http://www.mybloglog.com/buzz/members/mybloglogc0e2ec6b786bd0c44849/
元気
Thursday, May 28, 2009
US should consider military options against N Korea: Perry
US should consider military options against N Korea: Perry
WASHINGTON (AFP) – The United States should consider a range of coercive measures against North Korea, including possible military action, for diplomacy to have a chance of success, former US defense secretary William Perry said Thursday.
Perry emphasized that he was not recommending military action against North Korea now but said the United States should at least consider escalating to military action if other lesser coercive measures prove ineffective.
"We could have stopped this last nuclear test if we had chosen to do so. We could have stopped the first one had we chosen to do so," he told an audience at the Council on Foreign Relations.
"That requires a military action, and I'm not recommending military action. But somewhere along in this series of coercive actions, one can imagine an escalation, and if the ones that are less do not succeed, we have to be willing to consider the other ones," he said.
He noted that North Korea has not yet tested a missile with a nuclear weapon, a difficult technical achievement, and said preemptive strikes to stop such tests was another option that could be considered.
Perry served as defense secretary from 1994-96 during a similar confrontation with North Korea that ended in the first nuclear disarmament accord with North Korea in 1994, only narrowly avoiding US military action.
Brent Scowcroft, a former national security adviser and Perry's co-author in a study on US nuclear policy, said he agreed with Perry, but cautioned that the use of force was fraught with the risk of unintended consequences.
In a question and answer session, Perry said the US approach toward North Korea in the six party talks had failed, and there could be no return to business as usual.
"Having said that, I do believe that diplomacy still has a chance of success, but only if it is robust and only if its robustness includes some meaningful coercion on opponents," he said.
"I recognize that diplomacy has a much steeper hill to climb now than it did in 2003 because they now have a bomb," he said, referring to the last crisis with North Korea.
"Then we had the option of stopping the production of plutonium. Now the plutonium has been produced and it is located somewhere we know not where. So that option has now disappeared," he said.
But he said the United States should not accept a nuclear armed North Korea.
He said the United States needs to hear an "an unambiguous and clear condemnation" of North Korea by the UN Security Council, and that any rebuke had to be more than "an exercise in words."
WASHINGTON (AFP) – The United States should consider a range of coercive measures against North Korea, including possible military action, for diplomacy to have a chance of success, former US defense secretary William Perry said Thursday.
Perry emphasized that he was not recommending military action against North Korea now but said the United States should at least consider escalating to military action if other lesser coercive measures prove ineffective.
"We could have stopped this last nuclear test if we had chosen to do so. We could have stopped the first one had we chosen to do so," he told an audience at the Council on Foreign Relations.
"That requires a military action, and I'm not recommending military action. But somewhere along in this series of coercive actions, one can imagine an escalation, and if the ones that are less do not succeed, we have to be willing to consider the other ones," he said.
He noted that North Korea has not yet tested a missile with a nuclear weapon, a difficult technical achievement, and said preemptive strikes to stop such tests was another option that could be considered.
Perry served as defense secretary from 1994-96 during a similar confrontation with North Korea that ended in the first nuclear disarmament accord with North Korea in 1994, only narrowly avoiding US military action.
Brent Scowcroft, a former national security adviser and Perry's co-author in a study on US nuclear policy, said he agreed with Perry, but cautioned that the use of force was fraught with the risk of unintended consequences.
In a question and answer session, Perry said the US approach toward North Korea in the six party talks had failed, and there could be no return to business as usual.
"Having said that, I do believe that diplomacy still has a chance of success, but only if it is robust and only if its robustness includes some meaningful coercion on opponents," he said.
"I recognize that diplomacy has a much steeper hill to climb now than it did in 2003 because they now have a bomb," he said, referring to the last crisis with North Korea.
"Then we had the option of stopping the production of plutonium. Now the plutonium has been produced and it is located somewhere we know not where. So that option has now disappeared," he said.
But he said the United States should not accept a nuclear armed North Korea.
