>> fairly priced? >> i think the market has proven that agencies and the private market have proven that doing market risk pricing across the credit spectrum has not been perfect. and if the private market was to take over credit pricing, i would argue that people of good credit would get very good rates in people with mediocre and bad credit would not be able to get a mortgage. maybe they should be renters. maybe they should be, but that's certainly how -- >> i thought that's a credit was supposed to work, but go ahead. if you have bad credit you can get alone. if you have good credit, you do. >> i agree with you, but i think, listen to -- >> if washington is willing to depoliticize housing, then what you're saying is correct. it has no interest in homeowner rates are having credit available to homeowners, then i

think what you're saying is absolutely true. and only people that have very good credit and can bring 20% down to the table ever get a mortgage. i think that's right. i'm not making a judgment. but i think that's the results. >> i think what you just said is a very telling thing. and i appreciate it. >> i think that, you know, the guarantee subsidizes that spectrum of the borrower. and it enables, you know, the 30 year fixed rate, we don't know if there'll be a market for three year guarantee right now because it doesn't exist. so could we develop one? it will take us five, 10 years to develop, but so, we could probably go out and price it today but there'll be no liquidity in the credit. so we will be fairly priced, probably not. so what we thought we were some of the government guarantee is cheaper than what a fictional market that we don't have any

real price discovery on, so the rationale historically, to my understanding is that you subsidized the borrower with this 30 year fixed rate, you are now instilling more benefits, public policy wise because now you have more, well, they can buy a large house or whatever, but i don't know the studies and the reality of this, the analysis around that, but this is the message that's been sacrosanct for years, that we subsidize the 30 year mortgage, create more homeownership and, you know, better communities because we have more, bigger houses and more involvement in the community. >> mr. davidson? >> so, while the mortgage tba market is essential like the futures market, it does have some important differences. one of them is that under

current sec rules you cancel a private security before it is created. where in the tba market you can sell loans to go go into the security that has been critics at least technically some rules would need to change in order to create a tba market which would allow physical delivery of loans. so in most futures market people don't deliver their product. they don't deliver the court to the exchange or to the counterparty. use a pair those traits are. in the tba market, most of the originators actually sell the loans into a short position that they have created. in addition, we found a financial market is that financial markets that have government guarantees behind them, so sovereign markets, trade with much greater liquidity and the non-cyber markets. so, i agree that futures market could work. many of our clients also use futures markets, the treasury futures or eurodollar futures to hedge their positions. at the tba market has proven to be the most liquid and most

effective hedge for the mortgages. >> i guess in september the loan limit will go back to the pre-crisis levels, at least currently that's what's going to happen. will that give us an opportunity see if this is something that will work? >> yes. i think the first -- >> and what is the market expecting right now, going back to your solution to washington and depoliticizing? what do they think washington is going to do right now as it relates to that? >> oh, i think it's mandated that the loan that goes down to 625 at this rate. i think the market is expecting that to happen. i think the market would hope that it continues to drift down in a meaningful way. i don't think we're going to be able to create a private-label mortgage market without product. we can't compete against the u.s. >> so that's going to be, will there be any tba activity on

those upper levels of? >> my belief is no, it will all go into a private-label mortgage securitizations. or banks which is keep those loans on their balance sheets. >> my point on this is that you are being passed, summit is being asked, what about, what's the consequences, what are the trade-offs to lower this, spending limit down? what's the price and what are the benefits? and we don't have any real information to make the decision. we don't have any real price discovery as to what the cost, as far as what would willing parties in the private market trade that risk for. and then we could be violate what the cost would be as far as the incremental guarantee exposure to our balance sheet, if you will, for the u.s. taxpayers by reducing fat loan limit down. and then we could evaluate it with real risk management so

that we could assess whether what is in effect, what is the cost. we don't have any other price discovery mechanisms to do that today because it's all, well, it's this amorphous blob of it government guarantee. on suggesting we could create vibrant markets that trade in price credit. this price information will help the economy out capital more effectively, and price this risk and help us, you know, make better policy as part of the process. >> i believe it's a good step to lower the loan limits. private market produce a trillion dollar, to try and does. supports our mortgage loans. there's a reason it can support a substantially larger portion than it is right now. >> mr. chairman, i think you. i think all of you. and mr. hamilton, i was in no way critical. i appreciate the observation that we in washington have created a mechanism where those people with good credit pay more

for the mortgages, and those people with bad credit pay less for the mortgages. and you know, the question is will we ever depoliticize and cause the market to work in our normal way where people have bad credit pay more for their rates in people with good credit a less. so i appreciate you bringing that out so clearly, and thank all of you for adjustment and look forward to seeing you individuals in our offices over the course of time. thank you. >> thank you very much, senator corker. i've got a few additional questions, but i think in the last question both senator crapo and senator corker, it has expose sort of the real policy choices we have. i mean, we have collectively, for generations, both republicans and democrats and everyone else has said putting people in homes is key to

america, and it has resonated. it's resonated, and as a result a lot of these programs will be gone. -- begin to do that. now we're at the point where we are looking at how do we make a transition and how do we do it in an effective way, how we price it correctly, how do we maintain a market. and this hearing, despite the esoteric title, it's absolutely essential to what we're going to do going forward for all the reasons that senator corker and senator crapo indicated. and the private market step in? will they step in? so let me just ask a few other questions, but i will also joined senator corker in inviting you to come by the office. because we're not going to settle this this morning. it's going to be a dialogue going forward. but begin, mr. davidson, and the question is that, again, if my understanding is incorrect, please correct it, but the tba

market is not subject to the securities laws, you know, that it is exempt because of the participation of the gses, the agencies. if we move to a private market where these activities have to be performed by private firms, would that induce sec registration requirements and other forms? and if so, with a couple get things further, or how should we think about that maybe in a more general question? >> so, so currently loans that deliver into the tba market are exempt from sec registration. so that allows you to essentially sell them before the figures are created. some private market, an issuer can't do that. they can't say planning on securitizing next year, police by this, or next month, please buy this security in advance. and so that's just eliminate the possibility possibility for physical delivery into a forward sale. so of the mechanism could be

developed that they're just not going to be as efficient or maybe there could be some exception created for some type of mortgage. but sec is going the other direction right now, and sort of requiring more disclosure, more detailed disclosure about loans and longer time periods between when you announce a deal and when you sell it. so the sec's direction is sort of contrary to what you need to create a tba tight mortgage, market for nonagency specs one of the assets of creating this new, we all understand it's not going to happen next year, this is a phase adaptation going forward, would be to provide investor protections, but perhaps not in the same way that is than presently by the sec and private labels. but to work both of those in, liquidity, the uniformity with your investor protection.

so we would have to deal with that i guess. >> that's correct. >> one of the proposals come and this was again, we ensure liquidity and market, a single issue except to practice if necessary. essentially separating the guarantee function from the insurance function. and the issuing function a bit and mr. hamilton, you commented on that approach, separating the functions spent are you saying separate the government guaranteeing it or someone private guaranteeing it? >> i was -- >> do we need to have multiple issuers? i was you suggesting that issue and should be single issuer so that as investors are not

confused, abc issuer or xyz issuer, it was done by the same issuance, and a guaranteed function could be priced independent become audible could be determined. >> and i won't put words in your mouth, but if it's a single issuer, that likely could be a government entity. >> yes, it could be. >> i think these are all saying the same thing. i think that separating at the guarantee function is what we're talking about. when we discuss selling, when mr. davidson said selling subordinate charges off of agencies, or selling credit risk in a cds four credit default swaps off of a certain pool of residential mortgages, it's all a college in the same thing. will try to separate the guarantee function and mitigate and so the credit risk so taxpayers are not on the hook at the same time. maintaining one issuer, a couple of issues and maintaining that liquidity. so i think it's all saying the same thing in a different way. >> mr. davidson, your thoughts? do you want to elaborate?

>> mr. van valkenburg. >> yes. i was basically come in the current tba market, there's the perception of fannie mae has been acquitted and freddie mac, and it's minor. two, three takes. i don't know. tom knows better than i. so name an issuer name is significant as far as liquidity, even, so that was basically, i think if we get into to an issuer going to confuse the investors which will affect the level of liquidity. so a single name issuer was what i was advocating and the guarantee function separate. i think it cost us in the query if the multiple issuers. >> right. but just thinking back, i think that's the way we sort of walked our way into the gses, which is basically if you're going to give a monopoly, then it's got to be quasigovernmental at

least, otherwise a monopoly will probably go to someone, you know, that's not our tradition. so this approach i think would apply, the issuer would be some type of entity, either very closely regulated by the government, or some quasigovernmental entity. and they guarantees would be subject to market pricing and market activity. >> exactly. we're not going to get, you know, the credit market adapts quickly, but we could develop that overtime. you know, the current infrastructure with a three-year guarantee is not going to go away tomorrow. it's going to take time for that to develop. >> mr. davidson, your comments. you are mr. davidson, right? >> yes. >> it is vision as well as -- >> you know, one idea is that if you going to have a single issuer or a few issuers to avoid the monopoly, is that you can

allow that to exist only in the cooperative. some sort of industry cooperative. so if there is monopoly profits they have to go back into the chain where is competitive, either above or below that cooperative. and i do think that having one or two issuers is good, trying to get as many participants to take the credit risk is good but you have to find a way to standardize the mortgage product. so if there were 20 different mortgage over years, all would go through this one guarantor, but they all had 20 different like long documents, 20 different types of disclosure. then we would have 20 different markets. and that is going to promote the liquidity we need. it's just a careful balancing act between spreading the risk and standardizing. >> let me ask a final question, and, to all the panelists, but i will begin with you, mr. davidson. which is your propose is

subordinated debt approach. but i think it implicates a bigger issue, which is recognizing that we should probably begin to take steps now to begin a transition, that legislative steps, because it takes a long time to get legislation through, and because the potential is not likely going to happen today, or even next year, et cetera. but as you suggested, and i think everyone on the panel has suggested, there are things today that should be considered to begin this process, maybe even experiments which don't work out, unless the trouble of trying them on a larger scale, or adopting them as an exclusive remedy. so, if you can comment on your subordinate approach how it might work, and is it feasible to begin to adopt it today? then i would like to ask the other panelists to think of what

other steps would you suggest, again, outside of legislative but within the purview of the agencies today, and as you understand the legal framework so let's begin with mr. davidson. >> so, the subordinate approach is something the gses have done in the past, and -- >> it was pointed out specs would've in the multifamily ticket i believe it's something the gses are exploring currently, different ways of adding private capital. and so it's certainly doable within the existing structure that they probably do need the approval, fhfa, i don't need it the -- if they need to build a treasure. and i think they could move in that direction. i think they should try several things. i like the subordinate bond but because people might think private mortgage insurance. i think the key factor there is sending a message to fhfa that extra mentation is good, you

know, and you don't need to have so focus on conservatorship of every dollar today. and finding the right solution actually adds value to the gses overtime. the other important about if you try to move the dialogue away from, eliminate the gses tomorrow because they were bad before. and management who did that are all gone. and say, you know, are the pieces of the gses that would like to preserve overtime. so anyway, i think it is doable. >> mr. van valkenburg, please. >> yeah, i -- [inaudible] >> i propose one idea but there's no single monolithic solution. all these markets are complex and the price was differently and different audience of investors. so the subordinated bond

