Group 2: Conflict in Syria, Refugees and the World Food Programme
In March of 2011 a civil uprising began in Syria. Dissenters started protesting the Syrian-led cell of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party of President Bashar al-Assad; a regime which employs a one-party state. The civil unrest began in December of 2010, and escalated from there. As the uprising grew in March of 2011, the Syrian government began to retaliate with force in April of that year. The situation has only grown more contentious since.
President Assad has been able to maintain power as he has fought the uprising with oppression and force, causing civil war to emerge. Rebels have taken up arms, which are being supplied to them from countries such as Saudi Arabia. The Syrian government has been accused of striking rebel forces and civilians with chemical weapons, causing international alarm, as Assad’s actions appear to be in violation of international law. As the civil war continues to rage, it has claimed over 100,000 victims caught in the conflict.
The Syrian conflict can also be classified by its sectarian nature. Assad is Alawite, a small section of Shiite Islam that represents the ruling majority in Syria. Over the decades, there has been a divided “us versus them” conflict rising from the conservative Sunni factions who oppose the political favoritism the Alawites have received. This conflict drives the issues in Syria today, engaging other religious subsets of the population that have either pledged support to the Syrian government or the rebel cause.
More than a million Syrians have sought shelter from the conflict in neighboring countries like Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon and Iraq. One of the largest refugee sites is Jordan’s Zaatari camp, which shelters more than 120,000 refugees. The refugees flee to other countries, often with no savings, taking only what they can carry in hopes of finding safety from their country’s civil war.
Among the many issues they face, finding food is among the top. As a result, the UN World Food Programme (WFP) has been providing support to the refugees in Zaatari and elsewhere. But the current aid in Syria is nothing new. The WFP has been providing assistance to Syria since 1964, totalling about $500 million worth of food (www.wfp.org/countries/syria/operations). It was also involved during the four-year drought that began in 2006, which decimated crops in Syria (www.wfp.org/countries/syria/operations).
Key stakeholders involved with the WFP in Syria
There are many stakeholders involved in the conflict in Syria, both locally and internationally. First, the WFP is an international organization operating within the UN, which positions the organization to have access to international stakeholders to alleviate hunger relief. Acting as part of the UN is essential to the way the WFP operates in Syria.
There are a number of hunger relief areas that the WFP focuses on. Because of this, various stakeholders are engaged with the hunger relief problem. These areas include farming, access, education and emergency response, among many others.
The WFP has specifically partnered with the Syrian Arab Red Crescent (SARC) and 23 other local partners in order to supply monthly food assistance to Syrians. This year alone, the WFP will feed nearly 3 million Syrians, which should rise to feed 4 million people by October (www.wfp.org/countries/syria/overview). In order to do so, it is crucial that local partnerships are in place, as they provide an opportunity for the organization to access areas that are controlled by the regime and opposition.
The WFP’s Food for Education Programme implements a food voucher program in numerous camps throughout Syria and affected neighboring countries (www.wfp.org/countries/syria/operations). As a result, neighboring countries will help with the distribution of aid. These partner organizations include TUA, Thaghar Al Madina, and Radi Shedifat in Al Za’atari camp and King Abdullah Park in Jordan; Danish Refugee Council in Lebanon; Islamic Relief Iraq, working in partnership with Barzani Foundation in Iraq; and Kilis Camp in October in Turkey (www.wfp.org/countries/syria/overview).
The Purchase for Progress Programme also works with local stakeholders, but to increase community harvests. This is how the programme works: The WFP purchases food from local “smallholder” farmers, which is then pumped back into the programme to feed those in need. The organization refers to this approach as an “agricultural value chain,” which ensures that the changes made in a community are sustainable (www.un.org/apps/news/newsmakers).
Due to its valuable local partnerships and connection with the UN in particular, WFP officials are also able to travel more easily with UN “insignia” throughout high conflict areas in convoys in armored vehicles to deliver food (www.un.org/apps/news/newsmakers). One of the main struggles the WFP continues to face, however, is in areas where there is shelling and fighting in which the organization will not enter, and therefore, remains challenged in helping the hungry (www.un.org/apps/news/newsmakers).
