Bureaucratizing the Good Samaritan: The Limitations of Humanitarian Relief Operations

  • 71 339 3
  • Like this paper and download? You can publish your own PDF file online for free in a few minutes! Sign Up
File loading please wait...
Citation preview

Bureaucratizing the Good Samaritan

This page intentionally left blank

Bureaucratizing the Good Samaritan The Limitations to Humanitarian ief Operation



' A Member of the Pcrseus Books Group

All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reprc3duced or transmitted in any form or by any means, etectrc3nic or mechanical, including photocopy, recordhg, :,or any inEorxnal.ian storage and retrieval system, without permission in writkg frc1n-i the publisher,

Copyright O 2001 by Weshriew Press, A Member of the Pewus Books Group P~~bIished in 2002 in tlw United Stater;of America by Wwtview Press, 5500 Central Avenue, Boulder, Colorado 80301-2877, and in tl-re United Kingdom by Westview Press, 22 Hid's Copse R c ~ dCurnnor , Hill, Oxford OX2 9JJ Fincl US on the World Wide Web at wwwwesk~ietvpress.ft>m

Librar~iof Congress Catal-tloging-in-PublicationData Waters, Tony. Bttreaucratizing the gocd samaritan : the limitations to humanitarian relief operation / Tony Waters, p. cm. Includes bibliograpl~icalreferences and index. lSBM 0-8133-6790-5 (pbk, : afk. paper) I, Refugeeelnternational cooperation, 2. Humanitarian assistance, 3, Bttreat~cracy. 4. Refctgees-Rwanda. 5. Refctgees-Tanzania. I. Title.

The paper used in this pubticaticrn meets the requirements of the American National Standard for Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials 239.48-1984,

To Dagmuu, Christopher and Kirsten Waters

This page intentionally left blank

Contents List of Tables and Figures List of Acronyms Acknrrw Eedg~nm ts


xi a . .


Part One: The International Refugee Relief Regime


htroductio~z:The Rwanda Rehgee Relief @eration. and the Bureaucratized Goad Sarnaritm-A Personal Context


Refugees, Internatio~zalPolitics, and the Goad Samaritan.


'I'he Strength of Bureaucracy


Definjng Sides: The Social Structure of Rjght and Wrong in International Refugee Relief


Making Comparisons Between md. Within Emergencies


Explaining Rwmdm Ge~zocide,W r , m d Relief


October 199>Octclber 1994: The Relief Effort W h d s Up


October 194-December 1996: Normalized Crisis'I'he Operaticm W h d s Down

Part Two: Bureautllrakizing the Good Sarxta~kxr 9

'I'he Lhnitations o f Contingency Nanning


Bureaucmtizing the Good Samaritan-Water


Bureaueratizhg the Good Smaritm-Delhzhg

Crises Genocide





Wtny Chly the Rwandans? Relief qerations and Politics


From TVVorld War 11 to Rwmda a d Kosovo


A Broader Context: Overcamisrg the Limitations of the Bureaucratized Good Samaritan

Part Three: Background Essays Essay 1: The Demogfaphy of a Camp for Rwanlians

Essay 2: Gamp Management 199495 Essay 3: The Chabalisa 2 Market Developme~~i: Project Essay 4: HIV and A D S in the Ngara Refugee Camps

Essay 5: FXow Many IZefugees Are n e r e in Ngara? Essay 6: Wishing for Repatriation, Late 1995 Essay 7: A Bishop in Exile-me Ngara C m p s

A n g l i c m Church in fie

Essay 8: Some Practical Notes on a Names Taboo in Western Tmzania

Tables and Figures

Successes and Failures of Contingemy Plansling in the Rwanda and Bumndi Crises in Tanzmia, 1993-1996 Morta:lity m d Fertility Data for Chabalisa 2 Refugee Camp in 1995 Food Distribution in 1995 Monthly Mortality Data Mortality by Disease for Chabalisa 2 Refugee Camp, October 1994-December 1995 Mortality by Cause and Mmth, October 1994December 1995 De~elopmenthdicrators in Tanzania and b a n & , 1989-1 994 .h Con?parison of Refugee Comts Fluctuation of Refugee Population in Ngara Camps


Map of Rwanda, Rumndi, and western Tanzania showing the Imation of refugee canps, and other places relevant to the Great Lakes refugee crises, 199696 6

Gsowth FR rclfugee populatiosls in Tanzanids Ngasa m d Kafagwe districts, 1994-96 7.2 UN expenditures h the Great Lakes region, 1994 7.3 International prlnt media coverage oi Rwanda 7.4a-7.43 Food deliveries to Ngara and &ragwe districts, 1994

106 IQ7 114 116

Age etistrihution at Chabalisa 2 rczfugee camp




This page intentionally left blank






Austrian nclngovernmental organization Africa Education Foundation Agellee hternationale Contre la Faim (French NGO) CARE International (htemational NGO) Coalition pour la D4fense de la Rkpublique (radical Rwandan E-futu,party) (name of It-alim construction company) Catholic Relief Services (Americm MGO) Disaster Relief Age~~cy ( h t c h NGO) European Community Humanitarian Organization Evmgelical Lutheran Church in Tmzania Front des Dkmocrates du Burundi (Burundian political


(Irish NGQ) hternational Committee for the Red Cross (Swiss agelzey) hternational Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies hternational Rescue Committee (American NGO) hterna tional Relief hf ormation Network hternally displaced. person Jesttit Refugee 9rvice Joint Voluntary A g m q (American NGO in mailand) Lutheran World Federation Mouvelnent R4volutiomaire National pour le D4veloppement (ruling party of Rwanda before 1994) M4decFns sms FrontiPres (Doctors Wi-thsut Borders, hternational NCO) Nonvegian People" Aid ental Orgmizatian Organization of .hf"ricanUnity &erseas Development Assistance (U.K. government agency) Rwanda Patriotic Front (ruling party of Rwanda aft= 1994)


Tmganyika Christian Refugee Service Tmzanian Red Cross U ~ ~ i t eNations d Assistance Mission to Rwmda (UN military eoNingent in Rwmda, 1993-96) United Nations Border Relief %eration (Cambodianailmd) United Nations Development Programme United Nations International Children" E m r g m e y Fund U ~ ~ i t eNations d High Commissioner for Refugees Parti de lfUnimet du PmgCis National (governing party in Burundi until mid-1993 and after coup in 1998) U ~ ~ i t eStates d Agency for fnternatimal Development United States Committee for Refugees World Food Frogsamme (UN) Wrld Health Organization (UN)

Acknowledgments This book is the ~ s doft my invotvemmt in the refugee business since 1982. Mmy people have c o ~ ~ t r i b ~to ~ tmy e d thoughts shce then. I would like to take this chance to reach back into my memorks to acknowledge a fevv (though by no means a311 of them, though of course they may not agree wi& my conclusions. Nevertheless, in all, I h o w , there was a heartfelt ixrtercst in finding the best way to serve the dispossessed oi the wmib. In Nan, Thailand (1982): Peter Rees, Steve Haman, Naowarait, fan Timm, Kouei Cho Saeteurn, Nai fmt-rroi,Seng Lor, In Phanat Nikhom and Bangkok, Thailand (1983): Manit Chiachuabsilp, hither Sanit, Father Boonlert, Jenny Kang, Vongduen Kerdchana, Tony Nolan, Philip ESe~moun,Tassanee L., "Uncle" Manu, Meng Chiew Sae Teusn, Manh Cho Saeteum, Thavjnh Pbmyapanh. In Kigoma region, Tanzania (1984-87): Wikid a d Karin Mahn, fan m d h t j e Siernerink, Carol~xsand W i h a Poldervaart, Wllem and Rleke t'an Gogh, Heidi Kaletsch, Kalima Mambosheh, Mzee AbdaIfah, Tobias Siweya, N. P. Mchonchele, Mrs. C. Basongo MB, Cosmas Malugu, Mafiayo Balikutsa, E@ Nissen, Mzee Charnwino, Ramadhani Asedi, Tbrahimu Luziga, Father H. Van der Paverd, Father Tvers, Father Bourdieu, Magdalena Lmz, Ilse Pamrmz, Elfriede Mueller, Jan and Catherine Rot&. A special n&e of thmks to Benedicto fos protecting the refugees in Heru Ushingo, He did it wi.thout reward. or expectations of compensation or acknowledgment, mly because it was the right thhg to do. In Ngam and Karagwe, Tanzania (1994-96): Leo Norholt, Philip Wijmans, Lazarus Mezza, John and Su.zanne Cosgrave, Adamasu Simeso, Joh m Ifalslev, Mark A~obe,B e h a r d Staub, Gary Sibson, David and Tehira Porter, Everready Nkya, Peter Sweetnam, Ted Berth-Jones, Dietriclh m d Ulrike Sehneiss, Kari Se-einacker, Maureen Connellp, Andreas Koessler, Jucly Benjamin, R/larr: Sommers, Steve Njobe, Trisln and Rob Wilsm, Sister Ag~nes,Sam and Miranda Gihbs, Antony and Chistian Lathm, Jaap htjcs, Denise Barrett, Eugene Samuel, Paul Sijssens, Chantal Garand, Colin. IJrycr, Peter Buchanan, lCirhard Luff, ikfzee Atanase, Mzee Evariste, Rilzee I:.,emidas, Bodil Torp, Edkvi.n and D o r o ~ yRamathal, Stephan and Gertraud Schaeffer, Sosthenes Bernhard, Brigadier General Sylvester Hamedi, f'ki1ip Mangula MB, Bishop and :Mrs. Edwin :Nyamuhi, Matias, Jean-Paul, and Jean-Pierre.

I also want to acknowledge the courage of Eveready Nkyr, n/Itee AIfred Jab, and nine Tanzanian drivers lfor TRCs who remahed in Southwest bands in Augu" 119% when the Ermch army pulled out. Their courage was to lightly acknowledged. Ingeborg Rernmel (my mothes-in-law) provided a comfortable and peaceful place to work in Leverkusen, C;erman?i, in the srtmmer of 1999. This is where much of the manuscript was wrinmz. Acdemic debts are more difijcult and complex to achowlledge. But a nurnber of people have had intluence on this hook. At the University of Califomia, Da\ris, John R, Hal%has been the most-persistent in sczeing that- 1 iollowed up the subject of the "burcaucratized Good Samaritan" "sn ice I first discussed it with him after a graduate semiz~arin 1990 or so. Jack Galdstosze has also contributed ideas, particularly in terms of methodology I have discussed this work at various times with Catherhe Newhur)l: Goran I-tyden, %ott McNall, Craig fenkins, Tom Johnson, Laurie Wermuth, Clark Davis, Kathy Kaiser, Frmk Hirtz, f im H a e h , Eric f ones, Nelsolz &Sfir, m d others whO were interested. and encouraged me to continue. B e f i a r d Staub, Bent Sirnonsen, Heidi Kaletsch, and k t h Witaker all deserve credit as peaple interested inbridging the gap between acadelne and field practice. Nichael Hyden also assisted with data couection h Chabalisa 2, and Frid-S-jovRuden patiently taught me something about hydmgeology. I hope Chapter 10 does what he tarnght justi,ce; the ntistakes are of course m h e , Arrne Abran-tsm read and critiyued the entire manuscript. Some importmt ad-j~~sts~ents were made at her suggestion. Bill Travers assisted with Chapter 11. Candy Priano provided the graphics, George Thampson at the ifierlibrary loan desk at Merriam Lihrary at California State University, Cbjco, helped chase elusive references qrxjckly and efficientlyJeff %eter assisted with conversion of the photographs into black-andwhite f)hoto-Shop files. Bitilic Kanter, Jolee Liptrap, and Cheryl Vermitlion patiently =ranged for l.he burearncra.t.ic thrcads to be tied togethcr when it came to charges, budgets, a d payments. Billie and Jolee also kindly looked the other way when 1 exceeded my share of the Department of Sociology's photocapy resources. The interest from Andy Day and Dave McBride at Westview Press provided encoufagement and support. I hope tbat the book does their confidence in it justice. The copyedithg of KaQherineScott was sharp and insighlful. The other source of support I have received was tbr Department of Sociology and Social Work, California State University, Chico-from the staff,facuilty and students. I have never had a more combrtablc and collegial place to work. Tony Wuters


Iesus mid, " A Y I I ~ ~was Z goi~zgd ~ r i 'fli ~ r p t . Jerzrsalerrt.to I@vicha,whtrrz he fell i~zto the hands of nlbbers, Tlrey stripped him of his clofhes, beat kiln and went azuay, leaviq him half dead, A prir;ist haypetzed to be p i % ~ U T L T Mthe same rund, n ~ d whefz he saw tile nzals, he pmsed by m? the other side. So too a Levik, zuf~entrcr came to the plclce and sazu Izi~n,passed hy 0t-t the &her side, Nzlt a Sirmarifan, as he fraveled, caltne tuhere the Inan zuas; and whm he saw hi^^, he took yify m Ftim, I-fe w e t f to him and b~~tdagcrd his wozrnds, ppourirzg on oil and wifze. Thm he put fhc man 0t-t his own h n k e y , took him to a n irm, and took care af him. The next day, he took otlt fzuo siluer coins and gave fhem to the innkeqer, l o o k @ter him,' I-fe saibi ' ~ ~wfierz t d f etrrm, I will reiNlbume yozifor any C X ~ ~expense LI you may have," fhree do ;YOZ~ thiak ruas n ~wigFtborfo fhe mnlz zuho fell into the i l W ~ i efhc.si-1 ~h halzds IIJ mbbers? Thc exprt itl the law replied, "7"I;teone zoho had mercy on him." Jeszrs told Izim, "Go a d do Eike~uise."* As the Biblical parable of the Good Samaritan implies, the innpulse to help a stranger in need is m t new; it is a trait long admired, fn telling this parable, Jesus tells his listeners that the Sarnaritm was a better neighbor than the holy m n who neglected to assist the stranger. H e says it is good a d proper to show mercy, and to ignore suffering you encounter is wrong. The lesson is that the morally superior decision was take11 by the Samaritan, and not the holy men. This is of course a sentiment shared by many of the world's religions. 7'he requirement to assist: is also accepted as rnoraf and right in the modern secular world.

"Luke 10:30-37, New International krsion.

Part I : TJle I?ztermtional Reftlgee Relief Regi~ze

mough the impulse to help the mare u~nfortunatearrtolng us is old, our capacity to do so has expanded expmentialily with the Endustrial Revolution, tbr modern state, instant communications, and modernity in general. In the modern world, charity is organized far beyond the level of a moral choice made by an individual who by chance passes a robbery victim along the road. In fact, in the sibation where chariy is most broad, and assists the gseatest num:ber of victixns, it is oqanized into a "comptex taskw-meankg that specialized organizations are established that randertake the relief m d rehabilitation of the millions of monymous victims lying along the world's hjghways, The ability of the modem world. to organize these tasks has resulted in the rescue of miXIions oE victimized shangers in the years roughly since World War I. To do this, a complex oJ: organizati.ons and agencies such as the UNICEF (Unikd.Nations Xntemational Children" Emergemy Fund), the Red Cross, CARE: International, UNflCR (United Nations High Co sioncr for Refugees), Qxfaxn, M4decins sans Fmnti&res(MSF), and other names hmiliar to modern Western socriety have eznerged, often achjevirrg fnr themselves a high prome on nightly newscasts throughout the world. Mare lives than ever are saved because such age~zciesspecialize in treating the victhized quickly and effectively. And because of the wonder of modern transport and communications, trained people specializing in these tasks are sent, often quicklyf and far fewer victi,ms are left: mnsuccored by the side of the road, than would oherwise be the case. h response to this perceived need, budgets for relief work have also ballooned: in 1995 about $8 billion was spent 011 relief. Less predictable is the fact that these spendlng increases have not been accompanied by a concmtration on one or two ma~orcmtralized agencies; irrstead there has been a proliferation of groups In 1980 there wcre about l,fj00 nongovernmental agencies operating out of the 24 e c m o n i c q developed OECD states, &y the rrtid-1990s thert?were about 4,6W (Walkup 49973136),1 N s o more efficient, though, is the other side of a m r c y equation, meaning that credit fur being a Good Samaritan justifiably is s h a d by schootchildren Mtho respond to Red Cross appeals; Mlestern govemmmts that Ry in shipments of relief goods to Bosnia, Rwanda, and Albania; and individual Tanzanians, East Timorese, Colombians, or Albanians who quietly protect refugees beforl, the international relief agencies arrive. Eaekt agency cmnecting ""vjctims" and donors justifies its involveme~ntin the terms of humanitarianjsm or religion, And in order that it be known to donor comtih;rencies, the popular press b a d c a s t s and disseminates word of the g d deed done. Such publicizing of '"rightewsncss" may not be what Jesus had in mind in the parable of the Good Samaritan, but nevertheless it is a pmminmt feature. of how relief eft'crrts are ccmducted today and camot be ignured.

Part 1: The I~ztemntimzalRefidgee Relief Regi~ze


The reason t-hat succoring the needy and delivering credit is morc efficient for both the victim and the &nor, is that, as with other complex tasks, the task of providhg relief has become bureaucratized. To do this, the "mercy" function has been broken down into tasks done by specidists hired and trained to do each action efiiciently and effectively. frt this ~ s p e c tthe , work Of today's G o d Samaritan agencies is not that different .from the larger bureaucracies of modcm busincss and government withjn which the principles of bureaucratization were established. n e s e organizations defh~ea goal to achieve, identify the means to do it, and establisk programs to achieve the specilied goals* The nature of these relief agendes-w2lich 1 call. the international rt?l"ugee d i e f regime-is discussed fn the following chapters. The first chapter is about how and why I've becom interested in this subject The description starts with Chapter 2, which is a brief histosical ovemicw of how the bureaucracies of the international relief regime evolved. Chapter 3 is about their strmgths and weilknesses, give13 the i,nherently bureaucratic nature of the international refugee relief regime. Chapter 4 is about the moral underpinnings assumed by the bureaucracies as they seek to justify their programs,. Chapter 5 dljscusses the methodological difficulties inherent to discussing refugee relief agencies. Chapters 6-8 focus on describing h w the international rclfugee relief regime operated fn the Rwandan refugee crisis in Tmzmia. Notes 1.Natsicts (1996:68) notes that the United States in particular has seen a growth. in the amount of emergency aid given. He uses a s an example the o~bservatic>n that between 1989 and 1993 budgets f c x two U.S. agencies, the Office for Foreign Disaster Assistance and the Food for Peace program, rose from $297 million to $1.2 billion. Natsios't; article also describes the specifics of how such money is chameled to a variety of NGBs (nongovemmntal organizations) in the United States and Europe.

This page intentionally left blank

Introduction: The Rwanda Refugee Relief Operation and the Bureaucratized Good SamaritanA Personal Context

Between October and December 1996, troops across central Africa forced 1.4 million refugees back to their home country of Wands. This forcible was undertaken by Zaire and Tanzania with the ac~ f u g e repatriation e quiescence of the iatemational commw~ityThis occurstld despite the fact for two and a half years Tanzania, Zaire, and the international community protected the same ~hgeedronrtsuch an event. in late 1996 was prob;ably the largest in modThe forcible repatriatio~~ ern times. Certajnly it was the largest since the Allies forced refugees back to Soviet-domfnated corantries in the pt?riod 1945-47.qeerrtingly forgalZen in the intervenixlg 50 years was the fact that s o m of Chc forci,bly returned European refugees were executed withirr earshot of the Allits at the time they were repatriated. fndeed, it was out of this experimce that the principle of refugee protection emerged: that persons having a legitimate fear of persecution have a right to protection in the country of first asyium from forced ~patriation.Wt-ty, then, for the first t h e since World e a maWar H, did the international refugee relief community a c ~ i e s c to jor forcible rehgee repatriatiodwhy were Rwandans forced back, and not the Cambodian, Afghan, Bos.Hian, or others who, since World War lIr have fled l-heir countries and been protected to some degrc3e frown such action? As a studmt of re.fugee history I find the conventional reasons given for the forcible rclpatriation (reviewed hereafier) of Rwandans too easy, and therefore dissatisfying, h particular, they were made without reference to a hrctader understandhg cJf how =&gee crises have been created and rcsolved durhg the last 50 years. Instead, Che explanations d h s s

FXGUM 1.1 Map of Rwanda, Burundi, and w s t e m Tanzania showing the Ic>cat.ionof refugee camps, and other places relevant to the Great Lakes refugee crises, 199&96. (Map by Candy Priano.)

only issues and explanations raised by that one crisis, oftm offering explanations rooted in the interests of the protagonists, be they the new tjwernment in Rwanda, Tanzania, thc. refugees themselves, the United Nations, or refugee assistance agencies. Some of the common explanations given about what happened to the Rwandans included the following:

* The Rwandan refugees were common people who had nothhg to fear in their home country*(The same was said about the eastern Ewropeans forced back to their cottntries at the end of W r l d Was I2 and shot by the Soviets. The same was also said of C m bodians t l e e a after the Vietsramese invasim in the late 1970s.) The Rwmdan rcfugees were manipulated by unscrupulous leaders using them for political ends. (The same was said of Can-tbodians & e a with Pol Pot.) The home country (Rkvmda's) new governme~~t established amicable relations with its neighbors; those nei@bors were iY1. a better position to judge the new government's ir-ttentionsthan those who had fled. (This was the excuse used by the htlics after Miorld War I2 to forcibl.y return refugees to territories controlled by the Sowiets.) It was noted that the refugees themefves had worn out their welcome in poor host countries that we= ill prepared to pmvide asylum. (W a devastated Centrat Europe hosted milIions of refugees through the 1,950s, India hosted 10 million refugees from Bangladesh in 1972, Iran and Pakistan have hosted millions from Afghanistan since 1979, China has hosted hundreds of thousands of Uewarnese, and Ctmtrd Amczrican relugees were widespread throughout that isthmus between 1379 and 2993. All were poor comtries.) It was claimed that Rwanda had legitimate hterests in invading Zaire in order to close the refugee camps because otherwise perpetrators of crirnes q a i n s t hurnanity would remain free to threatell Rwmda's territory. (Cambodia and Bosnia could have both justified invasions of neighbors with simjlar clai-nns.) * It was claimed that host countries can best judge refugee status and home conditions. (The humanitarim community objected to this position in the case of Viehamese in Hmg Kong, Malaysia, etc.; Bosnians in Germany; Cuatemlans in W x i c o ; Haitians in the United States; and so forth.) * At the end, it was pointed. out that Wands had a right to shut down rt?l"ugeecamps that doubled as mftitary bases. (Afghanistan, Laos, Cambodia, El Salvador, and Nicaragua could all have


asserted a similar right at various times. The apartheid-era South African regime actually used this excuse for attacks on African National Ccmgress exile camps throughout southern Africa in the I"380s.) In short, the justifications appear sensible, but are m t completely satisfying. There is a sense that somethhg more happened in the Rwmda crisis; that although such commonsense justifications peshaps offer shortterm explanations to policy maicers, there must be a broad= story. The broader story 1 think is that the Rwanda refugee situation became "bureaucratized" too fast, with the resdt that the administratke and paliticai compromises erected to deal with the short-term emergency were incapable of ge~~erating longer-term \?.isions. Adnnittedl~~; this is a dry exptmatim for a juicy and dramatic subject like the Rwanda gcrnocide and refugee crisis. Certainly it is more dry than rczcomting the conditions during the genocide, narrathg the drama af the military successes of the RPF (Rwanda Patriotic Front, the ruling party of hands dter 1994), cheering the downfall of Mobutu, or describing bodies in the river. But I think it is one that expf,ains a great deal xnorcir than the osthe-cuff: explanations listed above. This book is about how I reached that conclusion, Excitement, Emotion, and the Rwandan Refugee Crisis Superlatives domilnated discussion of the Rwanda refugee crisis from the start. For the world, the Rwandan reftlgee crisis started on April 28-29, 1994, with "the largest and fiistest refmgee exodus in a single day.." The camp established in Ngara, Tmzania, was "the largest in the world." The American. calumist Rager Rose~~blatt: (1994:40,42), writing about Ngara in May 1994, was sensitive to the drama: "Boditzs appear in an explosion of spray at the top of a steep falls, and then spin and turnble down like logs on their way to a mill." HE-ccontinued with Ihe enthusiasti.~use oE supeslatiws: Benaco refugee camp, he wrote '"is a mariccrtplace, perbaps the largest in the world." The T ~ P Tmagazine ~L. cover was for me particularly memorable. In, bold type over the picture of a mot.her and her child was the dramatic beadline: 'There are no devils left in Hel1,~hemissionary said. 'They are all in Rwanda,' More drama came only a few weelks later when the Ngara recards were eclipsed, after 2 million Rwandans fled westward. to Zaire, and a fastkilling cholera epidemic emerged. The Zairean camps were described in cover stories as "Land of the Dead and Dying" "fze Ectlnorrrit;l), "This Is the Apocalypse" (En.re),and "Helf on Earth" (Newszueek).New records for size of refugee camps, speed of cholera epidemfcs, and size and speed of '"


international relief programt; toppled after Ngara had been at the top of the publicity heap for a short two m o n h , Thus, from the beghning, the international humanitarian response was darnhated by emotional superlatives, 'There was a massive oul-pouring of relief supplies. Heroic efforts to control cholera were made in T m zania and Zaire. The unusual coordination between aid agencies and wd-organized refugees in distribzlting relief goods in Tanzani,a was praised. Fur the first tilne Russians participated in an intctmational relief operation in liafrica as part cJf the fntctmational team coordi~~ated by t-he UN, Finally, a report about the Rwanda relief opemtion, vdzred at $1.4 billion between May and D ~ e m b e r1994, receked an evaluation study costjllg $3.5 million, an evaluaticm, I was assured, that was the mmt expensive m d complete u~~dertakelz of a humanitarim operation." Capping the d r m a and requiring more superlatives was the kilIing preceding and during the reflugee exodus, which uneierlay all anaiyses. The genocide was ""the largest since the Holocaust," and killing in Rwanda proceeded at a pace faster than even Auschwitz was able to achieve. The masterminds cJf t-he genocide were also judged in terms of superlatives: lhcir evil, along hvilh that of Bosnia, are t-be orlly two war crimes since world War 11 for which the UN has had the wherewithal to press prosecution. 'f'hus, in the case of the Rct'anrla relief operation, two became intertwined: pity for rcfugees and revenge emotional s~~bjects against the perpetrators of the genocide, known c o m d y by a sinister sounding French word, g&rzocida'nires. Pity and revenge m of course two ver)i different emotions. 'The question for the international refugee relief communi.9 became, in effect, how to express the world's emotions effectively for such massive sufferitlg. Can both exist side-by-side? Is a relkf operatio~~ the most approprjate response? Or are justice tribunals? Whichever was the case, one thing was clear, the only type of human organfzation capabte of dealing with the l q e task was a bureaucracy, that cz~xnbersomeand alf-pervasive form of social organization which, as Max Weber points out, we all revile, yet arc so dependent upon for modem life to be possible. 'f'hus, ironically, despite the fact that bureaucracies are inherently sterile, conscienceless, and inhuman,they are nevertheless the onXy toot, useful for expressing both mercy and revenge, the emtions t-he world demands be expressed. This book is an exercise in ssessing p&cy by Loobg both at wh& actually happened and also at what might have happened. VVas the forced ~patriationfnevitable?Would efiffe~ntpoticy decisions have ~ s u l t e din d i f f e ~ nconsequences? t In terns of methcufology, this book uses traditional historical narratke with a comparative sociologicd analysis. The book is divided into two sections. Part I focuses on the historical underpinnings of the "inter~~a-


Ivt froducfion

tiond rcfugee relief regime." Chpter 2 describes the institutional limitations within which the regime must operate, Chapters 3 and 4 are both about the naturt- of burt-aucracy in the context of internationai relief operations. Chapter 3 is about why bureaucracies are effective, even in emoticmal situations like refugee relief. Chapter 4 is the "yes but" "chapter with respect to hrtreaucracb and explores Mthy it is diEicult for burczaucracies to define the moral differences between right and wrong in emotionally charged situations. The difiiculties inherent in studyirrg the mgime are the subjeclt of Chapter S. Chapters 6 to 8 co~~clude the first section of the book with a description of the Rwanda crisis and how it developed. The focus in this part is a study of how the work in Ngara unfolded, how policies developed, a d the crikria on which decisions wercl. made. The second sectim of the book shokvs how the concept of the "'bureaucratized Good Samaritan" i s an effective one for understandislg the l i d tations of the international refugee relief regime. There are three case studies of how donor emations and the needs of the bureaucracies interacted in Ngara, Tmzania (Chapters 9 to 11).The subjects covered are purposely disparak, and include one centering on the role cJf planners ( c m tingency planning and preparedness for an influx fsom Burundi); one iocusing on the role of engineers and public health experts (water provision and wefl-drilling);and one of general interest to the iawyers (violent death). The point: of choaskg such broad subjects is to dmonstrate how similar bureaucratic and emotional concerns undcrlay decision-making, irmspective of the techical field involved. From this analysis, the ""breaucratized Good Samaritan'koncept is used to assess what the Ijnnitations of the international refugee relief ~ g i m are e and how these limitations will continue to limit reform. 'Thfs leads up to a discussion, in Chapter 12, of the question asked at the begiming of this chapter: Why were only the Rwandms forcibly repatriate&?The liiscussion in Chapter 12 leads to a conclusion that refugee crises arc inherentIy poltical. Neverthekss, the need for an apolitical humanitarian veneer is maintained not d y in connection with the W a n d m s but hother crises as well. ?"his is the suhject of Chapter 13, where it is pointed out Ihat the weahesses fomd in the Rwandan case are in fact built into the contraclictions of bow refugee relief is handed, and that each of the other crises discussed implicitZy had a unrealized potential Thus, as the emerge~zcyresponse sydem is curfor a forcible repatriatio~~. rently constituted there are certain '"decision points" wwbcre opportunities are taken advantage of or lost. 'f"hese points reflect the dynamics of how po:[itical and financial support for h u m n i b r i m crises is generated, and not the ohjectke needs of the refugees themselves, flow these points arc deait with typically has much to do with the effects that the international popdar press has 811 policy and decisim makers.

