IRIN interview with UN Humanitarian Coordinator, Randolph Kent

All UN international staff were evacuated from Somalia on Monday 24 September, after insurance coverage for war-risk was withdrawn. The lapse of war-risk coverage was a result of the enormous insurance claims arising out of the attacks in the US on 11 September. As the UN attempts to renegotiate its insurance policy with insurance underwriters, humanitarian staff worry that the pull-out will be misinterpreted and associated with the security status of Somalia. Somalia - presently suffering the effects of prolonged drought and a ban on livestock exports - has been placed by the US on a list of countries known to have links with terrorist organisations, although authorities in Somalia have condemned the recent terrorist attacks, and have offered full cooperation with the US and the international community. In an interview with IRIN, UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator Randolph Kent talked about the withdrawal and his concerns about Somalia. QUESTION: Why exactly did the UN have to evacuate its international staff from Somalia this week? ANSWER: The UN had to evacuate its international staff from Somalia for only one reason only, and that is that the war-liability clause that enables us to fly in and out of Somalia had been withdrawn. We were told by our insurance that of midnight as of 24 September that we would not be insured. But let me emphasise this has nothing to do with the security situation in Somalia. This is to do with the consequences of the insurance companies around the world now having to cover themselves because of the impact of the devastation of the World Trade Centre, the implications for international airlines, the need for insurance companies to cover themselves to deal with increased insurance obligations. All of that combined just happened to fall on our own efforts to try and get people in and out of Somalia on our regular programmes. Q: Long term, does this mean it is going to be a lot more expensive for a humanitarian organisation to operate in Somalia? A: Our New York UN headquarters was in discussions with Lloyds of London about this issue on Monday, and the results of those discussions have not yet emerged. We also know that the World Food Programme [WFP], which is the logistics arm of the UN system, is also in discussions with Lloyds and underwriters to determine what the financial consequences are. We would hope to have an answer over the next week or two. I think the relocation as it is now, if I were optimistic, it would last for 10 days... It depends on the time it will take for the insurance companies to sort this out, and it depends on whether or not we in the UN system can afford the premiums that we may be forced to cover - all of these things will determine whether or not we, the UN programmes, can come back in confidence to Somalia. I think that we need to use this period to look for other ways to engage with the people of Somalia. For example, we are extremely concerned about the possible impact the drought will have in Bay and Bakol [southern Somalia], and northern Gedo, and parts of Togdeer and Sool [northwestern Somalia] and other places in Somalia. Maybe now we have to start thinking about a cross-border operation in which in collaboration with neighbouring states and with our UN and NGO colleagues the other side of the Kenya and Ethiopia border, have operations which will provide people with assistance rather than just say: "We will have to wait". Good can come out of this unfortunate technical problem. Q: In terms of security concerns, will it make a difference to humanitarian operations that Somalia is on the US list of countries known to have had links with terrorist activities. A: Let me emphasise that our concerns are about the welfare of the people of Somalia, and while we have had no indications about the consequences of being on a particular list of a particular member state, or member states, the fact of the matter is the United Nation system has a primary responsibility to those in need. In this case, to those Somalis who may be suffering the effects of drought and impoverishment. So our commitment continues whatever happens... All we are really talking about now is, given the difficulties of not having aircraft at this point, can we fulfil that obligation? Q: What do you think the effect of the pull-out will be - it comes at a particularly bad time regarding humanitarian concerns. A: The pull-out has indeed come at a particularly bad time. But the UN system is more and more anxious to engage in Somalia, and I know - for example - the UN Development Programme will be moving over the next two or three months all of its development programmes and projects into Somalia to be run in the country. In places such as Baidoa there will be a UN compound which will have people from FAO, FSAU [Food Security Analysis Unit], UNESCO and other agencies... We are not doing this blindly: there are more and more areas in which we can work in Somalia. I think that sense of relative security, that sense that the people of Somalia are willing to support and protect us, makes us feel that we should move more and more and more back into Somalia. I think the effect of the relocation is going to do several things. I have no doubt that this will be seen by the people of Somalia as a reflection of our view that Somalia is insecure. My frustration is that I cannot find a way to convince them that this is a technical issue which has nothing to do with our sense of security. We feel secure in many parts of Somalia, and had it not been for this insurance matter we would still be there. I was in Baidoa [regional capital of Bay, southern Somalia] and Hargeysa [capital of the self-declared state of Somaliland, northwestern Somalia] this weekend, and the authorities were very understanding... In Hargeysa, what was emphasised by the authorities was, please tell people that Hargeysa is stable and secure, which I have no hesitation in underscoring. In Baidoa I can say with utmost certainty that the response from the authorities was fulsome and supportive, and it was made known that extra police would guard our properties. But we know that whatever the authorities say, people in the villages, in the towns, in the teashops, will be all too prone to say that this is a reflection on Somalia - and it is not, it is a reflection of the tragic events in the US on 11 September, and the global financial consequences which have poured out of that disaster.