solution may be the best solution but we don't know until we actually go out and tried to execute and see what the price and the cost of that credit is. so i proposed a cds markets, one avenue of exploratory thought. so i don't have a particular single solution. i think you have to price it, find out what the costs are and find out what the best execution for the government balance sheet. >> thank you. and mr. hamilton. >> i think we and out with a portfolio, things we need to work on in the interim. given the likelihood of legislation in the near term is low. the fhfa can obviously pay a large part in your blowing of the loan limit is one step. we could lower them further on a gradual basis. to 18 months will be the next that. enable the private markets to open a. i think fhfa could, you could limit the amount of borrowing that bank can do from the home

loan bank system. you could encourage the covered bonds legislation and market to open up to be another funding vehicle. you know, i think there's a portfolio of approaches that are going to attack the u.s. housing system, be the solution and i think there's quite a few of these we can do in the next 18 months without legislation. and i think those are just a few of the things we should work on. and i think we will find the answer, we will rise to the top of. >> thank you very much. gentlemen, visiting very, very helpful to the subcommittee. and as senator corker suggested, please don't be surprised if you're called again to get your views and your advice, because it has been extraordinarily helpful. thank you very much for your testimony and your appearance today. some of my colleagues might have additional questions. we will ask that these questions be submitted before the end of the week. it's wednesday. and so by friday, i think that

is fair. and we will get that to you and ask you to return them as probably as possible if there any written questions. again, thank you very much. hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

according to the united nations over twelve million people in the region are in need of food held by senate african affairs subcommittee this is 1 hour and 50 minutes. >> this hearing focusing on one of the most critical issues in the world today responding to the drought and famine in the lord of africa. i am privileged to serve as my friend senator isaacson and want to thank him for staying with me in washington after the senate has adjourned in order to convene and preside over today's hearing. this is a children's crisis.

there are hundreds of thousands of children suffering malnutrition in the ward of africa. we agreed that this hearing could not wait. many of our colleagues have returned to their home states and districts but we believed it was crucial to go ahead with this hearing and not let another month ago by. senator isaacson has highlighted a range of issues that i appreciate his leadership in this subcommittee. everyone is aware congress has been focused on the deficit and debt crisis in recent weeks and that issue was rightfully at the top of the agenda we must also consider global issues of greater humanitarian concern especially when million of lives are risk and tens of thousands have died. we display images of the crisis to demonstrate the rising human toll of the drought and famine

including on children speaking deprivation and hardship. numbers will quantify the effect of the drought but these damages help convey powerful the the true impact on human lives. i want to thank unicef for providing the photographs we displayed and for submitting a statement detailing its efforts that i will submit for the record. the crisis has been caused by the worst drought in the region in 60 years resulting in severe malnutrition, acute hunger but the rising level of starvation and famine. is the most severe humanitarian crisis in a generation affecting food security for twelve million people across somalia and ethiopia and surrounding areas as illustrated by a map i will submit for the record. according to unicef 2.3 million children in the region are acutely malnourished half of whom are at risk of imminent

death. this crisis is expected to worsen eclipsing the famine of the 1980s that elicited global public outcry and great response demonstrated by memorable events like live aid. the public awareness of that crisis is absent today despite a worsening humanitarian situation and increasing need for aid. is most severe in somalia where rising food prices and failures of governance and regional security exacerbated a dire situation. given the ongoing conflict and obstructed humanitarian access by the group al-shabaab. a organizations and government officials estimate 1500 refugees flooding the largest refugee compound which is well over capacity nearing half a million refugees or population comparable to tucson, arizona. hundreds are fleeing for other

camps in ethiopia which is well over its capacity. the international community and the united states are working with governments of kenya, ethiopia and djibouti to address this influx of refugees and i praise their efforts to accommodate these displaced populations while their own people and countries face severe challenges from the drought. the country's impacted by this drought and famine suffer higher rates of poverty little unemployment and the failure of two consecutive rainy seasons contributed to the scale of this disaster the humanitarian crisis and famine highlights broader capacity, infrastructure and security problems in the region. this was not a surprise. usaid predicted an impending crisis last year and worked closely with kenyan and ethiopian government's to

enhance their ability to respond and position emergency relief supplies. as the u.s. joined its partners in the international community to provide emergency assistance they must consider lessons learned to over the next famine to improve food security globally and build sustainable capacity and mitigate the impact of this crisis. in response to the drought united states has been the largest donor providing $450 million in food aid and treatment from now nourished children and other assistance but the responsibility cannot rest on our shoulders alone especially in difficult budgetary times the humanitarian response must be a shared obligation. according to the united nations $2 billion will be needed to provide emergency assistance and only a billion has been committed. the international community must join the united states and others providing this aid -- malnourished children and others in desperate need.

as we consider international response we must examine restrictions on access given the volatile -- environment where areas are controlled by al-shabaab. yesterday the u.s. government announced an easing of restrictions on humanitarian organizations operating in somalia to facilitate delivery of aid. i look forward to hearing from today's witnesses about this policy which provides additional assurances 2 additional organizations. to hear more about the scope and responds to the crisis we are privileged to be joined by two distinguished panel. we will hear from nancy lindborg of humanitarian assistance for usaid and she will be joined on this panel by ambassador donald yamamoto, principal assistant secretary of state for african affairs and former ambassador to ethiopia and djibouti and

finally dr. reuben brigety, the the assistance and former fellow of foreign relations who has just returned from a visit to the region. on the second panel we will hear from mr. jeremy konyndyk 11 from mercy corps who has led humanitarian and recovery operations throughout the region and dr. peter pham of the africa center of -- former professor of justice studies and political studies at james madison university. finally we will hear from wouter schaap, assistant country director of care based in nairobi and returned from a visit to drought affected areas of somalia. i am privileged to highlight the growing urgency of this humanitarian crisis. americans demonstrated great leadership helping those in need domestically and abroad and i am confident we will partner with the international community to save lives and protect future generations in the horn of

africa. i appreciate each other witnesses being here and appreciate your testimony. >> i want to welcome all who will testify today particularly wouter schaap from the care usa headquarters in my hometown of atlanta, georgia and many other care people who are here. i have the privilege of being on site with care in kenya and ethiopia and darfur and seen what our energy owns to deliver humanitarian aid as in the case of care, life sustaining techniques people learn to be self sustaining among themselves which is so critical in areas of bad poverty and not well-educated. i appreciate care being here. i am proud to have the home team here. parter peter pham who is on the second panel i am delighted he is here because he can provide

insight as an informed observer of the security dynamic without constraints and ngo must maintain. he will also examine the persistent extremist vein that runs through somaliland a perverse impact on the region. the severity of this crisis and complexity of the geopolitical situation coupled with the united states unchallenging history dealing with hunter and conflict make this a particularly challenging humanitarian response. the principles of our policies are tested and humanitarian impulse and hard-nosed realism regarding purveyors of moral control. of people in the region. i am delighted the chairman called this meeting. is one of the main humanitarian crises before the world today and we need to work together to see that it brings humanitarian relief to people struggling in that part of the world.

thank you for calling this hearing. i look forward to hearing testimony of all our witnesses. >> we will begin with the opening statement of donald yamamoto and then nancy lindborg and dr. reuben brigety and proceed to questions. >> i have a longer version for submission to the record but i will read a short version. >> i encourage 5 minute statements. we will submit your full record -- your full statement for the record. >> members of the committee, humanitarian crisis in the horn of africa had roots in the brutal force of al-shabaab which prevented humanitarian assistance from reaching those in need. persistent instability in somalia changing patterns that impact vulnerable pastoral

populations. we are working hard with international and regional partners to deliver quickly the life-saving short-term relief critical to those suffering the effects of this crisis. u.s. government and assistance has prevented a loss of millions of lives. we cannot rely on emergency assistance alone to resolve the underlying long-term problems in the region. therefore we are working with the government to support long-term political and food security in the region. let me be clear. the response to the drought has been complicated by the instability in somalia due to the actions of al-shabaab. those most seriously affected by the current -- two million somalis trapped in al-shabaab controlled areas in south central somalia. since january of 2010 al-shabaab has prohibited humanitarian workers and organizations from

operating in the area it controls. al-shabaab refused to grant humanitarian access and prevented the international community from responding quickly inside somalia. as we take advantage of any opening to expand aid we are working with our partners in the international community to counter al-shabaab's ability to threaten our interests or hold the somali people hostage. we are taking necessary steps to support urgently needed humanitarian aid to those who need it in south central somalia while minimizing risk of diversion to al-shabaab. we worked closely with the department of treasury to ensure aid workers are entering with u.s. government to help save lives under difficult and dangerous conditions are not in conflict with u.s. laws and regulation but the united states sanctions against al-shabaab have never prohibited the delivery of assistance to

somalia including those areas under the control of al-shabaab. regional security in the horn of africa requires political stability in somalia. the united states placed a long-term process to stabilize somalia. we announced that approach to broaden our efforts by taking into account the complex nature of somalis society and politics, more flexible and adaptable to our engagement. we continue to support the djibouti peace process as a first line of effort to stabilize somalia and expel al-shabaab. since 2007 the united states supported stabilization efforts by obligating $250 million to support amazon trading at $85 million to support capacity. on track 2 we are depending on

engagement with the regional government throughout central and south somali areas and those who are not affiliated with the tee effigy. in fiscal 11 there will be $20 million to support development efforts. we have further information as we go into the q&a and leave room -- thank you very much. >> nancy lindborg. [inaudible] >> thank you, i appreciate your taking time to hold the hearing and raise the level of attention. the situation is deteriorating and we all share significant concerns. the horn of africa have long been plagued by cyclical drop and we are seeing the worst in

60 years. what used to be ten year drought cycle are happening every other year and the current drought is affecting 12.4 million people in somalia, ethiopia and djibouti. the crisis is humanitarian and security. the famine declared in the most difficult to access areas of somalia. we will hear from reuben brigety about refugees pouring across the border into drought stress areas of kenya and ethiopia. internally a million displaced somalis are crowding into the northern cities of somalia that are ill-equipped to handle the increase in population. the july 20th declaration of famine in two regions of somalia was not made lightly and reflects dire conditions of the people in somalia. based on nutrition and mortality survey's data verified by the

cdc and on the basis of that we estimate in the last 90 days 29,000 somali children have died. nearly 4% of the children in southern somalia. our fear and the fear of the national community is the famine conditions in those two regions will spread to encompass eight regions of southern somalian. the next rains are in september and october and even if they are good we could bear witness to another wave of mortality due to waterborne diseases. in ethiopia and kenya the situation is grave but we don't expect it to deteriorated to famine or what we are witnessing in the south. ethiopia and kenya have large areas populated by past moralists.

