 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
USAID Agriculture Activities
in Africa
USAID Africa Agriculture Resources
Related USAID Topics
|
|
|
|
 |
- 02/06/12: Remarks by Donald Steinberg, Deputy Administrator, US Agency for International Development - Beyond Victimhood: The Crucial Role of Marginalized Groups in Building Peace
- 02/02/12: Statement of Dr. Sarah E. Mendelson, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance, before the House Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights - U.S. Policy toward Post-Election Democratic Republic of the Congo
- 01/20/12: Remarks by USAID Administrator Dr. Rajiv Shah at the Environment and Security Conference, Washington, DC
- 01/19/12: Remarks by USAID Administrator Dr. Rajiv Shah at the Brookings Institution, Washington, DC - U.S. Aid and Transparency for Global Development
- See all USAID Speeches and Testimony
 RSS Feed for Recent USAID Speeches and Testimony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is an archived USAID document retained on this web site as a matter of public record.
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Michael Ranneberger &
USAID Assistant Administrator for Legislative and Public Affairs Ed Fox
Humanitarian Efforts In Response to the Food Crisis in Niger
U.S. Department of State
Washington, DC
August 5, 2005
MR. CASEY: Okay. Afternoon, everybody. Welcome to Friday afternoon, hope you all had a good lunch. We're pleased to give you an opportunity to talk to a couple of our important policymakers here about the ongoing humanitarian efforts to respond to the food crisis in Niger. As you know, we've got with us Ed Fox, the Assistant Administrator from USAID and Mike Ranneberger, our Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs.
And with that, let me just turn the podium over to Ed. Let him make a couple of brief opening comments for you and then we'll try and get right to questions.
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Good afternoon, nice to be here with you even if you'd rather be someplace -- at least we're not outside, that's the good news if you've been out there.
I wanted to take the opportunity today to bring you up to speed a little bit on what the United States is doing in response to the situation in Niger -- and Niger - first, have we got a pronunciation we're going to agree to -- which group here? I rely on the State Department for all those kinds of questions. (Laughter.) The proper pronunciation.
QUESTION: Niger.
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Niger, thank you very much.
QUESTION: Niger --
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Pardon.
MR. CASEY: I'm from "New Jersey."
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: He's an African. (Laughter). Newjerian, very nice, I like that.
MR. CASEY: We do like many things associated with the French language. (Laughter).
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Very good. What I'd like to do is just make a couple of quick remarks and then we can go into questions. The United States, and particularly USAID has been closely monitoring the food situation in Niger and throughout this whole region since November of last year, where due to drought and locust damage, pockets of severe localized food insecurity have developed. The underlying causes of this remain chronic poverty.
We've responded rather quickly and generously, we believe, to this situation, also not only in the individual country but around in the region. At this point, we've provided approximately $127 million from the American people in programs that are designed to improve the lives of those who live in the Sahel and are working closely with the UN and other governments of the region and donor countries. These total funds represent direct assistance to Burkina Faso, Mali, Mauritania, Niger and Senegal and also include about a $14 million funded effort on locust eradication programs in this past year.
Today, the U.S. Government has funded some special airlifts of high nutrient food aid to the region in support of UNICEF's call for helping to feed more than 34,000 at-risk children. These airlifts are in addition to earlier aid that we've provided, some 12,000-metric tons of Title 2 food aid that was provided this fiscal year to people in some of the most food-insecure regions of Niger. The total amount of U.S. support to battle food insecurity in Niger this year is approximately $13.75 million.
We also have --
QUESTION: (Off-mike).
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: That is bilateral assistant to that country alone. Yes, that's correct.
We also have on the ground in-country and in the surrounding countries of Mali and Burkina Faso specialists from our FEWS NET team, our Famine Early Warning Team, as well as Food for Peace officers, AID officers and assisted by Embassy Officers who are monitoring the situation on an ongoing basis, not only to help to determine what's going on in-country, but also what's happening in the neighboring countries, if and when additional responses may be needed and what those conditions are.
So with that, perhaps -- I don't know if we wish to have any comments from the State Department at this point, if not I will --
QUESTION: Answer any questions (inaudible).
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Okay.
QUESTION: The 127 million is what fiscal year?
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: It would be FY '05.
QUESTION: Which we're still in.
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Which we are still in, correct.
Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: I have a question. You said the underlying causes are poverty. I thought the underlying causes were a lot of the situations that Mother Nature is responsible for, like the drought and then, of course, the locusts. I'm not sure if that's a kind of situation that accompanies poverty or --
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Well --
QUESTION: And then also, if you could talk about that apparently, there does seem to be kind of food in the pipeline, but there's just an emergency in getting it to these people right away. If you could give us a little bit about specifics about how many people you think are at risk of starvation right now and how long we have to get them the food.
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Sure. You almost made me forget your first question, but you indicated that this was -- or from my statement, that this was -- underlying cause is chronic poverty. What we mean by that is that, on an ongoing basis, there are a number of structural factors in the country, such as poverty itself, a precarious food security situation, desertification, inadequate provisions of water or sanitation services, and meager health coverage in the country.
So that when extraordinary circumstances hit, the population is less prepared and suited to respond to a crisis than a normal population might be. So when you add in there the unforeseen and unpredictable aspects of a drought and a locust infestation, a vulnerable population is much more seriously affected and that's basically what we're talking about.
Your second question?
QUESTION: Just a little bit about what is the situation, as you view it, how many people are at risk of literally starving and, you know, there seems to -- my impression was that there was some food kind of on its way, but you have like a very short amount of time to get it.
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: First, I'd like to answer that by recognizing the fact that the United States, to its credit and, particularly, the Embassy and our colleagues at the State Department were instrumental in helping the world identify this crisis.
It was back in October of last year, in 2004, that the first declaration, disaster declaration, was made by the embassy and called attention -- our attention and the world's attention to this problem. We sent in some teams from our FEWS NET organization, which is, once again, a United States-founded and organized effort with other countries in the region to monitor, on an ongoing basis, famine indicators.
And we made an assessment in November of last year that this problem existed and that extraordinary measures may be needed to address some of the problems. So this, while a crisis, has been something that has been ongoing for several months and that the United States has played a critical role into helping to analyze and bring to the world's attention.
Now, with regard to the numbers of people that are involved, that's always a difficult issue to agree upon in some cases. The best estimates that we have, based upon the surveys that we've taken, are that there are approximately 800,000 people within the country who are going to need some sort of food assistance under the current conditions.
QUESTION: If I -- I'm sorry.
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: No, I've just got to extrapolate a little bit.
QUESTION: Okay.
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: There are other ways that people are affected by these kinds of crises. For instance, if you're in a situation and your family may not need food assistance but because of some of the ecological results of this you lose your income, that's a serious thing as well. You can't buy food, so you begin to have those sorts of problems. So in some way or other, estimates vary, but clearly, somewhere in the millions. Two or three million people in the country are affected by this. Not all of them require food assistance, not all of them are in desperate straits, but they have been affected by the crisis.
Of that 800,000 number, we estimate that there are approximately 34,000, and this is a UNICEF number, which we agree with, that there are approximately 34,000 children who are severely malnourished and need extra special assistance under the circumstances.
In those cases, just providing food may not be enough, given the fact that we mentioned earlier that malnutrition is the biggest cause, they are the most ill-equipped to deal with a food shortage. Without food, the other aspects of malnutrition begin to kick in and tragically those that die, large numbers of them, they don't die from starvation. They die from the related aspects of malnutrition where their bodies cannot survive in those circumstances. So the 34,000 is a number that UNICEF has come up with and we are accepting that. And in fact, this food lift, the 200,000 tons that we are flying in today is made up primarily of an enriched food supplement which will be used to help bring those kids back to a more normal status.
QUESTION: Excuse me, but just to help --
QUESTION: I'm sorry, you say -- I thought you said 12,000. I'm sorry, 200,000 are being airlifted today?
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: No. Today, the airlift is 200,000 metric tons of food supplements. I mentioned that earlier we had flown in 12,000-metric tons of P.L. 480 food itself.
QUESTION: I'm sorry. Just to get the numbers, from the United Nations, according to our copy there, they're talking about, like, 2.5 million people are at risk, including 800,000 children. Is that -- I don't know how that squares with what we're counting and your counting.
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: As I said, numbers are difficult in a situation like this. There's a lot of estimates going on and all I can tell you is that our people who are on the ground, through our FEWS NET and other systems, have indicated that as many as two or three, three-and-a-half million are affected by this, but the real danger signs for us are those who are in the category of about 800,000 that will need some sort of food assistance on a direct basis and those children populations, of which we believe there are about 34,000 that are in the severe malnutritous --
QUESTION: The reason that I ask it because, again, today, we have -- the United Nations appealed for $81 million in humanitarian aid, up from $16 million. So in other words, they've increased by fivefold their appeal. Can you explain to us what this is for? Is this appropriate? Is this warranted? It seems to be a bit out of sync with some of the picture you're describing for us.
