UKRAINE HUMANITARIAN CRISES ANALYSIS 2016

UKRAINE HUMANITARIAN CRISES ANALYSIS 2016 Each year, Sida conducts a humanitarian allocation exercise in which a large part of its humanitarian budget is allocated to emergencies worldwide. This allocation takes place in the beginning of the year as to ensure predictability for humanitarian organisations and to allow for best possible operational planning. In an effort to truly adhere to the humanitarian principles Sida bases its allocation decisions on a number of objective indicators of which the most important are related to the number of affected people, vulnerability of affected people and level of funding in previous years. One of the indicators is also related to forgotten crises in order to ensure sufficient funding also to low profile crises. Besides this initial allocation, another part of the humanitarian budget is set aside as an emergency reserve for sudden onset emergencies and deteriorating humanitarian situations. This reserve allows Sida to quickly allocate funding to any humanitarian situation throughout the year, including additional funding to Ukraine. For 2016 Ukraine crisis is allocated an initial 30 MSK in January 2016. Close monitoring on Ukraine follows throughout the year for potentially additional funds. 1. CRISIS OVERVIEW Since March 2014, Ukraine has been involved in an international conflict with Russia after Russia's occupation of Crimea. Since April 2014, there have also been two non-international armed conflicts in the east of the country with the Ukrainian armed forces against the "People's Republic of Donetsk" (DNR) and the "People's Republic of Lugansk" (LNR). For the international armed conflict the four Geneva Conventions are applicable. As for the non-international armed conflicts (NIAC) the applicable law to all parties to the conflict, state and non-state actors, are common Article 3 to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the additional protocol II and customary international humanitarian law applicable to a NIAC. 1 The armed conflicts have led to large flows of displaced people; Ukraine has registered around 1.6 million persons as internally displaced. However some IDPs have returned and others move inbetween place of orginin and resettled area, the number of IDPs is therefore difficult to confirm. There are also 1,1 million refugees outside Ukraine 2. 9,000 people (military and civilians) have been killed and at least 21,000 have been injured 3. Political solutions to the conflict have so far failed and mutually agreed ceasefires (September 2014 and February 2015) have been broken. Indiscriminate shelling and continued insecurity are placing the civilian population and humanitarian organisations at risk. Supply of basic goods and services have been disrupted in the conflict affected areas. The latest negotiated ceasefire of September 2015 has created a noticeable reduction in fighting during September and October, improving access for humanitarian organisations to the affected population. Still, access is continuously curtailed by government imposed access restrictions and de-facto authorities banning most international organisations from delivering humanitarian aid in areas under their control. Further, the ceasefire is fragile and fighting has reportedly been escalating. The population also faces continued protection threats such as the risk of Explosive Remnants of War (ERWs). In 2015, there were 204 people killed and 380 (32 children) injured in mine/uxo incidents. The civilian population living on both sides of the contact line thereby continue to face imminent security threats due to military activities. The recent upsurge in fighting also confirms the fragility and unpredictability of the conflict and the need for humanitarian preparedness and contingency planning. 1.1 Geographical areas and affected population The Humanitarian Needs Overview (HNO) estimates that 3.7 million people are affected by the armed conflict and that 3.1 million of these are in need of humanitarian assistance. The Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP) defines the humanitarian needs to be most acute in areas close to the contact line, and in the non-governmental controlled areas of Donetsk and Luhansk regions, where 2,7 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance. Of the total 3.1 million people in need, nearly 1 million are elderly and half a million are children. People with disabilities are according to needs assessment identified as very vulnerable in conflict affected areas. Older persons, a majority women, represent a further high percentage of the most vulnerable as they face particular problems to access services and assistance. The conflict has also left many women as sole providers for their families but at the same time having reinforced their traditional gender roles (caring for children and elderly at home) and thereby in practice restricted their freedom of movement and livelihood opportunities. There are also reports on IDP women reverting to negative coping mechanisms such as sex work to provide for themselves and their families. Men are also vulnerable as for example their freedom of movement between government and non-government controlled areas in practice is more restricted than women s. Ukraine is a lower middle-income country, which indicates that the populations coping mechanisms would be stronger than in other more vulnerable contexts. For example according to the HNO nutrition is not major concern in eastern 1 www.rulac.org 2 UNCHR 3 OHCHR: Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 November 2015 to 15 February 2016, http://www.ohchr.org/documents/countries/ua/ukraine_13th_hrmmu_report_3march2016.pdf 1

