IRIN interview with UN Special Envoy Martii Ahtisaari

Former Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari is the United Nations Special Envoy for the Humanitarian Crisis in the Horn of Africa. During a six-day visit to drought-stricken Ethiopia and Eritrea, where 15 million people are facing starvation, he told IRIN that the international community should not overload with too many development initiatives a new five-year food coalition strategy aimed at ending food-aid dependency.

QUESTION: Since you were here earlier this year what has changed?

ANSWER: I was here [at the] end of June, early July, and we visited the southern region. There the situation has improved. It has been possible to close some of the therapeutic feeding centres. But there is a lot of work that still needs to be done.

Q: What areas do you feel that are exacerbating the crisis have not been properly addressed?

A: I think the whole dependence of rain-fed agriculture is a problem in itself. You can see when you come here and fly over areas that are green and flourishing, and then you see the dryness. I think what the government is trying to do is do some harvesting of the rain as well.

Q: Do you think a lack of good governance has played a role in exacerbating the current crisis?

A: I don’t necessarily think so, because if the situation is so desperate as it is, there is little room for good governance. You can talk about good governance when the situation is fairly normal, but I would say that if we are looking for the turnaround in a country, the mere fact that you now have a coalition for food security where everyone is participating, including the leadership of the government, and [the] nongovernmental organisations sector and donors and international organisations – those are forums where things can be discussed and also solutions can be found.

Q: Would you like to see some additions to the food coalition strategy?

A. I think the problem is, and this is something I drew to the attention of the donors and NGOs as well, the tendency is which concerns me a little is that we are trying to load the agenda too much, because there are many things that need to be done. If one looks at the society, there are gender issues, there are educational issues, there are many others.

I think it is better now to concentrate on the food-security programme and not to load it so. I use a comparison: you should not try to load the circuit so that soon you are out of electricity. The most essential things are now in place. With time, also one can bring those other issues, which are extremely important. I am not trying to say they are not important, but in order to address those issues you definitely want to have a much more sustained situation.

Q: The international response has been far less in Eritrea. Why do you think that is?

A: First of all, Ethiopia has its past history of droughts. Secondly, the size of the situation here is much greater. It went over 13 million, while the population afflicted by the drought in Eritrea is slightly more than 2 million. So it is not surprising that donors were much more focused on the problems in Ethiopia and the scale of the problems as well, and the
preparedness of everybody, including the nongovernmental sector.

Q: Do you think the failure to normalise the relations between the two countries is hampering the relief effort?

A: I don’t think it necessarily hampers the relief effort, but of course, from a developmental point of view, one hopes that normalcy would be achieved in relations of any country, and this particularly for the simple reason that one could utilise the manpower for productive purposes, because now unsolved problems are tying up a lot of manpower – I would call it for unproductive use.

Q: Will you raise the unresolved border issue?

A: No, I have not touched the issue at all, because I think it was understood from the beginning that there are a number of issues that one could discuss, but my mandate is to concentrate entirely on - as Secretary-General Kofi Annan asked me - to try to help everybody - governments, international organisations and NGOs - to prevent a humanitarian crisis developing and a disaster developing, and try also to move towards more sustained development and more long-term development.

We have to support the people, but the actual work is done - I think it is important to emphasise - by the government and the donors, who have been very forthcoming, and with the support of the nongovernmental organisations, because in a situation like this the country would not succeed without the support of the NGO sector. For me it is very important that we keep the political issues and the humanitarian issues separate from each other.

Q: US congressmen have put forward a bill to restrict economic aid over the unresolved border issue. Is this something you are against, given those comments?

A: I don’t think it matters much; I have no vote in the US Congress. [...] I think one has to take seriously this sort of initiative, because it would be disastrous if we would land in a situation where the donor communities’ willingness would start fading away. This year there has been an extraordinary response from the donor community, and now we are moving towards the more sustainable development to reduce dependency. So this is not the time, but it sends a clear message to everybody in the region so that those issues should be addressed as well.

Q: What message would you have for people hit by drought, extremely poor and perhaps who have seen little change in their lives in 10, 20, 30 years?

A: I think they are not starting to see the change. I welcome the government’s use of the food aid for food-for-work programmes, because it is a question also, as government have said, of social mobilisation of the people and through the food-for-work [programme] where they can
see the benefits directly. I think this will encourage people to do even more locally.

Q: The prime minister said he would like to shift away from food aid, and use cash as a safety mechanism. Is that something you would endorse?

A: I think it is easy to endorse, but it is extremely difficult to implement, because I don’t think we will ever reach a situation where the cash would be so freely available, and therefore we have to make the best out of what we have. I think it is good advice for all of us, whether we are talking about many countries or here. And food for work is an innovative way of using food or grain.

In effect, it is actually cash, because people would have to buy that. Obviously, the ideal situation is that you could utilise the cash to a larger extent, and I think both will be utilised in all situations. But let's make best use of the food, because I don’t think you can manage to make the change without the food inputs.

Q: So do you feel we are not making the best use of food aid?

A: No, it is not that, because sometimes there is a nearly theological discussion about the food and whether it should be utilised and how it should be utilised. I am a rather pragmatic person in that if people are dying without the livelihood, then food makes an important difference. But in the programme that the government has engaged [in] now - the social mobilisation of people - then I think it is quite natural that food inputs are used for work programmes so people actually see the results of their own work and at the same time get the livelihoods they need.