The fhal chapter asks how the limits of the "bureaucratized Good Samaritan" will shape current efforts at reform., The key point is that until decision-making is rooted more firmly in rationalized buwaucratic norms ratl.ler than the dictates of the emotimai.ized (and necessar2y sensalimal) mvhg eye of the prcss, reform efforts are likely to contlnue to be svmied, In essence, "press management" is the problem, not the soluthn. The solution is to s t ~ n g t h s nburctawratic rationality, and not delegate t?uthorit.y to the necessarily motimalized pogular prcss, which is pursuing other ends than the deliwery of rationalized services to the refugees. At the end of the book is a edection of eight essays 1 wrote about, refugees while inTfanzania. Six of them were writtm on behalf of my employer, the Lutheran World Federation (LWF), The origtnal purpose of these six essays was very consistent with the "bureaucratized Good Samaritan": they were tools to describe our work to donors within the church. As with ail such reports, there needed to be a strong l-ruman elemetnt, kvhich conveyed to lay waders the type of work we were doing, how their money had. been used in the past, and how it would be used in the h b r e . In this fmction, my job was not that different from that of a print reporter. The seventh essay is about the dcmographics of the refugee camp with which I was most familiar. Such data, though widely disseminated, were not d e r s t o o d m d were igmred by flanners who could have uscd them to make operations more efficient. Nevertheless, 1 think of this essay as being of genertral rwthociological and anaiytical interest. Likewise, I hnve hopes that some refugee c m p adminjstrator somwhesc will see the point in develophg such data. The final essay is adapted fmm a 1989 issue of Dit;usters, in wbich I wrok about the difficz~lt-y in counting refugees in a remote Tmzanian village, Since much of the usefuhess of the ""bureaucratized Good Samaritan"" concept rests on the accuracy of good counts, 1 hclude the essay here as a kvarning. Th.ings in Afsica are not always as straightforward as olxtsiders assume,

Personal Background own hterest: in the international re.fugee relief regime goes back to I982 klrhen, after a stint in the Peace Corps at a Nafaria Zone office in Thailand, I was employed by the hternational Rescue Committee ( X K ) as a sanitarian and project manager in Thai ~ f u g e ecamps for Zndochinese. A tiot~rceof contkual frustration for me was the inefficiencies m d wastefuIness in the relief effort, Water systems stood. unused while expensive water tmcks roared by; poorly desiped camps led to fires and


Ivt froducfion

Roods; refugee fmilies who were gohg to be resettled abroad endured p a r s of despondmry while on the international dole, Like many yomg ental organizations in such sibations, I people working for nongwe began to blame this situatio~~ on the two large international orgmizations most rcspmaiblc fur setthg policies for those camps. In tlne case of Thailand, these agencies were the Ur7ited Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UN:MCR), who ran thc c m p s , and the U.S. Departmnt of State, which had the largest resettjennent p r o g r m and also funded UNHCR. From this ercperience, I c m e m a y with a belictf that the ideals for rehgee refief could be realized if: it: w e x made rnore cost-effective and efficiesnt (see Waters 19%). From 14t.14 to 1987 I worked m another UNHCR-funded refut5ee project, one in Tmzmia for the Lutherm World Federation (LWF), this time as a special project officer responsiblu for hstallhg road culverts, managing building supplies, general rural development programs, and supervising agricm,l,turalextengm agents. Many of these projects were to be undertaken by employing villagers usixzg World Food Programme (WFP) "Food for Work" wmmodities-which, when they arrived at all, were a year or more late, 'The poht of this project was to settle "spontaneously settkd" 'refugees in Tanzanian villages and regularize their refugee status. Here, too, UNMCa policy did not meet its w n ideals. Particularly disruptive w s the failure to arrive of proxnised funcling. Neither the promised money from UNHCR nos food from WFP materiaked on time, and both we^ later cut, in the mfddle of the prqcct. This rczsulttld in a great deal of back-pedaling by those of us in the field. .A final assault on my bureaucratically rational sensibilities occurred when the Tanzanian gowe ent in 1987 expelled the refugeedfor whom we had been bujldjng in(sast:r.lzcture (Waters 1,988 a d 1989; Malkki, 1994), m d the UNHCR failed to even register a public protest in response to the expulsion, In this context, the LWF project coordinator insisted that a refrtgee project without refuges slhould be discontinued, since the refugees had. been sent back to Bumndi. The Kigama regional commissioner insisted that the constnaction projects be continued, even thmgh the rcfrtgees were no longer welcome, a psition wjth which the not-mcourapous UNfiCR concurred (see Waters 1988). Again, I looked critic d y at UNHCfCfs r& fn this affair, How was it possible for the High Commissioner for Refugees to continue a refiagee project. when all refitgees had been expelled? :Nfy next stop was graduate schod, evenbally at the University of California, Davis. In a social theory course at Davis, I read Max Weber's (1948,1958) descriptions of organizational rationaliw and, elsewhese, Arlie Russeil Hochschild's (1983) descriptions of the "emotional labor" of airline stewardesses. Suddenly, my view of what I had seen in the

UNHCR and the nongovernmental organizations I worked far made mort. sense, and m)l own youthful passion for insisting on effjciencyand predictability a tittle less. Tfie connection betweern, the two very djfere~ztapproaches to social theory is this. On the one hand the UNHCR and the agencks around it acted very much like the rational profit-seeking orgmizations Weber described as existing in both the private and public sectors..h particular, they were organized on the same principles; and as a msult &ere were the demands for accountability buwaucratic efliciency, ~ l i m c on e hierarchy,seal-ch for prtlcedent and consistency, persisternce, expansion, and the need to qumtify. But there was a difference between =&gee relief bu~aucraciesand the more contmon private- and public-sector bureaucrades. The "pmfit" (financial or political) was not generated by the sale of what they manufactured or the services delivered, but depended cm the size of the donations they received and spent, Hclt.n,ce,the elentent of the "emotional m n a g e ment" Hochschitd described. The amount of money received (md therefore spent) was generated not throu@ the impersonal pr~ducticmand sale of a product or service, or even by Chc generali.on of a service for a political constituency but by ""appeal.sUto '"donors" wwho themselves neither cmsumed the product pmdueed nor sought conwentional profits. fn other words, the "rdional prolit'' was imstead achieved by sotici,ting funds from '"donors," wwha Qpically werc the governments and citizens of Westcm demcrcritcies and Japan. 'Ehese countrim had mixed motives: they do value humanitarian values for their own sake, but they also had domestic and international irtterests. The point is that the "bottom line" fnr the humanitarian agencies was not financial profits in a price-setting market, but the ability to aMract mart? dollars through appeals to sympathy, friendship, empathy, and the emotional criteria implied by '"deservedness." The engine &rough vvhich this emotion is generated is the international press, which foczlscs sympathy through its selection of crises to respond to. My expelled R u r m d i m never made it to the New York Times, and thus ~ g a r d l e s of s the bmaucratic rationaliv I expcted of the UNHCR, were unlikely to command hummitarian hterest. Furthermom, this necessiq to generate such. emotion m a large ""burcaucratized'" scale was very similar to the way Ilochschild's fljght attendants needed to use smiles and other emotional cues to sell seats on an airplane. In both cases the results are similar, Just as Hochschild's stewardesses became cynicai about the srnile they sold, rt?fugee workers become cynical about the refugee projects they implement. In other words, my Wcberian love for maki-ng doilars work as efficiently as pow"ible was irrelevant in a refugee context, since organizational inefficiency could be papered over as lmg as the e~notionsof the


Ivt froducfion

do~zorswere tended to, Perceived deservedxzess determined the number of doflars available for the bureaucracy, not efficiency, In other m&, "emotion" was the implicit pmduct of the UIVHCR, whether m e a s w d in terms ol lives saved, good feelings, press cl@pings, vi,deos produced, social justice generated, or some other measure, And uniquely for the refugee relief businem, the good feelings that were relevant were not those of the rwipients (as is the case to a degrce in government social, welfare programs) but of the distant donors viewing the results of their largesse on television. A practical chance to test and refine these ideas came to me in 1994 when I was hired by the Lutheran World Federation to help establish their prqrams to rt.cc;ive Rwmdan refugees. I was assigned to Ngara, %mania, effective Map 2, 1994, and participated in the relief operation for the next two years. Much of this book is the result of what I sawf heard, and thwght during that time and is recounted in the ethnographic first person. I, also present reports about b a d e r documentation hum the operation. The ethnographic portions include discussions of Tanzania, and also a bit about 'Thailand. Descripttions of what happened in Ixwanda and Zaire draw on. written sources m d sorne personal communications. This approach is I think distinct horn that of others who have written &out. the Rwanda refugee relief operation, and as a result X viekv this book as compfemmtary to two other t y p e m h r i t i n g about the Rwanda rt?l"ugee crisis. E'irst are sorne outstanding, ~ c e n t l ypublished scholarly historicd assessments, including G4rard Prunierfs The Rwunda Crisis: H i s t o y o f n Genocide, Alism dcs Forges" Leave Noac to Tell fhe Story, m d Peter UV~I'sAidipztp Vinfe~zce.The first two books use the methods of the hislorim to describe what happencd in Rwanda, Uvin's hook impies a cmparative approach, but never moves very far beyond the situation in Rwanda. All three books, because of their emphasis on Rwanda, imply that what happencd in Rwanda was uniwe and weds to be understood in its own right, as &deed it can be. This is the nature of "historical particularity," a ssubject Which will be returned to in the discussion about methods in Chapter 5. The second genre relatiw to which I position this book is the mporting of the refief community itself. 'This ~ p o r t i n gundertakes to evaluatc-1itself and its operation for its okvn bureaucratic needs. S o m of this reportl.ing is of high quality; The binl Ezlnfuafio~c$ Emergency Asststnlrce to X m n h F E A R ) is the best known of this type of work, although C)xfam, Mbdecins sms Fmnt-i&res,the United States Cornittee for Refugees, and others also make notab)e contributions, The strength of this genre is that it was accessible to policy-makers i n t w s k d fn d ~ i s i o n &out s the Great Lakes rcgjnn of Afrka at the time decisions needed to be made. Such

analysis, though, often ends up describing the provehial trees rather than the fosest. These =ports tend to describe the administrative and politjcal difficdties fn particutar circumstances and times, rather than the ass~~mptions and weabesses inherent to the broader operation. Thus, much has been written about the breakup of the Rwandm camps in Zaire, hut little as to what the b ~ a k u gtells us about the organizational capncity of the UN and the NGO agemcks who s~~pervised Che camps.. :My a h with this book is to draw on the strengths of both gmres, to combine a historicai perspecthe with a general sociological mderstmding of the buteaucraeies. Notes I. There has been sc~meemtroversy about haw the Kwandan repatriation tzras conducted. At the time, interested parties (including the United States and Kwanda) insisted that the repatriation was by and large successful and was accomplished without sipificant loss of fife. Mare recent estimates indicate that between 200,000 and 300,000 of the refugees are unaecounted far. Estimates by UNHCR (the United Nations High Commissioner h r Refugees) and MSF (M4decims sans FrontlGres, or Dt~ctorsWithout Borders) jndjcate that as many as 200,000 Hutu refugees may have been kill ed by soldiers fmm Rwanda and / or by Zajrean rebets (Lernarchanel 1999:196), 2. Lnuise Holborn (1975) has tzrritten the most comprehensive history of refugee prc3gram admjnjstration in the period following V\J;;>rld War TT. John G. Stoessinger (1956) has tzrritten about the evolution af the international refugee regime in the period starting aAer World War X and extending to the early 1950s. 3, See Special issue af Disasfen, 2014) 1996, for a discussion of the study, especially the Introduction by Macrae. Fifty-two consultants were hired to produce the study which took a little ower one year to be published. John Bodon alerted me to the magnitude of the expense in a conversation in. rirgara in July 1995,

Refugees, International Politics, and the Good Samaritan

The Origin of the Good Samaritan's Bureaucracies

Pmgrams of refugee relief and resettlemnt am not new. One can imagine Moses in fie Sinai fussing with kraelite recipients over the quality and quantity of food rations, in the s m e way xfugee ahinistrators do today*Recards about the American Tories who fled t s Nova Scotia at the end of the American Revalution are clearele, Soon after their arrival. in Nova Scrotia, their British benefactors begm to moan about the danger of the refugees" developing an unfiealfiy dependcnce on the relief distributed by the militirry fhifafiinnon 1986). But, these efforts, vvhile commendable, wcre not like those today; they were not carried out by permanent organizations like the IZed Cross or UN agencies whose only job is to seek catastrophe and provicie succor m behalf of "'donors." This chapter is about hokv relief bureaucracies elnerged in order to mediate relations between donors and beneficiaries. A few of the modern relief agencies have tbrir primary origjn in wars that took place in the nineteent-h century (Shwcross f984:10&1(lf), but the really large and efficient process of mass famine relief began in. earnest efuring a d after World Miar I (Kaplan 1988329-30; Smith f 984:8&97). A complex of agencies developed togethes, often in fits and starts, as the international refugee reZief regime moved from crisis to crisis, coping with changing definitions of "refugee." As we seek exgimations for hokv it developed, the period since World War I is perhaps best divided into four eras* First was the period between 1914 and 1939, when famine relief was first undcrta,ken by the Anterican businessman Herbert Mower, first in Belgium during Warld War I, and later in Russia after the war (see SmiCh 19f14). He went beyond the efforts of the Red Cross, which had ministered to cornbatmts, and organized food delic~eriesto civilians trapped

Refidgees, hlitics, fke Good Snf~tal.z'Ca7.2


by military blockades. Fallowkg this effort the Arctic explorer Fridqov Nansen became the League of Nations9first "High Cmmissioner for Refugees,'" and issued 1.5 million "rehgee passports" to stateless White and Greeks in the 1920s (Shawcross 1984:80). The Russians, Arme~~ians, limitations of this system, which was dependent on the goodwill of "host'knations, faltered when Nanscm's successor as High Commissioner could not duplicate this achicvernel~tin tbt. 1930s after Jews were expelled by Nazi Germmy. ediately after W r l d War 11the focus shifted to resettling European refugees. Twelve million refugees were resettled and repatriated by the A1lies following World War II. Also at this time, the United Natims Relief and Works Agency was established to help Palestinian refugees (MarrelbRond 1986:xii; Hofhom 1975). This was folltokved h 1951 by the Office of the United Nations High Commjssioner for Refugees (UNWCR), which was charged with pmviding legal pmtection against forcible repatriation and the coordination of relief activities, and was provided with a $300,000 budget (Cunliffe 1995). At the time, UNI-LCIC activity was limited to providing assistance only to those who were refugees as a result of World War II, a millicrn of whom remined in Europe at that t h e . A third period, whjCh began in the 19605, marked a move into =&gee relief in the Third world. This was first done by the International Cornmittee for the Red Cross (KRC),which became detlply irtvolved in the provision cJf retief to both sides in the Nigerian Civil War (Shawcross ue the Red 1984:102-103). The ICRC, a Swiss organization, is u ~ ~ i q among Cross societies because international treaties give it rclsponsjbility for visiting prisoners of war. In part because of this duty, ICRC has principles of "confidentiality'" and "yle~~tralify~' in its relations with the combatants, the UN, NGOs, and the press. Note, though, that the UN itself was left behind in this expansion; in the context of the massive humanitarian emergency in East P&istan/Rangladesh, even Secretary General U' Thant of the UN acknowledged that in the early 197Us, the tiN was not equipped to deal with humanitarian emergencies (Oliver 1978:20).1 Nevertheless, in the late 1970s, a complex of agencies, m "international refugee relief regime," emerged to provide refugee mlief rander UN coordinatim. This happened in response first to the Indochinese ~ f u g e e crises of 1977-83, and )ater to a seemingly i,ntractabl,erefuge problem in Africa. h the process, refugee protection came to be seen as more than a simple legal problem. Rather it was seen as intertwined with the provision of clean wat.er, shelter, and fnod, whether in refugee e~~cantpmmts ~ ~ moved into the issue or in refugee settlements. Finally, in the 1 9 9 0 focus of "htema1ly displaced pcrlrsons," or Itzl's. These were people legally deIhed as being in "reSugeeljke circumstmces" despite the fact that they


Reftlgees, Politics, the Good Sn~uan'trtn

had not crossed a recog~~ized hternational border. It was noted that their needs were often identical to those of people who had crossed borders. The story told here is a historical account of how this international refugee relief regime developed. It is very much the story of m intemational regime, for no one agency dominates refugee relicf.2 At diffctrent t h e s and places, different agencies withh the international refugee relief r e g h e have domhated relief operations, For example, the Biafra operation (1968--79)was coordinated by the fntemational Committee for the Red Cross, the tndtxrhese programs in 'll-raitand by UNHCR, and relief prohtemational grams in Cambodia (1979-83) by UNICEF (United Natio~~s Children" Emergency Fund-now shortened to United Nations Chil5) was coordinated by WSAfD, dren's Fmd). The Ethiopia crisis (19 Catholic Relief Srvices (CES), m d the Z,utherm World Federation (Z,WF). The Rwanba refugee crisis was coordinated by the UNHCR. As of this writing, refugee relief in Alhmia for Kosovar rc;rfuget?sis being coordinated by a combkiltion of NATO (North Atlmtic Treaty Qrgmization, a military t ~ a t y and ) UNHCR, Of the ixrternational agencies, UNHCR is the only agency to specialize solely in rt?l"ugeew r k . But this involvement is far roles. from behg a monopoly; other agencies have played ee~ztrr-ll

Between the World Wars

I-fuowrS Famine Xelicrf Two recurre11.t: issues emerged after World War 12, which brought about the development of the refugee relief bureaucracies m d which continue to be at the core of refugee relief operatiom. First is the need to provide food, water, and shelter to civilim victims of co~~flict-thesuccor that the Good Samaritan provided; second is the need for internationally p a r a n teed legd protection for =&gees unalole to =turn to tbeir home country. that the right: to The formm is gromded i,n the commonsemse pmpositio~~ life is most basic, The latter recognj.zes that this life eveqwhere is in a context of a world liivided into natim-states that should-and wually guarmtee such rights to its citizens. The first modern refugee relief operations were undertaken during and after World War I. The businessman Herbert Hoover made his forbne in mbing, but he becme the cataiyzing force behind deliveries of aid to Belgium during the war and, later, to Russia during the civil war between the m i t e and Red armies (Smith 19M). Both operations involved a combhation of xnaterial and food supplies, which were to be distributed to milIions of noncornbatant civilims. Roth operations distributed srtrplus American commcrdieies, but they also relied on advertising and private donations to create distmcc betwee11 Chcmelves and the AUieci

Refidgees, hlitics, fke Good Snf~tal.z'Ca7.2


ents, and thereby maintah the veneer of being apolitical m d of beislg neutral in their provision of hurnanitarim relief, For the first time, ~ l i e programs f were measured in fillions of tons of commodities distributed, and hundrt3ds of millions of dollars spetnt. :Neilher of Hoover" operations addressed the central cause of the ~ f u g e ecrisis, which was hta seen, correctly to be rooted in the breakdown in thc relationship between the state and its citizen. 'Thus, at the conchsion of the Russian operation in 1920, the m w League of Nations conctuded that a permanent office to represent stateless pwsons was needed to resolve the contradiction of lost citizetnship. This move was timely because the conclusion of World War I had seen the bmakup of three multinational empires: Russia, Ottoman Turkey, a d hustriaHungary The rclsulling civil war in Russia and a series of ncw co~nfiicts among the newly created Balkan states also led to a series of crises h which large popufations of civilians suffered. fn particular, agreements among the new states provided for the exchange of new populations in accordance with a new policy that each nationality should have its own state. 'l'he results were massive population exchanges h1the RaIkans, the l q e s t between Greece and Turkey, often i,n the context:of war,

High Comnzissill~serforRefugees The post-World War I order left Europe with many millions of stat@Iess persons: people who could not clairn citizenship fn any one of the new countries. To accommodate these people the t,eague of Nations in 1921 established m Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees under the leadership of the Norwegian Arc?~c explorer Fridtjw Nansen, Headquart e ~ idn Getneva, the new office was prkarily a diplomatic and legal office concerned with m k i n g pleas to respect the rights of refugees, many of which came from minority groups im new nation-states. Nansen was assigned special responsibility for Russian, .Armenian, hsyrian, hustrian, and German refugees across eastern Europe, His work as High. Commissioner was best known for his issuance of travel documents h o w n as Nmsen passports to those unable to claim citizeznship in my countsy. At the time, the rationale for the office was seen as a one-time need resuiting from the breakup of the empires. After tbat, the r a t s of minorities were to be prtlserved by the nation-states of which f l r l q were citizens. h this context, Nasrsen was able to Ifacilitate the ~settlernmtof millions of =&gees from Russia, Greece, Turkey, and other countries. To accomplish this he had to rely on the goodwill of the settlemeld countries. But this relimce on the goodwill of the nation-states was a lhitatiasr, and the effectiveness for the League of Nations r e b e e office was reached in the late 1,9Ns when Jews began to be expelled from Nazi Ger-


Reftlgees, PoliCics, the Good Sn~uan'trtn

many. Confronted with a new exodus caused by an explicit state policy, the Office of the High Cmmissioner pleaded with western European countries and the Llnited States to accept a substantial portion of the Jews forcibly exiled frnm Germany Relying only on Ihe power of persuasi.on, the pleas of the High Commission were largely in vain; in retrospect, the failure to rc-rmwe Jewish refugees from areas where they would be abusczd, deportect, and eventually exmuted is recognized as being a major failurc in the prewar world order.

The Aftemath aE World War 11 At the end of W r l d War I1 in 1945, there were an estimated 12 million to 20 milion refugees in Europe. For large nu~nbersof people originauy displaced by the defeated Germany, it was a matter of returning home (Stoessinger 1956s). For a few milfion, though, this was pmhtematic; large nurnbers lived in corntries occupied durhg the war by the Soviet Union, and others we= survivors of concentration camps with n0 realistic place to =turn to. 11% 1 9 6 anli 194, large numbers of these refugees were repatriated to the Eastern Bloc countries, sometimes forcibly; where some were apparently executed by the new governments, sometims within. earshot of the border (Stoessinger 1956:58, Proudfoot 1956: 214-218). This experience, co~nbhedwith the prewar failure to take case Newish rchgces, led to the enunriatinn by the United Nations of a nm-1.eforikme1zt (literally "no forcing baeEc"9pprinc$le, in which it was asserzed that no state cotxld forclibly rehrn a rehgee who had a well-founded fear of pcrseclntim in his or her home country. Likewise, states had the responsibility to proto refugees Mlho had a ""legitimate fear of perwcution"" on the grounds of race, refjgion, ethn.ici9, pofitiral vlews, etc., shodd they be deported back to their own comtries. h 1952, this was enshrined inan internaticmal treaw and tbe OHice of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNMCIZ) was estabiishcd to protect thc legal right ol rcfugces to asflurn, m d to facilitate voluntary repatriation or ktegratim into new natimal commrmities (Pitterman 1984:44). The High Co sioner was provided with $N0,000 to esCablish an oMice to focus on this legalistit- task (Cunliffe 1995). h 1952, there were still several very specific restrictions on the auf;ht.,riEy of the UNHCR in its charter. First, it was restricted to resettling refugees within Europe. Second, it was to be '"nonoperationaX,"' m a n h g that it would not undertake to directly administer mfugee assistance operations, but only facifitate thetn through the institutims and organizations in bost countries. Finally, the cbarkr of the W H C R was for only five years, and therefore subject to renewal. Ostensibly this was because it was expected that all refugee operations would be c q l e t e d , and the

Refidgees, hlitics, fke Good Snf~tal.z'Ca7.2


need for the UPJ.MC:R terminated, fn practice, this state of &fairs c o n k ues today, m d the five-year limit also pernits the member nations of the UN to keep the UNHCR cm a short leash with respect to thrir own political needs. In more practical terms, it means that planning for periods longer than five years camot be undertaken. Consistent with this temporary status and with the office's nonoperatbnal role, the UNHCR has never been ghen a budget to mdertake major relief operdions on its own initiative. The Refugee Mandate Expands: The Decolonization of Africa In the 1 9 6 0 ~ the ~ n a m e of litg gee assistance changed. &y this time, the post-World War II refugee situatjons were resolved, asld even though there was a brief shift in attention when refugees fled :Flungar)i in 1958, by the early 1 9 6 0 ~ it ~was apparent that tbert. was little refugee work left to do in Europe. But with decolonization in Africa and Asia, millions of new refugees began to appear, Africa in particular provided a place that tbe refugee bureaucracies could expand, and in 1963 the UNHCR took its first tent-ative step outside its home continent by establishing resettlemnt programs for Rwandans in newly independent Tanganyika (its name was changed to Ta~zaniain 1964). h this operation, two thousand Rwandan ?irtsi refugees were flown from near Gorna in the Congo to Tangany-ika fnr resettlement. 'I'he new government of Tmganyika was amenable to this progrm, but only on the condition that the government itself 170t be directly rcsponsi:ble for the new settlement. The Tanganyikan gwemment also pointed out that it did not have staff or "operational capacity"" to impfcment the new work. 'The UNHCR, of course, was prohibited by its own charter from being "operational." Cmseyuently to do the actual work of ~settlttment,LINHCR approached the Lutheran World Federation (LWF) oMice in Geneva and asked it to establish an agency to undertake the assistance portion of the resettlement, LWF did this by estahlishing an d i c e in Tmganyika, and Mwese settlement for Rwandans was built on the s h o of ~ Lake Tangmyika (Hoiborn 1975). But the biggest relief efl'ort in Ahica did not involve UNFICR. The Nigerim Civil War led to the deaths of 1million to 3 million in Biafra in 1967-70, a conRjct: kvhich captured the attention of the West The British and American press reported widely on the starvation occurrhg, seemingly as the result of a Nigerim government policy that could be chdrarterized as genocide Uacobs 1987:4&53). Nevertheless, the Nigerian government asked the International Committee for Red Cross (ZCRC) to coordinak relief efforts for the survivors, This h & e d difficult negotiations on both sides of the civil war, and dclays in the dcljwry of relief


Reftlgees, PoliCics, the Good Sn~uan'trtn

goods, which probably exacerbated death rates, ICRC was roulzdly criticized for its slow response, a charge they were ill preparcd to refute in the newspapers and magazines wbrrc. it was made, in part owing to their strong tradition of empha"i"i.ng political neutrality and confidentiality Oacobs 1987; Thompsm 1990). Meanwbite, in the 396Us, UNHCR expanded its work across Africa, partic~~larly in those conntries adjacent to the I70rtuguese colonjes of: Mozambique, Angola, m d Guinea, countries where revolts we= being suppresed. Zn each countv the UNFtCR e n t w d into agreements with NGQs (nongovernmental organizations) that were already in place or were specifically formed to deal with refugee issues. ?jipically, under these agreements, UNHCR negotiated with a Western country to pay for a speciiic project on behalf of the refugees, which was to be ""intplemented" by the nongovernmental agency, The nmgwernmental agency in t-um often had other donors that cmtributed a portion of the costs in partnership with what the UNHCR was able to raise. UNHCR in turn monitored the implementatjon of the contract and becarne "operatlional"' only when issues of individuals' legal rights cJf refugee status were raised. In response, the U N K K s bureaucracy expanded, as did the cluster of agencies with which i"tmplemented projects xwnd th world. The largest of its parhers was to be the Lutheran World Federation, whjeh opened oftices primarily in Africa during the 1970s. Other large agencies entcrring into relati~ncihipswith. UlZIHCR included. CAM, Enternational Rescue Committee (IRC), Oxfam, MSF (M6decins sans Fronti&res),and Catholic Relief Services. Rooted in often asymmetric ""prtnerships" &minated. by EJNE-ICR control of purse strings, the relationships between the UNHCiZ and its parhers were o f f a fractious, dapitr-,generally being symbiotic relationships. .Also critical in this emerging mix of the late 1970s and early 1980s were the UN agencies which wew independent of the UNHCR. :Most prominent was the World Food Programme (WFI-'), whjeh was "operational"" and provided the most importmt relief item, food, for the UPJHCR to distribute via its partner agencies. Other UN agencies imvolved in relief and refugee work included LINICEF?WHO (Mitrld Health Orgmization), and UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), Out of this alphabet soup of agmcies came etemands for the grratcr administrative efficiency implied by centraljzation..This, however, was resisted b y agmcies interested in protecting their turf, a primary and consistent criticism of UN agencies in general.