Ukraine. 4 Nevertheless, the INFORM risk management index 5 rank Ukraine number 27 out of 191 countries, thereby defining Ukraine in high and increasing risk of humanitarian crisis and disasters. Most noteworthy is that, besides Palestine, Ukraine is the country in the world where the risk increased the most (from risk grade below 3 in 2014 to risk grade 5.4 in 2016); an early warning signal to take into consideration when allocating international aid to prevent further deterioration of the humanitarian situation in Ukraine. Furthermore, the continued fighting and government restrictions on freedom of movement of people and goods in and out of non-governmental controlled areas has led to dramatic increase, up to as much as 70 percent 6, in prices of food and non-food items and restricted livelihoods opportunities. The armed conflict has caused damage to important parts of the water network with risk of affecting water supply for over four million people. A multi-sector needs analysis conducted in early 2015 already then identified that the majority of the population in non-governmental controlled areas had adopted negative coping mechanisms such as spending savings, reduced food intake and seeking humanitarian assistance. Findings from more recent needs assessment indicates that situation has further depleted peoples coping mechanisms making them dependent on social support networks. 7 The Government s decision to withhold payment of pensions, social benefits, salaries to public servants and payments to public institutions such as schools and hospitals in areas which are not under their control has further contributed to increased humanitarian needs in these areas. IDPs themselves rank opportunity for employment among their highest needs 8, which indicates capacity for selfreliance should opportunities be provided. Livelihood opportunities for IDPs would drastically reduce reliance on humanitarian aid, especially in governmental controlled areas, and prevent people from early return to unsafe areas where fighting is still on-going. The situation in Ukraine could be summarised as a protection crisis with humanitarian consequences, characterized by lack of psychical protection, restriction on freedom of movement of people and goods across the line of contact and restricted access to civil documentation, social benefits and livelihoods for people residing in conflict affected areas and for IDPs. 1.2 Risks and threats The main risk for deterioration of the humanitarian situation is escalation of the armed violence as well as further depletion of coping mechanisms within population residing along the contact line and in non-governmental controlled areas. Furthermore, limited humanitarian access to these areas will prevent an effective humanitarian response. Humanitarian access to areas with the most urgent humanitarian needs has been a challenge in Ukraine since the early days of the armed conflict. This is despite the fact that the parties to the conflict are at all times to grant unhindered access to humanitarian organisations to all affected people, according to their needs and irrespective of where they are located according to IHL. On-going fighting has created a difficult security situation and bureaucratic measures imposed by the Ukrainian government, for passage in and out of non-governmental controlled areas, have hampered a fully effective humanitarian response. The situation has drastically worsened since the summer when the de-facto authorities in Luhansk and Donetsk halted all international humanitarian actors from working in areas under their control, pending these organisations registration with the de-facto authorities, and then in September denied the these organisations registration and ordered them to leave areas under their control. Furthermore, the de-facto authorities particular unwillingness to discuss protection related activities is a concern for implementation. At the time of writing a very limited number of international humanitarian actors have access (including approved registration by de-facto authorities ) to operate in non-governmental controlled areas. These include the Sida strategic humanitarian partners ICRC, UNHCR and OCHA, where out of the three only ICRC is allowed to operate in Donetsk. It s possible that other international humanitarian organisations will regain access but the situation is unpredictable, also for the organisations that presently have access. There are opportunities to implement through local CSOs, especially in the Donetsk region, but these organisations have limited capacity, both in terms of internal management and humanitarian needs assessments/response capacity (see below 2.1). International humanitarian actors need to prepare, and include contingency planning, for scenarios of continued restricted access. A principled humanitarian response 9 including operational independence is essential. Continued work to ensure that all parties to the conflict guarantee free and unimpeded humanitarian access is necessary. The de-facto authorities denying most humanitarian organisations from operating in areas under their control has also lead to a situation where several organisations have moved activities to governmental controlled areas. There are reports of insufficient coordination and overlap in work in these areas. 4 (HNO p.21)/fao SEINA 5 www.inform-index.org 6 HNO p 25/ WFP VAM market update for the month of July 2015 7 (HNO p 25) 8 Multi-Sector Needs Assessment, Ukraine NGO Forum 30 th of March2015 9 In accordance with the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence 2