He said the United States needs to hear an "an unambiguous and clear condemnation" of North Korea by the UN Security Council, and that any rebuke had to be more than "an exercise in words."
Abbas and the Peace Process: Is This Man Still Relevant?
Abbas and the Peace Process: Is This Man Still Relevant?
By TONY KARON Tony Karon
Nobody doubts that President Barack Obama has a lot on his plate, what with two wars, a credit crisis, a failing health-care system, a collapsing auto industry and much more demanding his attention. When he welcomes Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to the White House on Thursday, however, Obama will be forced to grapple with one of the more bizarre responsibilities bequeathed him by the Bush Administration: that of micromanaging the Palestinian Authority.
Last week's meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu underscored the challenge Obama faces in pursuing a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict - the Israeli leader, after all, opposes the principle of sovereign independence for the Palestinians. This week, Obama will encounter a second major obstacle: Abbas may be committed to the two-state solution, but his political authority over his own people is so limited that he is unable to effectively negotiate on their behalf. (See pictures of Israel's Gaza offensive in January.)
Abbas controls only the West Bank. The other Palestinian enclave, Gaza, remains in the hands of the Islamist Hamas movement, which doesn't recognize either Israel or the Palestinian Authority President's writ. Hamas, which says Abbas' term of office expired in January, no longer recognizes his presidency. (Abbas' supporters claim that he can rule legally until next January.) Hamas, moreover, is the ruling party of the democratically elected Palestinian legislature, which is supposed to approve the appointment of a government - but the legislature is unable to convene because of the large number of Hamas legislators in Israeli detention. (See pictures of Jerusalem, a divided city.)
Last week, Abbas named a new government chosen by its Prime Minister, the U.S.-anointed favorite Salam Fayyad. Fayyad is a competent technocrat whom the West is backing so he can build the structures of governance and security for a future Palestinian state. But he has no political base among Palestinians and is not even a member of Abbas' Fatah movement. Fatah, in fact, sees the Prime Minister and his government as having been imposed from outside, and publicly opposed its formation. Abbas' appointment of a government opposed by both Hamas and Fatah demonstrates just how precarious his political position has become, largely a result of his doing Washington's bidding, often against his own instincts. Palestinian polls and Israeli intelligence concur that if a new Palestinian election were held now, Abbas and his movement would likely lose to Hamas. (See pictures of the 2006 Palestinian election won by Hamas.)
With U.S. tutelage arguably having gotten him into such a dismal political situation, Abbas will expect Obama to answer tough questions. Abbas became President with U.S. backing after Yasser Arafat died, and the Bush Administration arranged a few photo opportunities with then Israeli Premier Ariel Sharon in order to create the impression of a peace process. But Washington also insisted that Abbas proceed with the legislative election scheduled for January 2006, despite the Palestinian leader's misgivings.
Abbas' doubts were well founded. He had read the mood of his people more accurately than the Bush Administration had. Frustrated at the failure of more than a decade of negotiation with Israel to end the occupation, voters gave Hamas a landslide victory. The Bush Administration then made things more complicated for him. Having championed the primacy of the government chosen by the elected parliament when Arafat was alive, Washington now demanded that Abbas reclaim for the presidency the control over finances and security forces for which it had so sharply criticized Arafat. And when Abbas agreed to enter a Saudi-brokered unity government with Hamas, the Bush Administration pressured him to walk away.
With Washington the key to delivering Israeli agreement on a two-state solution, Abbas saw little alternative but to do what the Americans asked of him. But the U.S. and Israel declined to give him the concessions necessary to validate his choices in Palestinian eyes, resulting in Abbas' losing even more ground to Hamas over the past two years.
The Obama Administration knows that a plausible peace process depends on Abbas' restoring his political mandate, which will require agreement between Fatah and Hamas on a new government and the holding of new elections by next January. But the current Israeli government is resistant to implementing a two-state solution, and it will refuse to deal with a Palestinian government that includes Hamas.