The lndochinese ReIief Operation The constellation of agencies partnered with the UNHCR was given a m;pjor boost beg ing in 1979 and 1980 when it played a major role in

Refidgees, hlitics, fke Good Snf~tal.z'Ca7.2


the Cambodia operation. in mailand, and the reception of Vietizamese "boat peaple" "throughout Sout)neastAsia. Tn a way not seen since the end of World War 11, rczfugees were consilie~das being worth of hummitarian concern. This happened because the needs of refugees, the poljtical interests of the West, the expanding capabilities of the UNFICR, and the attention of the w d d press miz~cided. In 1975, the C o m u n i s t Khmer Roug-e overtook Cambodia and violently emptied the major cities, Having closed down Cambodia" barders, they then tried to establish a utopian agriculturally based state. In hmanitarian terms, the conseque~~ces were? a djsaskr, Firm nu~nbersare still not available, but by 1978 it was clear that over 1 million Cambodians had died of execution, starvation, and other causes associated with the establishment of the new society. Rehgees bring-lng rurmors abctut the m m e r :Roup;e death toll between 1,975and 1978were frequently heard in n a i l m d . A few journalists wrote about the mmors, but not in a mamer that had caught the &tention of the United St.ates, the British, UNHCR, or others i n t e ~ s t e din refugee relief programs. 'I'hert? were flurries of interest, but overall it was treated less seriously than the Biafsan relief"progrm conducted bp the ICRC in the late 1960s. It was not mtiZ 1979 that the world took notice, tn 197S79, Indochi~~ese fled both Cambodia and Viebam. This flight, followi.ng closely on the 1975defea.t. of the U'nikd Staks' ccrlent ~ g i n t e isn those countries, helped justify, particularly for Americans, their long invotvement fn the Indochinese wars. tn effect, it prtwided an "I told you so" with respect to Communist aggression. The Vietzzamese refugees, many of whom had connections in the United States and therefore a constituency, arrived in Malaysia, n a i l m d , Hong Kong, and other corntries on rickety bmts telling horrific tales of escape and pkates. This h d l y at.tracted t:he attention of the Western press, a situation Southeast Asian ents exptoited by dramatically towing refugees back out to sea, argui,ng that doing so was necessary in order &at their countries not be saddled with an 'knfair burden." "The cynical. strategy, conducted. in front of cameras and at the expense of the refugees, actually worked, and Western countries begm accepting the boat people for resettlement (see Shawcross 1984; Mason and Brawn 1983). Cambodians arrived in mailmd later and with less dramatic Emfare. Viehrann invaded Carnbodia in January 1,978, and refugees fleejng both the retreating Khmer Rouge and the Vieharnese invaders began to appear m the 'f'hai-Cambodian bortler. nailand ~spondecl by vietly forcing the refugees back to Cambodia, &ten in a f a s b i z calculated to lead to fatalities in minefields, at th hands of f i m e r Ruuge, or by starvation, The most w e l l - h a m of these incidents occurred hJune 19'78, when the Thai military foxed between 43,000 and 45,0C)O relugees back to Cambodia on a path that went alongside a minefield. This raised a furor among


Reftlgees, PoliCics, the Good Sn~uan'trtn

the Western embassies in Bmgkok, a situation which the Thai prime mktister said he was pleased with, as it drmatized the necessity for the VVest to take responsibility for resettling Cambodians as well as the Vietnamese (Shawcross 19&4:88-91). Un behalf of the expelled Cambodians, the small Bangkok offices oi the UNMCB m d ICRC ~gistereddiplomatic protests and made the rounds of both sutheast Asian and Western embassjes, KRC aiso attempted to establish a humanitarian assistance program via the Viekamese-sponsored tjwemmmt i17 P h o m I'enh. But, both UNHCR m d ICRC were garticulady wary of haw the Kehamese cvou,ld.interpret assjstmce e h r t s along the Thai border, m area whese m m e r Routge fasces werc strong. As a resuit, &spite knowledge of desperate s u f f e ~ gon the Thni border, the agencies believed that the most suffering could be averted quickly by means of h o m Penh-based programs. However, the Esponse to these weak diplomatic efforts was neghgible, and the Thai continued with their hard line. Thus, it was not until C)ctober 1979, when CaPnbodian refugees h c h g famine massed at the Thai border, that a humani.tarim response came. In October, a Swedish film crew broadcast. pichtres of the famfne vktims to Europe. Tirrre magazine also pnblished an eight-page cover story, "Deathwatch in Caxnbodia," The report, whose covcrage came frm the border rather than inside Cambodia, began: It is a country soaked in blood, devastated by war, and its people are stawing to death. . . . Relief agencies believe as many as 2.25 million Cambodians could die of starnation in the next few months unless a vast amount of aid is provided soon. . . . There is nothing ermobling about death by starvation. . . . Scmn after faad is cut off, the body switclthes to burning fuel reserves in the liver and fatty tissues, After fat is exhausted, the body accelerates the breakdown of protein in the muscles including the heart, which saps strength. At the same time, the body attempts to husband its resources by cutting energy requirements to the minimum. Pulse rate and btood pressure fall and bcdy temperature drops. Men become impotent; women stop menstruating and nursing mathers fail to produce milk; children stop growing. . . . Death comes in many ways. The intestinal walls become damaged; severe and constant diarrhea may develop." (quoted in Shawcross 1984:171).

The Carter admhistratian, which had a new focus on humanitarimism in foreip policy, responded by generously funding the UNHCR and NCI13)s to provide relief programs..'l'kaimd accepted this sugpmt m d requested that the UM'FJCR coordhate relief darts. As a resuit, the C m b o d i m operation became the first time when an UMCR-led internaticmal rr?fugeerelief regime achieved a s i p s c a n t autonomous role alongside national governments. This position was not

Refidgees, hlitics, fke Good Snf~tal.z'Ca7.2


rooted in sovereignty, nor in finandal resources, but in an ideological commitment to a previously abstract '%unnanitarianim,"' This position

war; established through an appeai to moral authority rooted in the agency's ability to appeal diredly the Western public via the press? But the UNHCR still, had little practical sovereignq ri@ts outside the diplomatic passports their own offiicials carry. f-'h~ancially, the UNHCR c m t h uccf to be depender~ton appeals to donor governments, especially the United. States and Japan. The money collected by the U M C R in Esponse to this press-driven appeal for Cmbodians was far beyand what had been done before. Funds primarily from Western governments were reccjved as fast as they could be spent. Budgets ballooned to a point where the UNHCR was even able to hire a heticopter to krry stafE and reporters to the c m p s . The initial camg at Sa Kaeo was quickly established, hut then abandoned owing to flot>dhg(it had hem built in rice fields). A second camp was established at Khao 1 Dmg, and the Japanese agreccf to instdl a state-ofthe-art water system, This water system also proved unusable, so mre funds were solicited to purchase a water-trucking fleet so that a .minimum of water could be trucked in. Between October 1929 m d December 1981, the UNFXCR and.its NGO partners were able to spend $11115.7 million in donations, primarily from the blnited States and Japanese governments, At least $100 mjllioxr morc3 was coltected and spent by ICRC, WFT: and the NGO-partners of the UNHCR (Shawcross 1984:3(31-393 WBters 1984). Costs included housing and full r a t i m , as the Thai gove did not permit refuges to farm outside the crowcled camps* As the Cambodian relief program aged, though, it began to show its rough edges. Within two years programs were cut, carnps closed. By 1982, the Thai responded by implement "humme deterre~~ce'+rogram in order to encourage Miestem go ts into suppodtjng feeding m d third-country settlemmt programs." FinallyI it was argued morc convincingly that the camps had become a "pull" f'actor, encouraging people to become refugees, rather than simply a Rsponse to the 'pushf' of persecu.ticm in their h m e country, a duaiisrn implicit i,n the intemati.onally recognized definikion of: a refugee. By recognizing only persecution, the law consigned all other motives to the "pull" factor or economics. Despite the simplicity in the 'kither-or" dichotomy of the economic migrant[ ref ugee distinction, such decisions were undertaken at the urging of the United States. As a resufc it was ~ a s o n e d the , legal right to asylum ~ m a i n e dintact (McNamara 1989). These policies were i,n place thnlughout the t98Cfs. Whether the refugee fiow irom Cambodia, which eventually stopped, did so as a rcsult of the implementation clf these policies c ~ rof the graduaf pacification of the m m e r Rouge has never been evaluated.


Reftlgees, PoliCics, the Good Sn~uan'trtn

The sttccesses in the Cambodia operation. established the pattern of pres~drivenexpansion of the humanitarian burclaucracies, followed by periods of decline in program effectiveness as attention shifted my-I worked at Phand Nikhom C m p i,n 7,983,and whet1 I arrived, expatriate workers had already made 71-slnirts advertising the various camp closurt. dates announced for the Cambodian camps. Each closure had precipitated a. "crisis'2EEia.t. was amottnced to the refugees and refugee workers and in the press. As :Irecall, t h m were seven such dates by that point, reflecting '?firm deadlines" set by the Thai government and donors in the United States and Ezlrope. But even by this time, it W= widely achowiedged that these deadlines were simply Thai efforSs at reviving donor interest hfunding re.fugee programs, rather tban actual camp closure polities. In fact, the canps were not closed unt-il the 7,990s; and then only after a major proportion of Cambodians had. been settled in the United States and France, and a lasting peace agrrement had been ne8o"ciatc.dbetween the Phnom Penh government and remnants of Che m m e r Rouge (Mayotte 1992:93-124; Shawcross 2000:7M2)+ African SetCIemenC Programs in the 1970s and 1980s While the high-profilc and high-cost programs emerged in Indochina, other approaches to refugee work were developing, particularly inAfrica. By international definitims, which emphasize flight across internatimd borders, Africa had by far the most rczfugees in the world. African governments did not, however, demonstrate the hostility to newly arriving refugees so common in Southeast Asia, and instead devclczped reception progrms grounded in what they called '"raditionai African hospitalitp" Mar~ll-Bond(19%:16) has nokd that such hospitality is extended i,n spite of the fact that there is a positive incentive to threaten refugees, namdy, to attract more support from the international commmiv.,.-) As a reswlt., some of the largest and most extelrsive refugee assistance programs in the 1980s were h Africa, not Southeast Asia, where the p ~ s s focused its attention."elief efforts for refugees from Wlmamtnique, Angola, South Mica, Bufundi, Sudan, and Ethiopia served millions-even t h o q h Africa =presented only about one third of the UNFlCR p m g r m budget-c\lhereas the programs in Southeast Asia served h u n d ~ d sof thousands. Che conscquetnce of this austerity was that "'closed" camps in which refugees were not allowed to f a m were impossible in Africa, as rations were inadequate for survival. 'I'hus, in Africa most ~ f u g e e wert. s not in camps or settlements, and even those in camps were expected to iarm and thercrby raise a portion of their own subsistence. What rations there were, were considered '"supplemntal" a d included only basic

Refidgees, hlitics, fke Good Snf~tal.z'Ca7.2


dried goods; certahly they did not include the fresh pork and vegebbles 1saw distr-ibuted in the Thai camps in 19X2-.83,7 Massive resettlement programs in countries like Botswana, Zambia, Matawi, Swaziland, Zimbabwe, Uganda, and %mania also reflected the broader willingness of African governments to permit resettlement schemes that had the potential for conthufng into an indefhite fuh;lre.. Wically, rrefugees were dlotted lands in remote m a s to establish new homestcads,K This permitted rehgees to work and subsist far away from fighting in ongoing civil wars in countries like Mozambiyue and Angda. They clid this often wjth d y minimal filnancial and food subsidies from the international refugee relief regime, As a resullt, there was less pre* sure for quick ~patriationlresettlementschemes as emphasized in Southeast Asia. Anuther result in Africa was the concept of "relief through development'" and an emphasis on refugee self-sufficiency in food production dufing the 19Ns. Irrespective of criticisms concerning its implementation, this providcd a marked contrast to the Southeast Asian progrms (see, for example, Rogge 1985; Hard-Bond 1986; Lliaters 1999a).f)o(icies for resettle~xent,which were formalized h the UNI-ICZC" cmferences for donors and hosts of the 1980s, assumed food self-sufficiency in new settlements after a period of three to seven years. Other refugees were acknowledged to have settled and achieved self-wfficiency "'spunt.aneously""; some circumstances, there were more of t h s e latter refugees than of those who were formally msettled (Cuny and Stein 1989). For both groups, programs of ~naluralizationm d htegration into nebv coulntries were sometimes established. Likewise, as wars and political confrontation fn southern Africa dissipated in the 1991)s, progfams for repatriation werc initiated; large numbers of refugees made Cheir way back to Mozannbique in particular. Others adopted the citkenship of their m w country or, as likely informalry blended into local p ~ d a t i o n s(Malkki 1994; Sommers 1994).

Major African Relief Operations: Ethiopia, Sudan, and Somalia As the 1980s ended, better-funded efforts emerged in Africa, and the international refttgee relief regime began to experiment with new approaches. Among the initiatjves was famine relief that was undertaken in Ethiopia, a protracted food airlift to the southern Sudan, relief operations during civil wars h LiiIaeria and Sierra Leone, and military hvolvement in Somalia in 1992, Each of these experiences shaped the normative relationships existing among the UN agencies, their N G 0 partners, and


Reftlgees, PoliCics, the Good Sn~uan'trtn

rZfrican governments. The larger relief operations w m also focused by press attention, which raised expectations for humanitarian action. Like the Cambodian operation, the Ethiopia relief operation of 1984-85 was galvanized by press attention. lespile e x p k i t famine warnings from agencies in Ethiopia in early 1984, international response was sbw. I'he United States in particutar did not want to prop up the Marxist government \zrhose policies had led to the fantine in the first place. It was not until a film by a Kenyan, Mohammed Amin, was braadcast on the BBC and in North America that the world" attention shiAed to the famiae, which w s , ineffcet, lifted out of the broader poljtical context as a consequence. Largely as a result, massive assistance appeared at the beginning of the operation, followed by pleas to sustain life-sustaining operations and a di,minution of press al.tent.ion. USAD, C E , and LWF were particularly aggressive in mounting relief programs on the back of this publicity. Operalion failekeSudan was different. Beginning in the late 1980s, when it was coordinated by WFP and the LWF's Nairobi office, Operation Lifelirre Sudm has in fact been a ""lifeline." WFP co been and continue to be provided to refugees and the internally displaced in the southern Sudan. Delkeries typically occur by truck, but expensive airlifts have taken place during periods when toclins have been unreachable because of the rains or the siege tactics of the Sudanese mititary. Much of the support for this ""Xifeline" has originated in the United States, which in addition to a h u a n i t a r i m fnterest has a polticaf interest in destabilizhg the Islamic government in martourn., Ironically, the lifeline has kept alive the rebel force and the communities that shelter them, thus prolonging the war. As a result, the context of such operati.ons inclmdes the death of nnillions from confliet-induced causes, as well as the fight of hundreds of thousands into refugee camps in tlgmda and Kenya in what is arguably the most bloody of the world's conflicts" The government forces' bbrtality in attacEnt; civilim populations, selling of slaves, and the use of starvation as a tool is regardcd as even more repupant than the excesses of the rebellious forces, But a hypothetical quest.ion about wfiether rcrbellion is sustahed by food aid,, and as a result causes more human suffering than would occur illits absence is occasionaily asked (Shawcross 2C)t)I):282). 'The question is not only unanswerable, but also probably irrelevant As critics are wick to point out, relief aid responds to publicity and political needs, not to assessments of how to allwiate human suffering* Somalia is perhaps the m s t unusual of the African operdions in Ihe humanitarian aid context. Follawing the overthrow of President Siad Barre in 1991, the country slipped into a civil war in which competing

Refidgees, hlitics, fke Good Snf~tal.z'Ca7.2


warlords fought over control of the southem part of the country. The collapse of the state apparatus and the fighting over political control permitted famine cmditions to emerge in 19%. Aid agencies, especially ICRC and CARE, organized the distribution of food, bwt unprotected convoys were fOoted by competing warlords, who sold the grains on local markets to firlance their armies. The agencies in Somalia responded by hiring ever larger militias of their own; for example, :Natsios (199284)recounts that by the end of 1992 I C K had employed between 15,001) and 20,000 armed guards to protect food shipments. This only seerned to add to the anarchy as it stimdded blackmail by militia seeking employment as ""guards." As a resdt, a nulnber of h e r i c a n NGOs, CARE the most prominenrc, advocated for protection f r m the Unjted States military They did so by raising the specter of imminent mass starvation in the context of the large in-country thefts. Nezusweek magazine described the nature of starvation: During the famine in Somalia, perhaps the worst ever recorded, average food intake for adults has dwindled from a satisfactary 1,"i"O calories a day in 1988to a hopefessly inadequate 2C11f. . . . In essence the staming body consumes itself, devouring its own fat and muscle while shutting off fess important systems to keep the brain and the rest of the central nervous system operating.. . . lEJoss of fat around the eyes gives them a sunken look, and the face starts to wrinkle in what starvation experts call the old-man syndrome (N'eursaueek, December 24, 4992, p. 38).

In rclspmse to press reports, President Bush in late 1992 dispatched U.S. Marines to Somalia for the express purpose of protecting food deliveries. This action received thc approval of the tl'N, \zrhich took the unusual step of not giving a member state (Smalia) effective veto power over an operation on its own territory. After the Clinton administration task ofillce, the goal shifted to the reestil-blishment of civil authority; and c m m n d of the operation was shifted to the United Nations. It is estimated that as many as 100,000 people wrw saved from starvation; the goal of "state building," hhowever, was never achieved, and in 1,495 the UN withdrew its last contingent of troops (Natsios 1995"). Overview: the International Refugee Relief Regime This brief overview of the history of refugee assistance is designed to show how and why the hternational r e g h e has developed as it has. It is of courx by no means exhaustive; many more operations have been mdertaken than have hem etescribed here..I-lowcver, it does point to how

Reftlgees, PoliCics, tile Good Sn~uan'trtn


s o m of"the normative stmdards fos giving assistmce .first emerged and are deveioping. Among these principles arc the following:





* *

UN agencies have a central role in the coordinat-ion of hwmanitarian assistance. Notahly, this is a coordination role, not a hierarchicat role, The I1N agencies have little direct superwiscrry authority over the staffs of the specific NGOs typically implementhg actual.feeding programs. UNHCI.: s h d d be nonopaational while still coordinating. This p"ciple is to a certain extent a contradjctian. Coordination irnplies some ability to coerce cooperation, whether through the power of the purse or other means that: inflwnce assistance policies" UN agencies are by their very nature sensitive to the interests of gwernments, whieh almost by definition have a seat at the United Nations in New Ynrk-analogous to a UN' age~~cy's board of directors. At times this results In conflict between the human rights that tlN agencies seek to prottrrt and the poli.tica1 excesses of those m e governments. mough UN agencies do have independent hmanitarian agendas, they art. particularly sensitive tc:,the priorities of the governments of the Western democracies and Japan, which provide Ihe bulk of their funding. This funding, in turn, reflects not only general humanitarian interests but also domestic p"titica1 interests, hcjudkg those of e t h i c groups, elites, and cmstitue~~cies of particular nongwernmentaf actors, Filling the void between coordination and operatim is a wide array of nongovernmental organizations, or NGOs, that to varying degrees and in different places have a voice independent of both the UN m d hcrst governments. To maintain this in$ependellee, the agencies must either have financial independence (for example, the ZCRC, whose funding comes directly from countries that have signed the Geneva Co~~vention, or cultivate independent rcllations with Che other inltuenlial actor, the international media, A special relationship between NGOs and the press has developed, with the result that humanitarian activism via press release and insider leaks can be effective ways to inhence policy. The Western and Japanese dmocracies art. sensitive to the press, whi.ch itself often has no more than a passing interest in a particullar place or event. Nevertheless, the nature of cornplex emergencies means that solutions do not neatly fit within

Refidgees, hlitics, fke Good Snf~tal.z'Ca7.2


the popular press's attention span or simple "either/ort' dichotomies, Thus, l.hough the ta,t;ks of huntaniEitrian suceor are similar to those undertalten by the Good Smaritan along the Judean road, the means are diffwnt. The context has shifted from an indlvidtral act by a passing stranger to an organization to whjch acts of mercy are delegated. This is a positive development, since it means that the definition of a neighbor has expanded. Today, ill a mass catastrophe. far m m people can be effectjvely succored than c o d have been in the Goud Sarnaritan" day. Thus, in bands in 1994, when something like 3 million people (figurathely) were lying by the side of the road, hu,rt and homeless like the man robbed and beaten on the Judean road, the bureaucratized Good Smaritan vvas called to assist. Even if there had been enough Good Saxnarktans in central Africa at that time, there were not erlough bandages, oil, wine, donkeys, or inns in Rwmda to cope with a catastrophe that large. C)nly with the use of skills developed by the internatimal refugee rcllief regifne in plares like Skafra, Cannbodia, m d Somalia was this operation possibk. In ii(2scribing the strengths, weaknesses, and developmat of the internati.ona1 refugee relief regime, it is easy to forget that these normtive relationships and principles are not natural, and are of fairly recent origin. The overlappillg agencies-fie fntemational rczfiugee relief ~gime-are a combhation of modern bureauemcies seekkg to expand while protecting their own turf and at the same time doing the anomalous job of assisting strmgers on behalf of distant donors who have a mix of humanitarian and political goals. Because of this capability, the social space in which hundreds of thousands of people c m die from famirte, massacres, and disease has prcibably shrunk. The following chapters describe how the system that have ernerged to provide succor work, particularly in the case of the Rwanda refugee crisis. There are, as will be described, massive heffieiencies in how aid is delivered. This, though, is not a new critique. There is also a widespread awareness that more should have been done, but solutions to this relief situatim focus primarily on strengthening the existing assistmce regime, not on reexantining the assunnptions underlyjng it. Good examples of' this approxh to reiorm are provided by the JoinfEmlunficln(?I" Enze~qency Assistance to Rzua~~tJlk(1996) and WFPFslames lngram (1993). Both urt;e better finance, coordjnation, and ce~ztralization but without, however, examinhg how current methods of coordination and finance led to these weahesses in the first place..

Reftlgees, Politics, the Good Sn~uan'trtn


However, .Crhesestructures are inefficient when compared Ea other organizatianethat is, other bureaucracies (for context, see Wilson 1989)"It i s my contention that the strength of the international rc_.fuut;eerelief regirne is directly rcllated to the extart to wh,ich it has been bttreaucratized. If you start with this assumption, tke question then arkes: How can the strengthwf such a bureaucracy be strengthened in order to achitive a more effective relief regime? As will be wen, I conclude that the stxngthrj lie mre in relief organizationskcharacter as bureaucracies than in their ability to manipulate emotion and pity* Notes 1. Thomas Oliver" book The United N~tiotzsi ~ zBangladszslz is instructive on the subject of how quickly the international refugee relief regime expanded between the Bangladesh crisis (1971-72) and the Indochinese crisis (197&83). Oliver describes what are, by later standards, feeble U N bureaucracies. It took months (not days or hours) for the first relief supplies to arrive in Bangladesh. Furthermore, at that time the amounts of cash and supplies were, by todayPsstandards, minuscule. Just 4 million blankets were requisitioned for a population of 10 million returning rei'ugees, not counting internally displaced persons, in a country of 90 million people (19";7:114-445). The UNP-ICR also did not play a major role in the Bangladesh crisis of 1971-72, even though this crisis involved the Etight of over 40 million refugees from East Pakistan (Bangladesh) into India in late 1971. The Indian government was hesitant about admitting too much fc~reignassistance far reasons of both pride and political.expediency. In December 1971, India invaded East Pakistan and installed the new go>xsernmentof Bangladesh. This permitted the return of the refugees. A massive relief program an behalf of Bangladesh-~vhich had been devastated by a typhoon, massacres by the Pakistani military and the refugee flight and return-was mounted in 4972, The total death toll was estimated as high as 3 milXion fmm a combinatian of drowning, massacres, and famine. This relief operation involved direct aid from the United States via USAID (the United States Agency for International Development) and the establishment of an independent ad hoc U N relief operation, the United Nations Relief Operation in Dacca (UNROD). While extraordinarily ""late"'by 1990s standards-the relief took months to reach the Bangladeshis-this operation was considered the most successful UN relief prclgram mctrmted up to that time (see Qliver 1978; Payne 49733). 2. The literature on "international regimes" is xsoojurninous (see Haggard and Simmctns 4987). For example, Puchala and Hopkins say of interna"ticmal regimes: ""A regime exists in every substantive issue-area in international relations. . . . Wherever there is regularity in behaviclr, same kinds of principles, norms or rules must exist . . .'There is some debate about the h e points of this defkitian, but for this book, it highlights the relevant points.. The features of an international refugee relief regime are a substantive issue, the international organizations (e.g. UNHCR, VVFt", UNICEF, ICRC), and nongo>vernmentalorganizations that abide by regularized normative behavior. The very nakre of the work means that there

Refidgees, hlitics, fke Good Snf~tal.z'Ca7.2


is little coercive authority by which agreements (both treaty and contractual) can be enfc3rced. 3. UNHCR war; aw-arded the 1981 NobeX Peace Prize for its effc7rts in protecting Viebamese boat people. 4. Policies of the humane deterrence program emphasized the austerity of camp life and were meant to discc~urage""econamic adventuwrs," who, it tvas believed, comprised the rnl.ljority of the new refugee amivals, despite continuhg Widence of persecution in Vietnam and war in Cambodia. Howwer, such evaluations were also caught in between Cold War power calculation; indeed, as a consequence, the United States continued to back the Khmer Rouge" claim to Cambc~dia"seat at the United Nations. 5. Tn a foc>tnote,HarretX-Bcmd (1986:16 n.6) notes that Sudanae officials were well aware that Thailand attraded more funds by threatening refugees with expulsion, which was contrary to international. law, 6. The largest progam in the 4980s was in Pakistan, where large numbers of Afghans settled in camps that doubled as perilla bases. These camps were amply supported by the United States government v i a the UNE-TCR. Large numbers of Afghan refugees defined as such by the LINHCR were in Iran, which did not permit the large assistance programs that Pakistan did. Other major relief programs w e l ~ in Central America. '7. The disparity beween what is provided for refugees in Africa and elsewhere is a cmtinuing source of frustration for same. As the KC~SOVO operation unfolded, these were FIurries of e-mails among groups working in Africa who noted that African refugees are unlikely to receive special meals for diabetics, hot showers, or the amount of water being demanded (and financed) far the Kosovars. I think that this analogy couXd prc~bablybe extended to refugees in Asia. The refugees 1 saw in Thailand received higher levels of assistance than those in Africa. On the other hand, the Thai gc>vernmentwas more harsh with the refugees when it came to movement outside camps and forcible repatriation. 8. See Malkki (1994) and Stein (19%) far descriptions of refugee settlements. See Harrell-Bc~nd(1986)for descriptions of refugee camps in southern Sudan and Uganda in the 1980s. See Svmmers (1994) for a description of Burundians in Bar es Salaam.