Sida is for 2016 recommended to initially focus its support to actors that have access to areas where the humanitarian needs are most urgent, but should remain flexible (through the Rapid Response Mechanism and mid-year review) to provide additional support to other Sida humanitarian strategic partners should they become operational in these areas. Sida is also recommended to explore opportunities (pooled fund, consortium, cooperation with INGOs) to further strengthen local humanitarian actors capacity to continue and improve provision of assistance. A generic risk in all countries with humanitarian needs is the risk of corruption. With general challenges in all societal pillars including law, order, stability and justice - the area of checks and balances also becomes fragile. Ukraine ranks on number 130 on Transparency Internationals Index for 2015. 1.3 Strategic objectives identified in the Strategic Response Plan The HRP mainstream protection of civilians and includes three strategic objectives: 1) Protection: Advocacy for and response to protection needs of conflict affected people with due regards to international norms and standards. This includes human rights protection such as advocacy for freedom of movement and legal advice to conflict affected people, protection in programming by prevention and response to GBV, mine action as well as mainstreaming of protection in all cluster response plans. 2) Assistance: Provision of emergency live-saving water, food, health and shelter assistance to displaced and conflict-affected people with focus on the most vulnerable, including support for population to manage the harsh winter conditions. 3) Resilience: Prevention of further degradation of urban systems, infrastructure, systems and service provision and alleviation of human suffering. This priority thereby includes early recovery (including resilience) and action on social cohesion. The HRP also include monitoring of Multipurpose Cash Assistance integrated in cluster responses totalling 14,1 million USD. The HRP will focus geographically to areas where the humanitarian needs are most acute; areas close to the contact line, where 800 000 people (200 000 people in governmental controlled areas) reside. Support will also be provided to 2.7 million people in non-governmental controlled areas in need of humanitarian assistance. An additional 200 000 people, the most vulnerable IDPs residing in governmental controlled areas also have humanitarian needs according to the HRP and will be assisted. The HRP also underlines the importance of a recovery framework to ensure that conflict-affected people do not become reliant on humanitarian aid. 2. IN COUNTRY HUMANITARIAN CAPACITIES 2.1 National and local capacities and constraints The primary responsibility for provision of assistance remains with the authorities in accordance with IHL, UNGA resolutions and Guiding Principles on IDPs. Ukraine is a lower middle income country but a weakened economy has negatively affected the government s ability to respond to the humanitarian needs. Inefficiencies and bureaucracy has further hampered the national humanitarian response capacity including IDP registration and provision of social services for conflict affected people. Even if Ukraine has adopted an IDP legislation with the purpose of ensuring the right to basic social services for IDPs, further work is needed to ensure improved alignment with Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement including rights for all ethnic groups in society and to facilitate for IDP self-reliance in areas of residence through removal of bureaucratic requirements for employment, etc. Large parts of the humanitarian response have been provided by Ukrainian civil society volunteer groups and IDP host communities including relatives and friends of IDPs. A high number of local CSOs are also implementing partners of the HRP priorities in 2016. There are however reports on depletion of resources among local CSOs and host communities and increasing hostilities towards IDPs within host communities, which many times themselves face high unemployment rates and economic hardship. 2.2 International operational capacities and constraints Few humanitarian organisations were present in Ukraine before the armed conflict but a year and half later most of the large international humanitarian actors have presence in Ukraine. OCHA established its office in Kyiv in 2014 and during 2015 strived to improve its field presence. The Resident Coordinator, Mr Neil Walker, was designated as Humanitarian Coordinator in January 2015. There is an HCT, which recently has expanded to include NGO, but not donor, representation. The cluster system was activated in December 2014. There are however still improvements needed within the implementation of the cluster system and related coordination, especially at field level. Sida is recommended to continue monitoring how field presence of clusters develops in 2016. The HRP will change from activity based in 2015 to project based in 2016. The 2015 HRP is 47 percent funded; where the early recovery cluster received most funding (over 70%) followed by coordination and food clusters (just over 40% funded). 3