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Yeah, I -- no, you would have to ask the United Nations exactly what they're basing that on. All I can tell you is that the United States, based upon what we know and what we believe to be the needs are, have contributed generously to this process. We are the -- have been, up to this point, at least, the single largest donor country and we have been in early on this effort from the very beginning. And if the situation warrants it, we'll obviously do a review, on a day-to-day basis, as to what other types of assistance and in what fashion may be required and we'll respond on that basis.
But at the moment, we, as I say, feel comfortable that we are appropriately responding to the needs in the amount of about $14 million overall.
QUESTION: As you noted, it's many months ago that it was seen the crisis was brewing and yet, it wasn't really until mid-July that there was a large-scale emergency aid going in. To what do you attribute that lag time?
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Well, I think that the expectations were there for some time. As we've indicated, this is not a single event due to some natural disaster. It's a tragic, cyclical situation in that country and we had identified, early on, from our efforts that this was going to be a problem.
I do think that the severity of this problem was more difficult to predict, in that the natural disaster aspects, the lack of rain, due to a drought, the impact of the locusts, as well as the fact that the areas that were most severely affected are in remote pockets throughout the country, so that it wasn't like you could go into a particular region of the country and see massive response problems. And it was only as more people began to respond to our earlier efforts that they began to realize that things were getting worse than earlier expected and needed a more robust response.
QUESTION: Can I ask an overall question? As I understand it, the -- one of your agriculture committees on the Hill is talking about food aid for '06 for Africa and it's declining, as I understand it, from the -- from the current year's figures. Maybe these figures are wrong, but my recollection is going from 1.6 million to 1.2 million and with almost nothing set aside for development assistance. In other words, you know, infrastructure development and what not.
Correct me if any of those figures are wrong, but could you discuss the overall trend in food aid to Africa?
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: That's getting a little bit beyond my brief, but let me take a stab at a couple of points that I think are relevant to what you said. There are two kinds of food assistance and people may not be quite aware of that, but there's food assistance that we use for disasters. If there are severe hunger problems where we need to feed people, that's one kind of food assistance.
Then the other part is development-related food assistance where, on an ongoing basis, we provide supplemental feeding programs in a number of countries around the world and provide food from our Food for Peace programs, P.L. 480. And this is linked to ongoing development programs geared toward addressing long-term hunger and food crisis situations.
The fact of the matter is is that, in the case of Niger, both of those programs are in existence there and in fact, we have had an ongoing program in Niger for several years. I believe that over the last -- I forgotten now, I'll think in a moment of the figure -- of how much, I think, of $48 million over the last five years in Food for Peace feeding programs. So that has been a significant part of our program in that country. And it's going to go on for the next foreseeable future for at least for a couple of years under our current plan.
So there's been no cutback in those kinds of feeding programs in Niger. The food assistance that we've provided in the last few weeks here, has also included the more traditional disaster assistance food aid where we have feeding programs just on a regular basis. The Food for Peace is school lunch programs, infant supplement programs, those kinds of things.
The overall numbers and my memory is that food assistance programs in the U.S. Government have not been going down and are not going down as a total. In fact, at our fairly all-time highs, the disparity that you mentioned in the agricultural bill in what some of the organizations have expressed concern about is that the increasing number of disaster situations has caused more of the food aid program to be geared toward that aspect of food aid, leaving less for the longer-term development food programs, the supplemental food programs. And I think that's the concern that they've expressed. But the overall amount of assistance in food aid and the amount of assistance going to Africa, in general, is actually at an all-time high, is my understanding.
QUESTION: When you say that the U.S. is comfortable with the amount that it's giving to Niger right now and you look at the suffering that we are now seeing because there is now coverage, how can you say you're comfortable with -- how can you be comfortable with the amount of funding? Is it because there's not something more money could do? I mean, I don't know how anyone's comfortable looking at those pictures and thinking but there's got to be something else we can do?
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Well, obviously, one child is too many to see die in this kind of a situation, so I'm not speaking about our view of that situation. But in terms of our response, based upon the information we have and I repeat again it was the United States that first brought to the world's attention that there was a crisis in this country. It was the United States who first did the surveys that provided the information that alerted the world and the donor community as to the nature of it. And up 'til today, we have been the largest donor of any country as well.
