompanied children, restoration of basic services, and food aid.

Civil-military coordination is lacking, and the threat of violence against aid workers limits their efforts. Sudan and Djibouti have helped ease the crisis by keeping their borders open to refugees, though particularly in Sudan the border area is remote and suffers from poor infrastructure, complicating the process of moving aid staff and materiel.

Early financial appeals to address the crisis were 70% funded, but the original plan was limited in size and scope. The revised plan addresses the whole of Ethiopia in 2021 rather than just the Tigray region, and is 50% funded ($150 million), which is enough to continue operations through June. But aid efforts will have limited effectiveness without access to the areas worst hit by the crisis.

Jan Egeland

Impeding the humanitarian response is surprising coming from Ethiopia, which has a long history of generosity towards refugees. With the sudden restriction of access, agencies lost contact with numerous staff members. The trickle of information coming out of the region describes massacres and populations fleeing for their lives. Additional information remains scarce, but firsthand accounts remain horrific.

More international pressure is required to convince the Federal government to allow humanitarian workers access to the restricted areas. There are hundreds of volunteer workers prepared, with significant quantities of resources warehoused and ready for deployment. It would be helpful if the UN, US, or the African Union could secure the needed access to get aid where it is needed most, including to opposition-held areas. Federal and regional governance coordination needs improvement, as aid organizations find permission to intervene from Federal authorities can be blocked by local authorities, and vice versa.