The Strength of Bureaucracy

The qzlalify of'mercy is nof sfrained,

If dvopy~tltus the gentle ruitzfrom lreuven Upat? the place beneath; if is twice hlessc.d

If btess~tlthim fjzuf girars, atzd hint fjzuf fakes, -William Shakespeare, 7% *%erchant of Venice

lntroduction Refugee d i e f is a compla task. It involves organizing relief goods and refugees, and trhm brjnging them together in an efficient fashinn. It is often made more compkx by the fact that refugee flight tends to be to remote areas, md at least initially, is pexeived as being sudden, 'l%rus,to accommodate refugees effectively, it is necessary to bring together resources from around the world quidtly and efficiently. The only type of organization capabte of marshaiing the L\lidely dispersed resources needed to do this is Ihe modern specialized brxreaucracy. The strength of a bureaucracy lies in its breaklng tasks down into mmageable chunks, which can then be unliertaken by officiats with specific responsibilities. These officials' jobs are separate from their personalities, but their ability to do them is dependent on well-defned skills, Defined rules govern officiat actions and mlationships. 'f'he tasks and the holders of the positions are then organized into a hierarchy of authority. 'This is bureaucratic organization, Finally, the bureaucracy has a well-defined goal or product. In. the case of a private capitalist enterprise, this goal is the generation of profits for shardnolders, wlrrereas in gover undertake a specific measurable task while maintaining the authori-ty of the group in power.1 In relief work it is to extend mercy on a mass basis or, mare gelzerallly; to "sustain humanitarian principles.'"

Tht Strength ~jB~rer;l~~cracy


Bureaucratic organization is found in virtually all modern enterprises,

and for most people living in the modern world it is taken for granted (after Wber 1948:196;-198). In fact, bureaucracies are so taken for grmted that they are frewelntly blamed for the ilts of modem societyf despik the fact that hierarchically organized bureaucracy is m n d m society. This is because other forms of organization-sucb as blind obedience to the whints of a herfi?dit.arychief or kjng or ad hoc consensus with neigkibors about life" irritations-are msuitable for the administration of mass society Builcting highways, rczgulating markets, operating mass education system equitably, collecting and accomting, for taxation, or ensuring that the official responses to a theft in one place are sirnilar to those in another, all require a bureaucratic responsef not the whim of a chief or king. The s m e can be said of the large bwaucralically organized corporations which bave created the modem world"s wealth, They, too, need systemalic rules, regulations, m d p r o c e d u ~ in s order to generate t-tw profits their shareholders demand. Organized rational bureaucracies, no matter what l q e and. small frustrations they may cause, are fundamental to the modem world.

Bureaucratic:Goals Elemelntal to bureaucracies is the concept of formal ratimaljty. Formal rationaliw m a n s that for a given end, there arc rules, regulations, and social structures designed to optimfze the achievrment d the org"nizatiods goal. Four basic elements m e r g e from this process: efficiency, predictabitit~calculabil.ity and control by means of nonhuman technology (Kitzer 4996; Weber 1448). :Notice that lacking from these four elements are other hcentives for soeial action, such as affection, charisma, personal loyalty and a number of other emotional qualities that regulated ir^ltt.ractionin the premodern world. The rationalized bureaucracy seeks to maximize all of its four elelxents in the service of the gkcn end. Here it is perha.ps instructive to briefly review them, fctr as I will sho~\r, in the context of rcrfugee refief programs there is a discontinuity between the elements of rati~naiityand refugee work which makes this work more inefficient than other bureaucratized tasks (after fitzer 1996:ltF-19).2

The Rationalization. of Gaals

Eflclelzcy By efficimcy Wber meant that for businesses, as few inputs went into the generatim of profits as possibie, In other words, in a bureaucracy


T?zeStrength of Bureazkcracy

there is incentive to deliver the most bang for the buck. As a result, thruughout the business, there is an emphasis m cutting costs in order to maximize profits-or at least tcr maximize resdts in terms of what the bureaucracies are of course orgmized bureaucracy "pmduces.'"elieS similarly; it is just that efiiciency is organized to produce a vaguely deh e d "mercy" rather than financial gain.

In becornhg more efficient, bureaucracies seek to make thek inputs and outputs more ""calculable." This cuts across productive m d administrative tasks. In the modern corporation, profits are calcdated easily in terms of easily divisible units of money (prc3ferabl.y in a decimal system, as the British only recently discovered when they abolished shillings). Likewise, there is also an emphasis on calculating the hputs. Zn manufacturing, such inputs include tbc raw material, cost of labor, etc. As recent studies have shown, h service hdustries, companjes seek to quantify customer satisfaction through the use of surveys, tracking complaints, and even traclcing compliments (see Hachschild 1983:118-119). At universities, evaluation of facuky is periodically done by students, whose ratings of facdty members art? turned into numbers, which art. entered into a file. M is jn Ihe interest of calcdability In relief oper&iorns, caleulability is measured h terms of lives saved, kilocalories of hod distributed per refugee, money spent per refugee, etc. From such calculations, it is inferred hocv well the more abst..ract humnitarian task of delivering mercy is done.

Preetictdility is a third quatity Weber ascriibed to bureaucracies. Burt-aucracies seek to have Chejir submits behave ixn a predictable fashion. Predictability is entrenched in both writtm rules m d regulations, m d in the unwrittm norms of cclmpanfes and industries. 'l'he holder of a particular office or job knocvs what- to e q e d (and what not to expect) from holders of other posjtims within the bureaucracy Consumers also know what to exped when they p m h a s e a prtduct which is padaged inside a box, and citizens h o w wlat type of semice to expect h e m they approach the governant service desk at the post ofice, motor vehict registry, public school, social welfare office, etc. Bureaucracies seek to produce a predictable product. Thus, a McDo~nald's cconsumer h a w s what to expect of a Rig Mac in Moscow or San Francisco. National chains take advantage of: consumer d e s i ~ for s predictability when they develop brand loyalty. Even jails and prisons

Tht Strength ~jB~rer;l~~cracy


within the same system produce a level of incarceration that is the same from place to place, day in and day out (Ritzer 1996). The point of predictability is that t h g s tend to be consistent within a bureaucracy. Predictability is particularly important h a justice system founded on principles of deterrence, The point behind deterrence is that undesirable social acti\lity is controlled when potential offenders have a phusihle belief that there will be a Rsplmse. The difficulty in esthlishing predictabe precedents in the humanitarian context is discussed in Chapter 12 where violent d e a h in Kwanda. is discussed.

A final element of bureaucracies is the emphasis on seeking to control people, be they workers or consumers, through nonhuman technolog, especially rules and machines. ikfost elemental is the tendmcy to assign certain tasks (and only certajn tasks) to an office or agency, Rufes that control employee and customer behavior might focus on where to line up in a queue, when to smile, wl~atto wear, and even haw to justify arbitrary rules (""blue suits are more businesslike than red business suitsf'). Human behavior is controlled by machines when the speed of an assembly line is adjusted, when time-clocks art? pmched, phone cdls art- monitoxd, and fuel cmsumption is checkd. Bureaucratic cmtrol is increased on behalf of the hierarchy. Control means that power and authority move upward toward wbrrc. hformation is controtled. A by-product of this need to control is Chat the datawhether about efficiency, calculabiMy, or predictability-are held in confideneiality; indeed, data are often secret. The tendency to maintain secrets, not surprisingly, is yet another characteristic of the wed of the bureaucracy to assert control over the humans within it. Control as an issue is reh;lmed to in Chapter 1C)tryhere the assumptions behhd engheaing technology astl discussed, specifically in connectio~~ with questions of water engheering. Control over the faws of phpsics is element& to water engineering. However, the pumps and quipment of the water engineer also control hvhen and how water can be dellivered to refugees, The emotional urgency of refugee crises means that admjnistratiltns must make decisions without the types of control that bureaucracy normally gelzerates.

The Irrationality of Rationality Visible only from a distance, the dog, nicknamed the King of Ruffle Bar, had sustained itself for an estimated two years, was apparently in good health, and gresurnabty wouXd have suwived in this semi-wild state, barring acci-

The Strength of Bureazkcracy


dents, for the rest of his natural life. However, some well-meaning soul heard about the dog and reported him to the Society for the 13reventianof Cruelty to Animals, thereby setting the bureaucratic wheels in motic~n.Since the King could not be apprc3ached by people, a baited trap was set. According to the Ernes report . . every day a police bunch from Sheepshead Bay takes off for Ruffle Bar, the uninhabited swampy island of the dog. Every d a y a police helicopter hovers for a half hour or more over Ruffle Bar.'" . . . When questioned, representatives of the ASPCA said: "When we catch the dog we will find a Imppy home f o x it" "mphasis added]. The ASPCA became obsessed with capturing the clog. Once triggered, the ASPCA involved the police with a remorseless, mindless persistace that is tcm terrifyingly characteristic of bureaucracies once they are activated. . . . Emotionally [the police] sicled with the King, even while carrying out their orders. "Why don't they leave the dog alone?" said one policeman. Another abxrved, "The dog is as happy as a pig in a puddle." . . . The delusional aspects have to do with the institutionalized necessity to control "everything," and the widely accepted notion that the bureaucrat knows what is best; never f o x a moment does he doubt the validity of the bureaucratic solution (Ncw York Times, Frjbruary 120, 19170, quc)ted in Hail, 'I976:10-12). "".

h this description of bureaucratid rationality regarding the "Kng of RuMe Bar" there is also irrationality in the bureaucratic rationality*The irmtionality is in the fact that bureaucracies, developed tc:,serve humans, ultimat-ely end up tkmselves being served by humms. By-products of all this efficiency include m a y of the muroses of modern society. Max Weber, writing about nineteenth-century industrial capitalism, called these neuroses the "iron cage,""He saw a society that, in dl its efficimcy, had created mechanized petrifa.ction in which labored '"specialists without spirit, sensualists without heart; this nullity imagines that it has attained a level of civiIization never before aChieved even though it is at the expense of the highest c u h r a l and spjrituaX ideals" (Weber 1958:182). This is certainly the case-and the frustration-for the police dicers flying the helicopter searchhg for the King of Ruffle Bar. The sociologist George Mzer, writing more recently, renmed the late twentieth-cmtury version of this phenomenon ""McDonaldizationf"and called it the "velvet cageefWetoo, compli~zentedthe outstandhg efGcimcy of rationalized business organization, while pointing out that this process also subordinates human spirit to burraucratic efficiency. Both terms were meant as backhanded compfintents to what the authors viewed as the organizational paradigm for modern life. Both writers make the point that out: of this wmderfully productive way for managhng colnplcx tasks, many d e r n neuroses arise. Among

Tht Strength ~jB~rer;l~~cracy


them are ~ u n t m working e co~~ditians, efficient Nazi death camps, e11virmmental degradation, the cheapening of culture, and. that 1991)sneurosis named after the government's largest bmaucracy, "gohg po&alff: being overcome by a wave of videtnt rage. The point is that the necessarily abstract (and unpredictable) rationalism of society, carried to its log& cal extreme, destroys the hurnanity of the people who serve w i t h the system. This, it seems, is particdarly true in the large impersonal manuhcturing corporation. But it is also true in other industries, which sell the most unexpected products. For example, airlines flight attendants are taught to smik on command, Disneytand sells ""good feelkgs," and collection agmcy employees are taught to growl. on command (Hochschild 3983; Ritzer 3996). But for the hummitarian agencies it forces a unique quandary: To become part of an eliicient: bwreaucracy, a humanitarian organizatjon must figure out how to take the hrrmanity out of humanitarianism.

Taking the Humanity out of Humanitadanism: Rationalizing Relief W r k I'he sum of Weber% theory is that the goal of a brareaucracy is to maximize production of its product. 7;r, do this, bureaucracies grow engulhg the less efficjcnt and less predictable, as they seek to control. For a business this makes a great deal of seme; as it seeks to expand profits;, it orders it own hierarchy to focus on thit; one goal. That the humanness is taken out of this process, or at least redehed accordting to the goal of seeking prdits, is of course irrelevant. Instead, the assrtmpticm is that this mode of organization is idea:[, rather than only the most produc.live. h consequence has been that bureaucratic modes of organization are a given. Or to borrow a somewhat old-fashioned word, bureaucratic organization becomes hegemonic, meaning that bureaucratic forms of organiz a t h are borrowed from, the impersonal capitalist corporation and govent and applied to tasks of a differmt nature. One of these tasks is international refugee relief. h d hvlnile a b~xreazlcratizedform of organization is still probably the most efficient method possible for delivering massive relief to large remote populatims, the very nature of the task means that the irrationalities that do emerge are different than those that characteriz the dehumanizing Fmpersonali'cy of the corporate and govThe na.turc of these jrsati.onalities is best explained by evalwting the five elements discussed above-the goal of the bureaucracy, plus trificimcy, calculability, predictability and cmtrol-in the cmtext of =&gee relief.

T?zeStrength of Bureazkcracy

The Essential Problem of International Refugee Relief: A Vague Goal What: is the overarching purpose of the international refugee rclief regime? Is it profits? No, though clearly profits are of concern, particularly for the vendors operat-lng on the periphev Is it maintenance of power, as it is Ihe purpose of a political party? No, though &is too can bc an element as internationd refugee relief pmgrams can enter into the calculations of diplomats focused on international poiitics. Is it the welfare ? should be, but thcn how do you measure this welfare? of the ~ l u g e e s lit Likewise, part of the answer to this last qtlestion is that an empiricd evaluation of refugee suffering does not predict which crises will be responded to and which will not, although t?&ai_n, this does enter into calculations. What about the notorious "CNN effect"'? Is the overarching purpose of the internationat relief rc-rgime to gain the attention of the p r e s s m i s is perhaps a better predictor of how the internatio~~al refugee relief regime reacts, but it is at best indirect. Thus, the best anscsier even to one of the most powerful people in U.S. National Secz~rityAdviser Anthony Lake, policy-making positio~~s, could give to Human Rjgfiits Watch was to advise them to ""make mort. noise" (Des Forges 1996:229, 3999:C725), even though this has nothing to do with rationalized bureaucratic policy analysis. Implicitly Lake was admittkg that he could not, wilhout cooperation from the press, generate the poiitical legitimacy to spend retief funds and take principled stands.3 Bat vvbat they are r e d y saying is that an internatio~~al relief effort requires the concern and sympathy of a wealthy donor government's constih;lmcybefore action will be taken. Mark Lliatkup (1997) framed this issue in the foltnwing fashion: For Humanitarian Organizations [HO], resource generation is dependent upon such factors as image enhancement, doonor-centric evaluation criteria, distinctirfe visibility, and competitive independence. . . . Moreover, efficiency; according to dclnclrs (the ones tzrt-rc> matter), is sametimes only a measure of how fast an H 0 can spend money and account for it, not whether the funds have any positive, sustainable impact on the affected population ('Walkup 1W7:43,189).

Denis Pingaud, development director of one of the most successful rt?l"ugeerelief NGOs, Mkdecins sans Fronti&res,was recently quoted as saying, "When the media go alS out on onc crisis they drai_n a lot of dollor money to the tele-visud events. . . . And that means there is less money fnr other places (Ford 1999)." Ironicaily, he goes on to note, ""Nowadays TV crews get to the major crisis before we do,'khich of course they do,

Tht Strength ~jB~rer;l~~cracy


since as Pingaud in effect indicates, publicity-savvy agmcies follow the TV cameras to the emergencies, rather than the other way around. So how do refugee assistance sencies calculate their goal-in social science terms, the ""dependent variableM-if it is not through profits? It seems that the dependent varitible is perhaps again described. in the context of the Good Samaritan: it is in terms of ""mercy" and not pmfits. Rather, what is received is a feeling that the right response was taken, a situation justified in the moral terms of a humanitarim ethic. h the calculation of such a dependent variable, m important element is also misshg: what refugees, the actual consumers of the products purchased and delivered, themselves think, wmt, or need. Instead, what is important is what others think they need or deserve and those othersf evaluation as to whether t h y r ~ e i v e dthese ite~nsor not. Thus, missing in the bureaucratized feedback loop is a response from the actual cons u e r s of the food, wiitf?l;medicd services, and relief supplies. As a rewilling sult, it does not rnatter wt-tet-her the consunters are price-se~~sithe, to legitimate power relations, or even legitimate the trmsaction. A result is that the other elements of bureaucracy, including efficiency calcutability, predictability; and co~~trol, all suffer. Walkup (199278) describes this situation in the context of refugee workers, whom be c d s "field-level bureaucrat~:~' While field-level bureaucrats have great impact on dients' lives, clients d o not have reciprocal influence. Clients are not party to Hurnanibrian Qrganization mandates, budgets, ns]determined it was not possible to grind grain far all the refugees. Skumped by this equity problem (which could have been rescjlued simply) the [humanitarian organizations] closed it down. It remained unused for almost five years untif. CARE ""rdiscoverect"" it and wanted to allocate its use to the community-based Economic Skills Development program, The idea tvas to put it into use governed by a comperative that would gay for its fuel with fees charged to rei'ugee users. However, a debate arose over the machine" ownership. UNHCR claimed it was theirs, but WFP claimed that they had paperwork to show that they purchased it. As a result, it still remains unused-.. . .

Resistance to central control is structured into fie UN a d NCO bureaucracies. In the case of UNHCR charter, there ,?re vagzle requircjmmts that it not be operational, and sirnpv pass along funds to a range of partners and subcontractors. The central activity in many rt;fugee situations, food requisition and distribution, is in ftact only a peripheral collcern of UNHCR; instead it is in the purview of the WFP, even though the UNHiCR-contracted agency will be the final camp manager doing the high-profile work of scooping maize into refugees' bags. lCRC has &@erent restrictions; due to its interest in preserving principles of confidentiality and independence, it typically has only remote relaticms with other agmcies, and does not seek the role of coordjnator in emergencies. This persistent Zack oi control is not for lack of interest of individual organizations in ercpanding. TiNHCa expmded a great deal in the bads crisis when USAID and ECHO, the Europem Commm~ityHummitarian


T?zeStrength of Bureazkcracy

Organization, for a short period =fused to contract directly wiCh NGOs and asked that all NGO requests be passed through UNHCR, But this effnrt to expand in the long run broke down. An irnportant rczason vvhy this broke down when NGOs like CARE, the Red Cross, Lutherm World Federation, and others the UNHCR contracted with had their own constituencies in Europe and North America. 'l'hese, cmstil-uencies sought shifts in overd ~ f u g e epdicy in ordcr Ihat direct governmnt to NGC) aid wouXd be resurned. Much of this lobbying occurred in the backchannels that independent access to the p ~ s permitted. s It also meant that the N'GOs needed to chdlenge the competency of the UNHCR, which u n d e ~ t lthat t bureaucracy" eefforts to assert control. Mark Walkup explained the importance of the press in this process: !Humanitarian orpnizations] rely on the media to spread the news of their good tvorks, Media coverage is atso seen as an independent validation of the work of MO, despite the reality that the media are somewhat dependent upon the information prwided by the H 0 themselves. The image of a HO is boosted tremendously by interviews with HQ-identified field personnel, photc>graphsand video of H 0 logos on tents or vehicles, and references to a specific H 0 in news reports (Walkup 1997:139-140).

h a more diplomatic fashion, hgram (1993:177-178) writes: The Lobbying power of NGOs is fc-ormidableduring emergencie that attract media attention. Governments respond by channeling resources thrc>ugh them. While key NGOs may ar may not be more efficient than UN agencies, the practical effect is that in almost all disasters a large number of NGOs is involved on the ground. NGOs often have conflicting aims and agendas, and often insist on working in particular regions of affcrcted countries. The task of harmonizing the tcrtaf effclrt, which falls to the UN, is far from easy. Very often the representatives of donor embassies insist on being involved-. While their efforts can sometimes be helpful, more often than not they add tcr the coordinatim burden.

MSF was (and is) perhaps the most skilled agency at coordinating, and at teast in %=a, their staff were well h w n fnr maintafning active lobbying efforts on behalf of ~patriationand assistance policies that they favored but that the UNHCR opposed.Wany of these recammenbations focused on security arrangements for expatriates, war crimes trials, and rclpatriation policies, all well nutside the medical sector to which they were =signed by the UNHCR. Donm governments responded, to some of M S % llubbying efforts (though not all) as a result of this press=. The

Tht Strength ~ j B ~ r e r ; l ~ ~ c r a c y


result was that UNHCR, the nornhal coordinator of MSF, aadj~~sted policies and progrms accordingIy-Such independence woulcf not have been tolerated in a better-rationalized bureaucracy whicl-t had a well-defined way of snhsuming competing interest groups.

Morals, Emotions, and Irrationalities The difference beheen the Good Samaritan bureaucracy and Weber's rationalized bureaucracy is that thr former is much more invdved in the ernogonal. process of defining its owl1 objectives. Ultimately, this is a question of defining what is good and bad, appropriate and inappropriate. 'This is u d i k a corporation, which has the weil-ddined and nonccmtmversial goal of genmating profits on behalf of shareholders. 'The same question can be turned around to analyzc the htctmational refugee relief ~ g i m eMlhat . is the goal of responding to a particular refugee situation outside of a vaguely agreed-on ""humanita,rianimperative'? ?dike the god of a publicly helld corporation, on which there is consensus, on the godwfihumanitarian organizations there is as yet no cmsensus. Llntil this happens, the intemtianal refugee relief regime will not be able to coordinate its activities in a way to take full advantage of the strength of its burraucratic organization. This si.tmtion is likely to c o n k u e as long as the debate about Ihe nature of mercy, which is a moral issue, continues. As Weber notes (1958:183), debates on moral issues take p h c e fn the world (Jf jucigments, of values, and of faith. T h i s is not a strcngth of bureaucrary but of politics, theology and other contexts less constrained by the limits of Weber's iron cage, the rationalized bureaucracy But, necesarily, the nature. of mercy is an issue that the Good Samaritan, whether a brtreaucracy or an hdividual, must confront. Notes 1. Wilson (1989) has written an important book describing how and why gcwe m m n t agencies manage tasks and power in the &ikd States. 2. See also Weber 1948:196-248, Ritzer is a more readable popularizer of Weber "s ideast and is highly recommended far the general reader, 3. lngrarn (l993:97) n&es that the lobbying power of NGBs is "formidable during emergencies which attract media attention." The two best examples of this are probably Oxfam in the United Kingdom, which, besides releasing issue papers, also has its own press, and Mkdecins sans Frontigres in France. In the case of MSF, The Ecano~rtistguly 20, 1999, p. $6) reports that its launder, Bernard KoucEtner, fc~rmertya junior minister of health who in 1999 was appc~intedthe first coordinator of UN uperationti in Kosavo, is "regularly judged France's most popular


T?zeStrength of Bureazkcracy

politician." He earned his fame by, among other things, helping found MSF, in 4971, on the principle that humanitarian agencies had a responsibility to make noise when witnessing human rights vioXations. 4. Mkdecins sans FrontiGres was also one of the more aggressive agencies when it came to courting the press, The by-and-large French-speaking agency had an American in Ngara to deal with press relations at a point in May 4994 when the press was prcsminent there, They were also known fur having stickers and Bags on their vehicles, and their expatriates were all issued white safari vests ernbtazcmed with MSF logos, Some of their expatriate staff made their image more high-prof le by standing up in the back of pickup trucks as they drove tc:, the camps, a dramatic pose that went with their rough-and-tumble public image. TiValkup f199'7:140) mentions hearing about an ECHO representative" being particularly aggressive about sticking blue ECHO stickers on as many items as possible. The same policy was adopted in Ngara. ECHQ was UNHCR's main donor, and asked that all assets purchased with ECHO money be emblazmed with ECHO stickers, I received a comphint fram the UNHCR logistics officer in summer 1994 when this was not done quickly enough on LWF ~ ~ e h i c l pures chased with ECHQ money. One of the LWF water engheers mischiwously asked whether ECHO stickers should be put on his water pumps before they were placed in his 30-meter-dep wells.

Defining Sides: The Social Structure of liight and Wrong in International Refugee Relief "It was a EeelingtrhsaidMiss M a ~ t e"It . wasn2 really, you know; logical deducticm. It was based on a kind of emotional reaction or susceptibility towell, I: can only a l l i t amo?spl-rere.. . . Who could be a killer? W ~ a kind t of a killer? What kind of a killing? X could feel then risir~gup rather slowly, like a miasma does, an atmosphere. I don't think there is another word that expresses it; except evil. Not necessarily that any one of tl.le?sethree was evil, but they were certainly living in an atmosphere where evil had happened, l-rad left its shadow or was still threatening them,"

Hidden in the parabte of the Good Samaritm is a moral dile rnanitarian bureaucracies. Haw can they translate into regulations the fact that their field-level bureaucrat should, stop and assist, rather than pass by on the side as did the busy priest and Levite? If the regdation is written too loosely their field bureaucrat will need to stop and ixlquire about the health and status of all the poor along the road, and never reach the scme of the major catastrophe. If it is written too tightly, the field bureaucrat will not be able to legithately use agezzcy resources and will not extend mercy, as indetld did neither the Levite or priest in the I"ar&le of the Good Samaritan. Refugee relief implies the preencc of war, and thus inhertntly requiscls evaluating enemies and making moral judgmnts. It also irnplies defining what is acceptable and not accepthle in the conduct of war, *c, is a combatant who is a refugee, what is a "legitimate fear of persecution," when is crosshg a borcier significant, and what is a liv-ing ratinn, The fntematicmal Committee for the Red Cmss (ICRC) with its policy ent: has perhaps been most successful at dealing MIith these


Social Strucfure 0jRi~q1ttand Woug

questions. It does this by takhg a view that it is in the business of providing impartial assistance and makes no j u d p m t s about those they assist. This clarity is ~ f l e c t e din very tightly written regulations, which can res~tltin bureauaatic decisions such as the one Mark Walkup (1997:89) heard about: A German TCRC officer in Lokjchoklls [Sudanj lamented about a situation he recently faced when he flew an a reconnaissance mission into a war-ravaged area in sc~rathernSudan, Upon Landing on a r e m t e airstrip, he discover-ed two pclopte requiring medical evacuation. One was, in his words, ""astoppydrunk, amogant, wounded SPLA soldier who had probably killed at least five men, and who was smaking cigarettes and bragging to his friends abaut going on vacation to the hospital." The other was a young girt who would soon die without treatmrtnt of a parasitic infection of one side of her face. AIt b u g h the plane had sufficient space, the ICRC officer was fcxced to deny evacuation t c ~the girl because her condition was not war-inflicted. With anger in his voice, the officer said, ""Surely the little girl deserved and needed the flight mare than that bastard, but LCRC policy restricts transport and medical care only to those who are war-wounded." He revealed that he almost broke fundamental TCRC rules and carried her on board. Instead he faced the task af asking fc-orgivenessaf the girl's pleading family knowing that she would surely die because of his decision.