in partnership with international donors we worked in both countries to increase resilience of these communities in drought affected areas. we strengthened early warning systems and supported ongoing safety net and community protection programs and worked to increase productivity in arid lands. in partnership with the ethiopian government with the world bank and other donors u.s. government supported the ethiopian productive safety net program. as a result 7.6 million people have been emerged from the caseload. the government of ethiopia in 2003 stated 13.2 million people were drought affected. today only 4.8 million are stated to be in need. then needs in ethiopia and kenya's require sustained focus and attention but the results of

our preparedness and development program are paying off. we are seeing results. as you noted, the early warning system alerted us in august that a drought was on the tour rise in. we began repositioning food stocks, stockpiling food in djibouti, kenya and south africa. we provided $459 million of aid in the horn including treatment for malnourished children, water sanitation and assistance in the refugee camp. we are focused aggressively on potential for mass starvation in southern somalian. we learned in the drought of 92 that the leading cause of death for children under 5 was disease. we are focusing on three key areas, availability of food

including therapeutic foods essential for children under 5, access to food and integrated health programs. in terms of key challenges we identified three. time is not on our side. we have a small window to reach those in need or risk additional death of several hundred thousand. access in the worst affected areas remain primary obstacle to relief efforts. the food program in most international organizations suspended operations in early 2010. in 2008 they lost 14 staff members. until now al-shabaab restricted access and have given mixed signals whether it will lift its ban. we are working to explore all avenues to provide assistance

where there is access. in the face of these we have issued new guidance on the provision of assistance to allow more flexibility to wider range of aid to those areas in need and we clarified aid workers partnering with the u.s. government to save lives are not in conflict. the third challenge is scale. the emergency lobster resources currently available in the international community. we are working to encourage all donors to step forward with assistance. i will conclude by saying we cannot stop drought from happening in this region but we can strengthen community and their ability to withstand these natural calamities. president obama's feed the future initiative is focused on addressing these root causes of hunter and working to strengthen resilience of communities. it shores up the ability of

these populations to withstand drought through commercial availability, access to staple foods and reducing trade and transport barriers that impede movement and sale of livestock and harnessing science and technology. we are seeing how these investments can make a critical difference. thank you, mr. chairman and senator isaacson. and signal to the people of the horn and some all-american this that the american people are with them in this time of need. >> good morning. thank you for the opportunity to testify on the humanitarian crisis in the ward of effort and let me say we appreciate the support congress has given in the midst of so many issues you have been grappling with. i will discuss the situation

facing refugees, immediate response and challenges we face meeting their needs as more survivors reach the border of djibouti and plans to work with the community to meet with those challenges and save as many lives as we can coming months. i traveled to ethiopia in july to evaluate the emerging refugee crisis where hundreds of thousands of somalis have fled. during my trip i visited refugee camps along with representatives from donor countries and met with senior government officials and talked with officials from non-governmental organizations and spoke with many refugees. it was clear the situation is developing into the worst humanitarian emergency the region has seen a generation since the great famine of

1991-1992. we must confront the emergency in the refugee situation. years of hard work by the host governments and international partners to address just basic need in established camps are quickly overshadowed by the need to add broader border crossing facilities, new camps and emergency services. ethiopia and kenya are receiving in flows refugees from somalia and refugees are arriving in appalling physical health. every refugee family with whom i spoke in ethiopia and kenya said they walked for days from somalia with no food or water. brief visits to health clinics revealed dozens of men and nourished children so in may ceded that they appeared close to death.

among new arrivals we're seeing 50% global acute malnutrition reflecting a different state of affairs for children in somalia. with regard to space, staff and essential services as they try to cope with record influx of refugees which continues unabated. somalia represents the largest refugee population in africa. somalia's neighbors host 620 somali refugees. 1 69 sought refuge in ethiopia with 75,000 arriving since january of this year. there are 438,000 refugees with 100,000 arriving since the beginning of this year. even djibouti has seen a 20% increase in the number of

refugees since the beginning of 2011. we commend the government's for their generous support for refugee populations in the region even as they themselves are currently struggling with the drought that may be the worst in 60 years. the current crisis is tax a stressed system but i am confident the governments and their international partners to include the united states have the ability to confront this crisis head on and will find new solutions to address needs within the camps and those with in somalia. let me give you two examples of what i saw during my trip and how we responded to those needs. the u.s. regional and international partners ramped up specifics. i traveled to the refugee complex on the ethiopian somali border accompanied by u.s.

ambassador donald both and don steinberg, government officials and senior representatives from several donor embassies. as we wandered through the refugee camp talking to people who had been there several days or arrived hours earlier we heard the same story over and over again. one man had come nine days with his wife and six children with little to eat along the way. i talked with him as he sat on the hospital cot with his youngest child who are will call eyes of. she never stopped moving. she could not get comfortable amid the heat and flies as a tiny bones threat to pierce her paper thin skin. we saw many families in the same situation in a separate visit. i spoke to one mother who

carried her 7-year-old daughter on her back for nine days with little food and water as her six children trailed behind. was clear a number of interventions were final steps needed beyond basic camps service to assist those making the heartbreaking journey. i commend the you and commissioner for finding ways to add these additional programs after he visited the area a few days before i had. more must be done. the second example is how the united states increased assistance throughout the region. the u.s. has been a partner to governments and people in an effort as they host hundreds of thousands of somali refugees providing $450 million in humanitarian assistance to those in need.

this funding support refugees, internally displaced persons and drought affected populations. out of this funding the u.s. is providing $69 million to refugees through the state department. maintaining access for somali's in neighboring countries is critical to saving lives. the u.s. supported the expansion and moving refugees into the new space following can yet's agreement to allow the opening of a new site. we are urging canada to open more reception center capacities of incoming refugees can be properly screened. we will support the country's efforts to provide asylum including our support to the office of the world food program and other international organizations in the region. representatives were also moved

by the gravity of the situation. they said they would work with their own government to support the efforts of aid groups. rigorous sustain diplomacy will be required in the region and with other donor capitals to assure the international community and host countries take measures to save lives in coming months. we are committed to addressing humanitarian needs inside somalia. there's an immediate need to reach vulnerable populations so they don't have to travel long distances but unless we find ways to provide assistance to people in somalia we will see refugees arrived in appalling health and mortality rates in the refugee camp surprise unabated. this brings us to the security situation. al-shabaab's activities made the situation worse as donald yamamoto noted.

we expect the situation to decline where conditions worsen. we are working through a variety of mechanisms including addressing the underlying causes as addressed by my colleague. mr. chairman, thank you for your time and look forward to questions. ..

>> that's really a multifaceted answer. i'll refer to others for answers, but 50% of those in need are in the territory, and the question is whether or not the u.s. policy or not prevented, and the answer is no, it has not. it's extremely difficult and impossible to deliver food. what the united states has taken has been too easy. the opoc licenses on ngo groups. they are required heightened due diligence procedures to avoid diversion, but essentially it is to allow ngo groups to enter the

areas if they can, even if it means paying fees or convoy fees or what have you, as long as there's the due diligence, there's no alternative. even with the easenning of the licensing and procedures, really is shaabab going to allow the delivers? you see the displaced people, 100,000 or so, and at a rate of a thousand a day going into those areas. you have troops and shooters going into the areas and targeting refugees and making it more difficult. amazon has done a preemptive work. the question is how are we going to stabilize the area, the free of flow of food into the areas.

>> please, if you'd like to expand. >> yes, thanks. you know, i think time and access are the two challenges that we face, and we are working closely with the international community to explore a number of options that test the possibility of having greater access. there are air lifts bringing food in. we are hopeful that there will be an opportunity to move more vigorously into areas where there is a willingness by al-sha abab to let others in. the guidance issues shows greater flexibility, but fundamentally, this is a tough area to operate. it is probably one of the toughest operating environments globally now, and it will take

very seasoned humanitarian workers to be able to navigate through that environment. >> ambassador, how would you assess the international community's response with the united states and how are we encouraging involvement with the ecu, arab, and other millionth lateral entities and groups that might be engaged. >> i'll answer in two ways. the response by the united states has always been it's not something we responded because of the effects of the famine. for years, the united states is the primary food supplier to the region. in fact, the horn of africa is probably the number one region for food recipients around the world and ethiopia is the number one country for several years. the issue comes in, another example too for the breath of the depth of the problems, on a

good day in ethiopia, 300 kids under 5 die every day from preventable diseases. in this situation, the rates are much higher, and so the response has been how to get more food into the pipelines, ensure deliveries, and working with ethiopia and kenya to expand camps, better access, and number three is work with the amazon forces to ensure there's more feeding capability to those idps and also easing up of procedures to make it easier for ngo groups to operate, and finally really is to confront the shaababs to contain them or open more quarters for feeding. do you want to add to that? >> i'd be interested in the testimony of the hard role of

harnessing technology and the role feed the future has played. in doing the background on this, i was struck at using foods that are being deployed and revolutionized our ability to revive children who are at the edge of the starvation and the investments made on water drilling in ethiopia and allowed people to sustain their lifestyle, but they have more reliable water supplies. any brief comments how are strategic advances changed the situation on the ground than in previous drought cycles? >> yes, thank you. the most striking is what i cited in my testimony because of our work with the world bank and other donors and the government on the community safety net, we enabled 7.5 million ethiopians

not to go into urgent need. there's work on increasing pastorrists to weather the droughts, improving the health of their lives and as we look ahead to feed the future initiative that is really, i think, at the heart of president obama's vision for how to truly enable us not have to mobilize large emergency responses every time there's a drought. we want to couple that with the kind of trade reforms and policies that can enable vulnerable populations to have greater protection for their to be greater productive capacity, and to use technology on issue like drought resistance seeds or better livestock approaches. >> thank you. >> senator?

>> thank you, mr. chairman, and thanking to all of you for testifying. ambassador, you said -- i think i got this right --sanctions do not inhibit delivery of humanitarian aide. what do our sanctions say regarding humanitarian aide? >> you mean this is the opec licensing? >> yes. >> when we debated the issue on deliveries into the territory, the debate was on the payment of convoy fees in order to allow feeding into those areas. the second thing is what were they using the money and funding for? that became a major concern. is through this effort of feeding also contributing to greater instability? that became a great debate. the problem comes in right now is with the father and mother

anyone or -- famine or acute nutrition, how do you open up the capabilities of ngo's and explore opportunities to allow them procedurally to get into the areas faster and quicker with food deliveries? with all the openness, will they allow them to enter? ethiopia and kenya tried to open up corridors for feeding or pushed into somalia, but even those are not sufficient enough given that those are still remaining in secure areas and dangerous. it becomes a big problem as how do you engage, open corridors, how do you begin to feed in those areas where peel 50% of those in need are in the held territories. that's the problem. >> the problem is the corruption at the check points where they have payoff fees or safe passage and use those to help finance their organization, is that what

you're referring to? >> yes, sir. >> and so the question is is it -- are we telling ngo's willing to travel and deliver humanitarian aide it's okay to pay those fees? >> no, we are requiring through procedures that they do the due diligence, to find any way possible to be able to feed and provide food to needed areas without paying those fees, but if it is necessary, obviously -- >> any security provided u.n. wise or african union in terms of getting the material into somalia? >> well, i'll refer to you, nancy. >> well, i know you have an ngo panel following us so i know they'll have much to say on this, but i think most groups operating have a very principled approach to not paying taxes or tolls and many are able to accomplish this. the easing of the legal

restrictions simply removes any concern that an accidental or incidental payment will not jeopardize them with any legal action, and so it's creating a greater sense of comfort with the partners that is not a barrier to effective assistance delivery. >> in somalia after that as you still said it's a pretty dangerous place and they use violence as intimidation to carry out its intent, do the ngos have degree of protection other than their own provided protection? >> i believe most of them choose not to have any other protection either the protection of the communities welcoming them in and hosting them in the provision of assistance. ultimately, we all need the kind of access that comes from the communities wanting and