Administration officials have made clear that they expect Abbas to immediately enter unconditional talks with Netanyahu, though there isn't all that much to talk about - not only because Netanyahu is significantly more hawkish than his predecessor, but also because the parameters of such a solution are already well established. Such noncommittal talks would do little to advance any peace process, but they would damage whatever credibility Abbas retains in Palestinian eyes.
The Administration would also like Abbas - or Fayyad - to continue building up the Palestinian Authority's administrative and security capacity in the West Bank. But absent progress toward ending the occupation, that too risks further weakening Abbas. Indeed, the frustration of Fatah's membership with its leader, and the continued siege of Hamas-controlled Gaza, raises the prospect that both major Palestinian organizations, Hamas and Fatah, may decide to signal their opposition to Abbas and Fayyad by renewing attacks on Israelis.
Obama could also seek to head off the danger of renewed confrontation by urging Abbas to go ahead with holding the long-delayed internal Fatah congress and preparing for elections next year. But both events run the risk of further weakening the power of Abbas and the government on which the U.S. has placed its hopes, because as much as peace needs a Palestinian national consensus, that consensus is likely to be far less pliant toward the U.S. and Israel than Abbas has been.
During Netanyahu's visit, Obama acquainted himself with the reality that dealing with the Israeli side of the two-state peace equation will not be easy. When he meets with Abbas this week, he'll be reminded that the Palestinian side of the equation will be just as difficult.
- With reporting by Jamil Hamad / Bethlehem
View this article on Time.com
Related articles on Time.com:
After Israel's Election, Palestinians Weigh a New Intifadeh
What's Behind the Arab-Israel Summit
The Two-State Solution Now a Three-Way Stalemate
Seeing Hope in a Hamas Victory
Now, the Palestinian Vote: Hamas Victorious
By TONY KARON Tony Karon
Nobody doubts that President Barack Obama has a lot on his plate, what with two wars, a credit crisis, a failing health-care system, a collapsing auto industry and much more demanding his attention. When he welcomes Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to the White House on Thursday, however, Obama will be forced to grapple with one of the more bizarre responsibilities bequeathed him by the Bush Administration: that of micromanaging the Palestinian Authority.
Last week's meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu underscored the challenge Obama faces in pursuing a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict - the Israeli leader, after all, opposes the principle of sovereign independence for the Palestinians. This week, Obama will encounter a second major obstacle: Abbas may be committed to the two-state solution, but his political authority over his own people is so limited that he is unable to effectively negotiate on their behalf. (See pictures of Israel's Gaza offensive in January.)
Abbas controls only the West Bank. The other Palestinian enclave, Gaza, remains in the hands of the Islamist Hamas movement, which doesn't recognize either Israel or the Palestinian Authority President's writ. Hamas, which says Abbas' term of office expired in January, no longer recognizes his presidency. (Abbas' supporters claim that he can rule legally until next January.) Hamas, moreover, is the ruling party of the democratically elected Palestinian legislature, which is supposed to approve the appointment of a government - but the legislature is unable to convene because of the large number of Hamas legislators in Israeli detention. (See pictures of Jerusalem, a divided city.)
Last week, Abbas named a new government chosen by its Prime Minister, the U.S.-anointed favorite Salam Fayyad. Fayyad is a competent technocrat whom the West is backing so he can build the structures of governance and security for a future Palestinian state. But he has no political base among Palestinians and is not even a member of Abbas' Fatah movement. Fatah, in fact, sees the Prime Minister and his government as having been imposed from outside, and publicly opposed its formation. Abbas' appointment of a government opposed by both Hamas and Fatah demonstrates just how precarious his political position has become, largely a result of his doing Washington's bidding, often against his own instincts. Palestinian polls and Israeli intelligence concur that if a new Palestinian election were held now, Abbas and his movement would likely lose to Hamas. (See pictures of the 2006 Palestinian election won by Hamas.)