Their reputation for "strict neutrality permits ICRC to negcrtiate with distasteful regimes existing in the very red in-between m a s creat-ed by prirzc$les of national sovereignty XCRC's assumption is that their presence prevents more violence than a lack of presence implied by strong pditicat judgments about warring protagonists. Sut following this rulc meant the German XCRC offices was presented with the necessit_yto leave a girl deserving of mercy lying by t-he side of the road. The ~ s dwas t the "irrationality in the rationality" mentioned earlier, But the real irony is not h what the German ICRC officer saw. Instead, in wrestling with the a, he sought to structure t-he w s t i o n as one of right and wrong; as a result the soldier became evil because he smoked cigarettes, laugtned, joked, and could be assumed (without evidence) to have killed "at least five men.'' ?he girl and her family meanwhile (again without evidence), were assumed to be completely dependent on the one flight to save her life. In effect, the German TCRC officer is creating the atmosphere of good and evil that Miss Marple spoke of in the Agatha Cbristie novel, and the conmdrum presented is one of good and evil, right and wrong. Such judgments are perhaps i n h e ~ nto t the nature of burcaucratized relief. But it also introduces a strong element of gassicm into wkat the presumably dispassionate bureaucracy does"

Social Structure oJRiglzt and Wmng


The United Nations Mi& Comrnissiorler for kfugees (UNMCR) is expticitly charged with the legal duty of determining who has a legitimate fear of perseation, and who does not. This duty very much involves the type of decisions that- the XCEiC man made in the s0ttthc.m Sudan. In settled stable circumstances, this implies a hearing process abuut asylum requests, in vvhich individual cases are examined in the cmtext of intemational law. Clften these heasings hinge on Ml)nether an individual has a legitimate fear of prosecution for crimes or persecution for beliefs or membership in an ethnic group. The former wodd lead to jail time, the latter, to asylum status. Most refugees, however, never receive this dispassionate hearing, for they arrive as part of a mass mwement in which a "legitirnate kar of persecutionf' is assumed, irrcsspectke of individual circzmstmces, Nevertheless, the legal subcultustl of the U'N'MCR is fundamentally concerned with legd judgments. As a result morc so than the ICRC, the UNHCR focuses m whether assistance is prwided to war criminats or not. fn the absence of a legitirnat-e cowt system (also a characteristic of mass ~ f u g e movements), e the UNHCIR sees itself confronted with a moral liilctmma. Some of the UNHCIC's :NGO p a t n e s also view this moral distinction as important. Mbdecins sans Frontiiitres (MSF) is particdarly aggressive in making judgments (see Destexhe 1395 and 1996; MSE; l995).1 Rut the moral issues invdved in refuge relief are far more than general judgmnts about worthiness. Fundamental to c u r m t definitions of rt?l"ugees is the question of what responsibilities and rights individuals have vis-8-vis the state or a broader huntanity These definitions have shifted over time, but decisions about them are hherently embedded in ~ f u g e erelief operations. Ucspite the desire to believe that rehgees are sin?gl,y imocents whn can =turn to their h m e s after the cessation ol hostilities, this is rarely the case, Refugees themselves hevitably assign blame and rttspmsilslility for their flight. Likewise, war is a polarizing event in a society, and all mcmbers of the society are likely to align with one political group or the other, for whatever rcasms, Often, refmgees are associated with a political c a u x that is losing p u n d in their own country; those associated with a winning cause tend to stay Tlnus, though refugees may be innocent victims in a legal sense, they am rarely disinterested bystanders.

Defining Victirnhood To illustrate this point, I will briefly recount the moral dilnensions of refugeeism by focusing m definitions of victimhood h three djfferent rt?fugee crises: Cambodians in Thailand in 19E-83, Ethiopians durir~g the 1"38 famine, and Somalians in 1992-95. These situations provide


Social Strucfure 0jRi~q1ttand Woug

well-docmented exmgles of how difficult decisions were made about who was a victim and who was not. In the case of the Cambodians, difficult decisims were made about how to deal with a peasantry associated with and somet.i,mescomnnitted to the brutd Khmer Rouge regi,me. In Ethiopia, the Western donors found th existiq government extmmely distasteful: the Communist Mengistu government was responsible for resettlement policies m d wars that had m d e a relief program necessary in the first place. The paradigmatic exaxnple of callousness cited in this emergency was the deeisim of the Mengish gave ent's eastern European allies to pay for a $250 millio~~ tenth-anniversary celebration even as massive starvation raged. Sornalia is h o w n for being the paradigmatic example of how media involvemat drives policy decisions. It was in response to dernmds by the press, manipulated by American NGOs, that President George Bush ordered the h r i r a n tmops into the country in Decen-tber 1942. The point is that ineach of these circumstances, the need for hummitarian action was invested with moral terms that implied distinguishing victims from victimizers (see Mhear, Scott, and Weiss 7.996). Identifying victims involves the promulgation of rules alld poiicies, which b e c m e the bureauaacy and thus take on a lir, of their own. C)n this basis financial appeals are made, fixhg patterns of ""victihood"9or the duration of tke crisis. This h a p g e n e n particular as bureaucratic or the other. The classic structures become invested in one explanatio~~ case of this phenomenon is the definition of the Rwanda crisis. Initial assessmmts that emerged in April 1994 indicated that fie fighthg was due to centuries-old ""tribal hostilities"""ese explanations received wide exposure in the Western press for a short t h e , but they also we= subject to widespread academic criticism. It was pointed out that this was an overly simplistic genedjzation, and that- the roots of the crisis were in a connbhation of gcrnocidr, ongoing war, e t h i c mobilization, external political relations, and economic exploitation (see D. :Nevvbury 1998; C. Newbury 1995). According to this viecv, the vidims in the situation were the refugees from the regime in Kigal-i. The popular press, however, took these explanations and simplified them into the single explanation "genocide," in wwfiich some refugees had played a role. This shiAd victirnhood from the refugees in Rwanda and Tmzania to the new regixn.e in Kigati (see Minear, kott, and Weiss 1996:62-6q.TCAarles Bierbauer, set CNN (1996:vii-viii), desesibed hocv nior Washington c o r ~ s p m d e n for this occurs in what is often m arbitrary fashion: News organlzatic~nsare capabte of landing srnaXl armies of reporters, producers, photographers, and technicians in remote areas. . . . Collectively they are a Cyelops, a giant that cannot be ipored. Television especially, with its st"ngXefc~cused,eye, commands attention. For brief but intense periods of

Social Structure oJRiglzt and Wmng time the media send monocular burning images onto the screens we at1 watch. Scorched villages in Bosnia. Chopped bodies in Rwmda. A soldier dragged through Somali stl-eets. . . . But for all their ability to focus similarly on such stories, the media are not monolithic. And not entirely dependable.. Not every tribe's tragedy is recorded. . . . What attracts? Plight and might. N o matter haw desperate the indigensus situation, the story gets better when the troops arrive.

Quick and simple judgments are not new; in many ~ s p e c t sthey are even necessary, givezn the nature of the bureaucracy Bureaucratic corporations, which advertise and sell goods, are adept at identifying and targeting categories of people who are most likely to buy hmanas, Beanie Babies, or hantburgers. Such well-defined categories are necessary in order for the modem bureaucratic system to work well, They are afso well within the scope of what bureaucratic organizations do well: create predidable m d calculable categories of people. But the burclaucratic categorizations of corporations arc by their very nature defined in an m o r a l marketplace. 'They do not involve issues of basic human rights to assistance, of right and wrong, finding fault, or even of life itself, as decisiosls about refugee assistance explicitly and implicitly do. Despite the diffemnt character of humanitarian bureaucracies, howevcr, the same process of categorizalion occws. Peope are classified as refugees or codatants. They are defined as refugees who have crossed an fnternational border and art? eligibte h r intemationai assistance, or "'internalfy djsplaced people""who are eligible for some other less vaguely defined assistance. They are &fined as refugees eligi:ble for assistance a d protwtian, or "economic migrants" su27ject to deportation. C)r, as happetned once in the Rwanda refugee crisis, they were defhed as refugees from Rwanda and were given asylum h Burundi; but when they wem maiicicrusly b w e d out of their Burundian camps and Red to %mania, they were considered ineligibf e for asylum in %mania because they had abandoned a second comtr~rof asylum. In the cases of the fndochjnese refugees, Ethiopia, and Somalia, the international, community came ta terms with deciding who was ""legitimately'" refugee and worthy of assistance and who was not. This occurred in the context of a refugee popdation made up primarily of women, children, and elderly cvho were clearly m t corn bat ant.^. This need to categorize is within the naturc of the bureaucratk mode of action. But morat dctcisions are also implicitly made as well. Returning to the parable of the Good Sanaritan, the challenge in each situation is to develop moral rules, meaning that field-level bureaucrats can Iegil.imate a decision to help generously, as the Goad Samaritan did, ratl-\er than to pass by on the side, as did the priest and the Levite. The


Social Strucfure 0jRi~q1ttand Woug

rules and regulations framing each situation reflect the search of nominally amoral bureaucracies to solve such questions,

Cambodians in Thailand In 197M3, following the invasion of Vktnam by Khmer Rouge Cambodia, over l million Indochines Vietnamese, Z,aotims, and Cambodians-fled to Thailand, h response to th picturcs of the Kehamese boat people and the ftight cJf Cambociians, major refugee relief efforts wme launched. Most of the hdochinese fleeing to Thailand wen. Carnbodians, and this section focuses on them, However, because humanitarim assistance policies were dweloped m t for the Cambodians but for the Vietn m e s e and Laotians, these groups wiil also be briefly discussed. Mrhm it canne to identifying victihood and establishing the moral basis for assistance, Cambodians p ~ s e n t e dthe most ambiguous case of the three groups: between l975 md 1978, Cambodia was controlled by the brutal and isolationist mmer Rouge government. Behind the sealed herders of Cambodia over 1 million died, the victims of mass executions, starvation, and neglect. The dead inclukd a subslantid proportion of urban people, m d substantia ers of Chhese, Vietnamese, and Cham (Muslim) mi~~arities. Rural also suffered a great deal. The control of the country was developed by a smalf clique front a secretive Cantmunist party,the " K h e r Rouge," which had existed in the forests since the 1960s. In rcsponse to the corruptim of the American-supported government and American b o d i n g of eastern Cambodia during the Vietnam War, much of the rural population aligned itself with the Khmer Rouge before their excesses became apparent. An i.nkling of the suffering in Cantbodia was heard bn? rclfugees between 1975 and 1978, but there was little response from the world. I'hough reports of the mass exodus f m Phnom Pcnh in May 1975 were acknowledged in the Western press, ideological blillders made the refugees9ales difficuilt to believe. Some from the VVrcstem left actually became apdogists for the Khrner Rouge, white those on the right focused on Cold War geopolitieai considerations in whieh massacres &ICarnbodia were of peripheral in.terest (Shawcmss 1%84:45-49), Most notably Vietnam, Cambodia" eastern neighbor, hosted the largest number of refugees bearing tales- E-fohvever, became of an aifi,ance betcveen the Communist parties of the two corntries against the United. States and its allies, Vietnam asserted that all was well with Cambodia" Commmist revolution. Cold War calculations shified in late 1978, when Vietnam, after repeated border skimishes with the ICktfner Rouge, invaded Cambodia, driving the er Rouge government into the forests atong the b0rdr.r wjth Thai-

Social Structure oJRiglzt and Wmng


land. In Phnorn Pemh, a new government made up of former Khmer Rouge cadres and protected by the Vietnamese army was installed. Focused on Cold W r rivalries, the Thai and their Wstem allies responded with alarm to the Viewarnese invasion; the Thai have a traditional fear of Vietnmese expansionism., which the px.esence of a battlehardened Qtnamese m y on their border exacerbated.W:Nobly, Ziiet-nam was uninterested in humanitarianism; their prirnary reason for invading was to secure their border. As for the Western countries, their Rsponse was confused; the defeat of the :KL-imerfCouge was welcomed, but the victory of the Soviet-alfied Ket-nmese was viewed Chrough the prism of its Cold War strategic implications. Left with the paradox of srtppo"lin8 a wictorious friend of their worst enemy (Vietnam) or a persistent but emascdated m m e r Rouge, the Thai and h e r i c a n s chose tfire latter (Shawcross 19%:20-76). For the overwhelming majority of the Cambodian people, the Vietnamese invasion meant freedom. From thek view it was irrelevant that the li:berator was a traditional enemy of the Cambodians or the Thai; the point was that the despised and brutaf er fCouge lost control of their er Rouge retreated talives. Still, the war continued k t o 1929, as the ward. 1Phailmd in the West, Refugees appearcld agairz along the heavily militarized Thai border. Thailand, claiming that the burden of Vietn m e s e boat people and I:,,aotiansliving in the camps was already stressing the country, forcihIy returned several thuusand people in early 1979. UNFICR, MIhich had a presence in the country, made quiet diplomatic protests. Nter personal pleas frnrn UN %cretary General Kurt Waldhcirn to t:he Thai government and the provision of cash cmtributions to the government for refugee relief, there was a brief respite in the foreible repatriation reports in early 1979. 'Then h June, after Thai newspapers complained lou* about the "refugee burden," 445,000 were piled into buses and forced back into Cambodia in a well-mined border area. Unh o w n thousands died from mines, thirst, and neglect, while the UNFICR quietly atteznpted to negotiate a settlement with either the Thai or nearby Vietnamese arn-ty to provide relief and safe passage. ICRC complained more loudly of the repatriation action, a plea that was rejected angrily the Thai; and ICRC's head delegate was removed (Shawcruss 19&4:91-93). Despite the drama quietly t a h g place h Cambodia, hummitarim hterest was in fact focused on people fleeing by sea from Vietnam. By this time, in mid-1979, over 350,000 boat people were in camps, mostly in Malaysia, Hong Kong, S h g a p o ~Indonesia, , and Thiriland. ^The intemational press focused Western hummitarian cmcern on the boat people, and the Malaysian govmmmt p a m t w d that mernbers of the Western press wimessed rickety boats being forcibly pushed out:to sea. As a result,


Social Strucfure 0jRi~q1ttand Woug

the West adopted a somewhat cmtradictsry policy; at a UN-coordinated conferenre in Geneva, it was declided that a quarter milfim new =settlement spots would be prowided for fteeing boat people in the United States, Frmce, and other Western cottntries. Vjebann, the corntry whose abuses led to flight in the first place, also agreed. to seal its borders, fiertlby preventhg the flight of more ~ h g e e sThis . policy impbed closing Vietnam's borders to rcstrjct people who had Legitim,at.e kars of prsecutim, This cmvcni.nt compromising of refugee rights was a g ~ e dto , by all the memtime, in Cambodia" Viewamese-controlled areas, peasmts who had been relocated during the Khmer Rouge years actively sought rnissing family mernbers and r e m to their home villages for the first time in three years. Fighthg cmthued in western Cambodia on the Tl-tai border. But most irrrportant, the crops planted were abandoned. This raised the specter of mass famine in addition to fie fighting. Writing in a regional magazinel the FlEr Eastern Eccw~alrzicReview i,n late spring, Nayan Chanda. claimed: Kampuchea today is described by recent visitors and refugees as a countr)r after a holocaust. In this parched land abandoned towns are littered with skeletons and the debris of war, and hundreds of tbusands of dazed people crisscross the countr)~seeking missing relatives and tr)ring to reach their native villages (quoted in Shawcrass 1984:96).

This presented the international commw~itywi& a dilemma: whom to deal with, the discredited mnner Rouge who c m t m k d the small population along the accessibte Thai border, or the pditically suspect Vietnamese, who cmtrolfed the masses in a dangerous m d inaccessible interior? Consistent with their own established policy of neutrality, ICRC insisted on simultaneously cmtltcting both. Durhg the summer, contacts with both the Vietnamese-backed gover~zmexrtand the Khmer Rouge capital Phnom Penh were established with respect to the emerging famine; simultaneously the Khmer Rouge government, which was receiving bacEng b m China and mailand, also contacted ICRC and the UN for assistance, Finally, individuals working at the American embassy in Bangkok formed the er Emergmcy Group, which began to establish cont.ingency plans and drun?med up diplmatic support for a humanitarian relief operatjon. T h a e actions together initiated the Cambodia relief operation and set fie terns for the four categories of rczfugees that emerged. h b e d d e d in the definitions were also moral judgntczt~ts about the Cannbodims and their suitability for aid. The four categories were: borcter civilians associated with Khmer Rouge camps; border civilians msodated wi& the c m g s of the "Freeffmmer; Cambodians h i n g

Social Structure oJRiglzt and Wmng


inside Thailand h UNHCR-spo~zsoredcamps; and the vast miljority of refugees who remained in Cambodia itself, In October 1979, the p ~ d i c t e drefugee exodus emerged from Cambodia's forests. Ulzexpectedly; the Thai goverlzment reversed policy and asked the UNHCR to take charge of 60,000 '"llrgal immigrants" an two to four daysf notice. UNf-iCR hnmediately hired bUlldozers, back hoes, and water trucks to clear space for a c m p , dig latrines, and bring potable water. The Thai government bused ixz the refugcres on schedule, a mixtun. of Khmer Rouge soldiers, their families, and civilians who had been forced to travel with the m m e r Rouge (Shawcrass l984:176-17"3. Interagency fighting emeqetl a h o s t immediately, particularly in the context of press interest made stronger by an h e r i c a n government gearing up for: an electio~zyear and w a g to fund ge~zemtlslyrelkf programs in such a high-profile crisis. UPdHCR m d ICRC we= in particular criticTized by the Americans for faiIhg to bring staff in anticipation of the =lease of the refugee" or in response to their actual release. Thjs was done FR the context of feverish attention from the internationa) press, whose single Cyclopean eye covered the high-profile visit of First Lady Rosalyn Carter at the end of C)ctobec The logjams in publ-icity, fundislg, and attention for the a m e r were broken. The focus of the Good Samaritan was now on the 'Ihai-Can-tbodian border. By the end of thc.year, there were between GO0,QQOand 750,000 people in encampments alang the border, Many were refugees associated with rebel movements, the largest being the I(hmer Rouge, Mthich cmtk~uedto ~ c e i v ae m s from the Chinese and logistical s ~ ~ p p ofrom r t the Thai, There were also small armies of Free m m e r as well, which the Americans hoped wwld provide a nonCommunist alternative. Finally, there was an assortment of bandits, warlords, and people d uncertain origin, all armed. i\rs for the hul-rgry people pushing out of Cannbodja to the border, they probably had a mix of loyalties, some political but many gerscmal. Of course, such Loyalties could shift. Nevertheless, for practical and political reasons, food supplies could be routed only through the four relief categories. As a cunsequmce, the food of the ir^ltt.mationai refugee relief regime ended up being used to subsidize various po:ljtical a d j t i o n s of uncertain origi.n and er Rouge leacters, Free m m r , and bandits rushed in to establish conditions for how food would be distributed. Thus, the stage for the moral dile~~nrta of the Cambodia relief operation was set. fnJho shctdd be assisted? The border-based refugees via the (h. the masses rttmahing in the interior, where they were a ~ r n eRouge? r emtrolled by distasteful Vietnamese in\Paders? How to deal with the potential for forced rttpatriation by the mai-virtual blachail? The sotutim reached was to demcmize further the Khmer Rouge, while kedi,ng the populations living in areas controled by &em. Of the four


Social Strucfure 0jRi~q1ttand Woug

major players on the border, thcy had the djsadvantage of havifig by far the worst record, but dso c m t r d e d of the largest civilian populatim, an estimated 1 fillion inside Cambodla itself and border camps by 19D. The Khntm Rouge also continued to have the legitimacy of a seat in the United Nations, a political plum. Since, technically, the 1 million they controlled were fnternally displaced persons, the Unitecl Nations fomed the United Nations Border Relief Operation (UNBltO), througl? which stocks of World Food Prograrnm (WFP) h o d were handed over to the commanders of rimer Rouge refugee encampments. The encampments were located right on the border; their position inside Cambodia, was literally measured in meters.Weverthc?less, the diplomatic niceties demantfed that the people Living there were not "reftlgees" mwiting protection from the U'MCR, but iutternatly displaced persons. The distinctiosl becme important to the refugees, h the b d e r encampments, they were more likety to be caught in the fighting between the Viewamese, Thai, and border leaders"But the markets at the bosder camps were ro'oust as well, prwiding incentives for the more enterprising and/or mthless. This black market was perceived by s o w reat the border, lief workers as m indication that there was too little co~~trol and as a consequence, reiugees there werc "'overfed."s In contrast, movement within the UNHCR camps was restricted. The advmtage of the UNHCR camps was that- htemiews for overseas raettlernent werc available to refugees withixr these camps only, Westerners interested in isolating :Khmr Rouge were unsuccessful. Never able to extract the rbetoric about Khmer Rouge brutafity from their practical international politics, diplomats instead tried to avoid er Rouge repremtatives at the international shaking h a d s with the cderemees they attended together,%tymied by the Thai, K h m r Rouge, betnamese, and Chinese political demands, Western humanitarians were in effect p ~ s e n t c dwith choices between assisting militarized population~or not assisting at all, Give11 this choice, symbolic gestures were the only mems by which to respond. Somehow this helped create in the mind of the dcmors a picture of ~ f u g e e as s they wmted them to be: hungry, kfpess, and apoliticat.7 h the face of aggressive Thail Cambodian, and Vietnamese assertions of policy, the one way Westerners in ?'hailand had to assed their moral views of hurnanitar.ianism was by accepting hdoclkinese for overseas resettlement, For the United States a resettlement program was established following the p ~ c e d mof t the Vietnamese boat people program, vvhereby refugees we= admitted who could, est&l.i,sh Ihat they had rclason to fear persecution because of prior connections with the United. States or had ~ l a t i v eh s the United States-"age numbers of Viewarnew and Laotians which was made possible by the quickly established such co~~nectio~~s, deep involvement of the United States militaq in Tiietnam and Laos and

Social Structure oJRiglzt and Wmng


the evacuation of over 100,000 Vietnamese to the United States in 1925. The United States-volvement with Cambodia had been more indirect, and substantial popdations of C a m b o d h s did not go to the United States followi,ng the collapse of lndochina in 7,975.As a result, the Americans were slow to hitiate resettlement programs for Carmbodjans aft-er 3978, despite the fact that they were the largest refugee population in the rclgion. The irony in this was not lost on the Thai government, whjch adopted a policy of ""no second-country rcsettXernent," memjng no settlement in n a i l m d , kaving the Cambodians no option except ~patriation or third-country resettle~xentin the West or Japan. .A strong moral element was also injected by the Americans when the programs wert?estabtished. The Jofnt Voluntary Agency (JVA), an American contractor with the Department of State, was establi,shed inThailmd with m explicit goal of excluding n m e r Rouge and other undesirables @igamists,dnlg users, prostitutes, u m w d tutnerculars, etc.) from the resettlemat program T k 'Thai, governmnt, meancvhile, continued to play a role in the process by permitting only refugees in the UNHCR camps to be fnterviewed, irrespective cJf whether s r not they had a weiffourtded fear of persecution or met the h e r i c a n criteria, Refugees who were not accepted were occasionally fnrced back to the border encampments by the Thai military, whereas those s n the border Mxho might meet resettlcmemt criteria illicitly entered the camps to be intervkwed. mere was never any way to verify how successful JVA was in excluder Rouge from settlemmt fn the mitecl States. 'They did develop elaborate q.ilest-ioningprocedures, moted in the cotlectio~~ of intelligence horn refugee supplicants. The refugees had little to lose by lying and probably did so a great deal, a sih;lation contributing to the rumor and innuendo about n m e r Rouge activity wilhin tke camps. It undoubtedly made JVA decisjon-makixzg much more difficult, if not impossible. When I talked with the F A fnterviewers in 1983, I r e m e h e r being told that ultimately you codd telf whether someone was Khmer Rouge or not by looking into their eyes and by the way that they looked at you while being ve"tioned via the interpreter. In a sense, the final arhiter was the same one that Agatha Christie's Miss Marple used in s e ~ ~ s evil h g . . . the vague, irrational "atmosphere," 'T'he net sum of the Cambodian relief operation was that the moral questions took a backseat to the dcmands of international polities. The primary distinction made was between Khmer Rouge m d Free Khmer ~ f u g e e in s Cambodia, who were k d by UNRRO, Mrhich gave food allotments to lheir "leadcrs'yor distribution, or directly to refixgees who were in the UNHCR camps. Dcspite the differences h deservingness that this implied, this was by and large an admfnistrative distiwtion reflectkng refugees' Merent arrival times at the border rather than their abstract desen;ingness,


Social Strucfure 0jRi~q1ttand Woug

Thus, two legitimate questions were raised in the cantext of the Cambodiim refugee Aief operation: Do international politics always trump hrtmanitarian gods? Or does the presence of humanitarian operations provi,de succor to armks? In esse~~ce, who is deservi,ng and who is not?

Ethiopia, October 1984: TnJe Are the WarXd Ethiopia has a history of repeated war and famine, the rebellions in Tigray and Eritrea in the northern part cJf the country being ammg the most persistent. 'The chronic war in Eritrea in particular lasted from 1962 until that country became independent in 1991, and has flared since, Famhes in the 1970s led to fie downfall cJf Emperor Haile Selassie and the emergence of a new Marxist government in 1976. This also led to a period. of turmoil, as the Mamist gwernment, supported by the Soviet Union and its allies, began a process of villat;il,atim in which milliom of peasants wercz moved out of traditional areas and into collectivized villages. Such policies, the continuhg wars, and a drougfnt in 1982-8rf combined to create famine conditions. The humanitarim community of the West noticed the cohcidence of conditims and began issuing pleas for aid in late 1982. Pressure for aid came from Catholic Relief Services (CW), which focused on fie Americans, m d the Lutherm World Federation (LWF), focusing on the Europeans. Trickles of aid appeared. For exmple, 8,UOO tons of grain were pledged by Wshington. However, dcmors wert. reluctant to assist a government viewed as both wasteful and incompetent- It was freqwntly pointed out that the luxury facilities in the capital of Addis Ababa had received a $250 million makeover to celebrate the tenth rclvoluion, paid for primarily by Ethiopia's allies in the Soviet Union, East Gcrmany, and other Cmmunist countries. It did not take a long leap of Cold War judgment to conclude that the money would have been better spent on famine relief, In this context, the United. States government, which had the larg@stassistance famine relief capabffity, was reluctant to assist. tn part this was a product of the Reagan adn7,inistrationfsmticommunism; but it was also the result oi a number of slights to Amrican-Ethiopim relations stretching bark to 3974 and fmstration with tbe futile villagization program. Agaiin, as wi& Cambodia, there was a political question: How to assist a large starving population under the control of a government which was often cruel, incompetmt, and ideoZogical2y suspect? The K O s working in Ethiopia attempted to fill, the void. CRS was particularly aggressive with their lobbying effort in the United States, coordinathg the produc"cicm of op-ed pieces and stories in high-prdile papers like the Wnshl~zgfolzPost and New York Tin.~esin BM. The result was a

Social Structure oJRiglzt and Wmng


shift in American policy; mnotmced in September 1984, which resulted in the approval of 32,559 tons of food to be delivered to C E in Ethiopia in P;lovemi?er 1984 ((Solbag 1991:29-34). 'This amount was nominal, given the scope of the problem; however, it did signal a policy shift, and eventually a total of 400,000 tans were shipped. to Ethiopia by the United States (I(ap1an 1998:21). The turnaroulzd was accelerated in C)ctober 19M, when a film b y the Kenyan Filmmaker :Mohammed Amin was broadcast m the BBC news, I'he film had been made in one of the camps for Tigrayans divlaced by the war. Ethiopia suddenly gripped the world's attention. 'The film was the actual reason for the increase in food shiyped. from the United Slates, and not the dire (and accurate) bureaucratic analyses of CRS s r other agencies..W t h h a few days, news programs around the world used excerpts from the film, and it galvanizd Vzlestem pressure. The most notable comequmce was tbr reversal of the American gave toward Ethiopia, m d hterest was fanned throtrgk 1985by rock stars who organized. rock concerts and recordjngs (Rand Aid, organized by Bob Geldof, and "We Art, the World,'" a song recorded by a bevy of music stars). As a consequence the interest in Ethiopian relief was sustained well into 2985, The situation was rife with ironies. 'The famine relief and the various customs fees the government collected from W s t e n donors were uscd to beef up the Ethiopian military efforts against rebels in Eritrea, %gray, and O r m o that were at the root of the pmblem. As with the Cambodian situation, classilica.t.ion of eligible recipients was postponed. Few attempts were made to distinguish between combatants and noncombatants, and large amounts of food aid, mostly distributed in governmentcontsolled areas, unduuhtedly contributed to the survival. of the Communist-led gwernment. mough the relief effort tmdoubtedly saved many victirns from famine, it also propped up an incompetent regime at a time when it was u~zderattack m d did nothing about resolvhg the W>derlying causes of the fmine, Again, questions of good guys and. bad guys were raised in the cmtext sf the largest humanitarian relief effort carried out to that time.

