Testimony of Gregory Gottlieb

Deputy Assistant Administrator

Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance

Before the House Foreign Affairs

Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health

Wednesday, February 6, 2008

The Political Crisis in Kenya: A Call for Justice and Peaceful Resolution

Thank you Chairman Payne, Ranking Member Smith, and members of the Subcommittee for the opportunity to appear before you and to discuss USAID’s provision of humanitarian assistance to the people of Kenya who have been so greatly affected by post-election violence.

The Kenyan people have been caught in the middle of indiscriminate violence that erupted across the country following disputed presidential election results in December. Tension between supporters of President Mwai Kibaki and opposition candidate Raila Odinga resulted in violence and looting – causing deaths, displacement, damage to homes and small businesses, and disruptions in commercial and humanitarian traffic.

Insecurity and roadblocks also interrupted cross-border trade and the delivery of humanitarian assistance between Kenya and Somalia, Uganda, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The episodes of violence, looting, and displacement have evoked tensions from previous presidential contests in 1992 and 1997, and re-ignited longstanding grievances ranging from land tenure to constitutional reform.

The areas that have been most affected by the violence include Nairobi and portions of Nyanza, Western, and Rift Valley provinces. While early incidents occurred in areas where groups supporting President Kibaki live in close proximity to supporters of opposition candidate Odinga, subsequent clashes have taken on a more organized and worrisome character.

It is important to view the current situation in the context of Kenya's strong economic growth and development over the past seven years.

KENYA BEFORE POST-ELECTION VIOLENCE

The USAID program in Kenya is one of our most mature development programs in Africa, with economic cooperation going as far back as Kenya’s pre-independence in the late 1950s and early 1960s. USAID has a substantial program in Kenya, as it is the linchpin for trade and economic development throughout East and Southern Africa. The overarching goal of USAID assistance is to build a democratic and economically prosperous Kenya by assisting the country to improve the balance of power among its institutions of governance, promoting the sustainable use of its natural resources, and improving rural incomes by increasing agricultural and rural enterprise opportunities. USAID assistance is also used to improve health conditions, provide access to quality education for children of historically marginalized populations, and promote trade and investment development programs. In FY 2007, the U.S. Government provided over $500 million in assistance to Kenya, of which $368 million was PEPFAR funds.

When it comes to emergency assistance to Kenya – with the exception our assistance after the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi in 1998 – the focus has historically been on short-term response to incidents of drought and floods, as well as episodes of civil unrest. Since 1997, Kenya has experienced several seasons of failed rains that caused widespread crop failure and water scarcity. Then there were years when flooding destroyed crops, farmland, livestock, and damaged roads and infrastructure. Cumulatively, the intermittent crises have exacerbated vulnerabilities arising from politically motivated interethnic conflicts over land, scarce water, and pasture resources.

Quoting from the Congressional Budget Justification for FY08, “Kenya has the potential to become a transformational country and achieve improved standards of living, improved quality of life, and more transparent, less corrupt and more participatory democratic governance.”

While Kenya seemed mostly on the right track prior to the elections, the events that followed suggest that underlying political grievances, corruption, and an imbalance in power among branches of government were too deeply rooted to prevent the current destruction and violence.

CURRENT SITUATION

The situation in Kenya is extremely fluid and continues to change on a daily basis.

Beginning on January 23, violence escalated in previously-affected areas, and spread to new locations including Naivasha and Nakuru towns. Even those already displaced are targeted. The Government of Kenya’s National Disaster Operations Center has confirmed 895 deaths resulting from post-election violence as of January 28, including 165 deaths since January 23.

The USAID assessment team has received multiple reports of threats to groups sheltering at police stations, schools, churches, and other settlement sites. Multiple sources point to the retaliatory nature and inter-connectedness between violence in Nakuru, Naivasha, and renewed attacks in other areas, and USAID staff are concerned about the potential for further deterioration in security and humanitarian conditions.

Escalating insecurity, attacks on commercial trucks and passenger vehicles, and the destruction of rail lines has repeatedly blocked ground transport in western Kenya and threatens to obstruct major access routes within Kenya and to neighboring countries. The UN World Food Program (WFP) reports that insecurity prevented all fuel exports from Kenya to Uganda, Rwanda, Tanzania, Burundi, southern Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo on January 28. Local media report that fuel prices have risen 300 percent in Uganda in January.

Beyond the immediate humanitarian impact, the post-election crisis has significantly impacted people’s income-generating activities and resulted in substantial livelihood and asset losses.  The World Bank has estimated that up to 2 million Kenyans may be driven into poverty from the effects of violence and political upheaval following the disputed election results.

Burned fields and businesses, un-harvested crops, market disruptions, and looting are expected to have long-term consequences.  Kenya's tourism industry, which represents approximately 25% of the economy, agricultural sector, small businesses, and casual laborers are most affected.  The tourist industry has almost completely come to a standstill, and up to 120,000 people may lose their jobs in this sector before the end of March. Such losses will mean decreased income and increased food insecurity for the millions of Kenyans who live without a financial safety net.