At the time of writing there are few humanitarian organisations with access to the geographical areas with the most urgent humanitarian needs (see 1.2). 2.3 International and Regional assistance Sweden was the 8 th largest humanitarian donor in Ukraine and the 9 th largest to the HRP in 2015. The major donors include the US, EC, Germany, Canada and UK. There is a risk of funding fatigue for Ukraine in 2016 and humanitarian priorities might need to be further specified and synergies with development cooperation swiftly developed. 3. SIDAs HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE PLAN 3.1. Sidas role Sweden initiated its humanitarian support of 37 million SEK to Ukraine in 2014 through its embassy in Kyiv, which also contributed 10 million SEK to UNDP s recovery programme in Ukraine. Sida took over responsibility for the humanitarian support in 2015 and has continued the partnerships established in 2014 with some slight adjustments. The initial 2015 contribution was planned to 33 million SEK but was adjusted to 42 million SEK after Sida s field visit to Ukraine in February 2015 when the increasing humanitarian needs became apparent. Additional funding to ICRC and OCHA as an outcome of Sida s mid-year review in July 2015 as well as rapid response funding to Sida strategic partners totals a Swedish contribution of 65,7 million SEK in 2015. In 2015 Sida identified ICRC and UNHCR as its main partners with their capacity to provide both protection and shelter/nfis and food to IDPs and to the population residing in conflict affected areas. Sida also provided support to NRC, Save the Children, Unicef and ACF for their work with shelter rehabilitation, emergency education, protection and food security as well as to OCHA for coordination. All Sida partners have had challenges during 2015 with operational constraints, especially access to the areas around the contact line and non-governmental controlled areas. Sweden s humanitarian support is managed from Sida HQ in Stockholm with support from Sida staff at the Swedish Embassy in Kyiv. Sweden has during 2015 focused on monitoring partners work at field level including monitoring of partners capacity to reach areas where humanitarian needs are most acute. Furthermore, Sweden has raised the importance of and supported partners to include gender analysis in needs assessments to ensure that the different needs of men, women, boys and girls are assessed and addressed. To contribute to an efficient humanitarian response Sida is recommended to keep the following dialogue issues with partners in 2016: Improved coordination, including humanitarian access, with focus on the field level. Improved gender analysis, including gender disaggregated statistics, ensuring that women, men, girls and boys humanitarian needs are analysed and responded to. In addition, it is recommended that Sweden follow up with partners their approach to ensuring equal access to humanitarian aid for all ethnic groups. Application of the humanitarian principles and promotion of IHL. Further develop the synergies between humanitarian and development interventions in Ukraine. IDPs social and economic integration into their host-communities would prevent long-term dependency on humanitarian aid and enable humanitarian actors to focus its response to where needs are most urgent. Sweden contributed with 220 million SEK to development cooperation with Ukraine in 2015. Components include market development and a more efficient public administration. A more efficient public administration in Ukraine would also be to the benefit of the humanitarian response as it could include improved capacity within the Ukrainian administration to respond to the humanitarian needs of the large IDP population as well as improved efficiency within the administration to facilitate for international humanitarian organisations operations in the country. Over the last year the Swedish embassy in Kyiv has entered into agreements on supporting a selected few projects focusing on synergies between the existing reform portfolio and recovery needs in the light of the conflict. These projects support clear links between some of the main areas of focus in the reform support, such as strengthening local governance structures and women s empowerment (political and economic). Sida will during 2016 conduct a study to explore possibilities to strengthen synergies between the humanitarian and development cooperation. Particular attention will be given to employment opportunities, a high ranking priority for the IDPs themselves. This will be done with a conflict sensitive approach and possibly with special attention to IDP women, which are identified to face particular difficulties in the job market as noted above. 3.2. Response Priorities 2015 Sida sectorial focus is recommended to include: Protection: The situation in Ukraine has turned into a protection crisis with humanitarian consequences. According to the HNO there are 3,1 million people in need of protection. Reports conclude that the IHL is not respected 10, and civilians lack protection from indiscriminate use of force by all parties to the conflict. Large areas 10 ICRC appeal 2016, https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/pol10/0001/2015/en and https://www.hrw.org/europe/central-asia/ukraine 4