Somalia: Operation Restore Hope Revolt in Somalia led to the downfall of President Siad Barre in 1990. I'here was no natimai authority to place him; instead, what authoriq was left was seized b y competing warlords who each controlled militias. vyicalfy the militias were responsible to one of the six large clans that are found in Somalia. Tl~isresdted in the immediate flight sf refugees into Kenya, where they were accomndated in UNf-XCB-sponsored


Social Strucfure 0jRi~q1ttand Woug

camps*Of more presshg corlcem, .Crhough, was the cmdition of the capital in Mogadishu, Tn 1990, the city was destroyed and 20,000 to 30,000 civilians were killed during fighting between rival clan rrtilitias. 11%the end, a clan leader, General Aideed, e~zdedup controllhg the city; but not the countp.ysid.c,where there was no efftlctive central government. During the summer of 1992, h e situation prolile rose in the American press. Focus was on. the part of Magadishu, m d reports from American NGOs that famine was imminent were briefly broadcast. Relief of the countryside was made difficdt by the presence of well-armed militia, who corltrolfed transportation routes out of the ports and aisports. Food was diverted by these militias, a use which the Western aid agencies considered unacceptable. Most agencies responded by hiring armed guards far t h i s convoys ol food; ICRC at orle point had 15,000 to 1,K,000 a r m d guarcis on payroll. T h i s yuickf. came to be seen as a form of blachail to avoid becoming a target rather than genuine ""scurity p r e c m t i o n ~ ~ ~ The U'N' itselr was styntied; as an organjzation composed of governments, it placed. centrail importarncc on the need to get permission from ents to mount relief ctperatims within their borcters. tn Somalia, there was no effective government, although there were plenty of claimants. X n summer 1992, the U N s interest in distributing hod overcame &:he political interest in preserving pinciples of sovereignty, and December, the United States contributed a military continent with the express goail of ensuring food deliveries. The cover of the Uercember 14, 3992, issw of Erne magazine bragged: ""Somalia: The W.S to the Rescue." Arrival of the troops was greeted with, mxirnurn fanfare kom the press, which Newsweek described: The Marines landed in Somalia, and Operation Restore Hope got off to a smooth start, except for a media circus on the landing beaches, which the military encouraged and then complained about. The real battles lay ahead: to feed starving people, impose order and disarm a country that Is awash in gms (Nczosz~eek~ Decmber 21,1992, p. 3).

The aid commu~~ity complained vehemently that food was being diverted, and under the protection of the cosnbined milit-ary contingents were portions of h e famine averted. It is believed that many lives wert. saved as a consequence of the intervention, and that this part of the intervention was a success (Natsios 1997). T11e armed contingents were transferred to UN command, but this proved not to be sustakable. This happened, 1 think, in part because a political need to maintain feelings of gratitude on the part of the Somali beneficiaries turned out to be too difficult in the emergir~gcircumstmces. Their gratitude was called into doubt in June 1993, when 24 Isakistani

Social Structure oJRiglzt and Wmng


peacekeepers were killed guarding a soup kitchen, and the West responded by issuing a warrant for the arrest of General Aideed, On October 34,rdations between donors and bmeficiaries again suffered when U.S. Marhes attemptkg to deliver the warrant were attacked, and three helicopters were shot down. Eighteen Marines and 208 Sornalis were killed in the unsuccessful arrest attempt. The future of U.S. assistance to Somalia was brought to a particularly high profile wher~an U',S. Mr-trine helicopter pilot was captured and subjected to a humiliating interview, and the body of a second Marine was dragged t h u g h the streets to the jeering of a Somali crowd. This, m o n g other things, m d e the moral category of the Somalis as victims particularly difficult to sustain in the press, wen though, as Dr)isdaIe (199E130) raticrndy note.;: 'The evidence that these higlly pubjicized and ernotive tragedies bore no relation to humanitarian peacekeeping needs to be emphatically stated." Nevertheless, for humanitarian peacemaking as a whole, the conseywnces were far-reaching.. The Americans, it was said, developed the "Somalia Syndrome," and this was blarned for their reluctance to engage in peacekeeping activities in Rwanda in 1994 and their hesitancy to be more aggressive in Kosovo in 1999. .As for Ai.dced and the Somalia operation, the UN effectively withdrew the arrest warrmt in November 1993, so that there would be someone to negotiate thc releaso of hostages with. In effect, the UN mandate had shifted in March 1993 from the delivery of relicf goods to '"nation buil.ding," Mxhich continued until 1995, when the final troops were withdram. Somalia itself averted the massive famine that loomed in 199-93, but also bas yet to establish a c ~ d i b l national e government in Mogadishu. The Paradox of Victimhood in International Relief Common to all three of these cases is a need to maiz~taina credible sense of victimhood. A moral category created for the Western donors, it gets taken up and used by rationalized bureaucracies. This is despite a fundamental contradktion: raticmalized bureaucracies are incapable of having such emotional commitments..21 is not a category hherent to the situations themselves, nor does it reflect preexistkg social categories. In each case, victimhod was a product of Western needs and fnterests. Indeed, until the international reftagee relief regirne focuses on them, the indjvidual Cambodians, Ethiopians, and Somalians who became delined as victims were just as likely to view thrmselves as enemies, friends, the starving poor, hustlers, homeless, or loyalists. But l.he old eategorks are irrelevant to the abstract category victirnkood; legitimated by the Westem prcrss, it is needed to trigger relief pmgrams. Were that not so, the bureaucratic assessments p ~ c e d i n geach relief effort would have been used

Social Strucfure 0jRi~q1ttand Woug


to commit resources much earlier to Ethiopia, Somalia, and Cambodia, and as a consequence, the dire emergencies portrayed m Western televisitrn screens may not have even emerged in the first place.. fndeed, to a g a result of the certain level, this type of prevention already is w c ~ r r i n as &mine early-warning systems established in the 19';aOsand 1 9 8 0 ~ . ~ For civil disorder, however, such early-warning systems do not yet: apply. 'The decision to commit massive resottrces b r refugee relief =mains embedded h moral disthctions about who is a v i c t h and who is not, a decision that currently is negotiated in the field of public. discourse rather than of bz~reaucraticlegalism. This imbues relief opemtions with a sense of morafity whereby judgment of the actions of others hecornes legitimated, often in simplistic categories srtiting the needs of the donors rather than f t h g the refugees themselves, The results are mornalies such as Cambodims recejvilrg assistance in one kind of camp, but not h another. Other examples are the rcsfationships established by the ICRCfs armed guards in Somatia and the need to deal with the various factions in Ethiopia, Notably, when these categories became untenable, the opesatiltn redefined the nabre of victirnlzood, a situaticrn particularly evident in Somalja, After peacekeepers were attacked and humiliated, the Somalis they had been ""helping" "were =defined as victhizers, This tendency to make moral judgments ranges from assessments of the trivial (whether proper gratitude is expressed) to interprebtions of eye contact to whether a particular FRdividual is guilty of war crjrnes or not. fn efiFect, when there is a lack of bureaucratic sgecidizaticm, it becomes possib%e to expect- all things of ali penple,l% situation that a British aid worker was surprised to find while working in the refugee camps for Rtzrmdans: problems they [the UNHCR and donors] expected us to solve were overwhelming; bigger than lif-problems of justice, national reconciliation, human rights. T'm just a community development worker. W were not trained in those things. We are just new to all this, but we had to make decisions about these issues almost every day. (Watkup 4996:"i"). "fhe

h mmy ways the sentiment exprctssed here is strange; indeed it is unlikely that the same aid worker would have the s a w complaint had she re~nainedin Britah. For example, if shc dealt daily with &%-addicted babies on her job, 1 doubt that she would assert that her job in Britain requires pwsonal judgments about drug control policy-because it wou.ld.nrt.The bureaucracies of the Nafiol~alMeal& 9rvjce and the judicial system compartmentalize these tasks, and she would be held personally accountable only for her narrowly deihed ret;ponsibilities. Her competencies in Britain arc well d e h e d , m d do not inclde Ihe duties of a

Social Structure oJRiglzt and Wmng


jwy and judge. If she lost sleep over her job in Britain, I suspwt it wottld be From cmpassim for the injustice done the drug-addicted baby, not for international drug trade, i~mer-citypoverty etc., which unvestionahly are also likely part of the problem. Barbasa Harsell-Bond (1986) has written about how this moral need to sepa"te deserving victims fmm the undeserving local populations who were actually hosting thern shaped agency programs in the soutf.tem Sudan and norhem Uganda. In explaining why refugees needed to be separated f m local populatiotls assisting them, she made the following observation about. the humanjt.arian c o m w ~ i t yworking these in the early 1980s: To attract money refugees must be t~isiibte.It is difficult to count the numbers of self-settled refugees, . . even if they could be identified. . . . Given the nature of international aid, host governments have fc3und it impc~ssibtetcr cmvince donor gc>vernmentsto spend monies earmarked for refu"uge assistance expanding the economic and social infrastructu~which would cope with such dramatic demagraphic changes. Distinguishing between victims of mass distress migrations has always been for the convenience of donors, since the immediate physical needs of t b s e who Bee across intei-na"tionalboundaries are the same as for the internally displaced-.. . . Humanitarian agencies assume that refugees always require relief and that material assistance must came from outside the host country (Harrell-Band 4986:8-9).

She went on to write about how these requiremnents led humanitarian agencies to assrtme that refugees

. . . constitute "a problem," a b u r d e rather than an economic vportunity. Outsiders view African refugees as helpless; as needing outsiders to plan for them and to take care of them. This assumption is the cornerstone of nearly a11 appeals for funds. Agencies vary in the degree of dignity with which they transmit images of refugees, but all rely on a public which will respond to media portrayal of extreme human suffering and starvation (1986:12-3 3). Note that these categories arc. created in response to the needs oE those assisting, not the refugees themselves. She go- on to state that this cornpassim is a m m l virtue, which is d.ifficult to measure. The problem is that there is m unspoken assun-tption that because refugees are hrlpiess, and the~forc3worlhy of rmpassian, "'any obstacle in the path of carrying out humanitarian objectives must be inzmctrnl, And shce the objective is to do good, it is inccmceivable that ~eipientswill faif to be grateful" (Harrc.11Bnnd 19%:2rj). Esse~~tially &is is thc catch Ihat led to the pr&lems with


Social Strucfure 0jRi~q1ttand Woug

Operation Restore Mope In Somalia. General Aideed came to be ~riewedas immoral, and this view c m e to dominate the rational decision-making oi the assistance bureaucracies to a point where the only feasibk response was to discanthue the program. S k a a r issues were raised with respect to the Carrrbodiacl and Ethiopian relief progrms, Theref too, the bureaucratically rafional decision (hWeb=% sense) to intervene was not taken until the highest level of an abstract ""desczmingness"(as opposed to a rationalized need for assistance) was established, fn effect, the extension of m r c y demanded the establishment of a high level of compassitm befort. rnercy could be shown..Waiting for this meant that the "most goad" wottld be preferred, But it also memt that, in effect, the most compassionate decision could not be made earlier. This demand for contpassio~~ ultimately distorts the implemem.t.ationof refugee assistance programs and the picture of refugees throughout an operation, as field-level bureaucrats wrmtle with the conflicting demands. 'This paradox is 1 think n o w h a better illustrated than b y the fob lowing example mcalled by PYlark Walkup (199783-84) in his dissertation: 1 once obsemed a UNHCR Field Officer in Badaab [Kenya] trying to get a large group of Somali refugee women tcr sit down wK-Lilethey waited in line far distribution of plastic sheeting used for shelter construction. When they did not comply with directives to sit, he seized a small tree branch and began beating the women. His beating ccjntinued thr~ughauthis time there, which h e told me was far "mmonitc>ringpurposes." Also during this time, h e approached a small group of refugees gathered between the refugee women and the distribution center and grabbed a teenage boy by the neck and roughly slung him to the grc>undwith an audible thud. His threats with the stick persuaded them to disperse, When he apprmched me after with stick in hand, he said matter of factly, '""eating refugees with sticks is nat in UNWCR policy, but- sometimes we have to do it." On the beating, his colleague attested, "Somali women need this because they don? tddcstand like the men," The Field Officer later commented that he hcjped this would not go in my. repc~rt.. . .

Conclusions The common t h ~ a ruming d t h u g h these examples is that victims and ~rictimizationare not preexisting discrete categories, but are categories created in the context of the moral d m a n d s of the international rehgee relief rltgirne. Given the nabre of international law and hu~aucraeylit is not s~trprisingthat the b~xreazlcraciesbend s3uations to m e t their defini-

Social Structure oJRiglzt and Wmng

tions of refugees as b e i ~ ~victims. g This is why a primary job of the UNHCR continues to be hearing m d adjudicating individual asylum requests. But this has little to do with broader questions of right and wrmg in the context of the mass refugee mergencies which are the prirnary focus of the international refugee relief regime today The cases described above illustrate at least two moral dilemmas that are insoluble in the context of refugee relief. First, the category of victim as currently constructed implie" ppolLcal vacuum for the mfugee. The ~ f u g e eis assumed to have no pditics or feelirngs vis-8-vis the situation that caused Right in the first place. There is no evidence to support this assumption; in fact, there is a wealth of evidence to the contrary. Cannbodim peasants do have attihtdes tt>warcl the m m e r Rouge and the Vietnamese invaders. Certainly the Somali people had political views. But none of these attitudes necessarily fit inside a bureaucratic box developed in foreif;n capitals to fur&er the geostrategic fnterests of players of international polities, cvho also likely cont.ml the purse strings o( refugee aid. In eifect, because refugee flight is hherently politicat to assume palitics away from rczfugees is to assrtme away the politics in politics. tn tbfs process, demands elnerge for humanitarim superworkers, people able to deal with issues on a level far outside their specialized expertise. As a resdt, refugees are forced into the preexisting boxes created in the conversation taking place in thc press and bureaucracies. Notably, this is not done by people with training in the use of bureaucmtized law, but in the press, by nufses, on W,fn newspapers, and by NGOs and others abte to shout loud e ~ ~ o u gtohbe heard. Second, mass refugee mvements do not lend themselves to the caseby-case legal determination prwieied for by current brtreaucratic procedures..To do so implies preparing case files for every one of the millions of refugees f o n d in the typical mwement. The alternative is that judgments are made in political arenas or in tbcz press. Thus, the issue of moralliq, as clnrrelrtly constructed, is a by-product of bureaucratic and political posturing as much as it is a higher-level assessment of what is right and gcrod, m wrong and evil. "I'his is because the to s o l ~ ~ t iwith o ~ ~the s availrnaral issues involved do not lend the~~selves able bureaucratic tools, Bureaucracies by their very nature do not deal well with the feelhgs and inbition found, most appropriately, in ingatha Christie novels. Imagine the problems a bureaucracy would have in hdling a detective like Miss Marpie, The problem is that Miss MarpIes's feelings are. not predictable or quantifi&Ie, and Miss Marple while efficient, was notoriously difficult to control! me field-lwcl bureaucrats, with their illdependence and need fur multiple skills, are the same. The consequence is that an emphasis on the maintenance of image takes precedence over a rationalized assessme~~t of cvhetihes objectives are met.

Social Strucfure 0jRi~q1ttand Woug


In S L E C ~a bureaucratic context, image becomes a primary goal, and program impfementatjon becomes more haphazard. Notes I. Such aggressiveness (and lack of attentic~ntcr detail) can lead to ironies, as noted by Johan Pottier (1996:426) in the case of Rwandan rei'ugees who were quoted in the same article of the 28 July, 1995, French journal Le Soir. "According to Carol. Faubert: for UNHCR, T h e i n t i ~ d a t i o nof '"ordinary" "refugees by leaders of the old Rwandan administration ""no longer occurs," even though extremists continue to effectively spread their disinfarmation campaign."T~ottier adds, ""MSF writes: 'The Instigators of the geno>cideare taking control of the camps in an increasingly systematic way, and block the return of the refugees. . . . [The instigators] are free to come and go beween camps, and manlputate the refugees thrc~ughcontmlling the flow of political information" (Pottier's translation), 2. Pottier (19"3:405) commented regarding the frequent recourse to dichtjtomous masoning he rtbsei-ved in the Rwanda crisis. He w r i t e that there is ""a wider ignorance within the "international commmityhbout political processes. . . . Aid workers, journalists observerst cconsumers of media informatian, all prefer to reduce social complexity though recourse to simple dichotomies.*' 3. Before the h-entleth century the petty principalities in what is now Cambodia and Lam were vassals of the larger and more powerful Thai and Vietnamese monarchs. Thus, it was in Laos and Cambodia that the two regionat powers rubbed up against each other. The Thai as a result developed pc~rtionsof Laos and Cambodia as buffer states to protect Thailand proper from their greatly feared rival in 'Vietnam. After the French left Indochina in 1954, Thailand adopted this policy again, backing the pro-Western factims in both countries against the Vietnamese-atlied Communist parties. Communist Vietnam in turn supported the insurgency of the Thai Communist party. Thus, in 1978, for the first time in decades a Vietnamese army was on the Thai border; reigniting longstanding fears. The Thai responded by backing whichever Cambodian faction fought the Vietnamese, including the Khmer Rouge, into the 1990s (Shawcross 22000). This led to the cynical observation that "the Tl~aitzrere tzrilling to fight the 'VieZnarnes to the last Cambc~dian." 4. See Mayotte 1992:42-83. Between 1979 and 1992 there was shifting ~ C ~ C I the SS line from the Cambodian to the Thai side. Far the entire period there existed a no man" land tzrhich was occupied by the refugees. Whichever side of the line they were on, the refugees were unable to seek protectian from the Thai or Cambodian gcjvernments. Also, they continued to have an anomalous relationship with the international refugee refief reirne. The variom leaders, bandits, and warlords effectively maintained their sc>vereignty 5. See description in Mason and Brown 1983:36-47 and Shatzrcross 19%:225-252. Shawcrc~ss~ in the cmclusion to his book, makes a comparison between the amctmts spent on each group of refugees. For the period between Qctaber 1 9 7 h n d Dtrcember 1981 this f i e r e ranged from a high of $1,124 per head for

Social Structure oJRiglzt and Wmng


refugees in the UNFTGF: camps to a lcw of about $48 per head for Cambc)dians who remained at home, Such figures are mugh approximations of the "benefits"" each received and are also indicative of the "mpressed preferences" h a t Western agencies had for different types of refugee victim behavic~r, 6, Shawcross (1984:138), in a chapter titled "Washing of Hands," describes how the American delegate to the United Nations found himself shaking the hand of Teng Sary, foreip minister of the m m e r Rouge. His comment to Shawcross was jf"Ielt like washing my hand." "nior NGO staff described to me meetings with Sary and others from the =met. Rouge in Bangkok in 1982-83, They described to me the prcjcess they went through to avoid shaking hands with him, which was samething of an admission of their powerlessness in challenging humanitarian policy 7. Mason and Brown (1983:172) wrote: "Relief workers tended tcr perceive the refugee camps as the donors and they themselves would have wanted them to be: filled with hrmgry and helpless people in desperate need of aid. Relief workers rewarded helplessness with compassian, self-reliance with suspicion. When a young Khmer worker from the feeding center join4 the militar?p;relief workers considered him lost. When a public-health trainee was seen trading sandals in the market, she was reprimanded. ImpXicitly., relief organization policy. sought to keep the Khmer people powerless." From this perspective, the militaries and markets were a threat to the aid agenciesbabiljty to control their image, and thereby their ability to fund-raise by exploiting the prolific press images of hmger and helplessness. 8. The United States-rogram tvas by far the largest. P-ic~wever,France, Canada, and Australia and other countries also established programs. The criteria for inclusion in each country" programs were different. The "prior connection" criterion was of most interest to the Americans, Other countries took refugees only with minimum skill tevels and, especially; language ability The result was that poor peasants unskilled in the ways of the West but who had served in American-sugporled military unlb had the United States as their primary destination, The outstanding generosity of the American program (any eligible refugee irrespective of language or professional skill was resettled in the States) I-tascost: that country billions in public tvelfaw costs for EImong refugees and otkers. This outstanding generosity nevertheless occurred in the context of a petty admissions prcjcess. 9, "Te relief veration far Murds in Kurdistan was conducted in 1992 beyond the eye of the press. It is generally regarded as successfut from a humanitarian viewpoint. The fe@timating fact in that case tvas not the press, but American political interests in maintaining an ally who woutd oppose Saddarn Hussein at that time. Notably this operation was undertaken with minimal press coverage, few NGOs, and a well-defined objective (see Natsios 1997). 10. Oddly, this view of the kumnitarian as a ""superhuman"%as been receiving more currency in recent years, perhaps a seriom reaction to a widely disseminated 1995 adicle in which Slim suggests that a tongue-in-cheek description of the ideal aid worker is somehow relevant: ""First, they must take graduate degrees in social antl-rropc)lc>gygeography. economics, a dozen or so difficult and

,;;lt?Sem jo qeaj m ~ a j ~ 02a duodn paip3 a4 uago Xaq a q s " 1 3 ~S" pueq-jo-)q%falw~"a~ ppoa .";ay$$1 i ~ aqap~ncjm ~ 41 pue 'sssauflqufes $0uorlelrur! afqlpaf;) e an@02 u;leal ~sr'lurAayj uoxjtppe ul -'alx;;l.aaur2uage~tj~e-tci Go~o~piCy 8Xurouu~%e amajadruc,:, ajesqsuourap lsntrx Aaqq " a ~ a ~f e q $ ~aJow e~d Ai~y%r[s e je "uuo~as .uor)e;lJsruru;rpessauxsnq pue 3ursrpaLxr "sa2en2uel pa4qa;lun

Making Comparisons Between and Within Emergencies 77rp fact of beitzg rrported multiplies the apparmt exf~ntof any deplorable event by five- to tet~fold(or latzy-figurrthe rmder zt~ouldcare to suppl!~). ---Barbar%Tuchman, A Bist~zntMirror: TIze Galntzzitot~s170tlrteetztlz Cerztury

I want to =view briefly what Cl~apters2 to 4 have established. Chapter 2 was a history of relief eMorts in this century C,&e other modcm endeavors, Aief operations have expanded m d grown in the last 70 years, They have grown along bwaucratic lines in a mamer similar to those found in most modern institutions. Chapter 3 described the nahare of rnodern bureaucracies, It discussed what factors make refugee relief dihrent from other bureaucratic endeavors and, from a theoretical level, where those weaknesses might be expected to be fotxnd. It was pinted oat that in normal bureaucracies the primary goals are profits or maixltenance of poweq a d these are easily measurrd. In humanitarian relief hmaucracies, on the other hand, the primary goal, being rooted in morals rather than a rati~naiizedmedium like profits or polls or votes, is vaguelp defh~ed.As a result, the criterion for success or failure (also called fie depende~~ variable) t is rooted in the mercy of l.he donors, not the actual needs of beneficiaries of the hdp, or '"victjm.~."h CChapter 4, the need to define good guys, bad guys, and victims was discussed. It was noted that this is a process the Good S m a r i t a n bureaucracy is ill-equipped to deal with, and that there is a proliferation of responsibilities where normally fiere would be a consolidation, Chapter 4 also &scribes trhree different situations (Thailand, EChiopia and Somalia) h which attempts were m d e to sort out victims and victimizers and notes that such definition of good and bad was highly situational, and was often rooted in political wish,es as w d as more &tract

humanitarian goals. In the case of Western democracies, this process of id.entil"ieatim of vktims and victimizers was highly dependent m the focus of the press rather than m the judicial fact-finding implied by the bureaucracies of the Good Sarnaritm. By themseIves, these observatiosls are interesthg, While X hope that I have framed them in a slightly new fashion, I have doubts that any one of these is particdaly original. Certainty, points about the "CN'N' effect" and the inefficiencies of the international relugee relief regime have b m made elsewhere. But I want: to go one step Eurther. My goal in the irst part of this book was to lay the theo~ticalfoundation as the central thesis of this book: that if the Good Samaritan,bureaucracy is understood as such, the international rehgee relief regime can be understood better. This differs from the more tradjlional reforms typically proposed to achieve greater effjciencyin the delivery of humanitarian pmgrams, be they increment& fmprovemmts h administrative hierarchy and coordiz~ation(see Ingram 1993; Natsios 1996; Walkup 1997; W X 1996) or trainhg and technology (Chdindcr 1994; Waters 19841, impmvemmts in relief distribution practices (IrJatas 1988; Pottier 1996; Jaspars 7,994; S h o h m 7,996), prosecution of war criminais (MSF 7,995; Destexhe 19961, accountability (Walkup 199i"),or better management of press elations WSF 1995; Bicrbauer 1996; Minear, Scott, and Weiss 19%)My cmtention is that the underlying logic of the international refugee relief regime is focused by the bureaucratic need to satisfy the emotions of the donor, rather than the rational needs of the refugees for relief services. Because t-his happens, it is necessary to maintain refugees as pkusiblcz vicths vis-8-vis the donor, whether or not this definition is useful in an bureaucratic (administrative or legal) sense. Next I show how these understanding5 can be used to inform analysis of specific prohiems that emerged in the Rwanda refugee emergency in Tanzania. This leads to two kinds of comparisons:

* Between emergencies as diverse as Rwanda, Cambodia, Ethiopia, and Tanzania. Within techically diverse fields such as water engineering, contingency plaming, food distribution, logistics, and evaluations of violent death.

h effect, donor demands for political legitimation, pl-irnarily in the form of positive popular press cowerage, drive the hreaucracies of the intemationai refugee relief regime rather than the efficient delivery of scrvices to rcfugces. As will be shown in the examples from the Rwmdtm operation, a by-product is that pmtocois and technologies that rest on rational bureaucratic impernelntation become less effectve. Efficiertey mffers at. afj. levels

of the operation, which by defjni.tion is bureatrcratic, The result is a lack of rationalization firouglnout the system. The level of deckion-making concerned ranges from decisions about when, h e r e , and how to respond down to what type of water pumps should be selected to identifyhg who is and isn"t eligible for ~ f u g e assistance, e

Reliability, Validity, and the Study of Emerf~encies Like any social scimce project, assessing the Rwanda litg gee relid operation requirc3s rcljable and valid measures. Emagencies by their very nature present unique methodojogicd challenges and, 1 think, for this reason are best studied in a compwative manner, which includes broad context. A. diflerellt approach would be a focused ethnographic approach, which emphasizes the brief period when a researcher happens to be present. This appmach, thou$ often appropriate to study settled circumstances, leads to biases in elnergency situations, which are fluid (Waters 1999a:15&54), But comparative techiyues raise two methdological issues: first, t-he validity of comparative snciology; and second, the reliabiliiry n( data collected during emergencies, wfirich are periods of rapid social change, Valid Methods: T6Lc Naturt of Corrrpnrafivr Soeinlqy

Although data from different emergencies are not in the strictest sense comparable, as they would pehaps be if: they resulted fsom a doubleblhd medical experiment, similar operations have been described at different times and locations. The question is hoMi to put together different types of studies conducted at- cl.iffesc3mttirnes and places in order to reach general conclusions? This suggests the use of cmparative sociological technipes relying cm data that are actualfy available, rather than what is ideally mailable as in the double-blind experixnent, By using historical comparative techniques{ one can eliminate or confirm possible altemtive explanations (see Gddstcme 1991; McGratrh 1984; \iVaters 199Eia and 1999b).l The advantage oi a comparative approach is that when we look at data from very different emergencies-for example, Tbailanli in 1973 and Tmzania in 1,994-we can start eontroHing for a broad range of social, c&tural polltical, and temporal conditiuns. In doing this, we can study the effects a common factcn has on decisicm-making. For example, a pattern of behavior m the part of the U'NHCR that was described for Tanzania could be written off as being idiosyncratic, ~ s u t t i n g from the particularities of that sikation. If tbr same pattern were found in tbe Esponse of the U'N'MCR to the Cambodian refugees in mailand, it w u l d be more

difficdt to write it off to the idiosyncrasies of the Tmznnia sitmtion; it could be better described as being a function of the unique instihxtional cuiturr of the UNHCR. Now, if the pattern wert? also found in the way that the U.S. gover ent and Cathoie Relief Services wsponded to the Ethiopian famhe, it becomes a characteristic of a broader phenomenon attributable to the broadtrr international rc-rfugee relief regime. As the cornparisms multiply, and an analytical constnlct We the bureaucratized Caod Samaritan is used to describe ever more situations, validity in effect improves ta a point where the cmstmct can be useful for analyzing similar situatio~zs* Jan Vmsina (19911, a scholar of African history, describes how the validity of such comparative methocls is evaluated to describe otkrcvise unobservable events, in his case, the spread of migrant groups across central Africa before there were written records. He notes that such an approach achfeves a higher order of logical validity because it pmwides expXanations for a large nutnber of hterconnected events. The point of such an appmach is to find as examples disparate cases, and then idmtify the underlying process common to ali (\lamina 1991:250). 'The ernphasis o~zexplaining unusual situatio~zs,hzown. in statistics as "o~tliers~" is important, because if this can be done the chmces of the model being applicable to other more normal cases that are not part of tbrt original s m p k improve..In this way, the tests for validity are different than more iarniliar methods of survey research, which assume that random@ chosen events reflect events that are not chosen. Applying these prhciples to the i s s ~ ~ discussed es here, I am making the followkg claims: There is an inter~zationalrefugee relief regime which is composed of numerous small bureaucracies whlch all have an expmssed goal (dependent variable) of providing refugee relief services aromzd the world. * This internationa) refugee relief regime, though clearly established on bu~aucraticprincir>les, is not able to reach its stated goal of providing such services wit.h efficiency, cdculabifity, predictability, and control. This inability is due to the fact that the goal itself is vaguely defined and sbifts quickly The international refugee relief wgime i s hypersensitive to the i q a c t of the press on donor politics, otherwise k n o m gmeraIly as the ""CNN effect," a factor that fntroduces bureaucratically irrational emotion into calcztltatio~zsof bureaucratic success of failblre. * 'l'hese effects mean that the emergencies actual respanlied to are, fsom the point of objective humanitarian need, fairly arbitrary

More important are the emotional recyuirements, which tend to be reflected not just in which emeqencies arc selected, but also in how actual programs artl Fr.nplemented.2

Reliability-The l~zlzere~z t Dzficulties in Ev~11trat i r y 6nergency Opemtions Barbara Tuchman (1978)sulnmed up the issue of reliability in developing data for her book about what she called Europe" 'kcalmitous fourteenth cenhtryffa pmiod of &ease, war, and disortymization that saw the continent's ppopulation declhe by about one third. I believe that, particularly in the context of modern journalism (if it bleeds, it leads), her assessment also has some relevance to the reliability of data collected for a book f-abcrutemergency operations:

The fact of being reported multiplies the apparent extent of any deplorable event by five- to tenfold (or any figttw the reader would care tcr supply).