understanding the importance of the international effort to help them at this critical hour. >> i wanted to make a point. chairman coons and i traveled africa together and seen the discourage the corruption causes throughout the continent, and this is not related to this issue, but what the united states is doing to get democratic institutions to rid themselves of corruption in return for mcc contracts and things of that nature is changing africa. this region not necessarily because of al-shaabab and the other organizations there are the prohib tore to u.s. investment and u.s. foreign fade going through through ngos. i was in kenya two years ago, and at that time, the kenyans expressed frustration of pressure applied to them with the number of refugees they had then. they get 1295 new ones a day and

expanded that camp, and the camp has almost half a million people in it now; is that correct? how -- other than providing the additional land to the expansion, what pressure is put on the kenyans to provide help and what cost and how is that cost being born? >> thank you very much, senator. you're correct the camp is the largest in the world. it's been there since 1991. the issue of refugees inside kenya is a sensitive one politically for them. they have been very patient in dealing with this crisis for two decades now. the -- just as an order of magnitude, back in january, they got 1200 new arrivals a week, and now it's 1200-1300 a day. they have been long asked to open another camp. the three camps are epo and

there was an expansion to evo that we asked them to expand. when i was there three weeks ago, i was on the ground with the prime minister who had a public press conference, and there he gave his word that the government of kenya would allow the evo expansion to be opened and uhcr moved refugees there and look forward to kenya to support that. the cost for the camp is largely born by the international community. the u.n. high commissioner for refugees is responsible for camp management and world food program which is responsible for feeding those refugees. the government of kenya obviously provides some financial support for the guard and provision of security forces around the borders, but the united states is long been the leader in terms of supporting and working with other international partners to do so. >> the reason i brought it up

because i think it's -- when we talk about tragedies with what's beginning on with the famine on the horn, we have to give kudos to the countries trying to help and kenya and the people have been supportive for two decades and bearing a tremendous amount of the brunt of the burden now and the cost of that security alone is a significant contribution by kenya. we need to acknowledge and appreciate what they've done in that case. >> yes, sir, you're correct, and we do regularly. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. if i could just follow-up -- the other largest camp receiving -- somalia, my understanding is there was nearly 2,000 refugees arriving a day until a few weeks ago, but that dropped significantly. do you have a sense of the cause of that, and how do you assess the ethiopia's government willingness in providing support and the ongoing issues at that camp? >> thank you for the question,

senator. you are correct. a week ago it was 2,000 a day, and now it's 250 a day. we frankly do not have a good answer for why that number decreased by an order of magnitude, but we are working with partners to understand what the nature of that dynamic is. when i was first there in february of this year, the two major camps there had about 50,000 refugees combined. that number now doubled to about 100,000. at the rates we were seeing in mid-july, it was conceivable that rate could double again by the end of the year. the government of ethiopia frankly has been a very, very good partner in terms of supporting this population particularly since the on set of the current drought crisis earlier this summer. they responded with the additional staff from their agency to deemployee there, allowed ngos to operate there, engage regularly and repeatedly

with the government of ethiopia in the ministry of foreign affairs and refugee agency to know we are effective partners with them and we are pleased in which they extended hospitality. >> what's the medical situation in these two camps? it's hard for a senator from delaware to grasp a camp the size of half a million people. that's five times larger than the largest city in my state. how are they handling the health pressures and not with the on set of september rains another crisis from rapid spread of disease. >> that's a very good question. to be frank, one camp not at 100,000, but could be by the end of the year, the health pressures are enormous. the camp complex, just a camp, is the fourth largest population

center. having said that, there are a number of partners which help provide health services inside the camps, but frankly with the new refugees arriving, about 44,000 refugees simply on the outskirts because they could not settle in the extension and the others were full. those on the outskirts with no services to speak of were clearly suffering additional rates of all sorts of basic preventable diseases to include respiratory diseases. these are hot, dusty conditions, out without center, and easy to develop those sorts of problems. we're hoping that the addition of the opening of the new camp expansion gives people shelter, gives them access to establish health clinics and other facilities that are built, but

they need the permission of the ethiopia to support, and we will continue to support both uhcr and other ngos providing these services especially to treat these horrible rates of malnutrition amongst children under 5 years old that we are seeing. >> we talked about science and technology earlier. these two nations, ethiopia and kenya, are bearing much of the burden. much of kenya's power is hydroelectricity power, and due to the drought, has dropped more than half. what are you doing employ power or other sources of power to help provide electricity either in ethiopia or kenya to the camps or reduce the strain on the rest of the host nations in terms of electricity grid, and anything we're doing to streamline or expedite the process of deploying alternative

power to sources not so reliant on water? >> senator, i want to get back to you with the specifics on that answer. there's a number of conversations with kenya and ethiopia on ways in which to work closely with them to mitt kate the impact of future drought. there's conversations underway, and we would be delighted to get back to you with details. >> thank you. let me ask a financial question for any member of the panel. what are we doing to avoid the significant security challenges facing somalia spilling over into kenya and ethiopia, both of these nations have supported and sustained very large refugee populations for a long time, and would have understandable concerns about the possibility of it destalizing their nations. last is the investment made, if it's sufficient from the united

states and the international community and what additional resources might be needed and how we can be more effective in engaging the ngo community and international community op top of the commitments already made by the united states. >> answer quickly -- somalia and that region is so complex. if you think about it, one of every six somalia is ethiopia living in the area. the issue comes in is on security and stability. ethiopia and kenya, somalia is a strategic interest because of its security concerns. during the time i was there, for instance, in one year's time, there was 12 terrorist bombings in one year, and from groups emanating out of somalia into ethiopia, so if it's a concern for the ethiopians just as it's a concern for kenya, then it's a concern for us in the regional states. how do you ease security concerns? i think the dual-track approach

is one approach that we have worked not just with the regional states, but also with the transitional government to stabilize that region. that really is one area that to look at the security by the somalia's themselves to address the somalia problems, and then the amazon troops from ewe -- uganda have done a great job. the bottom line problem is that security is going to be a long-term problem. do we have enough finances? no. it's an issue in partnership with the regional states and somalia themselveses. >> senator, if i may add one concrete example on the security aspect. one of the principle crossing points of somalia and kenya is a place coulded dubois where the united states long encouraged the government of kenya to open

a screening center. the government of kenya closed their border from kenya to smol somalia. we encourage them to reopen the screens center of dubois, and we have considerable funds for them to reopen. it's coming into their country, and provides staps to refugees at the first point of crossing before they make the additional 80 mile trek to daub. i hope they consider this and open the screening center in short order. >> i'll wrap it up by saying we are very focused on ensuring that the host communities around the vicinities of the camps also receive assistance. there are large drought affected areas as we've discussed in ethiopia and kenya, and it's important that we were to meet

those grave needs as well. on the awareness issue, it's important. i think that we mobilize the resources of genius private citizens as well as nontraditional donors and there's a significant effort underway to do exactly that. >> great, thank you very much. senator? >> thank you, mr. chairman. just one question, and i ask ambassador, it could be directed to you. in our briefing moment moe, there's -- memo there's access to ngos to provide them with food and assistance. the instance being it was somewhat restricted. what's the case with ethnic somalia and ethiopia, and is there restrictions in getting food? >> during the time i was ambassador there, i spent most of my time traveling into the

somalia area to ensure the u.s. food staps was getting to the -- assistance was getting to the right people. we had $600 million dollars or 800 tops of food -- tons of food to deliver to the people in the area. we were able to verify through other ngo groups about a 70% accuracy rate of getting the food to distribution points. the problem is getting the distribution points to the beneficiaries, and we're only able to confirm about 20%. the reason is because of not only insecurity, but also the problems of delivery of food into areas of insecurity and conflict, so is it we have been working closely to open access and allow the groups to go into areas, ensure the food is getting to the right appropriate people, and those are some of the essential problems.

>> but there is still some difficulty of getting it there? >> yes, sir, yes, it is. >> thank you very much. >> we'd like to thank all members of this panel and thank you for your testimony, thank you for your service, and thank you for your work on this important issue. we thank you for your testimony today. we'd like to turn to the second panel. we'll take a moment here while they join us. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> we'd like to welcome dr. faum, and mr.shop, and i encourage you to correct the pronunciation of your names. we are grateful for you taking time out of your work to testify here today and add your testimony to the record and to the attention paid to the senate and international community to the challenging time in horn of africa. i encourage each of you to try and contain your comments to about five minutes, and we'll

submit for the record additional statements you might have. please, sir. >> thank you. [inaudible] thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. it is an incredibly important issue, and we really appreciate the focus that you and subcommittee are dedicating to this. it's very timely and very urgent. i'm jermy konyndyk. i'm here representing a relief organization, but for today's purposes, three of the most affected areas in the region, kenya, somalia, and ethiopia, where we need drought relief throughout that region. i think that everyone has been shocked by some of the photos that have been coming out of the region, but particularly out of the communities in recent days where there's a striking photo in yesterday's "new york times"

of a picture of a child. as horrific as the images are, it's important to recognize for every image of a child however unfortunate, made it to a treatment center, and there's many, many more children and adults as well who have not made it that far, and that is a growing tragedy. it's critical to remember that much of the attention is focused on somalia, the situation in kenya and ethiopia is desperate as well. our teams are doing assessments now throughout kenya and ethiopia, initiating programs, and seeing vast swabs of people in extreme humanitarian emergency. there's land scapes full of dead and dying livestock that form the basis of ability for people living there to support themselves and feed their

families. villages are emptied by the drought because people cannot get water and have to go elsewhere. there's families and meeting families struggling to eat one meal a day. it is a truly desperate situation. to describe this is not hyperbole. it could be thee worst humanitarian crisis we've seen in a generation. the good news, if any, the aide community has a good understanding on how to fight a crisis like this. we learned a great deal on how to respond effectively to hunger crisis, and i described this in my written remarks that i submitted for the record. the big question is whether aide groups will have the opportunity to apply that understanding that we've developed. our entire sector is facing a massive short fall in funding for the response. the u.s. in particular has been very jeep rows so far. the rest of the world has also

put up a good amount of money, but it's far short of what we saw a few years ago when a drought hit in 2008. there doesn't seem to be yet global recognition of how severe the crisis is. there's a fraction of the engagement and level of resources we saw after the haiti earthquake, for example, despite the number of people at risk exceeds the entire population of hay -- heyty. the u.s. government is working hard to mobilize resources, and we are appreciative of that. the teams working u.s.-aid and the refugee bureau are the best in the business, and we deeply appreciate that commitment, expertise, and professionalism, but they need resources in order to combat this crisis, and so far this year, the u.s. contribution, while extremely generous and rerecognize it as

such, remains under half of what the bush administration contributeed in 2008. we are concernedded as we look at the upcoming fy12 budget debate there's proposals on the other side of the hill to slash the very accounts providing the assistance that the u.s. government is using for the response of this crisis, specifically the international disaster assistance account and food for peace. food for peace should be highlighted here because there's a proposed conned of 30% of that budget over fy11 levels that would be a 50% cut in 2008 during the last major crisis. that's a real concern. the other challenge has been the legal restrictions discussed a bit on the earlier panel. it does now appear the u.s. government waved or moving to waive these. it's a positive step, we recognize it, and commend the