With U.S. tutelage arguably having gotten him into such a dismal political situation, Abbas will expect Obama to answer tough questions. Abbas became President with U.S. backing after Yasser Arafat died, and the Bush Administration arranged a few photo opportunities with then Israeli Premier Ariel Sharon in order to create the impression of a peace process. But Washington also insisted that Abbas proceed with the legislative election scheduled for January 2006, despite the Palestinian leader's misgivings.
Abbas' doubts were well founded. He had read the mood of his people more accurately than the Bush Administration had. Frustrated at the failure of more than a decade of negotiation with Israel to end the occupation, voters gave Hamas a landslide victory. The Bush Administration then made things more complicated for him. Having championed the primacy of the government chosen by the elected parliament when Arafat was alive, Washington now demanded that Abbas reclaim for the presidency the control over finances and security forces for which it had so sharply criticized Arafat. And when Abbas agreed to enter a Saudi-brokered unity government with Hamas, the Bush Administration pressured him to walk away.
With Washington the key to delivering Israeli agreement on a two-state solution, Abbas saw little alternative but to do what the Americans asked of him. But the U.S. and Israel declined to give him the concessions necessary to validate his choices in Palestinian eyes, resulting in Abbas' losing even more ground to Hamas over the past two years.
The Obama Administration knows that a plausible peace process depends on Abbas' restoring his political mandate, which will require agreement between Fatah and Hamas on a new government and the holding of new elections by next January. But the current Israeli government is resistant to implementing a two-state solution, and it will refuse to deal with a Palestinian government that includes Hamas.
Administration officials have made clear that they expect Abbas to immediately enter unconditional talks with Netanyahu, though there isn't all that much to talk about - not only because Netanyahu is significantly more hawkish than his predecessor, but also because the parameters of such a solution are already well established. Such noncommittal talks would do little to advance any peace process, but they would damage whatever credibility Abbas retains in Palestinian eyes.
The Administration would also like Abbas - or Fayyad - to continue building up the Palestinian Authority's administrative and security capacity in the West Bank. But absent progress toward ending the occupation, that too risks further weakening Abbas. Indeed, the frustration of Fatah's membership with its leader, and the continued siege of Hamas-controlled Gaza, raises the prospect that both major Palestinian organizations, Hamas and Fatah, may decide to signal their opposition to Abbas and Fayyad by renewing attacks on Israelis.
Obama could also seek to head off the danger of renewed confrontation by urging Abbas to go ahead with holding the long-delayed internal Fatah congress and preparing for elections next year. But both events run the risk of further weakening the power of Abbas and the government on which the U.S. has placed its hopes, because as much as peace needs a Palestinian national consensus, that consensus is likely to be far less pliant toward the U.S. and Israel than Abbas has been.
During Netanyahu's visit, Obama acquainted himself with the reality that dealing with the Israeli side of the two-state peace equation will not be easy. When he meets with Abbas this week, he'll be reminded that the Palestinian side of the equation will be just as difficult.
- With reporting by Jamil Hamad / Bethlehem
View this article on Time.com
Related articles on Time.com:
After Israel's Election, Palestinians Weigh a New Intifadeh
What's Behind the Arab-Israel Summit
The Two-State Solution Now a Three-Way Stalemate
Seeing Hope in a Hamas Victory
Now, the Palestinian Vote: Hamas Victorious
7.1 earthquake topples homes, kills Honduras teen
Thousands Flee New Violence in Somalia
Wed May 27, 5:28 pm ETWASHINGTON, May 27 (OneWorld.net) - Over 67,000 people have fled the latest outbreak of violence in and around the Somali capital Mogadishu, as increasing security concerns obstruct aid to many of those affected.
What's the Story?
Since Friday alone, escalating violence between Islamist insurgents and pro-government troops in Mogadishu, situated on Somalia's eastern coast, has forced roughly 8,000 people to seek refuge in makeshift camps where medicine, food, and water are scarce, reports Reuters AlertNet, citing aid agencies.