ExpIahing the origins of her ""Law" Tuchman notes: Disaster is rarely as ger~asiveas it seems from recorded accounts. The fact of being on the record makes it appear continuous and ubiquitous whereas it is mow Zikefy to have been sporadic both in time and place. Besides, persistence of the normal is usually greater than the effect of distuhance, as we know from our own times. After absorbing the news of today, one expects to face a wclrld ccjnsisting entirely of strikes, crimes, power failures, broken water mains, stalled trainsf school shutdc>wns,muggers, drug addicts, newNazis, and rapists, The fact is that one can come hame in the wenin lucky day-without having encountered more than one or two of these phenomena (Tuchman 1978:xviii).

The point that Barbara Tuchrr-ran is making is that most things are not written down, and what gets writtell dnwn is not random, What gets writkn down is what is most interesting or relevant at the moment, most dramatic, or with the benefit of hindsight most sipificant. Nodern refugee emergencies, witfi their overt dependence on press attention Proadening " I " M c ~ ~ Law ~ ' s to thisrgs nut only written down but also communicated widely) and srtffering, probably exceed the ""five-to tenfoldf"discaunt ratios she recommends. Like Tuchmm's study of fourteentkcentury disasters (and keeping in mind. that the fourteenth century was far more disastrous h humm terms thm the twentieth), this study of disaster response by the humanitarim bureaucracies needs to

take Tuchman" Law into accotmt. Despite press-related assertions to the contrary, refugee carnps are usually the. most boring of places, in which wai2ing and milling about are probably the most cornmm activities.

Reliabilil-y: The hhrrelzf blstabitify ofRI.fidgee Crises Modern refugee crises are h e r e ~ ~ t unstable, ly leading to three separate issues that shvuld be considered when evaluathg the mliability of data (Waters 1999a:154). First, data sets are often unavailable, a d those that are typicalty are collected under difficult cmcfitions, raising issues of REability; Second, the inhrently unstable nature of emergencies makes the "cross-sectional data'"ypi,cal,iy available of less value fnr making broadelr inference. Most data, quantitative or qualitative, are collected only at one particular time and as a result are cross-sectional, representing wfiat was happening at the time wheln Ihe data were collwct.ed and not the time before or after. This meacrs that healfi or demographic surveys, budgeting assumptims, rczgistration statistics, morbidiq rates, etc., can be used to draw inferences only .for the brief windokv of time they were collected. An important parameter in the developmnt of a refugee situatim is time; camps tend to grow, shrink, and change fairly quickly. Udess such statistics are arranged in a time series, t h y can be of little use except fnr the short time around which they were collectd. Pasticularly in a refugee situation, you c ot assume &at conditions go backward or fmd in time i,n a predictably consistent fashion. Qualitative data, impressions written down, do sometimes bave mre depth, although the usual tradeoff is the prt-cision of calculabffity. Often, hawevcr, these writhgs are also "cross-sectional""; they are done hp aid workers and consultmts on short contracts, or journalists on short visits. I'hese ~pol-tsmay be more insightfut thm quantitatke data, and in some conditions, But their weahess ways are more appropriate to emerge~~cy is that they must be considered in the context of Tuchman%Law Their authors, too, write down mly that which is unusual and eye-catch& irrespective of thc fact that most social interaction even in a refugee camp is mundane. 7"0 mphrase Barbara Tuchmm" tongue-in-cheek aphorism in terms of what a rczfugee worker might experience: "One expects to face , children, thieves, a world consisting entirely of mss m u r d e ~ r s dying cholera victjms. The fact is, even in a refugee camp one can come h m e in the evening trYithoUf;having encountered more than one or t w of these phenomena!" fadapted from Tuchman 1,97e3:xvii,ii). There are of course people trained and capable of seeing past the drama into the muntSane nature of social history, as indeed Tuchman was, These people are typically in aeadernia, though, and not refugee

camps. There is a paucity of such broad-based analyses because acad m i c s are rarely on the scene quick@ enough to develop the broader context in which such stories can be developed wefl. Journalists are often capable of writhg insightf~xlassess~nentsthat take into account a broader perspecthe. However, the nature of deadlines and assignment editors means that only the most persistent are consistently present in a p a r t i c h r emergency long e ~ ~ o u g tohm& broader selnse of it.3 But again, longer assignments to a region or emergency arc the exception, not the rule, and the vast bulk of what is written about emergencies reflects fleeting impressions of a reporter sent to a site specikally to report on the dramatic elements, not to provide a detlper analysis. Methods for this Study I worked in weskm Tanzania on a m a l refugee resettlement project for Ru,rm~diansin 1984-47, and trhm in the Rwaxlda ~ f u g e relief e tlpera.t.ion from 1994 to 1996, Tn the latter job, I was extensively invdved with setting up the operation, especidy issues of food transport, t n t c b ~ gwater , development, and the management of Chabalisa 2 refugee camp in Kasagwe District, In these positions I learned the benefits of "arguing by anecdcrte."' In the absence of a skady supply of calcmlabe data, this is a technique well developed, in most emergency bureaucracies. This type of argument is different from the m e a s w d accumulation and weighing of data typically used in a history lilcc Tuchxnan's. Such anecdotes m y not reach Ihe standard for the measured accumulation of data by standard. academic writing, but it is nevertheless the basis for the quick efecision-makfng used in elnergencies in particulas, and bureaucracies in general. Quick decisions based on seemingly incomplete data were the basis for the policies &at unfc7lded during the two years I was in Ngara, as is gmerally the case in emergencies..Such a method of course opens one to criticism by academics conditioned to more caref-ul (and slower) methods of argumentation, which ultilnately result in fewer mistakes, but arc. too slow for the dynamics of emergency admi,nistr&ion. Nevertheless, such techniqueAbased in anecdote are often '"the best we can do," and in the absence of mything better need to be assessed and anatyzed. An academic shruggi.ng of shodders and saying "'we can't tell" won" do. After A, relief administrators make important decisions m the basis of such data, and there is no reason that academics can't stick their collective necks out of their shells too. Because I was involved in day-to-day administration of tbe relief protjran-t, I was not able to collect data (quafitative or vantitative) in a systematic fashion. What f was able to do was oceasiona& take notes, col-

lect memormda, and news articles. Part of my job was also to do the reporting about the crisis in general for the Lutheran world Federation. Particularly toward the enci of my time in Ngara, I was able to devote a greater aunow~tof time to this mare introspective activity; m d my choice of subjects presented here reflects this somewhat. To this bias toward the t u t h s a n World Federation" pmgrams, I can only point to Jan Vmsina's centrd point: in comparative social science, the point is to pick the ""outliers," and not just what is typical. I suspect that the mdical programs also had a great deal cJf interesting material; they certailnly had the largest number of expatriate rcljef workers and the largest budgets. Having noted the caveats, it is now time to get on with the Rwanda situation. The b a n d a situaticm was both an exhilarathg and tragic experience. Countless lives were saved, to a considerable extelzt because of the UNHCR" sskill at o ~ a n i z i n ga response once they we= on site. Much of this skill had to do with focusing internationd attention and raisint; money and evipment for the i,nitiat responscl. This was a admhistrative and logistical achievement. Thus, there is a major hun-tanitarian success story to be told here. But part of the story is that in the end, a major huntanit.arian principle, a stand against forcible repatriation, was discarded by the UNHCR, or at best i p m e d . I trust that recmdering these successes and f a i l w s in the cmtext of. the bureaucratized Good Samaritan adds to an understandir?g of how this happened and.why Notes 1. This section is adapted from my bc)ok Crime and Imnt@rn~tlVot;lfll(I999b) and draws heavily on pp. 5455, 2. Follow-ing similar reasoning, Goldstc~ne(19(31:57-58) points out that the point of such m apprc~achis to identiEy a process that has unfc~ldedin a similar but not necessarily identical fashion in a number of different contexts. Such a process is not necessarily a law, but is a causal statement asxrting that a particular sequence will emerge because imtitutionti or individuals-in this case the international refugee relief regim+respond in a similar fashion tc~similar situations. I f the proposed construct is a good one, people will retipond similarly, and as a result, likety actions can be predicted andior explained. 3, Two important examples of this are Shawcross's The Qzdalr'ty#Mercy! which is about the Cambodia relief operation, and Rcybert E. Kaplarz" S~rvendcror Stnrr~c:The Wars Bchirzd the Faruritzc, tesley Bilinda, a missic~naryin Kwanda, alsa wrote an insightful book, Tke Colour c$ Darkness, about the genocide in Rw-anda. Her book fc3cuses on the work of her missictn and that of her husband, who was killed in the genocide. She did write one chapter about Benaco, but this chapter reELected the unusual week in October 1994 when she visited, and not the more mundane weeks that followed and p ~ c e d e dit,

Explaining Rwandan Genocide, War, and Relief

Explaining Genocide The special nature of Rwanda in the modern Western hagination emerges out of one word: '"genocide.'TVirtuatly al) accounts written &out Rwanda, sjncc 19944 take the genocide as their jumping-off point, whether the subject be economics, agriculture, fand refonx, religion, h o d security, ethography, politics, government, or geography*Even Natinml Geocide]:overpoputatim. This [subject] is still a taboo, became human beings are not supposed

to be rats in a laboratory cage, and Christians, Marxists, Islamic fundamentalists, and MlorXd Bank a p e r t s will all tell you that overpopulation is relative and that Cod (c~rmodern techology or the Sltarikn) will provide. But let whoever has not at least once felt murderous in a crowded subway at rushhour t h r w the first stone, This author knows of only two cases where overpopulation has been mentioned in straight unabashed fashion as a direct cause of the Rwandese genodde. One came from a geclgrapher, Jean-Pierre Maison, and the other fram Mary Gore, wife of the US Vice-13resident, who said at the Cairo World Population Conference in September 1994: Rwanda i s a tragedy and a warning. '"t i s a warning about the way in which extremists can manipulate the fears of a population threatened by its own numbers and by its massive pc~verty."" Whatever else they know; geographers know about land and women know about wombs. Both are to do with nature which they know cannot be pushed beyond a certain point without kicking back."

Peter Uvjin (1998:182-83) refines this argument by pointing out that it is not a hard-line Malthusian argument, in which balhoning popdations outgrow the food supply. The importance of demographics fies rather i,n the fact that land scarcity rcsults from decrclased agricultural potential, ~ g i o n aeconomic l decline, population movements, disntption cJf social exchange institutior-ts, and decreased accottntability of the state- All such issues contribute to cmdltims that may lead. to genocide. He goes m to point out &at "nearly atl scholars dealing with Rwanda, including the sncial scientists w h o have witten the nnnst serious studjel; of the genocide, align themselves with this position." Like other structural arguments, dewgraphic argttments imply the need for development aid, if: by development aid is understood improving womeds education and.opportunj.ties, which is closely associated with lowering birth rates, In a context where birth control policies fail, a ~ is occasio~~aly focus on demographics means that h r e i g ~resettlement suggested as the only hvious way to lower population densities (see for example discussion in Rutinwa 4996:295-99). It is still too early to know whether attempts to cro~~trol population growth i,n Rwancta wilX fail; it: is an important policy area that should be continually assessed.

Conclusion Each of the six exphations contributes to an undemtanding of what happened in Rwanda when it did. A number of them are also interrelated. Nevertheless, programs to prescribe solutions have typicaily emphasized one or the other explanation. Specifically, the international refugee assistmce o ~ w a t i o n in s Tanzania and Zairri assumed that the problem was one of historically grounded disIikcls by e t h i c elites; their

Explaining Rzon~danGenocide


programs were designed to quickly repatriate refugees in the hope that when Ihe ellites werc forced to share powel; the people would learn to get along. This is why programs desiped to mitigate problems focus in on measurcs to encourage Rwandans to reconcdc emotianally with each other, be it through the admjnistratjon of justice, the provision of housing, psycho-social services, or calls for e t h i c integration (see, e.g., USCR 1998:4243). Left out of such lformulations are measures to ensure that class diwisitrns are not reestatillished in ways that re-create pre-genocide inequaiities. In part, this negkct occurs because it is much more politkalfy difficult and expensive to establish such programs than merely to repatriate ~ftrgees.Policies focusing on ensuring that the next generation of Rwandim youth are not margir\alized in 15 or 20 years do not have much of a constibency in bureaucracies focused on I-, 2-, or 5-year budgets. But the lack of attention to longer-term issues is not due only to difficult financial or political problens. h clevelopment circles, it is beginning to be noted that major investment in Rwanda's development was wasted becaux of such inattmtion to long-term scrlutims.'Verhaps they have a point. After all, l.he overall response to the Rwanda situation was not cheap: the esti.mate for May-December 1994 was that $1.4 bitlion was spent, m m than Rwanda's 1993 total gross domestic product of $1.359 billlion (World Bank 1995:166). Notes I. This approach is rc~otedin Max Weber's description of e t h i c cammunities (1948:18%, among other traditions. 2, For scholarly accounts of the origins of Rwandan ethnicity, see Newbury 1988; Uvin 1998:13--18; and des Forges 1999:31-37- These accounts all stress the ""socially constructed" nature of ethnicity in Kwanda, Uvin's recent account stresses that in Rwanda these are four persistent e t h i c groups: majority Hutu, Tutsi, Twa, and Bazungu, or Europeans. The Europeans were individually itinerant but as a group persistent, Initially (1900-62) they were colonialists, missionaries, and businesspeople; after independence (since 1962) they have been aid experts, missionaries, and businesspeapfe. In both peric~ds,the Bazungu group has had the most economic controi, regardless of whether they cmtrolfed the power of the state. 3, As the name implies, the party focused on the interests of the Hutus vis-8-vis the Belgians an8 the Tutsi monarchy. The preponderance of Hutus in the papulation meant that as long as democratic principles about majority rule were FolIc>wed,Parmehut-uwas likely to defeat any rcjyalist party. 4. Burundi, which received independence on the same day in Z%2 as Rwanda, continued to be rufe8 by a Tutsi king until 11366. For most cof the period since it I-tas been ruled by the Tutsi-dominated militaq. In Burundi, despite cmtinuing

ethnic polarization, ethnic designations were remc>vedfrom identity cards. Certainly ethnic designations on identity cards facilitated genocidal intent in Rwanda, but by itself it is inadequate to explain the persistence (or not) of these particular ethnic categories. Even without the cardq Burundians have na tmuble assigning themselves to Hutu and Tutsi categories, sometimes with extremely violent ccjnsequences. 5, Far an excellent summary time line of the period from 1990 to 1994, see Uvin 1998:70-81. 6. Gourevitch (1995,1996, Z998), writing in Tfze New YoI.ker,presented the most simplistic accounts of jfHutu I""c>wernidxdeolctgy o f e n using sources within the WE: government. As historians, ddes Forges (1999) and Prunier (1995) present much more scholarly and nuanced accounts, in which they acknowledge o>ther factors besides ideology. Cuensd (1967) tzrrote an early description of the first Rwandan crisis. Smith (1995) and Reed ("195) wrote a post-invasion account of refugee activity in Uganda. 7, This is the ""virtuouspower'" doctrine adopted by the Clinton administration in Kosc>vo,described by kayne and Schwartz (2000). According to the virtuous power doctrine, military farce shall be used in response to violatiom of internationally recognized human rights. 8, See also Uvin 4998:4&50. 9. Speculation about who actually attacked the plane continues, Prunier believed in 4995 that the evidence painted to alienated members of President Habyarimana" own entourage, Des Forges f1999), writing later, professes not to be sure who undertmk the attack, and indicates that there is a plausible reawn for the RPF or radical members of Habyarimana" own group to have been involved, She speculates alsc:, that the French may have had a mte, but she is unsure what this might have been (des Forges 1999:181-185). 10.ZJabetingtheorists in criminofogy call this ""rtrospective interpretation"" and note it is commonly used to explain deviant ads, tzrhether ar not there is a causal relati~n~hip. Rather it is a trick of memory and interpretation. 14. Prunier (1995 and 199'7) devotes majclr pc~rtionsof his boc~ktcr a dixussiort of the relationship between France and the Habyarimana-MEND regime. 12. Since 1994 there has been a demogaphie sesaw in Rwanda resulting from genocide, the return of Tutsi refugees from abroad in 199&95, and the return of Hutu refugees from Tanzania and Zaire in 1996-97. The net result is that despite the substantial mortality in the genocide and war, the population of Rwmda in 1998 was greater than in 1993, the dead having been replaced by refugees from the Tutsi diasgclra, Hutu refugees, and babies. Compclunding the population prc3blem is the fact that a birth contrc3l mojvement intrc3duced in the 1988s has been replaced since 4974 with pro-natalist views on the part af the peasantry that the dead must be replaced by children, irrespective of government paficy. The result is a total fertility rate of an expected 8.3 children during the fifetime of the average Rwandan woman QUSR 2998:41). This is almost the highest national rate in the world today and approaches the acknowiedged absolute limit of human fecundity, 10 children per woman. (Tl-reHutterites of North America, a group that had a strcmg pro-natalist iciec~logyand good nutrition, had a total fertiXity rate of

10 children per woman in the early Wentieth century; see Narn 1994:179-80). As a emsequence, Rwranda" ppapulation can be expected to double within 20 to 25 years, as a volatile new group of adotescents come of child-bearing age, Such information obviously relates to the demagraphie argument that the generation of large numbers of poorly educated, landless youth is a recipe for future sociayofitical vctlaftif ity. 13.1 heard this view expressed by officials from the Department of State at a meeting convened in February 1999 a t the Congressional Hunger Center in Washington, D,C,

October 1993-October 1994: The Relief Effort Winds Up

Refugees in Tanzania There is a tradition of movement-flight and refuge, if you will-in the Great W e s r e g m czS Africa dathg back several hundred years. As a result, the populations of the countries hordcring on Rwanda and Burmdi at1 speak sixnilar lanpages, and have sinnilar traditions sf cdkrat contact and move~nent(see Le~narchand1970; Waters 199%)*However, k ~ termtioflitl humaktarian efforts to alleviate the suflering caused by such migratjvns is of more r e c m vintage. The first international efforts at refugee resettlement begm at the b e when many African counbies &tahed their independence in the early 1960s. Since tlne 1 9 6 0 ~ refugces ~ from the new modern sta& of Rwanda. and di resettled in Ugmda, Zaire, Tmzania, and B m d i , with different degsees of invotvernent by the UNHCR. Settlement schemes, lincluding internationafly financed virgin-land settlemnts in Tanzania and Uganda, we= estabtishctd from the 1960s .to the 1980s.Typically such settlements invotvd resettling refugees on rexnate forest arcas and then providing partid WFP rations while t h y established self-sufficiency Spontaneous urban settlement in Buntndi and spontaneous rural settlement in.Zaire, Tmzania, and Uganda also took place, all wiEfnouf:international support, There wert; also effork at naturaliziztg b a n d a m and Kumndiam in Tmzania and Uganda LhrougFhout the 1980s and early 1990s. 'These efforb had some successes in h z a n i a , despite bureaucrat-icinertia. Rut the Ugandan governmmt resisted, format naturalization for Rwandans in Ifgilnda, and the several hundred thousand Rwmdan refugees in Uganda remained wifiout citizemhip rights despite residence there shse the early 1960s." Despite a hiswy of fi&t m d popula~on~novement,the capaciq of univ to receive refugees from Rwmda and Buthe irrternational co

I Q4

The Relief Eflt~rtWinds up

Chabalisa 2 refugee camp for Rwandans was atablished in October 1994. The layout in a grid pattern made food distribution and camp mmagement par2icuZarty easy. (13hc?toby Michael Hyden.)

mndi was at a low point in 1993, At that time, there had been no major international rehgee crisis &I the region sinre August 1988, when small nurnhers of Bwundian Hutu fled to Rwarnda. F r m the perspective of Che international communiq, this crisis "solved itself" when most of the Hutu refugees spontaneously returned to Bu di after the cessation of confrontations (Lemarchand 2994:IPta-130; MSF 2995:21). Prior to that, the fast rnajor fight had been in 1972-74, when several hllpldred thousand Buntndians fled to Tammia. hdwd, in 1993 there semed to be an ouQouring of peace and gocrdwill.2 T"be first dernucralric elections in Kumndi resulted in a peaceful bansi.tion sf power from the Tutsi tfprona party (Parti de lfUnion et du ProgrPs National) to the moderate Hutu Frodebu (Front des D6macrates) party, a transition observed by North erica" preemincnt expert on the region, Ren.4 Lemrchand, Wrihg in mid-1993, he concluded with a p a l e d o p h i s m : Che aspect of the erncfrgng realily in Bmundi is the vision of a multi-pwv democracy drawing its streng.th from a civil sociev free of e t h i c codiet; another is that of a singularly fragile polity undermined by the instinctive fears and violent reacticms of a Tutsi rninoriv that sees itself at the mercy czf a f--Luhilma~ariv.Exactly what kind of system rnay u l ~ m t e l yemerge from these contrasting visiic3ns is hard to formee (Lemarchand 1%4:18v.

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up

I Q5

As for Rwanda, the wal; which had b q u n in 1990, while unfortunate, seemed to he winding down; an agreement was reached, in August 1993 and elections were sshecluled. Further afield, Mozalnbique, which had sent: hundreds of thousands of refugees to Rnzafia, Malawi, and Zambia over a 25-year period, also was engagrd in peace talks. As a result, both the UNHCR and the other reh;tgee assistmce agencia in Tanzania wcre scaling back staff and closing down programs*This meant that vehicles and other assets were behg relocated, sold, or handed over to local gavem~nentauhrities. A s late as September 1993, no obwrver expected a new rdugee influx into Tanzania in t:he foreseeable future. Indeed, the opposite was occurring. In Sptember4ctQber 1993, Burundim refugees left T a m a ~ aInany , spontaneously and ohms as part of an official UNHCR-sponsored program, to rejoin the civil society in Kumndi b a r c h a n d (7994) described. Plans were also mder way to repatriate Mozalnbicans. Thus, when the Tutsi-dornimated military in Burundi umuccessfully attempted to topple thtt new democra~cgovernmmt on October 23,1993, there were still hopes that Tm would not need tcl ag"in gear up its refugee receptjon mpacity. This conclusion was easy to reach. Mter all, the coup plottersfailed, even t h u g h in the process about 100,000 Hutu and T~~tsi died. Thus, the ht-emational refugee relief re e was caught fiatfooted when h u n d ~ d sof thousands of Hutu peasants fled along old flight paths to Tanzania. The intema~onalcommuniv was slow to gear up in response, with the result that large numbers of the e s b a t e d 2$5,0O refugem begm to sicken and die in the remote formb to .whjch they Aed (sete JEEAX 1996:29; MSF 1995:l9-31). Primary responses c a m from development-focwed agencies already in Tmzania, especially the mission hospiLals that we= in the area. Surveys were also taken by UNHCR and WFP staff, but neither the cash nor food resources these agencies con7.1),3 trofled were forthco j;f-or the Brxmndians f see Fig-~tre BegimiXEg in December 1993, in respame to both the high death rates of Burundims in Tanzania and an apparent relaxing of politrical relations in Burundi, the refugees spontaneously decided to r e t w to Burundi, even as UNE-ICR and WFP offices were finally opened in western Tanzania, Later evaluatjons noted, "A refugtle population, wEtj.ch had arrived [in Tmzmia] in reasonable health, e x p a i m e d a fa e." This occurred in large part because WFP had no conlingency stocks ;and little ready cash with which to make needed local purchases of grain (IEEAR 1996:29-30). WHCR, MihicR did not estatvIisb a permanent office until early 7994, atso was unahlc to at-h-actdonors to assist isolated refugees in remute forest clearings (see Figure 7.2). Never&eless, the first Bu di emergency, despite the mistilkes, was a basis for the UNMCR and WFB offices for the Kurundiam being estab-


The Relief Eflt~rtWinds up

FIGURE 7.3 Graph showing grc)wt.h and decline in refugee populatic3ns in Tanzha's Ngara and b r a w e districts, 199496. Note Ehe 'Qeclines" in the sta.Lis-t-;ics fc32lr->uringregistration exercises in July 1994. (Sources: Data for Qlctober 1993-May 1995 are from ZINHCR reports to JEEAR 1995; later data are from various UNHCR and WFP sources,)

lisbed in Kibonciu, Kasulu, and Ngara disbicts in western Tmzania by early 7994. The UNHCR field office inNgam was to become the center of: the Rwanda relief opera~on,and also for the 'Panzanian Red C m s , with the assistance of the htemational Federation of the Red Cross (IFRC). The ZFRC also cared for the rema g 8,000 Burundians in a "*sedpernnanmt'" camp. The assumptian was that the refugcles would remain until they chose to voluntarify return to Ru Wifi little to do with the few Burndims rema g, the UNHCR staff began drawing up continlrgency ptans to accommsdate any potential refugee flight from Buntndi. Wifiout a budget, tbey did vvhat they could: identsied a site witb water and firewood some distmce f'rsrn the Burndim border, and applied for permission from the Tmzanian and viflage ents for the use of the site, Mrkjch was Iater to be called Benaco. This occupied their time, along with facilitathg the passage of relief supplies intended for Burundians in 'Panzania to Burundi, where the bufk of the relugees were then Iocatcsd (see Jasparr; 19946). Ngara was not to rema.n a rcsfugee backwater, dnorrgh. Ngara districl boders both Rwanda and Burundi, and the only ma& suplying both counkries via the port of Dar es Salaam pass &ough the district. When in early April the w d d was surprised by the deaths of the presidents of"

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up


FIGURE 7.2 The United N a ~ o n DeparMent s of k-lurnanitarimAffairs (DE-IA) tracked official expendibres by UN agencies (primarily UNPXCR m d WFP) in 1994, Respc3nw to appeals was low until the N g m inRux in May when there was a s-tronger appeal, The mcjst expenditures were made in July, which reflects both emergency spending in Zaire and heavy equipment purchases in Tanzania in responstl to the May-Jme inRux there. (So~irce: JEEAlr 1995,)

Marnda and Kurmdi in Kigali, Rlgara was the logical site for hu ian contingency prepara~onsfor both cotuttries. Africa Watch announced that Burundi was teetering on the edge, and that "it could explode in the canring weeks or xnontk'"bnard 19%). Feming a repeat of the B u m dim disaster of the previous year, UN staff were put on imediate alert dim influx. NGO staff (including me) were r ~ r u i t e dto expmd operations all along the lanzanim border with Burundi. Most sign;ificant, the KRC positiond h o d suppffes, and the UNHCR assigned two emergency staff,Maureen Comefly and facyues Frmquh, to Ngma in mid-April.5 By the end of April it was clear that Rwandms might be hvolved as well as Burundian refugees. :In the first week or two after the April 6 plane attack in #iga,li, small numbers of Tutsi refugees (numbering in the tens and hundreds) began to amear in Karagwe and Ngara districts. I-iutu also arrived farther to the north, in Karagwe District, escaping from the WF-contrulled arcas followhg the beg ng of their April 10 offensive. These gruuys were given tents at sites slightly removed h r n the border. Refugee workers werc. appalled by the machett;.wounds they saw on the lutsi refugees and described the refugees' look as dazed, or