Response priorities must adapt to reflect changes in the size, location, and duration of displaced and vulnerable populations.  As of late January, the political crisis remains unresolved, and relief agencies are reporting widespread fear of reprisal attacks and reluctance among some internally displaced persons (IDPs) to return home.  Medium and long-term response strategies must address economic recovery, social reconciliation, and possibly include the resettlement and relocation of IDPs unable to return home.  Further assessments are expected to inform planned recovery, reintegration, and reconciliation activities.

DISPLACEMENT

Although media reports indicate that as many as 300,000 people have fled their homes and found temporary shelter in camps or with host families, USAID field staff note that efforts to quantify Kenya's newly displaced population are complicated by insecurity, continued movements, and unpredictable access to affected areas. In addition, many IDPs have been absorbed by host communities, and mechanisms to identify, locate, and track these vulnerable populations are not yet in place. The recurring cycles of violence are likely to impact IDPs’ decisions regarding future movement and the possibility of returning home.

USAID is concerned by an emerging trend of camp closures and evictions of internally displaced persons in Kenya, which contravenes widely-accepted humanitarian principles. USAID staff have received multiple reports of local officials attempting to close temporary settlement sites currently hosting IDPs without establishing an alternate settlement option, providing transport out of the area, or giving advance notice to the humanitarian relief community.   In addition, our team has received reports of increased threats against IDP populations who have settled at police stations, schools, churches, and temporary accommodation centers in Rift Valley, Nyanza, and Western provinces.

Protection is of the utmost concern, particularly for vulnerable groups such as women, children, and elderly persons. Concerns range from the potential for further violence, a reported increase of sexual and gender-based violence in recent weeks, and vulnerabilities associated with dense temporary settlements in a context of heightened inter-group tensions. Longer-term issues include assisting victims and witnesses of violence to recover from psychological and medical trauma, and providing appropriate counseling and psychosocial services, particularly to affected children and adolescents. USAID has prioritized the funding of protection-related activities and is working with implementing partners to incorporate protection strategies across all programs for the post-election crisis.

UNICEF estimates that between 80,000 and 100,000 children now live in camps for the internally displaced. Renewed violence beginning January 23 has led to an overall decline in school attendance, particularly among primary school children, and the Ministry of Education is reporting a shortage of teachers willing to report to work out of fear for their personal security. The violence will have a long-term impact on the lives of many students.

HUMANITARIAN NEEDS

USAID staff reports that the international humanitarian community is meeting the immediate needs of Kenyans displaced by the violence. However, additional support is needed to meet evolving needs in camp management, health, nutrition, protection, conflict mitigation, and early recovery over the next 12 to 18 months.

Camp Coordination and Camp Management

The Kenya Red Cross Society (KRCS) and UNHCR are working with other aid agencies to identify gaps and assist with training, technical support, and information management, as well as to provide psychosocial support to IDPs and refugees residing in camps.

Early Recovery

Beyond the immediate humanitarian impact, the post-election crisis has significantly impacted people’s income-generating activities and resulted in substantial livelihood losses. Burned fields and businesses, un-harvested crops, market disruptions, and looting are expected to have long-term consequences. Host communities are stretching limited available resources to meet the needs of IDP populations, yet this approach will be limited without substantial support from the international community.

In addition, all programs should be designed with the ongoing conflict in mind, and should engage affected populations to minimize, address, reduce, and/or mitigate tensions and conflicts.

Health

UNICEF, in collaboration with the Kenya’s Ministry of Health, is addressing health needs throughout violence-affected areas and conducting polio and measles immunization campaigns in all IDP sites. USAID staff visited the GOK-managed Nakuru health clinic, which has provided emergency and referral health services to more than 4,000 patients since January 4. According to health staff, diarrhea, respiratory infections, malaria, and dehydration remained the most pressing health concerns.

Emergency Relief Commodities

The U.N. Shelter Cluster, in conjunction with GOK officials and KRCS, will continue to conduct needs assessments in new IDP sites to determine if additional relief commodities are required.

Nutrition

Nutrition is not a critical humanitarian need at this time, but relief agencies are actively monitoring the situation. The U.N. Children's Fund is conducting nutrition screening and has identified approximately 7,500 cases of moderate malnutrition and 70 cases of severe malnutrition to date. To address potential gaps in the management of severe malnutrition resulting from the crisis, the U.N. Nutrition Cluster designed a minimum package of nutrition services for affected people, as well as tools for rapid assessment, screening, and monitoring of the nutrition situation.

USG RESPONSE EFFORTS

It is the obligation of the international community to provide humanitarian assistance wherever it is needed.

USAID has provided more than $4.7 million for emergency humanitarian response activities since January 3, 2008. Immediate priorities for USG assistance include protection, water, sanitation, health, shelter, and camp management interventions targeting displaced populations and stressed host communities in areas of Nairobi and western Kenya.