Factors shaping the context of the WFP’s efforts
There are many political, economic, social and cultural factors that come into play for the WFP’s efforts. The obvious political factors involve the domestic disputes between the Syrian opposition and Assad and his Ba’athist regime. In 2011, many of the opposition groups united under the branding of the Syrian National Council (SNC). The SNC is a recognized institution, or at least supported in some capacity, by 17 U.N. member states including the United States, France and the United Kingdom.
The WFP’s executive director, Ertharin Cousin, has commented that the WFP is not a political organization (Watkins, 2013). Despite this, the organization is still obliged to interact with all parties in the effort to reach those in need. Currently, the WFP is reaching out to roughly 3 million people inside Syria, and 1.2 million in neighboring regions. Because of the influx of refugees in neighboring countries, the WFP is also involved in dialogue with these countries to help meet aid efforts. With the new goal of the WFP to increase its efforts to a hopeful 4 million, as previously mentioned, inside the country and 1.7 million outside, these political relationships are strategic in the success of their campaign.
One reason why these efforts are so crucial is because local production of food has been severely stunted. Subsequently, many farmers have begun harvesting crops early in fear of losing them to fire or other damage caused by the conflict. Livestock is also suffering as many animals have begun to starve due to the lack of feed. This year has produced the worst wheat harvest in more than three decades, and this as the economy continues to weaken with the depletion of foreign reserves (Ridgwell, 2013).
Locally, Assad has sought to unfreeze funds in foreign bank accounts in an attempt to purchase food stocks including wheat. Although foodstuffs are not included in international sanctions, foreign accounts do fall into this realm. Only days after the resolution reached by the U.S., Russia and Syria to disarm the chemical weapons arsenal, France cleared the use of frozen assets in the E.U. to Syria for the import of foodstuffs. This should hopefully alleviate some of the growing pressure weighing on the WFP (Trompiz, 2013).
Unfortunately the economic strain is felt in neighboring countries as well, as camps become inundated by those seeking refuge. Acknowledging this, the UN Refugee Agency and the WFP have made a point to give their appreciation to these nations in their efforts. "This influx represents a huge strain on the economy and infrastructure here, and having a war next door is always a threat," UN High Commissioner for Refugees chief Antonio Guterres said after a trip to the Iraqi region of Kurdistan in August, lauding them for their humanitarian assistance (www.unhcr.org/522053a99). At least for now, it would seem the support of the WFP and other organizations has helped to curb any major economic or political ramifications that the influx of refugees has had on Syria’s neighbors.
Any social or cultural issues that have risen in wake of the conflict have had minor consequence with the efforts of the WFP. Despite allegations of the Syrian opposition having ties to Al Qaeda, and other domestic disputes involving Christian or Kurdish minorities, the WFP has been able to continue its efforts to assist all those affected by the conflict. The WFP has been accused in the past of not delivering aid to the Kurdish regions of Syria and not intervening with the Turkish government in disputes of accepting Kurdish refugees (ANF- News Desk, 2013). Most of these issues have arisen through the internal conflict of smaller Syrian insurgent forces against Kurdish rebels. As stated previously, the WFP is not a political institution, and has no legal grounding to become involved with or persuade the discussions in relation to any conflict/s. It will continue to partner its efforts with the FOA, Red Crescent and other organizations as it attempts to increase the number of people reached over the coming months.
Potential solutions to the problem
The WFP has a great approach to creating partnerships in the local and international community to advance their cause. However, because the organization is so multifaceted, operating across borders and under the UN, it can be somewhat confusing for people to understand who they should be giving their money to for global hunger relief.
Subsequently, what the organization could do is leverage a comprehensive awareness and fundraising campaign. First, by launching an awareness campaign, the organization could inform its publics of the type of aid they need for Syrians, and then follow up with a fundraising campaign to tell them where to go to donate money to help those people in need. Both campaigns would have to be interrelated and be dependant on the success of one another.
Discussion questions
1. Given the high-conflict situation in Syria, what considerations should be made by the WFP when communicating with those affected?
2. In a recent article, Assad was attempting to attain frozen funds based in Europe in the effort to secure foodstuffs. Would this be a conflict of interest for the WFP to work with Assad and the Syrian government or an opportunity to bridge a partnership to benefit all Syrians?
Citations
ANF - News Desk. “No UN food for Kurdish region in Syria.” Ajansa Nûçeyan a Firatê, n.p. 7 Aug. 2013 Firatnews.com Web 2 Oct. 2013. http://en.firatnews.com/news/news/no-un-food-for-kurdish-region-in-syria.htm.