are weapon contaminated causing protection threats to the population. IDPs lack information on access to services, documentation and legal aid. Sida is recommended to focus its support towards respect for IHL as well as protection for the conflict affected population including IDPs. NFI and emergency shelter: According to the HRP there are 900 000 people in need of shelter and NFI support, where the greatest concentration of needs are in non-governmental controlled areas and communities along the contact line. Sida is recommended to concentrate its response priorities to support these communities to provide dignified shelter through light and medium repairs and life-saving assistance to those most in need. Health: Health facilities in Eastern Ukraine have been damaged during fighting and government imposed restrictions have restricted supply of medical equipment and drugs. Sida is consequently recommended to provide humanitarian support contributing to provision of medical drugs and equipment. Food: The HNO identifies 1,1 million people in need of food security interventions foremost along the contact line and in non-governmental controlled areas. Sida is recommended to provide targeted support to food security interventions within identified vulnerable communities. There is good potential for multi-sector cash based assistance to cover basic humanitarian needs, including NFI/shelter, health and food in Ukraine and Sida is recommended to support and monitor partners work with cash interventions. 3.3. Partners As a consequence of growing humanitarian needs globally the initial Swedish allocation for Ukraine in 2016 has been reduced. Sida is therefore recommended to focus support to areas of which the HRP has identified that humanitarian needs are most acute and to partners with access to these areas. Sida is recommended to closely monitor how the humanitarian situation and partners operational capacity in most affected areas is developing and is recommend to remain flexible (Rapid Response Mechanism and mid-year review) to provide additional support to other Sida humanitarian strategic partners should they become operational in these areas. Sida is also recommended to explore opportunities (pooled fund, consortium, cooperation with INGOs) to ensure that local humanitarian actors are supported to continue providing assistance where the humanitarian needs are most urgent. International Committee of the Red Cross ICRC: ICRC is the only humanitarian actor, which at the time of writing has access and is operational in non-governmental controlled areas in both Donetsk and Luhansk. With few other international humanitarian actors operational ICRC has taken on a large scale assistance programme covering shelter repairs, NFI and food distributions, cash support/cash for work and are initiating small scale livelihood interventions. All ICRC assistance interventions are focused in Donetsk and Luhansk regions. ICRC is also a strong protection actor and includes work to promote protection of civilians and respect for IHL. Proposed amount for ICRC is 15 MSEK. United Nations High Commission for Refugees: UNHCR is one of the larger partners in the HRP and is assessed by Sida to be one of the main humanitarian actors in Ukraine. UNHCR has received registration in Luhansk and works through partners in Donetsk. UNHCR is the lead in the Shelter/NFI and Protection clusters. Protection is prioritised both in the HRP and within Sida s humanitarian response plan. Proposed amount for UNHCR is 13 MSEK. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs: OCHA will be supported to provide coordination of the humanitarian response in Ukraine. Sida notes that there is room for strengthening humanitarian coordination and improve OCHA s role in Ukraine. Sida is recommended to support and monitor process. Proposed allocation for OCHA is 2 MSEK. SIDA s HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE TO Ukraine in 2016 (Insert total sum allocated to country. If other sum is proposed please indicate that sum with a second/separate table) Recommended partner for Sector/focus of work (incl. integrated or Proposed amount Sida support multi sectorial programming ) by Sida (SEK) ICRC Protection, health, shelter/nfis, food 15 M assistance, multi-purpose cash UNHCR Protection and shelter/nfi, multi-purpose cash 13 M OCHA Coordination 2 M TOTAL: 30 M Sources http://www.rulac.org/countries/ukraine UNCHR Ukraine Humanitarian Needs Overview 2016, OCHA November 2015 www.inform-index.org Multi-Sector Needs Assessment, Ukraine NGO Forum 30 th of March2015 ICRC appeal 2016, https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/pol10/0001/2015/en and https://www.hrw.org/europe/centralasia/ukraine 5