Year: 2014 Last update: 29/10/2013 Version 1

Transcription

1 HUMANITARIAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (HIP) MYANMAR/BURMA AND THAILAND The activities proposed hereafter are still subject to the adoption of the financing decision ECHO/WWD/BUD/2014/ CONTEXT Myanmar AMOUNT: EUR Myanmar has a population of circa 55 million people, of which 40% are ethnic minorities. There are 135 different ethnic groups divided into 8 major ethnic national races. Net official development assistance (ODA) in 2011 was USD or USD 7.7 per capita (OECD). DG ECHO's Integrated Analysis Framework for identified extreme humanitarian needs in Myanmar. The vulnerability of the population affected by the crisis is assessed to be very high. Country Status in DG ECHO's Global Needs Assessment: Vulnerability Index- 3 and Crisis Index- 3. HDI (Human Development Index) ranking: 149. Since the national elections two years ago, the country is in transition from authoritarian military regime to nascent democratic governance with a market oriented economy and national engagement in peace efforts on the border areas after 60 years of conflict. Although a national census is due in 2014, lack of reliable official data and access constraints remain impediments for efficient humanitarian aid delivery. The European Commission's Directorate General for Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (DG ECHO's) country strategy addresses the needs of the most vulnerable people affected by violence and conflict. Focus will continued to be on Rakhine and Kachin States, the eastern border, and the refugee camps in Thailand. Rakhine State For the stateless Muslim people living in the northern townships, the protracted and acute humanitarian consequences of continued discrimination and human rights violations has worsened since communal violence erupted in Restriction on movements imposed by the authorities impact directly their food security and livelihood situation 1. Following the sectarian violence in June and October 2012, more than people remain displaced in 76 temporary camps 2. Tensions between communities and a hostile environment characterise the environment in which humanitarian operations are now taking place. With the unlikely prospect of the internally displaced people (IDPs) returning to their places of origin in the near future, there is a risk of permanent segregation of the Muslim population in Rakhine State. 1 2 WFP Operations, facts and figures March 2013 Shelter, CCCM cluster, analysis report June 2013 ECHO/-XA/BUD/2014/

2 In the current context of inter-communal violence and tension, conflict mitigation/ prevention measures will be important. Multi-sectoral analyses of the impact of violence on inter communal relations need to be an integral part of the post conflict intervention strategy of humanitarian actors. Reconciliation and pacific coexistence at community and state level should be advocated for. Kachin state The conflict between the Myanmar army and the Kachin Independence Army (KIA) erupted in eastern Kachin in June 2011 and expanded to northern Shan State. More than people have been displaced and are living in camps or host families in government or KIO (Kachin Independence Organisation) controlled areas 3. Since the beginning of the conflict, humanitarian access to the IDPs has been severely restricted. Only of the IDPs have received UN humanitarian assistance. 4 Humanitarian convoys have only been able to sporadically (11 convoys from 12/2011 to 06/2013) reach some of the people living in camps located in non-government controlled areas. International NGOs, working with local implementing partners, are able to deliver some assistance to those areas. Eastern border areas With several cease fire agreements concluded in 2012 with ethnic armed groups along the south-eastern border, the situation has stabilised. If the ceasefires are transformed into peace agreements, voluntary return of refugees from 9 camps in Thailand could materialise. However, in northern Shan State at least people have been displaced by spill-over fighting from Kachin state, whereas in south Shan, breakaway factions have resumed fighting with the national army over territorial control. Over the years, the internal conflict on the eastern border has resulted in more than IDPs. 5 Thailand An estimated 3 million Myanmar citizens live in Thailand as economic migrants, while , mostly ethnic Karen, reside in 9 refugee camps (temporary shelters) along the Thai-Myanmar border 6. The Government has responded to the protracted refugee situation by pursuing a policy of containment of the refugees in isolated camps along the border. Prolonged insecurity and uncertainty, aid dependency and limited livelihood and education opportunities has significant human rights and economic implications for the refugees UNOCHA internal displacement snapshot Kachin & Shan states June 2013/UNHCR situation update May 2013 UNOCHA internal displacement snapshot Kachin & Shan states June 2013 Thailand Burma Border Consortium (TBBC) UNHCR Framework for UNHCR engagement June 2013 ECHO/-XA/BUD/2014/