“Interview with Ertharin Cousin, Executive Director of the UN World Food Programme.” www.un.org/apps/news/newsmakers.asp?NewsID=89. World Food Programme, n.p. Web. 2 Oct. 2013.
Ridgwell, Henry. “Food Crisis Grips War-Torn Syria.” Voice of America London, 7 Aug. 2013. News/ Middle East. Web. 3 Oct. 2013. http://www.voanews.com/content/food-crisis-grips-war-torn-syria/1725576.html.
Trompiz, Gus. “France Cleared the Use of Frozen Funds to Export Food to Syria.” Reuters Paris, 23 Sep. 2013. n.p. Web. 2 Oct. 2013. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/23/us-france-syria-fund-idUSBRE98M0PV20130923.
“UNHCR and WFP Chiefs praise open border policy for Syrian refugees in Iraq’s Kurdistan region.” http://www.unhcr.org/522053a99.html. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, n.p. Web. 2 Oct. 2013
Watkins, Tom. “World Food Programme beefing up its Syria Program.” CNN New York, 25 Sep. 2013. CNN World Web. 2 Oct. 2013. http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/24/world/syria-refugees-food/index.html.
I agree that the WFP would greatly benefit from the launching of an awareness campaign within the United States. While the media here constantly reminds us of the needs of the Syrian people, we are not often informed of how we can help. A campaign that outlines exactly where money can be funneled and what it will be used for would provide clarity for those wanting to donate to the WFP’s efforts.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the WFP working with the Syrian government to access more food for the refugees, we are faced with an ethical dilemma. The WFP relies heavily on their relationships within communities to provide food to the refugees. In particular, the WFP utilizes their relationship with the UN to travel into the more dangerous parts of Syria. Their partnership with the UN is vital to the WFP’s distribution of food. Initially, I was in support of the World Food Programme working with Assad and the Syrian government to use their frozen funds to obtain foodstuffs. However, after considering the significant contribution the UN has made in the WFP efforts, I worry that by working with the Syrian government, the WFP may jeopardize this relationship. Would the World Food Programme be able to negotiate relationships with both the UN and the Syrian government? If they are transparent about their objectives and maintain political neutrality, I would imagine that the dual-partnership would be possible. I would however, be concerned about the UN’s reaction to the new partnership. How do you all think the WFP could best negotiate its relationship with the UN in light of the potential new partnership with the Syrian government?
Hi Elizabeth,
DeleteI think that the WFP has to maintain its mission-driven operations. That same mission-driven focus is also what gives them a valid explanation for partnering with President Assad. Above and beyond all else, they exist to provide food aid and logistical support to people in need. While they do rely on the recommendations of the UN and FAO, their first purpose is to provide food and assistance to those Syrians who haven't left and don't have a way to provide it for themselves. It is imperative, beyond politics, that food be provided to those individuals in need, given that is can be done so safely. If forging a partnership with President Assad gives them a way to accomplish this, I think it is a positive strategic decision that can be justified by the WFP's core mission and purpose.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree it could be an overall strategic advantage for the WFP. As Ken mentioned below though, one of the big factors would be assuring that Assad is not stockpiling or hoarding foodstuffs or being discriminatory in its distribution. Although the WFP could in some way serve as a transparency mechanism, its pledged to not be a political agency could prove to be a rocky slope in terms of its legitimacy of being a neutral and non-partisan entity.
DeleteWith that being said, would there be a benefit of having the U.N. itself or another branch/committe step in to monitor the distribution and of food stuffs acquired by the Syrian government? Would they have any grounding to do so? Why do you think a proposal of this nature hasn't come up?
In regards to Assad, how do you think partnering with the WFP or the U.N. would affect his credibility with his cohorts or legitimacy as president? Would it be beneficial to him having transparency with the distribution of resources, or would it weaken his defense if potential rebels were being supplied by government funded rations?
Perhaps they should ask the Syrian people if it matters to them of whether or not they care where the food is coming from. I understand that people in need may not care about this, but you never know. In fact, if I was Syrian, and a family member of a family member was killed by chemical weapons, why would I want Assad's pity? Isn't he the one who put all of these people in this situation in the first place? I may be insulted by the WFP providing food from the regime. To continue to play devil's advocate, I would bet that there are other hunger relief organizations who would think a WFP-Assad partnership is unethical. I think the WFP should opt out of this partnership before it happens.