administration for taking it. we do, nopes, have remaining concerns how this will be implemented. i'd be happy to address them in more detail in questioning, but as we move pass this impasse, it's important to recognize that the fact that the administration issued this license only several weeks after a famine was decleared and several months after we knew something very, very bad was coming represents a real problem. i don't think it makes sense to point at any part of the administration as bearing responsibility for these. they were struggling and hashing these things out the best they could. there's an issue here bearing further exploration with the interaction of the legal restrictions and humanitarian priorities. very quickly to the question of whether we can get into this and how this is going to work, we don't know yet. we're going to -- the waiving of the legal restrictions takes an

obstacle out of the way, but there's questions what can be achieved in the south, what access we're going to see, and dr. phaum can talk about the regional politics there. there's optimism in there that gives us hope. we have a posture of hope and cautious optimism, but not naivety about this at this point. thank you very much. >> mr. chairman, ranking member, isakson, i thank you for the opportunity to testify today on a very important issue. as we meet the situation as the other panelists stated is especially grave, the u.n. refugee agency describes it as the worst humanitarian disaster in the world with nearly half the somalia population facing starvation while another 11

million men, women, and children across the horn at are risk. given the grim reality, the first concern is understandably focused where if sthowb, getting relief to the victims, however, in addressing immediate needs, attention should be paid to the broader geopolitical context as well as the long term implications of the challenges before us. since other witnesses testifying today are better positioned individually or institutionally to address the technical questions relating to the humanitarian crisis, its impact on vulnerable populations, and the logistics to getting assistance to them, i'll concentrate on four points that policymakers in the united states and other international responsible actors should bear in mind in assessing the current situation and determining adequate responses to it as well as planning longer term engagement with this region. first, ah-shaabab has a

responsibility for exacerbating the crisis. while the group cannot be grammed for the trends, climate change, or meteorology conditions, the conflict it's engaged in, the economic, political policies pursued have certainly worsened an already bad situation. in the past they profited by diversion or taxation of humanitarian aid, the amounts represented a small amount of the broader revenue stream. it's heartening to hear the administration is working to clarify and where necessary ease the relevant restrictions in order to facilitate the work of humanitarian organizations. however, allow me to cite just one example of where the major funding streams of ah-shabab represent the crisis. charcoal -- it's estimates

somewhere around two-thirds of the forrest that used to cover 15 mcof somalia have been reduced to chunks of black gold backed into 25 kilogram bags, shipped to countries in the persian gulf. with cannot underestimate the negative environmental impact of all of this earning him millions in profit which is then recycled into violence and terrorism. if this is not bad enough, once the famine set in, they alternated between denying the crisis and denying people from moving in search of food. whether it's a formal policy of the group, i have reports from sources on the ground in the last 24 hours of at least three holding areas where forces are using force or the threat thereof to keep displaced people from leaving the territory and finding help, and we can get

into why they might be doing that. far from being -- secondly, far from being part of the solution, somalia's transitional government, the tfg, is part of the problem. in fact, not an insignificant cause of the ongoing crisis. the regimes unelected officials may be preferable to insurgents but represent the the choice of the lesser of the two evils. it is of limited helpfulness in the face of the present humanitarian emergency. leaders are likelier to see the crisis as yet another opportunity to capture especially since they expanded their mandate in two weeks and in want of a ready made plan b that the international community is not taking issue with the leaders arbitrary extension of their terms of office by another year. no wonder the official position of the government of the united states not with standing

engagements with the regime is not to recognize the tfg or any other entity as the legal sovereign of somalia. we need a permanent resolution to the ongoing crisis of state failure in somalia to avoid humanitarian emergencies in the future. thirdly, the sheer number of people moving in and from somalia territory have an enormous and perhaps permanent consequences for the region. the population shifts threat p to up end political balances and present new security challenges for the horn of africa and beyond. if they are not to cause greater harm, responses to the mass migration should be factored into the considerations. finally, amid the crisis, there's nonetheless an opportunity to promote stability and security in somalia. in fact, there is a narrow win doe of opportunity through which

it might be possible to weaken and possibly finish al-shabab once and for all. disaster exposed divisions in the movement and expressing willingness to accept help even as the leadership continues to spurn it. the disaster exposed provision within it and ways the international community can get assistance to drought affected populations rather than requiring the poor people to displace themselves and create additional challenges to be dealt with down the road. i want to gorped score there's -- underscore there's local ngos to deliver aid to hard to reach to areas while avoiding aid to problematic entities. again, thank you for your attention, and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, doctor. >> mr. chairman, senator aye

-- senator isakson, thank you for the opportunity to testify about the situation we're facing in the horn of africa. i speak on the care humanitarian organization and six years of preparing for and responding to disasters providing life saving assistance in crisis and helping communities recover. we place special focus on women and children and again in this crisis, by bear the bankrupt of what's happening. myself as working for programs in care if somalia, i see firsthand in my work the consequences that tens of thousands of people are facing today. i've worked in the horn for seven years now traveling extensively within somalia both in the north and south. i recently returned from a trip to idp camps and drought

affected areas in the north, and what we see there is probably less dray dramatic than what we see in some parts of the south, yet the stories we hear are horrible. a woman i met in one of the idp camps with a severely malnourished child on her arm that she had no money to seek assistance for her child. you could see in her eyes she was traumatized by the experiences and things that she had seen there. i met a father in the region who recently lost his wife, and he was there nursing his five remaining cows. the cows were bleeding from their noses, and he was trying to do something about it, but not knowing what to do, and our staff said this is a lost cause. this kind of experience as my staff see on a regular basis,

and there's stories that remain with you for the rest of your life. our response to the emergency in the horn began to scale up in 2011, the gipping of 2011 when the early signs were clear that this was going to be a major crisis. today we're helping more than 1 million people with live saving food, water, and nutrition and other life saving staps. care is one of the largest agencies working. we also support longer term activities that help people become more resill yept to drought. the severity of the situation is extremely worrying and other speakers have spoken at length about that, so i'll keep my remarks on that quite short, but the worry is that the situation is not worse yet. the deepest part of the drought is the part before the rapes -- rains come and then people are weakened. in september there's an increased number of deaths due to diseases that affect the

already weakened populations. as my colleagues have said, agencies know now how to deal with this kind of situation and that we need to focus on a broad range of services and water, irrigation, health, nutrition, food, and address those multipl causes of death in a famine crisis. however, unfortunately, there's still a major funding gap in the region of about $1.4 u.s.-dollars for the appeal of the u.n.. this is really a really, not descending all the other support from the u.s. government, and we appreciate the support from other countries and others and really appreciate that, however, it's not enough. the crisis is so massive it needs additional support. the access issues have been discussed at length. the ongoing conflict in the

south is making it much more difficult to get access to the south, and what we're seeing is that agencies already present there, local ngo's that work there have an ability to negotiate some level of access, but it is limited. unfortunately, aims at risk of becoming politicized, and it's important for all sides of the conflict to guide all the discussions on humanitarian assistance, and we're determined to provide only stance to those people that are most in need, and we have systems in place to ensure only those people get it. we are urging local authorities in southern somalia to grant uninhibited and unconditional access, but the crisis is happening now and needs a concerted, thoughtful, careful diplomatic work of u.n., donors, and ngo's to get aid to the

victims of famine wherever they are. now is the time to have space and reach out to all parties of the conflict and work to save the lives of tens of thousands of people and avoid to littization of the punishes. we have been speaking with colleagues in the u.s. government about the legal issues that have concerned us, and we really appreciate the recent steps taken by the u.s. government, specifically for programs funded by u.s. aid. questions, however, remain on the ability of u.s. government -- u.s. ngos to program funding from non-u.s. government donors. for instance, the u.s. public. ngos get large sums of money from the general public, but funding doesn't fall under the opec licensing in place for ngos. that would be covered if you only have funding from the u.s. government for south ethiopia

government. those are major sources of funding for u.s.-based ngos. the long term implications, we need to start thinking about those as well now. i'm running a little bit over time. these are very marginalized populations among the most vulnerable to the impact of changes of the weather patterns. we see drought every five years, and now it's a continuous cycle of missed seasons and it's difficult and it's difficult to adjust to the changes. we need to invest in that in the years to come. our recommendation, i just want to sum up, the expansion and speed of funding for the crisis is really important. the urgency is there, but we're

seeing that major donors take substantial time for funding to become available citizen. we urge them to be faster in processes and move things forward. we need to plan for increased long term support for resilience in these areas. we need concerted, thoughtful, and careful diplomatic work of u.n. donors and ngos to mitigate access on the ground, support a public climate in which this can take place by the agencies working there, and the efforts by the u.s. government to ease legal restrictions for u.s. government funded work is very appreciated, but it's not enough. we are at risk when we use other government's funding and u.s. public funding for instance. on that last item, we really need some very urgent action

forward. the ngo community is ready to engage the development and constructed options to alleviate the effects of famine while controlling the risk of diversion, and there are precedence for this in iran and more recently in -- [inaudible] and that could be achieved in two different ways. first issuing the general license that reduces the risk of prosecution due to transactions that may be incidental to the famine response, and secondly, favorable and very expeditious processing of specific licensing request to u.s.-based ngos. those things would really help agencies place themselves in a position where they can start negotiating access on the ground. thank you. >> thank you very much, mr. schaap. i hear a common theme. obviously, there are both naturally costs incurring that

are climate driven causes for a regional drought and famine, but those that arise directly from the control of the significant area. there's a real concern about the security and logistics of getting into the area, but about the united states and the interaction between our agencies a endepartments and the opportunity now through opec to get a license. you raised concerns and questions about the implementation about the new opec license opportunity and mr. schaap reflected that we're grateful for the role and care and mercy corp. and others play, and how ngos receive funding other than directly from the u.s. government, there's questions about the licenses, can you expand as you suggested in your statement, concerns about implementation and clarity about the necessary path forward for us to deliver assistance appropriately in a multilateral

way? >> [inaudible] sorry. i associate myself with mr. schaap's comments. as we understand it, and we were only briefed on this yesterday amp, so we are still digesting it, and we all have armies of lawyers reviewing this and whatnot. our understanding at this point is that the license that has been issued would only apply to programs that are wholly or partly funded by the u.s. government. if our agencies work there doing discreet programs not receiving u.s. funding or wishing to do that, that would not be covered by the license that was issued. apparently, last friday. >> your concern if i understand correctly from both of you on behalf of your organizations, relief efforts not funded directly by the u.s. government could put your organization at legal risk in south somalia? >> yes, that's correct. >> i hope that's resolved

promptly. >> we do at well. at this point per our understanding you say it has the authorities and clearances it needs and that translates to their partners, but that's a discussion to have in the coming days. >> all three of you and the previous panel emphasized time is of the essence and tens of thousands of children who are starving and hundreds of thousands on the risk or verge of starvation. would further bureaucratic delay and issues strike you as cruel and inappropriate? >> your words, not mine, senator. [laughter] i certainly think that the administration is moving now with great urgency to clear this out of the way. i think what we were told yesterday is an important step forward and a sign of sincere good faith on the part of the administration in resolving these things. i hope we're now to the point of detail negotiations rather than

big picture political will. i hope that's the case, but as i said in the remarks and expand in the written testimony, i think there's a larger issue here that bears exploration going forward by the congress and the administration of how -- why it even got to this point. i mean, can we find other ways, some ways of reviewing the law on this so that we don't have to go through this long drawn out bureaucratic process to do what regimely everyone agrees should be done in the first place. >> doctor, turning to the question of al-shabab. they are sanctioned to requirements of the united states. we have done everything we can to restrict their opportunity to gain funding to further their terrorist activities. you referenced in your written testimony and the testimony you just gave us of the real opportunity here because of tensions within the organizations. speak, if you would, further about whether it's appropriate for us to issue broad licenses

