This year could be the most deadly from famine in three decades. The lives of more than 20 million people are at risk in four countries. Large areas of South Sudan have already been declared a famine zone. Five years after a famine that claimed about 250,000 lives, Somalia is back on the brink of catastrophe — 6 million people are in need of assistance. Both northeastern Nigeria and Yemen face real and present risks of famine.
An elaborate humanitarian aid system has been created to prevent mass hunger. However, the international community is failing to respond to the deadly threats posed by entirely predictable and eminently avoidable famine.
“Famine” is a technical state defined by the level of acute malnutrition and food shortage. However, people, especially children, are already going hungry, getting sick and dying. The lives of many of these children hang by a nutritional drip. For every life saved, many more do not make it to a clinic.
Illustration: Constance Chou
A precipice is nearing, with relentless predictability. At a conservative estimate, 1.4 million children are at imminent risk of death across the four affected countries over the next year. That number is rising by the day as hunger interacts with killer diseases such as diarrhea, pneumonia, cholera and measles. Every week of delayed action puts more lives on the line.
How did this situation arise? Conflict, drought, poor governance and a shockingly inadequate international response have all played a part.
In South Sudan, famine is concentrated in areas where government forces and rebels have been carrying out brutal ethnic killings.
In Yemen, where half a million children face severe acute malnutrition, conflict and a humanitarian blockade operated by the Saudi-led coalition are pushing a food crisis toward outright famine.
In northern Nigeria, the military is regaining territory from Boko Haram and uncovering shocking levels of malnutrition. In each case, the violence is destroying livelihoods and displacing the farmers on which food production depends.
The crisis in the Horn of Africa bears all the hallmarks of the famine declared in 2011. The region is in its third year of drought, with Somalia, southern Ethiopia and northern Kenya the worst affected. The familiar pattern of crop failure, livestock deaths and rising food prices has exposed pastoralists and farmers to acute risks and left 12.8 million people in need of assistance.
All of this could have been predicted. The warning signs were clearly visible months ago. However, the international community has prevaricated to the point of inertia. UN agencies that should have been working together have failed to coordinate their response, leading to fragmentation on the ground.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres deserves credit for sounding a loud — if belated — alarm bell. His agencies must now work together to deliver an effective response.
One consequence is a gap in financing. The UN estimates that US$5.6 billion is needed to address urgent needs. Most of that money was needed yesterday. However, less than 2 percent is in the financial pipeline. Aid donors have got into the bad habit of recycling old aid pledges as new money and failing to set clear timelines for delivery.
As the images of hunger multiply, there will be calls for action, nongovernmental organizations will mount emergency appeals and there will be more pledging conferences. However, surely this is the time for the major aid donors, the G7, G20 and the World Bank to convene a financing summit that provides front-loaded support, delivered through a properly coordinated system of UN agencies and nongovernmental organizations.
Much of that support should be delivered in cash. Putting money in the hands of vulnerable people is far more cost-effective than delivering food. Cash transfer programs in Somalia, Yemen and northeastern Nigeria are already protecting vulnerable people — and these programs could be scaled-up rapidly.
Of course, money is not the only missing link. The politics of famine has to be put at the center of the international response. Apart from being a breach of the Geneva convention, it is ethically indefensible for Saudi Arabia to obstruct humanitarian aid and bomb the ports, roads and bridges needed to deliver famine relief. It is surely time for the UK to exert its “soft-power” influence with Saudi Arabia on behalf of Yemeni children, if necessary backed by an arms embargo and sanctions.
One age-old lesson evident in the current crisis it is that famine prevention is better than cure. Last year’s El Nino drought in Ethiopia was one the worst since the mid-1980s, yet the country avoided a social disaster. In part, it did so because aid has been used to finance the expansions of rural health and nutrition clinics, support a safety net program reaching 2.2 million people in the worst-affected areas and provide relief to pastoralist communities to minimize livestock losses.
The aid cynics attacking the UK’s commitment to spend 0.7 percent of the nation’s income on development assistance should take note. One of the most effective ways of saving lives is to support the efforts of poor people to build more resilient livelihoods.
Britain’s aid represents a small investment with a high return in combating the poverty and building the resilience needed to prevent famine. Cutting it would hurt vulnerable people, make future famines more likely and diminish the UK’s standing as a global force for good.
A few days ago, I received the government’s “Recommendations for appropriate COVID-19 [Wuhan pneumonia] epidemic prevention activities in the home, community, neighborhood long-term care centers, community care centers and dementia centers.” The recommendations asked the centers to train staff members on how to gain an understanding of the outbreak’s status, how to determine whether people are infected, and how to promote awareness about respiratory health and vaccinations. What the government does not understand is that the centers do not have the capability to offer specialist training to staff members. Most of the centers have been set up by community development associations and village
Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜), still smarting from his Jan. 11 presidential election pummeling, is careening toward another test: his possible recall. The residents of Kaohsiung have previously impressed the rest of the nation — for example, they completely transformed the Love River (愛河) from a pitch-black, fetid stench of a waterway to a beautiful, romantic attraction. Han’s fortunes have changed, from his shock victory in the Nov. 24, 2018, mayoral election — where he defeated his opponent, Democratic Progressive Party candidate Chen Chi-mai (陳其邁), by 150,000 votes — to the presidential election, in which President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) defeated him by
Desperate times call for desperate measures, and now is the time to urge President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) to issue emergency decrees to combat the COVID-19 situation. With the coronavirus, which originated in China, reaching pandemic status, Taiwan has thus far implemented effective strategies to handle it, taking for example the ban on the export of masks. The successful “Taiwanese model,” as New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has described it, is now being studied by other nations. Owing to the immediate passage of the Special Act on COVID-19 Prevention, Relief and Recovery (嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎防治及紓困振興特別條例), government agencies have a clear legal mandate to respond swiftly
Everyone knows that COVID-19 emerged in Wuhan, but Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Zhao Lijian (趙立堅) said the virus might have come from US military personnel who took part in the Military World Games in the city in October last year. The US government has sternly refuted this accusation, and it is easy to see who is right and who is wrong. Interestingly, this has brought the Military World Games to the attention of many Taiwanese for the first time. The Games, which are organized by the International Military Sports Council, have been called the “Olympics for the military.” They were first