DeleteAdriana,
Delete(CC: Everyone else, of course.)
Whether you are truly "playing devil's advocate" or not, I'll have to agree with the devil here! So often in relief efforts, we forget to consider the emotional needs, ideas, and values of the people we are "aiding." Which is fascinating, as "relief" efforts are marked as an attempt to increase the well-being of those on the receiving aid, and are emotions, ideas, and values not very much linked to over well-being?
I mean, of course, as a little American girl, my first instinct was to respond to the second question, "Well, of course the WFP should partner with Assad if it means feeding those poor, needy, starving Syrians!" But I am not part of the conflict, and many of those who are truly trying to help are not either. We need to allow those who are to speak and decide what is best for themselves.
The WFP is in a difficult position by being a U.N. entity. That being the case, the WFP must work within geo-political regulations to accomplish its means. Due to the U.N.’s stance on the Syrian conflict and the Syrian agreement to hand over its chemical weapons to the U.S. and Russia has forced the U.N. to take a back seat in the conflict. This has also forced the WFP to do the same. The WFP must now work with neighboring countries to supply food to Syrian refugees sheltering in those countries.
ReplyDeleteThe WFP has begun featuring information on heir website to garner donations to help those in need of food. WFP.org details the Syrian conflict and what has happened to those who have been affected by the civil war. The WFP website features the cost of feeding a family for a week and month ($18 and $72, respectively). This is an important step, but it is not enough. We shouldn’t have to looking for where to donate. UNICEF runs an aggressive ad campaign seeking to help those in need of food and basic necessities.
The WFP working with Assad and his regime could be a positive or have severe effects. Assad could be looking to really help the people whose lives have been destroyed, or he could be looking to hold the foodstuff hostage and force those in need to abide by his leadership. The WFP needs to tread lightly and make sure that the foodstuffs are going where they need to go, and the U.N. must play an integral role in that process. With the general mistrust of the Assad regime, it would be interesting to see what road the WFP takes.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThanks Elizabeth and Ken for your comments. It sounds like we're all in agreement that the WFP should have a more proactive and aggressive campaign to seek aid and donation funds from the U.S. and other capable audiences. At this point, information seems to be primarily available to those actively seeking it. That being said, would it be beneficial for the WFP to partner with outreach groups within the U.N., such as UNICEF to meet these needs? What potential road blocks or conflict's of interest could you see coming from this?
ReplyDeleteA partnership with UNICEF would be beneficial to WFP. UNICEF has far-reaching influence in the global community and is more widely known, despite both operating under the U.N. Competing agendas would be the largest issue with these organizations teaming up. Since they are independent entities, each has a process and an ultimate goal they would like to achieve. Both must work collectively with Assad, the Syrian government and the U.N. to achieve a common goal, therein lies the mistrust between the global community and the Assad regime. Once a middle ground is established, and agreements are made and upheld, then the process can begin.
DeleteI agree with Ken that a partnership with UNICEF would definitely help the WFP efforts in Syria. I did some research on the UNICEF webpage and found that they already have a prominent presence in Syria. Their goals for this past year included providing vaccination, water sanitation, psychological support, and learning programs for the Syrian children refugees. With UNICEF's programs already implemented in Syria, I would think that partnering with WFP would be a logical step for the organization. Their focus has not emphasized food provision this past year, but a partnership might enable them to make it more of a priority. I do see a potential problem in UNICEF's concentration on children when partnering with WFP. They would need to be willing to expand their support to focus on all of the Syrian refugees, young and old. In conclusion, I think the UNICEF's previous activity in Syria sets them up well for a partnership with the WFP.
Delete1. The main consideration that should be made by the WFP when communicating with those affected is that their mission is not to assess the political situation, but to press on in spite of the political situation. Making sure that everyone knows that their actions are for the greater good of all people, not select people. In terms of those in the Kurdish region, it is unacceptable that they did not receive food when they were meant to do so.
ReplyDelete2. In this type of situation there are nothing but conflicts of interest. Every party involved has its own agenda and makes its decisions accordingly. As much as it might pain those who are against everything Assad stands for, it is a necessary evil to work with him in order to accomplish certain tasks. The WFP can’t afford to alienate anyone, let alone Assad, at this point. There are possibilities of making certain assistance contingent upon Assad committing to certain things, but ultimately the suffering of his people isn’t his top priority right now. Maintaining control takes precedence over everything else.