and allowing humanitarian assistance and if it might further strengthen terrorist organizations. >> thank you. mr. chairman, the question of this really is to understand that it's not a monolithic organization. >> right. >> it's core is radicalized extremist leadership with very close connections to some very dangerous people in other parts of the world, and we need to be seriously concerned. they have reach and have shown themselves capable of carrying out attacks in neighboring countries as well. that being said, however, the organization itself is broken up. it's a marriage of convenience. some. faction -- some of the factions are now there, a year ago possibly with the government, next year -- they are clans, factions, and militias. this is an opportunity, some of them in places i can name, some stated they bring us aide,

willing to switch allegiances. there is an opportunity. this is where it's important, these secondary track two policy that assistant secretary carson announced last year. we need to get it going. it was announced a year ago, but have not yet developed. it's a program that would allow us to have the information and the partners on the ground who can distinguish, okay, where are the areas we can work in. right now, it's a theory, it's a concept, a very valid one, but we have not worked it out as well as we should have. >> if i understand you correctly, like most groups it's made of a variety of splintered groups, some who are hard core jihadists and others who are local or planning groups aligned with al-shabab out of convenience. there's reason to believe they may be holding thousands of

refuge jihadistss by threat of -- refugees by threat. why are they doing that in >> several reasonsment first, there have been several districts actually where they didn't exercise that type of control, and now they rule literally a desert. 100% of the people are gone, 100% of the livestock are dead, a desert this themselves, and they can enjoy it. if you want to seek territory, you want a population. it gets into aide delivery secondly. eventually aide is going to flow. this is where we have to be careful how we allow it to flow. we had the experience in somalia, was there in the 90s when it happened. the more refugees, the more displaced people, the more resources flow to your country, not necessarily to the people. some are holding people to

increase head count and rent seeking behavior. >> one country in the region we have not referenced at all is one of the most toal tearian regimes in the world. there's very little information about the conditions on the ground about the humanitarian needs if i understand that correctly. it was blank in terms of data. any insight from any members on the panel about the situation in the country where the tension where the security situation, government situation, humanitarian situation is un resolved with an unclear path. >> if i may begin, senator, to give an index how bad it is, somewhere around slightly under 50,000 people have crossed the border into ethiopia. it's a mine laiden trap, and these people risked everything, not just to walk across the desert, but a mine field to get -- these are the survivors, and so that just says something about the level of december per

ration. i met people who crossed it and the situation is pretty dire. >> thank you. i have further questions, but i'll yield to senator isakson. >> i want to ask a specific question regarding what you referred to as a systemic problem in the administration regarding licensing. is it a systemic problem with too much bureaucracy? >> i don't know if there's too much pure bureaucracy -- what we've is there's different agencies with different priorities and different angles on issues, and the set up we have right now in terms of the legal restrictions, the opec restrictions, what is prohibited in terms of what is considered to be material support makes it, i think, very difficult for those different agencies that all have a stake in this to resolve this sort of thing quickly.

our suggestion would be to look at, maybe as a first step, to our understanding the patriot act exempts medical supplies and religious materials from the definition as what we constitute material support. we are interested in exploring whether that carveout could include other humanitarian assistance in situations like this so it doesn't require a long drawn out bureaucratic process to enable aide agencies to have the legal permissions needed to respond in these types of situations. >> it's my understanding, and in your testimony you said that in many cases local ngos are better equipped to deliver aide than a non-resident ngo. there's a group of somalia women who deliver support within somalia, but would probably be prohibited from having assets because of this restriction. it's only u.s.-delivered funds;

is that correct? >> well, senator, to cite that specific ngo, one of those problems was that they were falsely accused about a year and a half ago in a u.n. report of having made payoffs to ah-shabab. ..

we focus a lot on obstacles in our own processes. i think we also in fairness also look at obstacles at the international level. the world food program works on a three-month delivery cycle. how is it, and i ask myself, how is it that knowing this was coming down the line although there is a major resource in the region, they didn't put more food in the region. over the weekend they had flu flights that for all intensive purposes in mogadishu were for show. they took four tons of meat and 14 tons understand to mogadishu. sayeed and who we spoke about earlier in the month goes through 65 tons just in mogadishu alone so moore is helpful but it really was more from the cameras then every --

anything else frankly. >> i want to be quite clear, and her stand it is important that the administration and our country prohibited usaid getting into terrorist hands and that is one of the reasons for some of the restrictions. but when you do reach a crisis crisis.and a humanitarian problem like this it seems like there ought to be expedited procedures or else the people you are trying to help are going to be dead. that is the comment that i was trying to get to, because there is no question these organizations in africa operate on cash flow from corruption and many other organizations that are affiliated with al qaeda or other various groups around the world, but it is important that this many people the threat of losing their life that we have an expedited procedure to the maximum extent possible. i bob was supposed to testify today that you are in his place.

that causes me to make an observation to. today area might be that might or strip would care to ethiopia, the care representative that i worked with also had malaria. so i want to thank you for the risk that you take him very dangerous parts of the world to deliver humanitarian aid and hope and many other ngos like it. people i don't think sometimes equate the risk and the exposure of your own health it you put to help other people so thank you for doing that. one last question for dr. pham you talked in your remarks about al-shabaab keeping people from getting help that are actually stopping refugees from leaving the country to get help. is that correct? >> from sources on the ground that i have spoken with in the

last 24 hours, there appear to be three different areas. one that appears to be a camp of sorts where they are actually holding people, two are just areas where they created enough violence around them more or less to corral them and so it is not a guarded situation but it is a threat and they are preventing people it appears in two of those cases from heading to mogadishu, crossing the lines over to the area controlled by the african union. a hundred thousand people have art across and they are preventing more from going. the other areas seem to be to prevent people from heading south toward kenya. >> and the goal that is to strike fear in the population are what? >> i think it is several fold and i think it is hard to disaggregate them. to keep people that they can still rule, they aspire to rule and moving on empty land is not

what they were planning to do. and two i think some of them were local interests of local al shabaab commanders to have people as resources because people will attract aid, which they hope they will be able to tax, divert or otherwise tap into. >> a last quick question. one of the big problems in africa is a lot of the, in a lot of cases organizations that use rape and violence against women as a tool of accomplishing their end goals. to your people on the ground give you any indication of how al shabaab is using that as a tool? >> i'm not getting reports of anything sustained. there are cases against women very clearly and those are some of those are being documented but that is a systematic attempts to exert control or terror, unlike other tragic cases in africa. >> may i? adding a point to that, in various camps in the region

sexual violence against women is a serious problem and not just within somalia. >> thank you very much for testifying, all of you. mr. chairman. >> i would like to to follow up if i could i comment you made earlier in response to the earthquake that was in iran. i think 2003, there was an exception to the licensing procedure that was granted more broadly that might be a useful example here. could you elaborate on that? >> i don't have the technical details and we will get back to you on that. >> certainly from all of our witnesses today we are looking for a responsible, swift and appropriate path forward. i understand that despite my comment earlier i understand that different entities within the united states government united states government are charged with enforcing different legal obligations and that sometimes the desire for prompt and effective humanitarian assistance runs up against the barriers that they put in place

in order to prevent assistance from being provided willingly or unwillingly to those who are also in the united states and pose a threat to the international order. i would be interested in your input if i could as my last request. first about future planning about how the united states can better assist the countries in the region particularly here in the heart of africa where the climactic conditions seem to be worsening. how do we help them build resilience and sustainable capacity to deal with these crises so that we don't base them periodically? second, several of you have referenced threatened cuts to usaid. the house is taken up the relevant budget and has proposed -- i think mr. konyndyk suggested it was a 30% cut over last year and 50% over the 08 funding levels. how do you see our efforts to sustain american engagement with

development, with assistance playing out in what suggestions might you have for us and how to help the average american understand why there is value in doing this, not just from a humanitarian perspective rat from a strategic prospective? >> i think that the need for recovery and resilience programming is extremely high and i think it is important to get the planning for that started now even while we are in such a crisis. there are things that ngos and others are doing in these areas around, ensuring livestock health and ensuring improvement of natural resource management and diversifying the income streams that people have. savings groups to help asset diversification so people have liquid assets so there are little things that can be done and this needs to be scaled up in response to the drought because people have lost a lot

of their assets. we want to avoid a situation where after this drought and after this crisis because it is going to be massive, people are left for a long period of time while agencies are planning for recovery and resilience programming afterwards. if i may, i had a point on your earlier comment on bureaucratic obstacles coming through quickly. this is a serious concern. we are looking at a two or three month window of opportunity in which we can still save lives with the base we have seen not just with u.s. government of the owners but other donors as well. it takes multiple multiple months to get through the process and the added complications of u.s. antiterrorist regulations have added significant periods of time and that is really worrying also going forward now for that we have this short timeframe to prevent more death.

zvi thank you mr. schaap. >> yeah, i would again fully endorse what mr. wouter schaap has said about the need to build resiliency. the sorts of programs the u.s. government has funded in ethiopia and kenya are really important reason why they impact of the drought there is not as severe as we are seeing in somalia. i think it's important to note regardless of the political security factors, the lack of development programming going back years in somalia far before the current political configuration was in place is a significant factor in why it is so much worse there and looking forward we need to invest in a response right now that is not thinking just about the next three months but about the next five to 10 years in trying to rebuild people's resilience and livelihoods as quickly as possible. in terms of the u.s. government support, the specific budget and engaging the american public, we have been very concerned so far

that this situation doesn't seem to have really broken through yet in terms of the american consciousness in a way that the recent crises in haiti and japan did. i think there is a very clear link between the level of american public engagement in a crisis in the level of private donations and private support of the public life of a of the level of support that the u.s. government is motivated to provide. so i think that obviously we strongly support the accounts that i mentioned earlier and we think protecting those is critical but it also also really important for u.s. political leaders to a think to signal to the american people just how serious the situation is. after the crisis in haiti the president and the first lady were very vocal about the needs they are, about the importance of providing aid their. we haven't seen that level of engagement at the white house yet and i think that would be really important and really

helpful. the president has been dealing with some other issues lately combat hopefully in the coming months we can see more engagement on that. and i think as well, for members of congress, all of them are going back to their districts now for recess. i think this is an important issue to discuss with your constituents, and we would love to see joined calls from the congress and the administration for a greater american engagement. thank you. >> thank you. >> following up mr. konyndyk. would guarantee or assurance does mercy corps give that funds made to it actually give to the needy communities? >> well, we have an arranged mission in place for that. as with any private american charity, there are laws and procedures that are in place. we get audited every year and we make those audit winding public. those audits are very intensive and they are every year. we also are part of, collaborate

with various accountability networks within our sector. there's a group called the direction which is sort of an umbrella operation for all international charities which have member standards that we adhere to, they get to exactly that. known also as a partner in the u.s. government there are very very rigorous standards that we have to adhere to in order to qualify for u.s. government funding. so there are a lot of overlapping accountability standards and audits and all of those things that, which helps helped to hold us to account. >> and no standards or in your own internally controlled standards, is there an acceptable amount of -- i understand we are dealing in very difficult areas of the world in very difficult circumstances. is there an acceptable level of leakage and one upon which there is no tolerance? >> there is no, you know, he never want to say here is our acceptable level of leakage

because then you will be sure to get that level of leakage. >> understand that. >> so i mean, our priority is absolutely to ensure that the aid gets where it is supposed to go. i think we have a very low tolerance for leakage. it is always on a case-by-case basis. specifically as i've written in earlier articles on this, one of the factors that caused us to scale back on our operations in the south back in 2010 before we were formerly -- was that we were seeing on acceptable levels of interference, and so we -- no level of leakage is really tolerable and i think that what we are willing to work with is minimal but it can't be defined except on a case-by-case basis.