In response to the complex humanitarian emergency in Kenya, a USG Inter-Agency Task Force convened in Nairobi to coordinate USAID/DCHA, USAID/Kenya, USAID/East Africa, U.S. Embassy, and other USG response efforts. 

A Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) from USAID’s Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance has deployed to Kenya and is working in concert with the U.S. Embassy and USAID Kenya and East Africa Missions to coordinate the U.S response effort. The DART is conducting field assessments, liaising with UN and international relief organizations, and engaging with other donors to identify evolving priority needs.

The USG is the largest donor to the UN World Food Program in Kenya. In close coordination with the Kenya Red Cross Society, WFP has distributed more than 1,226 metric tons of emergency food relief, valued at approximately $1.3 million, to affected populations in Nairobi and western areas of Kenya.

Additionally, the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration has pledged FY 2008 support to UNHCR and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to address refugee needs across Africa, including the initial emergency response to the refugee/IDP situation in Kenya and Uganda. Contributions to UNHCR and to ICRC will be made as soon as funds are formally available.

In addition to addressing the immediate humanitarian needs of affected populations, short, medium, and long-term response activities will be required in order to mitigate the political, economic, and social consequences of the current crisis. The USG Inter-Agency Task Force based in Nairobi is working to ensure that current emergency programs help reinforce our development programs.

The Government of Kenya, several Ministerial departments, local disaster response committees, churches, and national relief organizations demonstrated substantial capability during rapid response efforts for displaced and affected populations.  However, emergency needs quickly overwhelmed existing capacity and these organizations required additional support. All programs should work with and strengthen the very robust civil society, including the Kenyan Red Cross and Government of Kenya mechanisms, rather than working in ways that would bypass these national assets.

OTHER DONORS

The response from donors has been robust. The UN's Central Emergency Response Fund authorized $7,022,854 towards the Inter-Agency Standing Committee's Humanitarian Emergency Response Plan and Flash Appeal, which was well-allocated towards priority emergency sectors. As of January 30, 2008, other donors have provided $24.5 million in support to the U.N., International Committee of the Red Cross, the Kenya Red Cross Society, and NGOs responding to the crisis. These contributions, in concert with the expected USG contributions of nearly $8 million, will largely meet the immediate humanitarian needs as outlined in the Flash Appeal and the KRCS appeal. The total requested for these core emergency sectors under those appeals was $49,193,154 million. To date, $43,776,138 has been pledged or committed leaving a gap of $5,417,016. However, OCHA is revising the appeal as more detailed information on the scope of the evolving crisis is reported, and the humanitarian needs have shown to be more extensive than initially estimated. Therefore, we expect the funding requirements and funding gap to increase.

Additional mid-term needs for early recovery and education were identified in the Flash Appeal. Nearly $8 million was requested for these sectors; resources have not yet been pledged or committed.

Donor	Amount	Sector	Recipient Agency
Australia	$877,193	Food, medicines, shelter and protection	KRCS, ICRC, UNHCR
Canada	$1,019,368	ICRC preliminary appeal	KRCS
CERF	$7,022,854	Camp coordination and management; emergency health; protection; logistics; water and sanitation; shelter and non-food items; food	UN & NGOs
China	$300,000		KRCS
Denmark	$43,305		KRCS
DFID (UK)	$5,972,000	Food, shelter, water and emergency healthcare	KRCS, ICRC
ECHO	$8,093,415	Shelter, water, sanitation, emergency healthcare, basic household equipment, hygiene products, food, logistics	UN, NGOs and KRCS
France	$291,545	Health, food	Action Against Hunger and other NGOs
Germany	$1,350,770	Health, emergency relief supplies	German Red Cross, ICRC, World Vision Kenya, German Agro Action
Ireland	$728,863	Non-food items	Trocaire
Italy	$358,600	Assistance for Kenyan refugees in Uganda	IFRC
Japan	$ 200,000		ICRC
Korea	$200,000		UNICEF and OCHA
Netherlands	$2,207,295	Emergency relief supplies, water and health	KRCS
Norway	$2,189,949		UN, KRCS, ICRC & NGOs
Safaricom	$72,174		KRCS
Sweden	$356,526		Red Cross Sweden
Switzerland	$183,023	Logistics	ICRC, KRC
Turkey	$100,000		WFP
UNDP (Bureau for Crisis Response and Recovery)	$100,000		Early Recovery Cluster

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE

As I stated previously, it is the obligation of the international community to provide humanitarian assistance wherever it is needed. Some donors have hinted that they are not planning to contribute additional funding to assist with the post-election crisis in Kenya.

It is only with the assistance of the international community that Kenyans can move their country to a place of peace and stability. Such assistance can assist Kenya to reestablish its position within the wider community of African nations working toward democracy and economic independence.