In total, 67,000 people have been uprooted and nearly 200 killed by the most recent bout of fighting, which began May 8. (See the full story from the UN News Center below.)
Violence Hampering Humanitarian Aid
"Aid work in Mogadishu has virtually ground to a halt because of increasing violence," wrote the humanitarian news agency IRIN last week.
The medical humanitarian organization Médecins Sans Frontières has put operations on hold at its outpatient clinic in Yaaqshid while UNICEF's compound in Jowhar, north of Mogadishu, was looted on May 17 when a militia group seized control of the town.
The destruction of the UN children's agency's medical and nutritional supplies and equipment will affect upwards of 100,000 young people in Somalia.
Nonetheless, UNICEF and UNHCR said Friday that they plan to reach, over the course of several days, 100,000 people affected by the fighting with non-food items. In addition, the UN World Food Program is continuing to serve more than 80,000 cooked meals on a daily basis in Mogadishu.
Local human rights and civil society organizations have also come together to mobilize assistance for those affected.
"The situation is so bad that if nothing is done many will die," Asha Sha'ur, a civil society activist, told IRIN last week. "We are appealing to the international aid agencies to help these desperate people before it is too late."
Sha'ur's task force is also accompanying aid agencies "wherever they want to go," including camps and makeshift shelters for the internally displaced, many of whom are living in dire conditions.
Many groups providing on-the-ground assistance in Somalia are also concerned for the safety of their staff. According to a report released in November by human rights monitor Amnesty International, at least 40 aid workers have been killed so far this year in the country, "putting at least 3 million Somalis at even greater risk of malnutrition and disease."
Reporter Killed in Mogadishu
Humanitarian aid workers are not the only ones in danger in Somalia due to their work. Radio journalist Abdirisak Mohamed Warsame was killed last week in Mogadishu, caught in crossfire while on his way to work.
Warsame's employer, Shabelle Media Network, has previously criticized both the transitional government in Somalia and its Islamist opponents. In addition to Warsame, two Radio Shabelle reporters have been killed since 2007; both were murdered.
In 2007, "Somalia was the deadliest place for the press in Africa and second only to Iraq worldwide," notes the Committee to Protect Journalists. The organization has accused the Somali government of intimidating and persecuting Somali reporters.
"Three Somali journalists have died in the line of duty so far this year," said CPJ. "Since 2007, 12 journalists have died in Somalia in connection with their work, half killed in crossfire and half targeted for murder."
Background: Conflict and Humanitarian Crisis in Somalia
Many of the people fleeing the capital were escaping violence for at least the second time, noted Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN Secretary-General's Special Representative to Somalia. He characterized the situation as "very difficult ... but not hopeless."
Somalia is at the top of Foreign Policy magazine's 2008 Failed States Index, an annual report from the think tank. The absence of a strong central government since the 1991 overthrow of the military regime has resulted in violence and lawlessness.
Many Somalis have been driven out of the country by an ongoing civil war between Islamist insurgents and the government, who fear Somalia will become an Islamic state. Repeated incursions by Ethiopian troops seeking to wipe out the insurgents have also fanned the flames of conflict.
In 2008, a series of UN-sponsored talks in Djibouti among opposition parties led to the signing of a peace agreement. The accord, among other things, called for the cessation and termination of all armed confrontation by the two sides within 30 days, reported IRIN.
But the recent outbreak of violence in Mogadishu on May 8 between government and opposition forces has stalled the country's forward momentum.
"They [refugees] had returned to Mogadishu after the signing of the UN-backed peace agreements in Djibouti in January, only to be sent running for their lives again," said a UN report.
Thousands of civilians have lost their lives to the conflict and a total of 1.1 million people in Somalia are currently living as refugees in their own country. For more information on politics, conflict, and development in Somalia, see OneWorld.net's Somalia country guide.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OneWorld.net: Take a 5-minute survey about this article for a chance to win a $50 Amazon.com gift certificate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 67,000 Somalis displaced by escalating fighting, reports UN agencyFrom: UN News Center
5/26/09
26 May 2009 - The number of Somalis fleeing the latest escalation of fighting in and around Mogadishu has surpassed 67,000, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reported today, adding that worsening security has also hampered aid delivery to the capital.