So I don't mean to say we're in any way comfortable or satisfied with the tragedy, but that at some point, we have made a determination that in response to that tragedy, we believe currently that we are doing what is necessary to respond in the most appropriate way. Food aid is not always the answer.
First of all, it takes a long time to get food aid from one country to another. If we -- the normal kind of food aid that we send this supplemental feeding program, for instance, can take four or five months to reach a country, so that's not a solution. And it's very expensive to fly it in. And as I indicated earlier, that since much of this particular tragedy is due to underlying poverty and malnutrition, the kind of response is taking the form of these high-energy supplements that are being given to the most vulnerable, which address the vitamin needs and the malnutrition issues. And that's why we undertook the flights today to make sure that they will -- that'll be on the ground today and be part of the distribution system and will address the most severely affected.
QUESTION: But if we were in -- if we were aware of this so early on, is there another explanation for why it has -- I understand that there were things you couldn't foresee, but if you saw that any degree of this was possible, why is it still in a situation that it is today?
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Well, there is no perfect answer to that question. Obviously, hindsight is terrific, but we believe that given the information that we knew, at the time, we provided quick and adequate response, leading the way, and we will continue to do that, as this crisis unfolds. And if there is indications that further responses are needed, we have people on the ground monitoring this to make sure that what has been done already does reach the people that need it. And if we need to do other things to ensure that we can help minimize the loss of life, then we will do that. And that's been the way we've approached it from the beginning.
As we've seen the problems unfold and to the best of our ability to predict those things, we have taken the actions necessary and increased our response at those positions where we knew more needed to be done.
QUESTION: And is your efforts, it is within the framework of the United Nations appeal or is the 14 million, is it totally U.S. bilateral or --
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: That's a U.S. bilateral number.
QUESTION: Is that humanitarian aid or is that?
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Yes. It's directly related toward the food and security situation in the country.
QUESTION: Now is this part of the UN appeal or is it separate? How does that --
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Well, we began to do this in response to our own understanding of what the problem is. There is -- this is a direct bilateral effort. We provide this assistance either to, I believe, in this particular case, we're doing it through a variety of nongovernmental organizations on the ground who are implementing partners of ours, such as Africare, CARE, Catholic Relief, Helen Keller, World Vision. I think those are the primary implementing partners we have on the ground. And so we provided it directly to them on the ground.
The United Nations in its appeal is looking for donations and contributions to either the World Food Program or to them directly. In some ways, that's the answers to why there's a disparity in the numbers because I don't believe they count the food assistance and the response that we have as a part of their appeal numbers at this point. There's some question as to how they add those numbers up. You'd have to ask them exactly what the basis of that counting is, but --
MODERATOR: You know, I think we just got time for a couple more. Why don't we just take these last two questions.
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Sure.
QUESTION: I was just wondering how long do you expect the food to last them for and will we need to send more food after this?
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: This problem, as we've indicated, is due to a variety of tragic, ongoing circumstances. The harvest for this year is due sometime in September. Indications are that the rains earlier this year were quite adequate and there is hope that the harvest this year will be at least at the same levels of the last five years and perhaps even in a much larger amount.
So we are hoping that that will indicate that the most desperate timeframe will be between now and September, at some point, when they began to bring in the harvest in the country and that will alleviate a lot of the underlying problems.
QUESTION: Do you have an estimate of how many people have died in the crisis? And given that limited timeframe, I know this is macabre, but what's your estimates for how many people will die despite all the aid?
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: I truly do not have a number on that and it might be very difficult to determine, as I indicated; tragically, the cause of death in this situation is not from starvation. This is not a famine in that sense. People are not starving to death. They are vulnerable, they are weak, they are extremely able to have a variety of things happen to their bodies as a result of their conditions prior to this food shortage. And that is what ultimately creates this most serious problem and why, if we can get these supplemental food and supplies in there, that you can turn a child around in a very short period of times in terms of their vulnerability if you can get this assistance into their system. It's a matter of a few days you can often bring a child back to a very normal, healthy state in that country.
QUESTION: People are starving to death and they're --
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: I don't want to seem technical, but they're not starving to death in the normal sense that, because of lack of food, they are dying. It is, as in some other diseases, they cause weaknesses in your system in a variety of different ways and you don't really die of a primary cause. It's the secondary causes that -- because you were so weak when this happened, that you were much more vulnerable and succumb to some of the symptomatic problems that are related to malnutrition, rather than starvation, per se.
QUESTION: Thank you for doing this.
ADMINISTRATOR FOX: Thank you.
Back to Top ^
|