>> mr. wouter schaap is nodding his head in agreement with that i think that i want to give you a chance to express yourself. >> i just want to add to that data that in nairobi their agencies and a constant dialogue about what mechanisms we have in place to severely limit the ability of the diversion to happen. there is the leadership of the u.n. humanitarian coordinator on this that has been very strong abbas couple of months to really push back on those initiatives that have been pushing for taxation etc. on the ground, and our systems internally are very tight. we make sure that whatever we pledge to provide to beneficiaries is going to beneficiaries and not anywhere else. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> senator isakson thank you very much for joining me. i would like to thank mr. konyndyk, dr. pham and mr. wouter schaap for your personal service, for the risk you have taken in order to develop relief and the

leadership role that your positions have taken in the insight you have given us and the world as folks have delivered -- deliberated over this humanitarian crisis. as you have help a clear today this is the greatest humanitarian crisis facing the world today. it was foreseeable. it was one for which preparations were made and where there is investment that has made it less severe than it otherwise might have been. but it is one that can be expected to occur again because of the combination of governance, climactic regional economic and social factors in the horn of africa. so it is my hope that we will be working together and the people of the united states, the nonprofit community, private citizens to heightened public concern to strengthen international engagement, to not just respond to this immediate and very real crisis that will likely take tens of thousands of not hundreds of thousands of lives, but to lay the groundwork for preventing a recurrence of this crisis and those parts of

that they were entirely preventable. senator isakson and i share with you that africa is a continent of enormous promise and it is tragic to have this particular crisis be what most americans will be seeing about africa and the month ahead. it is my hope that they will be seeing more of that and i'm grateful for your role in highlighting and addressing this very serious humanitarian crisis. thank you for your testimony. i will keep the record open for the senators who were not able to join us today to submit statements until the close of business friday, august 5, and this hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

is 45. is no substantive regional representative for the united .ations high commissioner for refugees. distance of 11, the famine in j somalia, is this new orders foro something that is just getting reported things have youha disappointed to the point that we arenk at now is if thank yout for having me. it is not new. is one of there were the -- they were already s indications

we had the famine in 1992. 1998, 1999, 2000. what is important to see is that the famine stops at the border with somalia. in other countries affected by the drought, people are not dying. host: why? guest: because in somalia we have a conflict, we don't just aly fm an-- not just only famine. fighting for control of the markets, the routes. the affected population cannot get access to supplies. host: when did the fighting start? guest: in long time ago in 1999. since then, the country has been divided. we had different regimes succeeding each other.

recently, there has been fighting around at the mogadishu area, with a transitional national government is fighting. host: now, what is the situation in mogadishu? is aid getting at least to mogadishu and not being distributed, or is a did not even reaching the somalia at this point? guest: no, aid is reaching mogadishu, but mogadishu is a small part of the country. only people who can get access to the area controlled by the transitional national government, protected by peacekeeping force there, limited peacekeeping force there, the people can get into an indoor area control. but it is a tiny portion of the territory, only 5% of the territory up somalia. host: once it gets to mogadishu, what happens to it? guest: we have local community- based organizations, directly

buy control of making sure hte the aid reaches the right people. outside the area's control, it is more difficult. host: why? guest: because you cannot bring a lot of supplies there. there are logistical issues, and there is always a risk that it can attract attention, being manipulated by some of the armed groups around. the distribution outside this area controlled by the transitional national government has to be done on a low scale, using a community-based organizations. past be quite discreet. -- it has to be quite discreet. host: for safety reasons? guest: for safety reasons. there are many other partners involved in relief activities in somalia. internationals working there.

they our exposing themselves to danger. if you take 2008, 2009, 42 aid workers killed in somalia. you risk your life just working for a humanitarian organization. host: is this purposeful famine? is there enough food on the ground in somalia or available to get to somalia quickly? guest: at this stage there is not enough food to feed all the people. because of the distribution problems, unfortunately, we will not be able to reach everybody in a matter that is transparent, in a way where we are making sure all the affected population receives 2. 8 is very difficult at this stage to reach out all the people in need. is there enough food in the country? no, there is not enough food in the country. more food items and non-food items are brought into the country. host: according to the un high

commissioner's office, at the office you work for, 3.7 million people in somalia are in crisis out of a population of 7.5 million. 3.2 million are in need of life saving assistance. this the worst drought in somalia in 60 years. what about the designation of certain tribes or certain groups as terrorist groups that affect aid distribution? guest: it certainly affects distribution in the sense that one group, al-shabbab, is in control of the largest portion of somalia and there is no way we can work with those people. we hope they will let humanitarian aid workers reach the population at any, al- shabab has made various statements in recent days and weeks and banning certain organizations, putting conditions on certain organizations, accusing organizations that we wanted to lure people with food assistance

in order to convert them to christianity. our job is an impartial humanitarian work. we try to save lives with other organizations. that is what we want to achieve in somalia and the sort of message we pass in different communities in somalia. host: acute malnutrition rates, children exceeding 30%. those are the three criteria for declaring famine, correct? guest: correct. host: are there other areas in the world currently in famine conditions? guest: no. host: just this area? guest: just this area. others are suffering from

drought and access to food, but it has not reached a state of famine. host: we are talking about famine in somalia and what can be done about it. our guest is vincent cochetel of the u.n. high commissioner for refugees office. you can also send a tweet, twitter.com/cspanwj, or an email, journal@c-span.org. where the refugees going? guest: mainly to 40 countries. kenya elmont, we are -- kenya at 50,000 people 5

coming since the beginning of the year. host: are people getting an offer nutrition? . -- enough nutrition? guest: ngo's are doing their best to save lives when people arrive in kenya from ethiopia. we have problems in terms of registration, creating -- [unintelligible] the response is satisfactory in can and ethiopia. the government is concerned for its own security -- save for for ethiopia.aame on the 14th of july, the prime minister of the kenyan government agreed to an extension of the largest refugee camp in the world. it has reached more than 400,000 people living there. it was opened 20 years ago, designed for something like 80,000 people.

we now have 400,000 people. host: what is the u.n. high commissioner for refugees office? guest: the u.n. high commissioner for refugees office was a u.n. organization created after the second world war i in order to protect refugees. this way, refugees unable to return to eastern europe, displaced because of the war -- the united nations decided to create it with a limited mandate of the three years initially. host: at it is still in existence today. in 2008, the u.s. was the top donor for the u.n. high commissioner's office, with $510 million donation. those statistics you see there are from the unhcr office, and

they are 2008. our guest is vincent cochetel. we are talking about the drought in somalia. republican in connecticut, you are for stop. -- are first up. caller: good morning, commissioners. host: joyce, you have got to turn down the volume and a tv. we will put you on hold, but don't hang up. listen to the found -- to the phone. mike in tampa. caller: good morning. thank you, c-span, for taking my call. you know, just thinking about this, at there has to be a similar solution. supplying these people with a way of growing their own food. put up solar panels and used the condensation. host: simpler solution for helping these people.

guest: we see that in other countries and we fully agree with you. the problem is that in somalia, as soon as you demonstrate entrepreneurial skills, your be a or suspected to wealthy individual and are at risk to be abducted were killed. al-shabab is keeping a close look on people and it is difficult to establish any kind of business in central or southern somalia. host: is it time, in your view, for military intervention in this situation? guest: i am representing a humanitarian organization. and never for conflict. but we should not be mistaken, there is no humanitarian solution do something that is a political problem in somalia. this cannot go on forever. otherwise, we are going to see more people leaving somalia. we can provide some humanitarian response. safety in the countries around

the somalia. we can do it inside somalia to assist people most in need. but there is no a humanitarian solution to this problem. host: there for? gu -- therefore? guest: therefore, the countries with some leverage on somalia -- saudi arabia, yemen, qatar -- need to talk to various stakeholders in somalia on a political deal at some stage. host: next call for mr. cochetel, let's go back to connecticut. joyce, you ready? caller: yes. good morning, commissioner. i was the administrator of two the fiji camps for two years. i found that i could not get -- two refugee camps for two years. i thought that i cannot get to first base with the high commissioner for refugees when i

had problems with the camp and the government. the food that used to come in, us flags on them, said "gift of the people of the united states," were immediately turned over to the refugees in the camps, which were governed by it thugs. they would take the food and make refugees pay for it, or they did not get it. now, i don't know about you, but it seems to me that every time i went to high commissioner for refugees about problems, the only answer i ever got was, "oh, i will have to speak to the president." is this condition going to continue? guest: well, thank you for your questions. the issue of the diversion by

some people, some individuals, sometimes some refugees inside some camps, that is a real problem. it happens in many countries around the world. we have a complete mechanism. we established a couple of years ago an investigation unit that is totally independent, capacity to investigate and take remedial action against these sorts of allegations. what we are confronted with these allegations, we investigate and take remedial action. i have to tell you come in 25 years working in the field with refugee emergency, it is complex. when you have a camp like that with 400,000 people, you try to do your best. you are putting monitoring procedures in place to make sure people get what they are supposed to get. we take corrective measures. it is true that in some situations, difficult sometimes for refugees to access our stuff. especially at times of emergency, because we are a bit

overwhelmed. but there are procedures in place and people to voice complaints. if they can not reach you and staff on the ground, they can reach u.s. ngo staff on the ground and we investigate. host: just this year alone in the first half of 2011, and ans tional 425,000 somali an have fled to kenya and 6000 have fled to ethiopia. if somebody wanted to help, where would you suggest they go? guest: if people want to help, first, there are many non- governmental organizations, including american and non- governmental organizations. if people have time to volunteer, it is a good time to help. there are many in the area of medical response, comcommunity

service. people can also donate to u.s. ngo's and other actors involved in relief efforts. host: if somebody, mr. cochetel, or to donate it to you when a food relief for whatever, or the high commissioner's office, would they be ensured that they are buying foodstuffs for people? guest: absolutely. when people give money, they can give money for this project, the scarboro refugees, and we make sure the money is not used for -- this group of refugees, and we make sure the money is not used for other purposes. host: my point being, how do you know the aid is actually getting to it? guest: we have no guarantee that it will reach the people. i worked in the middle of the war in chechnya. we cannot get guarantees in some

communities that we would be able to verify whether the people were getting assistance we provide it. i went back with food trucks and we did not distribute anything. host: what happened with the food trucks? guest: we kept them until we have an adequate mechanism. we did not just want to add it to the authorities on the trust they would be destroyed. host: you were kidnapped, correct? guest: yes, i was kidnapped and spent one year in captivity. host: 20 minutes of sunlight a day? guest: the candle. soup on a piece of bread. host: what was the point of 20 minutes of sunlight a day? guest: i was kept in a location in chechnya and they put them in

the ground where people don't know about their presence. any part -- many parts of chechnya at that time, they did not have electricity supply. host: how is it you got released? guest: the russian authorities, after a lot of pressure, said a special operation to get me out. host: military operation? guest: yeah. people got killed. host: that was in 1991 -- guest: 1998. host: the which it with your question for -- go ahead with your question for vincent cochetel. caller: i was concerned, because i would like to donate but i do not have internet access. a lot of the media will prompt you to "go to our website" if

you want to help, but i know a lot of people where i lived don't have internet access. maybe you have a phone number of the top of your head, maybe? what can people like me do? i will take your answer offline. guest: you have to decide which organization you want to give your donation. you can send it to us and we can channel it to the organization. you can write to us at 1717 k street, washington. indicate which organization you want to give your check and we will channel it to the organization. host: once again, the u.n. high commissioner for refugees office, unhcr. 1775 k street nw, washington, d.c. 20005.