3 2. HUMANITARIAN NEEDS 1) Affected people/potential beneficiaries In Rakhine state humanitarian activities are open to all ethnic groups, the criteria being the level of needs and vulnerability. People affected by the recent sectarian violence and communities which are victims of discrimination are the main target of DG ECHO's assistance. Depending on how the situation evolves, DG ECHO aims to target at least people in the townships of Maungdaw, Buthidaung, Rathedaung, Sittwe and other affected areas in Rakhine State. In Kachin state people displaced by the internal conflict in either government or ethnic armed group controlled areas will be targeted. In Shan state people affected by the spill over from Kachin conflict and renewed tension and fighting between ethnic armed groups and army, will be targeted. On the eastern border people on the eastern border who have been affected by conflict will be targeted, including IDPs and local host communities. Other humanitarian needs: Myanmar is a highly disaster-prone country exposed to regular meteorological events, notably floods and cyclones, but also earthquakes. Often international assistance is required to address new emergency situations with confirmed humanitarian needs. In Thailand, while in 2005 a programme started to resettle refugees from Myanmar to third country (80,000 refugees have already been resettled), the camp population did not decrease significantly until last year when spontaneous returns saw the overall camp figure decrease from to Approximately of those are unregistered. DG ECHO will target approx of the camp residents and other displaced persons outside the camps, as appropriate. 2) Description of the most acute humanitarian needs Rakhine state - Needs include protection activities against discrimination, provision of basic health care, nutrition, food security and livelihood support. In northern Rakhine state, there has been a significant deterioration in child nutritional status to levels far exceeding emergency thresholds. As many as one-quarter of all children under 5 could be acutely malnourished in Maungdaw and Buthidaung townships. 7 More than displaced people are now living in official or unofficial camps throughout the state and are in need of assistance. Basic health care, food, water, sanitation, livelihood support and protection are amongst the most acute needs. The construction of large camps has generated needs in the organisation and management of such camps. Some communities are also "enclaved" in Sittwe since June Cut off from traditional livelihoods due to the pervasive hostile environment, they are in need of adequate support to mitigate the loss of their livelihoods. 7 WFP Food security update April 2013 ECHO/-XA/BUD/2014/

4 An early warning system aiming at quick initiatives to defuse tension between communities through inter-communal dialogue and trust building are preliminary steps towards stabilisation. Restoring and improving pre-existing economic dynamics involving participation of both communities would benefit both groups. Context specific projects promoting peaceful co-existence and establishment of inter-community dialogue platforms are needed. Kachin state IDPs are living in temporary camps and host communities throughout Kachin and northern Shan States. Unaddressed acute needs exist with regards to food, shelter, NFIs, health care, camp management, livelihood support, and protection, notably in the areas outside government control where at least IDPs live in camps. Restricted access to the civilian population is still a major constraint challenging the relief response, in spite of recent positive signs by the Government granting sporadic access to ICRC and the UN. Needs of host families sheltering displaced families also have to be considered. Eastern border -In cease fire areas, the increased possibilities of access to remote areas populated by ethnic minorities will allow addressing crucial needs in protection, mine risks awareness, health and wash. Voluntary repatriation of refugees from camps in Thailand and resettlement of IDPs will be considered, should the peace situation be conducive to such evolution. Refugees and displaced persons in Thailand Needs in the refugee camps in Thailand relate to food security, nutrition, livelihood, water, sanitation, health and protection. A profiling exercise has started but there is also an urgent need to relaunch the screening and registration process of refugees to ensure that only genuine refugees and vulnerable groups are targeted, also in preparation of a future voluntary return to Myanmar. Other humanitarian needs- - Coordination, information and data management: In the complex operational context of Myanmar, consolidated and ready-to-use-data and information is important to the humanitarian/development community for programming and coordination purposes. Efficient coordination is needed in view of the various humanitarian crises in Myanmar. - Disaster response and disaster risk reduction /preparedness: Myanmar and Thailand are highly disaster-prone countries. Wherever appropriate, disaster risk reduction activities should be mainstreamed in programmes. 3) Humanitarian Response 1) National/local response and involvement In Myanmar the capacity of the government to respond to disasters remains limited. The Ministry of Social Welfare, Relief and Resettlement is the designated lead Ministry in charge of providing relief assistance to affected communities and it is also where the Emergency Operations Centre (EOC) is located. The Ministry of Border Affairs is in charge of regulating assistance in border areas. The Myanmar Red Cross has increased its response capacity due to its collaboration with IFRC, ICRC and various national societies present in Myanmar. ECHO/-XA/BUD/2014/