If a fundraising campaign is to be successful, the importance of confirming that the money would actually be going to feed people is paramount. The public’s ability to trust that the money would not be used to support the oppression in Syria would determine the amount of money given to the cause. In this case the elaboration likelihood model would need to be used to determine how best to target groups of people that feel attached to the issue, but need to know exactly what they can do to get involved.
Hi Jennifer,
DeleteI also agree with you that the WFP would need to utilize the utmost transparency and give excellent reports of fund disbursement to the actual cause. I think that along with the ELM, the Knowledge Gap Hypothesis would be a great pillar. I think that most people know about the dire situation in Syria, but don't know exactly what needs the unintended victims of this situation have. Educating American citizens, for example, about why supplying food to those who have been needlessly displaced or effected by the fighting is critical. Showing facts and figures of how much money it costs to provide a meal, or why these individuals cannot begin to provide sustenance on their own would be helpful. The public needs to understand why they should help, and if they choose to do so, where exactly their valuable assets are being used.
I agree with Kenny and Jen’s posts. Ashley mentioned the use of the knowledge gap hypothesis to educate the public about the needs amongst the Syrian people in addition to Jen’s elaboration likelihood model recommendation. Unfortunately, I do not think a lot of people know about the conflict in Syria. People with a similar educational background to ours will know, however the “general” public most likely does not fully understand the conflict, especially here in the United States. Obama’s wanting to intervene caused multiple media outlets to take on different perceptions of the conflict leading to the dissemination of confusing information to the public. Since The WFP is working on a global stage, this can play a role in the amount received in donations (assuming the fundraising idea).
ReplyDeleteThere’s a strong possibility that in addition to the elaboration likelihood model and knowledge gap theories, a campaign from WFP would have to address some cognitive dissonance. For simplicity reasons I’ll use the U.S. as an example. We already experienced extreme racist stupidity, for lack of a better term, during the Miss United States Pageant. Given the U.S.’s past experiences, Americans, knowledgeable about Syria and not, are going to be hesitant. However, this is not to say America needs to come to rescue. Gaining interest and raising money might prove to be more difficult because of past events more so than if the WFP is working with the Syrian government or not.
We know part of the WFP main mission is not to involve itself in politics. SO what about the social implications outside Syria from the donators? Or would it be in the WFP’s best interest to not care what outsiders think and go ahead and do what’s best for the Syrian people? I think Kenny answered this in one of his comments; sorry to reiterate. The WFP and UN have to work with the Syrian government and Assad to attain a common middle ground. In terms of a fundraiser, there might be some social dissonance hindering donations.
1. The WFP, first and foremost, needs to make sure that their workers and volunteers will be safe when delivering food to Syria. Once they have done that to the best of their ability, it is important that they are aware of whom they are communicating with. They need to know if they are speaking with a Sunni or a Shiite because, although they are both Muslim, they have different beliefs and stand on opposite sides of the conflict.
ReplyDelete2. I believe that allowing the Syrian government to attain frozen funds based in Europe to secure foodstuffs is a good call right now. As we have seen, the civil war going on in Syria has devastated the country and its citizens. Hundreds of thousands of innocent people have been forced to leave their homes to find refuge in other countries. As you mentioned, this is also causing strain on the countries taking the refugees in. All of Syria is suffering right now. With all the devastation from the war, there isn’t enough food. You mentioned that the WFP is not political. If this is so, they are obligated to help all those in need, not just those who whose side they agree with.
I think France was right in waiting to lift the freeze until after a resolution was reached by the U.S., Russia and Syria to disarm the chemical weapons arsenal. This shows that we are willing to work with them towards a resolution as long as they follow the rules established by the UN.
I realize that many people believe that by providing food to these regions we are only supporting the Syrian government, which relies on the distribution of food in the areas it controls to boost support. While I think there is some value to this perspective, I think our obligation to help the innocent people in Syria is more important and I think the good that comes from these efforts outweigh the bad.
Here is a follow up to the WFP Syria crisis: http://du-strategic-comm-campaigns-2013.blogspot.com/2013/11/syrian-refugees-suffer-cuts-to-food-aid.html
ReplyDelete