connecticut, frank, you are on with vincent cochetel. caller: yeah, good morning. my question is, ok, i have been listening, and you sort of basically answered, but there's actually no way to ensure that the money we are giving to somalia is actually going to get to the simoleons -- to the somalians? is there a way to ensure it is going to get there? guest: well, i'm talking first about so many refugees in kenya, ethiopia, djibouti. we can assure you we get the assistance with the generous

response we're getting from u.s. citizens, but also citizens from many parts of the world and governments. inside a somalia, all the organizations involved -- we don't do much in somalia because we don't have guarantees in place in many areas of somalia that the aid will reach people. it is important to check with the organization where you want to donate to, where they operates, how they operates, what sort of assurance they can give you. i am not saying the money will be diverted. we know there is more demand got humanitarian organizations to make sure the assistance reaches the right people. if you have hesitation, contact the agency you want to help or get more details on what they are doing inside somalia. host: do you have any estimates on how many people have died so far in this somalia famine? guest: no, i don't have

estimates. but what i want your viewers to know is that we talk about the famine. but if people come to ethiopia, kenya, not just because of the famine -- if it was just the famine, they would a state where it they are. if they moves, it is because there are other pressures. the conflict has been going on for many years, all sorts of human rights violations taking place their. and 30 seconds with someone in -- if you spend 30 seconds with someone in kenya and ask why they went to kenya, and they say the famine, give them five minutes and asked them what their life was like in somalia and white they made the choice to move to kenya, you will hear stories that they were beaten because they would not wear the veil, beaten in prison because

they wore bras, prohibited by al-shabab, prohibited to sell me on the market. people have left to their livelihoods. you hear about girls being gang raped by local thugs, protected by officials. you have a lot of factors contributing to the movement of people. it is not just famine. host: recently the u.s. eased restrictions on its relationship relationship,early but eased restrictions when it came to al-shabab. guest: the u.s. did not necessarily ease restrictions, but the u.s. understands better the constraints under which organizations can work inside somalia. there is a constant and regular

dialogue between the u.s. administration on the non- governmental organizations and u.n. agencies that work in somalia. they and a san better how we work, with whom we work. -- they understand better how we work, with whom we work. as soon as you have big camps, we are going to bring to the trucking contract, bring the food and at the camp, distribute inside the camp. there is going to be a tax imposed, bribes requested to get access to supplies and all that. they understand that there are -- we have to work at the community-based level with people trust and that working for for many years did those people have a limited capacity. host: is there an end to the situation there? guest: well -- host: as far as the weather

goes, and you talk about the political situation going on since 1991 are so. guest: well, political situation, i am not very optimistic, on the sticky stakeholders in the region -- not necessarily the u.s. government, but neighboring countries taking a role in peace process in somalia. and it depends on the rainfall. we will see in late september and beginning of october whether the situation improves. it will not bring immediate results. we expect more people to continue to be affected by the famine and continue to move until the end of september. host: beginning at 10:00 a.m. this morning, the house foreign affairs subcommittee on africa is holding a hearing on ethnic cleansing in sudan. we will be bringing that to you live. humanitarian crisis there as well. when was the last time you were

in mogadishu? guest: personally i got into mogadishu, but have been in and out every day. host: what have you heard from fellow co-workers about the situation? guest: a lot of people try to get there to access the food, but to do that they have to cross the fire in line. host: brooklyn, new york, thanks for holding. stephanie, you are on the air to . caller: peter, i think you are great. you are the most unbiased representative for the network. the un forces, are they extending our relationship with the saudi companies that are able to add aid to what others have done? it seems a shame that these people are being held hostage by their own people in the form of terrorism.

this is against all moral standards. i cannot understand why the very wealthy countries are not stepping in and reaching out in a humanitarian way and also the u.n. peacekeeping forces trying to put some type fence around these people that are basically extorting money in order to get aid to get through. it seems like a thing that needs to be done in a group effort. guest: absolutely right, but there is the challenge, to mobilize other countries that can play an active role inside somalia. the saudi private donors, some of the other governments in the gulf, the middle east, playing a more active role in studying the situation and reaching conditions for national dialogue, a reconciliation process, improvement of the situation on the ground.

it was an article recently in "foreign policy" saying that famine maybe the crime. it could averted through mitigation measures. and other population in a situation for many years paying a high price for people who did not take responsibility. host: mr. cochetel, what has been the reaction of the kenyan government, the ethiopian government? yemen government has quite a few refugees. you got the -- ugandan government, etc. guest: the country sat in it quite generous. -- the countries have been quite generous. 170,000 people went to kenya in less than six months. imagine what the reaction of the people would be in this country.

those governments have been generous. local populations are also showing solidarity vis-a-vis people coming over t. there are national security concerns, and we have to listen to them and mitigate those concerns. we have to screen the people who are there. it is going to take a lot of months for us to reassure those countries that all those people in the camps are genuine refugees and not people coming for other purposes. host: are you satisfied with the amount of attention the u.s. and eu are paying to the situation? guest: we are satisfied by the response. it is always difficult, especially in times of constraints and all that -- budgetary constraints and all that, but there are significant efforts to study the situation -- to stabilize the situation, at least for refugees. we hope to see more governments

involved in the response. host: tweets in -- next call for vincent cochetel comes from detroit. william, you are on the air guest. caller: your record at the un has been dismal when it comes to crises. we can cite rwanda, congo. when are you going to go over there and make something happen? guest: 90 for the call. i understand your -- but frustrate -- thank you for the call. i understand your frustration. it depends on member states, what decisions are taken within the security council.

it is not the when deciding -- not the un deciding. as far as humanitarian organizations are concerned, and i am not talking only about the commission for refugees, but talking about unicef, i can talk about the world food program, we do what we can to provide humanitarian response to people in need their. but we have a very, very little leverage on the root causes of the conflict spread at most we can help the victims, but we are not able to prevent the conflict and we have at very little leverage in trying to engage the actors into a political dialogue. host: does the un have troops on the ground in somalia? guest: four different countries have troops under very specific

mandate given to the security council for a mission inside mogadishu area. host: next call, fairfax, virginia. you are on the air. caller: hello, is that me? yeah, i was born and raised in africa. it seems that this problem has been going on for much -- long time, ages. it is about time for the west to change their policy. i appreciate the gentleman there is trying to help, helping solve the problem. but really, we are not solving the problem. all the energy in studying religion -- religion is not going to help issues like that. how about sending a message that it is not just sending aid, but may be changing the policy towards the third world? maybe we should start supporting more on science and find ways

and means to stop the problem physically, not just sitting there and teaching people every day religion. not that i am against religion, but people in that part of the world spend 90% of their time just teaching religion and religion does not help solve the problem. i think it is about time that we change the message. let them get the message that we will get involved in science. that is why america and the west is developed. it is more about science in schools. the kids grow up and actually get into innovation and come up -- this problem can be solvable. host: where did you grow up? caller: i grew up in sierra leone. the poorest country in the world right now. host: mr. cochetel? guest: you are absolutely right. some of these countries need a longer term development

programs that would address the root causes of the problem. a bit more on a positive note -- none of the other countries in africa are facing famine to d -- today. lack of development, human rights, but you don't have other countries at this stage with a famine. development programs using science -- i don't think religion is necessarily -- many organizationsou are deeply involved in a country and africa. but i agree with you that we need to be more creative on these programs. host: matt tweets in. guest: well, that is a very good

question. transfer of population has not taken place. it is not something that the international community, i think, would support. the last transfer of population i can think of -- part of the dismantlement of the ottoman empire where turks moved to avoid a mass killing of minorities. transfer of populations affected by harsh climate i don't think will happen. what you see in somalia at this stage is a bit of a partition of the country. you have two regions of somalia , defacto is separated from the rest of the somalia. not politically separated, but administratively separated you may see more fragmentation of the country in the coming

months. host: was there tactically at famine in sudan and the last decade or so? -- technically famine in sudan in the last decade or so? guest: not to the best of my knowledge. host: the countries separated with the south sudan. can you see that happening in somalia? guest: again, i don't want to make political statements. we are a humanitarian organization. an initiative pushed by some somali factions in kenya to create a separate territory in the south of somalia, which would comprise four or five regions in the south of somalia. the idea is that we would have to have some sort of safe-haven there with different territory.

whether it will happen, whether kenya will allow for that, nobody knows. host: a few minutes left before the house foreign affairs hearing on the humanitarian situation in sudan. tampa, you are on the air. caller: two comments. first of all, i think the last caller was from west africa. the problems in west africa are very different from what we're talking about in somalia. west africa is making it no progress at the moment. -- is making a little progress at the moment. also, somalia is an indictment of the international community. how could we let al-shabab and al qaeda affiliate's when an entire country? i don't know how that happened. i lived in minneapolis for awhile, and it is a visible somali community there. it is i don't want to say

everywhere, but they are very visible. i was hoping you could explain the process you have of resettling refugees at how they come to the united states and places in europe. host: thank you, caller. guest: very good. thank you for your remarks about west africa. you are absolutely right. i want to give yours positive tone on that. like ivory coast, nobody talks about it now. is getting soft. some crises find a -- solutions. -- it is getting solved. some crises find solutions. that is good, really up positive sign. you are absolutely right. people have forgotten somalia. after the last missions, the u.s. engaging missions in somalia, somalia has been to a large extent of black hole with no one wanting to intervene at, nobody wants to trigger a political dialogue.

djibouti, a couple of countries tried to initiate a political dialogue. i think there is a sense of fatigue when you talk about somalia among a lot of countries. in relation with so many refugees who are resettled, about 10,000 somali refugees are settled around the world. 5000 of them are coming to the u.s. every year. it is a small program. resettlement is not the solution for everybody. it is only the solution for a tiny minority of refugees. the u.s. has been generous. the somali refugees are doing well whatever they are in the u.s. minneapolis, and other parts of the country. i visited some recently in chicago, illinois. they are doing very well. they have an entrepreneurial

mind and they don't reduce the stigma of the fragmentation of the somali society when they get the chance to live in resettlement. many are fed up with the situation back home. they like to play an active role in promoting some sort of dialogue in their country. i think that maybe some of the solutions to somalia may come from the diaspora. host: nearly 900,000 somalis are currently refugees. you can see it on this map. the countries most affected, kenya, ethiopia, djibouti, down to tanzania. how they getting across the borders? is there any border control? is it mostly walking? by their tribes walking across the border? guest: they are walking. there is no smuggling. people walk on their own.

it is a long border. there are border control posts, but there was no possibility for a country like kenya to control entire border. it is a long walk. in countries like ethiopia, the border is better guarded. they have a problem with eritrea, so they have a better