5 In 2012 the Myanmar Peace Centre has been established and is serving as a government secretariat to support the national peace effort with ethnic armed groups that has been undertaken since The MPC and its working groups are providing coordination platforms for national and international organisations. The landmine issue is considered under the Mine Action Centre of the MPC. In Thailand the Government is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention. It maintains ultimate authority over the refugee camps. The Ministry of Interior controls the day-to-day management of the camps in collaboration with refugee and camp committees. Refugees are not allowed to move outside of the camps. Advocacy has resulted in lifting of some restrictions by authorities and non-formal and vocational education and livelihood activities are possible at local level. 2) International Humanitarian Response There is no Country Assistance Program (CAP) in Myanmar. Instead the UN has launched in 2013 a revised response plans for Kachin State (March December 2013 USD ) and revised response plan and inter agency preparedness/contingency plan for Rakhine State (up until Dec 2013 USD ). These 2 response plans will be updated to consider the needs for the year In Myanmar a large number of DG ECHO partners (63 including UN, INGOs, ICRC, IOM) are present. In Thailand both the UN and INGOs are able to work in the refugee camps. The level of funding going to the refugee operation along the Thailand is about EUR per year or EUR 336/refugee (TBBC 2011 Annual Report). 3) Constraints and DG ECHO response capacity Limitation on access is characteristic for many aid programmes in Myanmar, with lengthy procedures to obtain visas, travel authorisations and Memorandum of Understanding (MoUs). Security concerns and anti-un/ngo sentiment (i.e. in Rakhine state) are also hindering effective implementation of humanitarian aid. However, most programmes can still be monitored by DG ECHO. Although commitments have been made by the Government to improve access, and some positive developments have taken place, access in Kachin and Shan states remains erratic for international humanitarian staff. In Thailand, challenges relate to upholding humanitarian principles in the camps and finding durable solutions. 4) Envisaged DG ECHO response and expected results of humanitarian aid interventions In Myanmar, DG ECHO will focus on areas inhabited by ethnic minorities. Information management/ coordination/disaster response may be supported on a countrywide level. In Thailand, assistance to the camps and to displaced persons outside the camps should be coupled with improved beneficiary targeting, and advocacy for durable solutions, including voluntary repatriation to Myanmar. Northern Rakhine state Inter-ethnic tension mitigation and prevention ECHO/-XA/BUD/2014/

6 Protection activities against discrimination Food assistance, nutrition, livelihood support Provision of basic health services Rakhine state areas affected by sectarian violence Protection and inter-ethnic tension mitigation, dialogue and confidence building Food assistance, nutrition activities, livelihood support Temporary basic health care WASH Non Food Items Camp management Kachin and Shan state conflict areas Shelter - climate adapted shelter materials, camp/settlement management Non-food items, climate adapted kits WASH in camps and settlements Food aid, livelihood support Basic health services to the displaced and host communities Protection and mine awareness in camps with a high number of women, children and elderly. Eastern border areas Protection and mine awareness activities In case of return of IDPs and refugees to places of origin, temporary shelter and basic health services, water, sanitation. National Coordination and information management Disaster response following new emergencies Mainstreaming of Disaster risk reduction /preparedness Refugees and displaced persons in Thailand Food assistance, primary health care, protection and support for durable solutions. Effective coordination is essential. ECHO supports the Inter-Agency Standing Committee s Transformative Agenda (ITA) and encourages partners to demonstrate their engagement in implementing its objectives, to take part in coordination mechanisms (e.g. Humanitarian Country Team/Clusters) and to allocate resources to foster the ITA roll-out. Partners will be expected to ensure full compliance with visibility requirements and to acknowledge the funding role of the EU/ECHO, as set out in the applicable contractual arrangements. 4. LRRD, COORDINATION AND TRANSITION 1) Other DG ECHO interventions The DIPECHO programme for South East Asia includes Myanmar. The 2014/15 DIPECHO Action Plan will run in parallel to this HIP and will build on previous ECHO/-XA/BUD/2014/