In less than three weeks, some 20,000 residents of Mogadishu have fled to settlements like this one in Afgooye
Intense fighting between the Government and the opposition Al-Shabaab and Hisb-ul-Islam groups erupted in several north-west areas of Mogadishu on 8 May.
According to UNHCR, most of the uprooted are heading to makeshift camps along the Afgooye corridor, south-west of Mogadishu. These sites are already hosting an estimated 400,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs).
"Those displaced who are unable to make the 30-kilometre journey have sought refuge in south-western parts of Mogadishu that have not yet been overrun by fighting," UNHCR spokesperson Ron Redmond told reporters in Geneva.
The agency added that the deteriorating security situation has sharply reduced deliveries of desperately needed humanitarian aid to the displaced in and around the capital.
"Local agencies that have been providing a lifeline to the IDPs are facing growing security problems as they try to help the needy," Mr. Redmond said.
Starting today, UNHCR is distributing aid - including cooking sets, plastic sheeting and blankets - for some 50,000 people in the Afgooye corridor through its local partners in Somalia.
Somalia is one of the world's largest refugee-producing countries, and the number of Somalis fleeing to neighbouring countries continues to rise, the agency added.
In addition to providing protection and assistance to some half a million Somali refugees in nearby countries, including Kenya, Yemen, Ethiopia, Uganda, Djibouti, Eritrea and Tanzania, UNHCR is also coordinating aid for the 1.3 million displaced in Somalia.
Wed May 27, 5:28 pm ETWASHINGTON, May 27 (OneWorld.net) - Over 67,000 people have fled the latest outbreak of violence in and around the Somali capital Mogadishu, as increasing security concerns obstruct aid to many of those affected.
What's the Story?
Since Friday alone, escalating violence between Islamist insurgents and pro-government troops in Mogadishu, situated on Somalia's eastern coast, has forced roughly 8,000 people to seek refuge in makeshift camps where medicine, food, and water are scarce, reports Reuters AlertNet, citing aid agencies.
In total, 67,000 people have been uprooted and nearly 200 killed by the most recent bout of fighting, which began May 8. (See the full story from the UN News Center below.)
Violence Hampering Humanitarian Aid
"Aid work in Mogadishu has virtually ground to a halt because of increasing violence," wrote the humanitarian news agency IRIN last week.
The medical humanitarian organization Médecins Sans Frontières has put operations on hold at its outpatient clinic in Yaaqshid while UNICEF's compound in Jowhar, north of Mogadishu, was looted on May 17 when a militia group seized control of the town.
The destruction of the UN children's agency's medical and nutritional supplies and equipment will affect upwards of 100,000 young people in Somalia.
Nonetheless, UNICEF and UNHCR said Friday that they plan to reach, over the course of several days, 100,000 people affected by the fighting with non-food items. In addition, the UN World Food Program is continuing to serve more than 80,000 cooked meals on a daily basis in Mogadishu.
Local human rights and civil society organizations have also come together to mobilize assistance for those affected.
"The situation is so bad that if nothing is done many will die," Asha Sha'ur, a civil society activist, told IRIN last week. "We are appealing to the international aid agencies to help these desperate people before it is too late."
Sha'ur's task force is also accompanying aid agencies "wherever they want to go," including camps and makeshift shelters for the internally displaced, many of whom are living in dire conditions.
Many groups providing on-the-ground assistance in Somalia are also concerned for the safety of their staff. According to a report released in November by human rights monitor Amnesty International, at least 40 aid workers have been killed so far this year in the country, "putting at least 3 million Somalis at even greater risk of malnutrition and disease."