7 achievements with an extended geographical coverage and will include evaluation of earthquake risks in urban areas. DG ECHO's emergency response "toolbox", which includes IFRC's Disaster Relief Emergency Fund (the DREF), the Small Scale Disaster Response and Epidemics HIPs may complement this HIP. 2) Other services/donors availability In 2012, humanitarian funding to Myanmar amounted to approximately USD , with main donors being the EU, Germany, Switzerland, Norway, Japan, UK, AUSAID, USAID, Turkey, Sweden and Denmark and the UN (CERF). The Myanmar Peace Support Initiative (MPSI), launched in in January 2012 and led by Norway, provides immediate support in areas where ceasefires have been concluded. MPSI currently has pilot projects in Rakhine, Chin, Shan, Karen and Mon areas. The main donors to the camps in Thailand are the EU, Sweden, Netherlands, UK and USA. 3) Other related EU interventions Apart from ECHO, the main EU Programme supporting the ethnic areas is the Aid to Uprooted People programme (AUP) managed by DG DEVCO. In 2012, five projects for EUR were launched, including a livelihoods programme in Rakhine State (EUR ), and interventions in the South-east, with focus on Kayin, supporting community development, basic services and infrastructure. Projects in the ethnic regions have also been supported under multi-donor Trust Funds (LIFT -Livelihood Trust Fund and 3 MDG -health fund) and EU thematic programmes (the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights and the Non State Actors and Local Authorities Programmes) The Instrument for Stability (IfS) is supporting the implementation and monitoring of ceasefires, peace building, restorative justice and national reconciliation, establishment and support to the operations of the Myanmar Peace Centre (MPC), demining and police training. The IfS is also supporting the set-up of a national Crisis Centre in Nay Pyi Taw, which will respond to both man-made and natural disasters. In Rakhine state DG ECHO closely coordinates with other EU funded programmes to increase the possibility of eventually moving from humanitarian aid to rehabilitation and development. DG DEVCO will launch a EUR programme Support to Peace, Reconciliation and Development in Myanmar targeting the ethnic regions, with a call for proposals early In Thailand, coordinating with other EU funding instruments in the camps, such as the Aid to Uprooted People (AUP) program, will be ensured. 4) Exit scenarios With the challenging humanitarian contexts in Rakhine and Kachin States, efforts aiming at reinforcing resilience of vulnerable communities will be maintained, for 8 OCHA Financial Tracking Service for Myanmar emergencies 12/07/2013 ECHO/-XA/BUD/2014/

8 instance continued promotion of DRR, conflict sensitive livelihood schemes, as well as linkages with mid/long term development programmes. Although ceasefire agreements with ethnic groups have been signed, the need for political solutions to address minority issues remains important for a country still in transition. Durable settlements with ethnic groups should pave the way for development programmes and voluntary return of refugees from Thailand. Following positive political developments in Myanmar, UNHCR has put voluntary return of the refugees in Thailand to Myanmar on the international agenda. Ceasefires and on-going peace negotiations in Myanmar have already led to spontaneous returns and a reduction in the overall refugee case load. In this context, and taking into account other acute humanitarian needs in the world, it is becoming increasingly difficult to justify the continued funding of the camps under a limited EU humanitarian aid budget. Although the final allocation will depend on the proposals received, 2014 funding to the camps will not exceed EUR ECHO/-XA/BUD/2014/