Reporter Killed in Mogadishu
Humanitarian aid workers are not the only ones in danger in Somalia due to their work. Radio journalist Abdirisak Mohamed Warsame was killed last week in Mogadishu, caught in crossfire while on his way to work.
Warsame's employer, Shabelle Media Network, has previously criticized both the transitional government in Somalia and its Islamist opponents. In addition to Warsame, two Radio Shabelle reporters have been killed since 2007; both were murdered.
In 2007, "Somalia was the deadliest place for the press in Africa and second only to Iraq worldwide," notes the Committee to Protect Journalists. The organization has accused the Somali government of intimidating and persecuting Somali reporters.
"Three Somali journalists have died in the line of duty so far this year," said CPJ. "Since 2007, 12 journalists have died in Somalia in connection with their work, half killed in crossfire and half targeted for murder."
Background: Conflict and Humanitarian Crisis in Somalia
Many of the people fleeing the capital were escaping violence for at least the second time, noted Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN Secretary-General's Special Representative to Somalia. He characterized the situation as "very difficult ... but not hopeless."
Somalia is at the top of Foreign Policy magazine's 2008 Failed States Index, an annual report from the think tank. The absence of a strong central government since the 1991 overthrow of the military regime has resulted in violence and lawlessness.
Many Somalis have been driven out of the country by an ongoing civil war between Islamist insurgents and the government, who fear Somalia will become an Islamic state. Repeated incursions by Ethiopian troops seeking to wipe out the insurgents have also fanned the flames of conflict.
In 2008, a series of UN-sponsored talks in Djibouti among opposition parties led to the signing of a peace agreement. The accord, among other things, called for the cessation and termination of all armed confrontation by the two sides within 30 days, reported IRIN.
But the recent outbreak of violence in Mogadishu on May 8 between government and opposition forces has stalled the country's forward momentum.
"They [refugees] had returned to Mogadishu after the signing of the UN-backed peace agreements in Djibouti in January, only to be sent running for their lives again," said a UN report.
Thousands of civilians have lost their lives to the conflict and a total of 1.1 million people in Somalia are currently living as refugees in their own country. For more information on politics, conflict, and development in Somalia, see OneWorld.net's Somalia country guide.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OneWorld.net: Take a 5-minute survey about this article for a chance to win a $50 Amazon.com gift certificate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 67,000 Somalis displaced by escalating fighting, reports UN agencyFrom: UN News Center
5/26/09
26 May 2009 - The number of Somalis fleeing the latest escalation of fighting in and around Mogadishu has surpassed 67,000, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reported today, adding that worsening security has also hampered aid delivery to the capital.
In less than three weeks, some 20,000 residents of Mogadishu have fled to settlements like this one in Afgooye
Intense fighting between the Government and the opposition Al-Shabaab and Hisb-ul-Islam groups erupted in several north-west areas of Mogadishu on 8 May.
According to UNHCR, most of the uprooted are heading to makeshift camps along the Afgooye corridor, south-west of Mogadishu. These sites are already hosting an estimated 400,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs).
"Those displaced who are unable to make the 30-kilometre journey have sought refuge in south-western parts of Mogadishu that have not yet been overrun by fighting," UNHCR spokesperson Ron Redmond told reporters in Geneva.
The agency added that the deteriorating security situation has sharply reduced deliveries of desperately needed humanitarian aid to the displaced in and around the capital.
"Local agencies that have been providing a lifeline to the IDPs are facing growing security problems as they try to help the needy," Mr. Redmond said.
Starting today, UNHCR is distributing aid - including cooking sets, plastic sheeting and blankets - for some 50,000 people in the Afgooye corridor through its local partners in Somalia.
Somalia is one of the world's largest refugee-producing countries, and the number of Somalis fleeing to neighbouring countries continues to rise, the agency added.
In addition to providing protection and assistance to some half a million Somali refugees in nearby countries, including Kenya, Yemen, Ethiopia, Uganda, Djibouti, Eritrea and Tanzania, UNHCR is also coordinating aid for the 1.3 million displaced in Somalia.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)