The Relief Eflt~rtWinds up

"shell-shocked.'"t seemed as if they wtrzre incapafore uC organizing themselves,b A larger crisis loomed, as three things happened in eastern Rwanda during the 20 days folhwing the initial RPF attack. Inleunhamzoe d i t i a , apparently commnded from Kigali, attacked out of bases in Kibungo town, near the Tanzmim border. Second, the RPF began its advance on April 1.0 from its small sector in the north. In their advance they pushed before them hundreds of thousands of the Hutu IDP (internalty displaced person) population out of their camps in Byumba prefecture. Byumba town was captured on April 21, and Rusumo in the southeast on April 29-30 (des Forges 1999:295). These Hutu were the displaced who had previously lived in the RPF-controlled areas and had been evacuated in 1991-92. Third, the arrny of Rwmda, still nnsuro who wa,s in command and for the first fcw days not yet taking a majar role in the genocide, retreated before the advancing RPF (see Prunier N95: 213-2422, Ammg civilian populations, there was coltfusion h m the beginning. One wibess from GaErini, in northwestern Rwanda, recounted to me what happened, The Hutu Infcvnhanrwc, carryjng lists of flames of people who were to be executed with a machete chop, attacked, the hospital, They executed the people on the list and went away But they rehtmed a short time litter to attack all TuEsi, any Hutu who objected to E h E h g , and any otl-ters whom they may have had a perssnal gud.ge against. A few days later, a message came from a stranger who claimed to be the vanguard of the advancing RPF. The message was to leave; al% who stayed would be killed, by the second w a ~ fof e RPF occupiers, who included executicm: squads. f i e surviving populace left, either toward the s w m p s of Akagcm National Park in order to undertake the dangerous crossing to Tanzania on foot *mu& the swanps, or by rushing soutltward toward the only bridge crossing out of Rwanda, over the Kagera Ever at:the hszrmo bridtge, which wa,s cc2ntrollt.d by the Rwandan atmy. As they R9d they h a r d that tlne RPF execution units did arrive and killed stragglers. For most, though, it was unclear whom they were fleeing from: WF or furterahamwt. What was clear was that many people were dying, and tlnat in late April 1994, Tmzania was a safer place for a Rwand m to he (see des Forges 1999:72&31). April 25 was still just 19 days after the presidents"kne was shot down, and Rwanda was still newsworthy There was a dramatic evacuation of foreigners by the United States Marincs in Kigali; they brought with them horrific tales of massacres in the city (see, e,g., Gutekunst 1995:22-27). Rut with the wacuation, live news reports and film from Kigali became less available, and. press attention skjfted to the rnore

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up

'"visible'btory taking place lairther south at the Rasumo crossing from Rwanda to Tanzania, The only road cmssing a l q the enGrc length of the border is a single-lam bridge above I-he roaring Rasumo Falls, and the Tanzanians granted easy access to the media to film the gathering nnasses. The shots shifted, back and forth. from bodies bmbIhg over the falls to aerial views showhg a dra~nataking place on the Rwanda side of the border at the same time. Tens of thousads, and then hundreds of thousands, pushed up against the Rwandm border post, unable to cross as long as the Rwandan arm): con&olled the bddge. They waited. Pictures broadcast during the last week in hpril showed a mass uf humaniq pressing against this single narrow crossing. The MWD-contmlled ent, which still controlled the bridge, refused 16io let the masshg Rwandans pass; the only ones d o w e d to crass were a s d l number of expatriates. O n April 28, the block at the bridge broke when Rwandan border guards abandoned the post, leaving the border open. The bridge remined open,for some 20 hours on Aprif 2%29. Ch.erwhelmed Tanzanian border ~ ~ a r dhavhg s, heard of trhe Inasscres in Rwanda, required the largely p e a ~ npopulation t to leave their machetes, hoes, and other agriculhral irnplemmts in a large, growing pile. Estimtes vary widely but the JEEAR concluded later that 170,000 ftrtfugees passed the one-lam Rasumu Bride on that day7 Most travelcd on foot, a few on bjcycles, and even fewer in automobiles, many of which were the property of the Rwmdan gavem~nent.The thee UNHCR officers, who a few days before had been unsurc~of what emergency they had arrived for, directed the refirgees 18 kitometers (11miles) down the Rasuma b a d to the site that had been idenaied for the Burundims. There the refugees settled dawn on the mourrtaintop in Ngara that was to become Benaco Refugee Camp, "'the b e s t in the world," as UNHCR field sffictzss were soon to brag. There were two major groups in the arriving population. Half were "experienced" refugees trekkhg fsom the IDf caHlps in Byumba prefecture. The other half included a major portion of the surviving p o p u l a ~ m of Rusurno dist-rict, in Kibungo prekchre in soutlswest Rwanda. Both grotlps hcluded the M W D leadership who had governed the areas before the plane crash, and tio~neof Mihom had clearly parficipated in the genocjde. hdeed, at the reqtrest ud the mrik~ingpopul;ation, at least one of the stganizers of the genocide in Mwambi, Ryurnba, was arrested by the Tanzaniam at lhrt request of the fleekg refugees. The bulk of the popdaticm, tbugh, were Hulu peasamb. At l a s t 75 percat were women and children. Reflecting this relatively normal bitckgmund, 'Time magazine reported on May 18,1994:

The Relief Eflt~rtWinds up


Yet so far, dapair has not triumph4 compXeteIy. Relief workers are astonished by the cohesion and smse of cornmuniq they see around them. In some caws whde villages moved together and reassembled themselves in the camps; the elders ratic3n food supplies; some priests are presiding over conpegations 1,000 strc~ng.For those who have been witness to mayhem throughout the past four years of civil war, there were even words of relief. Compared with the life he had left behind, one refugee toXd a reporter frc)m ADC, "here we are tasting the good life." At least here, he explained, nu (me was being killed.

The normally staid Eennomist was even more imprctssed with the lack

c-tf e h i c confrontation in the new camp: A few were Tutsi. Fearing trouble, the UN's refugee agency bied to move them tc3 a separate camp, but gave up when it became clear that Hutu and Tutsi refugem were content to live bgethcher. The Red Cross distributed food, though most people had enough for a few days. . . . Most of the refugees were in reasonable heal& and only a few had been wounded. . . . But good news could swiftly turn to bad. The main camp relies on one small lake, already polluted, for water (7"hc Ecotzamist, May IS, "f94).

The International Refugee Relief Regime Responds 7Ke t3urund.i refugee crisis had prepwed the itlternaGona1 refugee relief regime far this moment well. The elements we= h place: representalrjvm of the two LP4 agencies charged with refugee relief, UNHCR and, WFP, w r e present. Ngara was also accessible .to the press, and there were opportunities for dramtic film footage both as the refu&ees crossed the bridge and as bodies bmbled under it, Indeed, &dies at the h o t of the waterfall did photographctrs the favor of w k h g around IC1 or 15bodks (depending on the day) in a mamner that made the river appem Literally clogged with bodies when viewed thmugh the zoom lens of a. Erne strllinger. In Ike background, tke key financial actC)rswere ready to ~nake decisicrns, ECHO and USAID were ~ a d to y pay gmeroudy for a Eghprofile refu~;t.erelief operatrim, Food For the since departed Burundians was &o awailable for diversion by WFP to the new refugees. Finally, a nurnher of NGO '"ixnplmenlers'" aarrived in Rlgara looking for ways to assist, or, more specifically, contract with donors tike UNHCR, USAXD, and ECHO to prolride services to the refugees (see Borton 1996; von Bernu& 1996:288). These were the e t e m & that W H C R in Geneva had been w a i ~ for g to try out a new plan whereby it would be the phmary au~oPityin managing efugee operalions: For the first time, the bureaucratic powtrzr of

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up


Geneva was among the first on the scene, wkch ga~leit an opportuI1Ci@to test a new emergency response system that had been designed foflming the corrcllnsion of the Gulf WBr in 1992. Two elements were key to this. First, early on there was arn ag~ementthat funds from ECHO a d USAID would be given to UNHCR for distribution to its "'implementing partners,'?.e. CARE, IRC, LWF, Concern, Red Cross, and the other nongovernmental orgmizations UNHCR selected. Xllei*er USAID or ECHO would provide donations dkectly to the NGOs, as t h y "nad often done etsewhere in the world; in effect, UNHCR m w had power of the purse (Borton 1996:312-313). Second, it provided a chance to ddttgate to predetermhed Europem agencies for specific emrtrgency coordinaGon responsibilities. Axnong these were the D a ~ s hRefugee Courmcit, Rri~sf-1 Overseas Development Agency, United. Nations Volunteers, and Emercom/Russia. Each organization was to provide a package of services, incIud- secondment of expaC-riatetechnical staff, to he used i17 the emergency under the coordination of the UNHCR. As a resdt, over 20 expabiate staff were in Ngara by ally under the WHCR banner (see Jaspars 1994:15). Finally, at a very early point the Tanzanian government assigned to UNHCR the responsibility far coordinating all expatriate assistance in the refugee camps, ef-fectivcllyofferhg the m H C R a sort of tiovereipty in dealing with refugee matters. Now is a good time to review the disferent groups involved in the Tanzanian veration and fheir reIaGonship to one a n o ~ e r . The t i ~ i t Nutions d High Crtmnzissirtneufor Refi1,yees

"I%eUnited Xllah'ons High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCXI)was COordinator of all refugee relief operations, According to its charter, the UNHCR is not an ""implemenkg" agency w e p t in limikd sectors, especially '"legal protection issues." This meant in praclice that UNHCR awarded contsacb to provide services to refugees on behalf sf the funding agencies, which were in fact the governments of the ldnited States and nations of the European Commmity. These contracts were let to ental oargmizations such as the Red Cross, CARE, the International Rescue C o m ~ t t e eConcern , Worldwide, Christian Outreach, Mkdech sans Fronti&res,and so on. UNHCR's internal. divisiam, or sectors, reftected, the functions that needed to be carrjed out by the NGOs: Site Preparatim and Planning, Logistics, Water and Sanilation, C m p Management1Food Distrihrrtion, Social Servica, and Medeal., UPSHCR implemented program of kgal protecGon and relations with the Tanzanian governlnent itself. These liaison pmitions were filled te~nporarilyby staff secrmded freassiwd)from Europe from May until July 3994- After


The Relief Eflt~rtWinds up

that, UNHCR hired expatriates on short-term contracts ushg UNHCR money directly Bchind the scenes, ECHO and USAID mintained CRfsau&oriq by refusing to make conkibutions direct@to the nongovemmmtal orgakations, as they had in the p a t UEEAIZ 1%6:33; .won k m u t h 2996). As a result, UNHC1;: coordinated the disbibution of over $200 ~ d l i o doUas n hcash and in-kind donatiom in Tmzania in 19134. StafZ: seconcled to UNHCli caxne from the British &erseas Development &ency (ODA) (air and local fogistics), the Norwegian Refugee Council (site preparation), Entercorn/X.lussia (trucking), the Swedish Refugee C o m d (social services and URTHCR office construction), the Danish Rehgee Council (si& preparation and field offjcer),h t c h Aid (nubition),and the UN Vollmteers (field and protecGon officers).

Wrlrld Food Pntgmmmc "I%eWrld Food Programme (WFP), a UN agency under the coor&nation of the Food and [email protected] Organization (FAO) in Rome, provided the food for the =&gees. As a WN agmcy, WE'P sohcitd food cmbibutiom directly from ECHO (European Community Humanitarian Organization) and USAID (United States Agency For International Developmt), though it was nominally under the control of the UMHCR in Ngara. WFP" rde was so central that it and UNMCR wcre mutudy dependent on each other: the UNHCR counted on the WFP to deliver about 2,500 tons of food ta the camps per week." WFP turn depeded on agencies working under UNHGR camp-mamgement contracts to disbibute food to the refupes. There was mutual monitoring for quality control, and in ddition each agency reported independently to USAIU and ECHO. WFP monitored the efficiency of distribution throuf;h market and nutritional surveys, UNHCR insisted on the timely delivery of bulk Food h r n WFP donors in Europe and :DJor.th America (Jaspars 1994; f E E A R 1996:87-94; Borton 11996), Bo& were complex tasks requiriirrg extensive bumwcratic olrganization to coordhate. Nongoverrt?nentaE Organizations a t of the 20 or 30 nongovem~nentalorgmizations (W&) that sent repmentati,ves to Rlgara, UNHCR selected 12 wKch it would etially fund to work in the camps. TTbe others were sent away and told that their assistmce was not neded; wftn if they brought donations of cash, staff, or relief items, the assistance wa,s turned h w n and they were sent away. ong those sent away were large international MGOs like Miorld Vision and Christim &&each, as well as local NG@ and Tanzanian churcha,'@ "I%e12 selected included those that had worked briefly in the Burundian camps durinj previous xnsnths, plus CARE, which had a large UNHCR-

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up


funded program in Kenya, how11 to Maureen Comelly, the UNHCR officer in charge, from her work there (Borton f996; Jaspars 1994). This meant -that the agencies establishing proFams were mostly the large and expensive international emergency agencies, rather than development agencies s r agencies with mats in Tamania. Later in 1994, a number of other agmcies began to he admitted by UNHCR as medical agendes like MSF .wi&drew and scrvices were cxgmded into school cmst-zuct-ion,operation sf primary schssls, and provision for social semices. The cutoff of direct access to USAID and ECHO funds that resulted from UNHCR" new regime created different cundjtions m o n g the NGOs. Some had a policy of not accepting too much money from the UNHCR, in order that they could mintain their hdependente of what they believed was an UNHCR &sensitivity to refugee needs.11 Others, like CARE, had a policy s f implmenting projects only with UNHCR money and were in dfect subcontractors to the UNHCR rather than "paraers.'' USAID and ECHO The largcst share of the spmding at Ngara came from monies granted by ents of European Comm ty nations and the United Statc-ls to the UNHCK and WFP. The agencies illcharf~eof making these grants were the United States Agency for lnternatiml Deve1opmen.t and the European C o m u n i t y Huntanitarian Organization. -Their grants had money earmarked for the provision of food co adi~es,cc3nstruction of road systems for tlne camps, water diskibuGon,system, medical services, expatriate salahes and housing, and the salaries of the 21) 6r, 30 UNHCI-: expatriate staff and 4 to 5 WFP expatriate staff. AIthough the physical presence of both funding agencies was low-profiite, particularly at first, the power of the purse gave them a pervasive influmce in broad poli'tical decision-making. For example, it was in effect a joint decision by USAID and ECHO that fed to the d o s i n down s f the camps for Rwandans in er of 1994, an ECHO monitor had l996 (see Chqter 8). During the su been assigned to the UNMCR as a field officer, but he was not in~iolvedin supenrising the NGOs and focused on protocol issues. h W 6 the ECHO monitor took more aclCPlority over budgebry &cisiorrs. The Internatz'mal Press

Anolhcrr, less ins~tutionalized,elment of the picture was the international press. The influence of the press presence was substantial, and UNHCR m n t to peat l e n g h to eflsurt. that press access to il.rfr>rma~on m d to the camps was controlled. From their perspective, the press was a double-edged sword. To mintain control over press activities at the

I 24

The Relief Eflt~rtWinds up

FIGURE 7.3 Press coverage of Rwmda was heaviest in late April, as it became evident that a genocide was taking place; in early June, when the press began to focus on the refugee c m p s in Tanzania; m d especially following the July flight of Rwandans into Zaire. Press coverage lasted fur a period of about four months, and then tapered off. franicdly, despite the ""CNN effect" nno tracking of TV was undertaken that I know of. ( S O E I JEEAR.) ~:

camps, UNHCR bmught in media special,ists as liaison officers, particularly at the beginning of the speration; m e such was Pano Moumkis, a public relations specialist who has worked in emerency relief around er agencie, incXudhg MSE C m E , and the Red Cross, also invested in staff to liaise with the international press. What the press wrote about and showed on television generated the political pressure leadkg to loose purse slrlngs at ECHO and USAID, w ~ c is h why the press response to the crisis was tracked so closely by atf c m e m e d (See Figure 7.3). Broad sympa~eticpress coverage led to larger refugee bureaucracies who cwufd povide more services, Alternatively, a critical press threatened the standing of any agency, and even the careers of those krvolved. 'This love/hate relatbnship with the press was a central concern as the UNEiCR and oljler agencies sou$ht to both amact and m t d press coverap (see%wing 1998). Setting Up Administrative Systems: Spend Whatever It Takes In early May 1994, the effects that these relafiontihips would have on the refugee assishce programs were not: yet apparent inRltgara. Instead, the

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up


focus was on the need to do somethg-any&hg-to prevent a recurrence of the Burundi refugee cataskophe of 1993, Unl&e the situation with the Bun~nciians,it soon became apparent that this was a disaster made frrr il-rternationalintervention. The intermtional press was p~sernt to record refugees as they starved, were murdered, or died of di.sease. This .made USAID and ECHO open heir checkbooks, and this was like sugar to a bee. The first to take advantage of' this sihatiun was the large Iblian coflstruchn company Cogefar, h i c k had backfnoes, graders, and other heavy equip~nentaliready on site for a European Union-funded road construction project. These they now offered to rent to UWNCR for camp constrwction,A private cornpan).; Cogehr took ahantage of its ef&five monopoly of this needed e v i p ~ ~ eand n t charged multi-milliondollar rents to divert the equipment far UNHCR use durhg the su of 2994, Most critical was a four-mile smitary trench that needed to be dug around the Zkm by 2km camp, to provide drainage which would prowt: llhe caxnp" water sowce from contarninalion, Tn the camp there were no toilets, and fecal matter had to be excluded from the water supply at alf costs. Other projecb inelucted cutting roads for vrhicle access mci clearing a large site at Benaco far food warehouses. The NGOs that UNHCR retained set about undertaking tasks on their o m initiative, with &er advice of the m H C R , Thus, at Benaco, I was &Ivolved with erecling the warehouses; MSF-Rame installed a pump and water-treatment facilities at a nearby lake which was to becme the t and so camp" water source; the Red Cross established o u p a ~ e nclinics; forth. Forty kilometers away, at the UNHCIZ office h Ngam, daily cordination meetings began. Whoever was present, mostly expatriates, but dso some Tamanians, gathered to exckane nrlks about what hppened, what the press wanted, and .what could he expected. By mid-May, UNHCR took control m d divided up tasks along sectoral tines, as described above, and made verbal promism (which generally were kept) to rcJimhurse NGOs for their activi~es.Gradually as compul.ers and typewriters arrived, written conbacts started to become more common, and responsihiliSies became clearer in tlne cmtext of what the NGOs brought to &c field and UNHC_:Rfspreexisting agremmts. Faad detiveries began when ICRC lent to the WFP stocks neclessary to f e d the refugees. The ICKC food stocks were particdarly important in Ngam during the first part of the emagency (see Figures 7.43 and 7.4b).'" This fwd, mainly dry maize and beans, was distribukd by the Tmzanian Red Cross, win, lists provided by refugee lcaders. There wati an awareness that these fists were exaggerated, but for the lime being all w a e retievcd that the refuges were being fed and mhubition was nst a problem. The relugees were cooperative; here was no further fighting dong ethnic lines, and crime was seemhgly nonexistent. At the time, Z Lived h


El World Food Programme

Metric Tonnes

Ntstrie Tonnes

@ World Faod Programme

Other Agencies BTabt

Other Agencies @ Total

p " -m ----------p-"


32 * m











FIGURES 7.4a and 7.4b The largest murce czf aid tcz refugees in Tmzania was in the form of food aid. Early disbursements from the ICRC were irnpor-tant in establishkg that pc)puX;atimin May 1994. Later in the year there were fluchations in the food pipeline, such as the one in Qlctober, which resulted in declines in ragom, M&ric tomage to Karagwe disbict was less than that to nigara, particularly in the early mc3nths. It is clear that this af-fected the n u & i ~ o m stabs l of refugees in Karagwe, but tc3 what extent is not clear. (Source: JEEAR 1995.)

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up


Bemco among plastic jerry cms, shovels, plastic sheekg, etc., whiich remined undisturbed, despite the lack of any securi.ty mtasures. Likctziise, a Tutsi nun from Rwanda, Miho had been living in Tanzania and now lived two or three tmts down, wandered u dered through the camp Estimates sf food distribution indicated a daily distribution bemcen 1,286 and 3,183 kilocalories per day mspars 1994:6-7; SI-roharn 1996); a survey by MSF-Hulland inclicatcd that the average ralion wa,s 2,700 kiloca1ori.s per refugee per day, but this figure was inflated in part because refugee leaders purposefully inflatcsd populaGon figwe &I order .to get more food, with the result that more food was disbursed than was rew from the water sector after installing the p ~ ehadt on hand, deferring to the British NCO, Oxfam, which had water enweers on staff and emergemy water-tseament equipment in stock in the W. Oxfam airlifted complete emergency water systems to the airport in Ibfwanza, Tclnzania, which was trucked to the site. The s y e tems were designed to pump water horn Renaco" l& and then sani.li.ze the wakr and pipe it into the camp. The @far= engheers, some of whom bad been worXcin,g 51the Bzrrundian catnps k t h e r sout%r,instalted the systems and they wese operational by the end of Nay This plant was capable of pumping and cleaning sorne 1,200 cubic meters of water per day, It was obvious, though, that if the hare m un?, of five liters (two gdlons) per person per day was to be provided, tlnis yield was inad.equate for the refugee poputa~on.. Also 5I Mayfla well-drillh rig was brought by UNICEF-Uganda to drill 25 boreholes in the ~gion..Thjs was a key addition in the water sector, as it permitted the decongestion of the high populaei.0~density site at Benaco, where there was water in a lake, to areas that otherwise were without water, and therefare unsuitable for refugtles. This acti:vity began by the end of May and by mid-Junrt, UMlCEF and Oxfam had water statiam available at a second site 5 kilometers from Benaco, called Lumasi* This camp opened in mjd-June, relieving crowding pressures in Bertaco and significantLy reciuck~gthe chanre of a cholera epidedc. The emergency response in the water sector was orrtsmding 5I terms of water provision, m a i n six weeks, the combination of MSF-France, WHCR, WICEF, m d %fam had estabEshed two francGo camps with ‘"temporary" water syskms to accommodate upwards of 250,000 people, This was done in a remote corner of the world that until then had not had a func.t;ionintywater system for the malt town center of 10,000 to 115,OUQ people at Ngara. But the opmatian was very costly. The contracts were negotiated without respect to cost effiricncy; materials were flown in from Englad, at; were expatriate Oxfarn engineers

The Relief Eflt~rtWinds Up

brought in for t.t4io-to-four-Wcek cmsdtancies. The UNHCR approved such expenditures and passed the hilts along to ECHO and USAID. MSF-Frmce, WIG"EFf and then %Earn wifidrew from the water sector &er the hi&-doll,ar, high-profie constructicm contracts were completed. An, men more expensive operation was the transporta.tion program, Truck prczcurrzment is notoriously slow in countries like Tmzania; typically it takes six months to order and deliver a standard six-to-kn-ton truck. Since most emergencies require transport of some sort-to haul people, food, equipment, water, anci any mmber of other items .to where the ~ f u g e ;are---lhe s UNHCR :h:ad made cmtjngmcy plans. Xn anticripation of the need, CrNHCR in the early 1990s had made a num:ber of sbndby arrangements, two of which were activated for Ngara, First, ten Nissam flatbed h c k s used in the Cambodim relief operalion had been gut on standhy in Dubai. These trucks were airlifited to Mwanza in the second week of May, and arrived in Ngara the next day. The othcjr standby ;arrangement was an unusual contract with the Russian government's civil defense ministry, Emercorn. Emercorn had placed 36 s m l l all-terrain Kamaz brand trucks on stmdby in Bosnia and Russia; they wodd be operated by a paramilitary unit from the Russian fninistry These trucks began to arrive at the be@mingof June. The unit that operated them was self-contained, and at its peak included 56 Russim drivers, mechanics, cc2ob, adminisbators, co ur.ricaticzns expertsr and Russian-En@sh h.mslators (see Ktrhhender 1994). Many had had experitznce with trucking and :Ka~naz dur* the Russian war in Afghanistan in the 1980s and in the Rosnia relief program; on the basis of Chis experience they qu.ickly orgmized themselves as a self-contained "military" ficld unit. The h c k s caxne with a complettl field kit-including hod, showers, perimeter fence, tents, vehirte spares, and diesel fuel-which the Russians b s a n setting up at the end of May in Renaco, a i c k t y the Russians were up and under the direct-ion of the WHCR, As with the water system, this was a high-cost operation in wlnjch little attention was paid to long-tcrrm operating costs. Again, UNHCR passed the bifls for air freight and trips hack and forth to Russia on to wi&g paymasters at USAID m d ECHO. %L with the water systemr the &uckkg operation was considered short-term; the contract with Emercorn was for three monlPls, at whjch point the exnergency would be over or the trucks wero to be hmded over to &ained Tmzadan drivers. Other sectors had similar success in effecting fast but expensive sehps, I;lented backhoes began dig@g 1atrint.s for refugee, who had few digghg tools. Facili~esfor purchasing services, relief supplies, c o d o r b and comeniences for expah-iates, etc. in-country were rclrnote and on the other side of the count-ry,so purchasing wars swted to Nairobi, in neighboring Kenya. Land transport to Nairohj was diBicult so UNI-ECE rented

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up


its OWLI smlf airplme to estabEsh an air link with Nairobi (see faspars 1994:1%19), 'The Ruvubu Ever separates the .main camp at Ngara from the others, but there was mo permanent bridge across it, only a hand-cmnked ferry. A pamanent bridge was planned, but it woddn? be comp2eted for a year and a M . To facilitate tr port bemeen the camps, British ODA ai~freighkdin a xnilitary-sqle '"MabeyJ%ridge,which was installed under ancltlter contract with Cclgefar,lJ Aid officials took daily flights to monitor rehgee arrivals, and the International Federation of the Red Cross set 1.1117 a referral hospital in tents, whiich rcceived more complimted facjrities. It was tlne best in that part of cases f m the in-camp sutpa~ent the world. The three :MSagenci's (the Netl-rerlands, France, and Spain) bad 50 mpatriates ready to deliver outpattient xnedical programs, especially in public health, and by the end of May a masles vacchation propm was completed for all under-fives in the camp. New camps were cleared as w c k i y as iblc by Cogefar, One camp, Kayonza, was accidenblly located on a ral concessisn and had to be unceremoniously abandoned when the stake was idmtified. May m d June1994, the refugee populalion inNgara was the d a r h g of the interna~onalmtdia and relief community The intermtianaf c m m w i q responded with m ou$ourhg of generosiv and good wrks. At one poht the U.S. Air Force apparently ask& to become jnvolved, but t.he only thing that the WHCR could thisLk of to ask for was air-drops of firewood. The refugees themselves raponded by being well organized, cooperative, artirulate (par~cdarly inFrench), and appropriately grateful. The First Crack Appears: Eatete and the Realignment of Refugee Retations There was a paIpable relief among the UNHCR, NGOs, m d other agencies working in Ngara in June of 1994. The refugees and agencies worked together well, there was little of the interna.1 syuabbling and,blaming activity re~nemberedby those who haci worked in the Bu maXi crhes. htl worked togetha well to susbin the refugees. Fears of a chof era epidemic subsided and, the carny-management agcncy s f Benaco, ian Red Cross, began to organize thrt refugee house plots into rows. Latrines were dug, and the Oxfam emergency water system was operational, 1x1June, the NCO Concern Mlorldwide from Ireland began to move substmtial portions of the Byrxmba caseload out of Ilenaco to the new camp at Lrrmasi in aa orderly fashion (Pot~er1996a:32527). Relations betvveen the refugees m d LTNHCR remajned good, despite a little bit of under-the-breath p ~ ~ b l i that n g "' ey art. redly all just a bunch of murderers- . . ."


The Relief Eflt~rtWinds up

The first potential for a crack in the good feelings smted on June 9, when Benaco registered its first murder. :Near the TTBnzanian marketplace across h e sbeet from the camp, a m& surrounded a woman accused of being a witch. She was brzaten to dea& at the edge of the camp, and her body left half covered in the sun. It was explained to a reporter that tlne wolnan had been accused of bewitching a person who died (see ReHaender 1994:4243,48). Uiscussion occurred at the UMHCR a e e h g , but the parlcicipants agreed that while regrettable, such an occurrence was a concern of the Tmzanian government, and noted that some violence was exf over 300,000 people. The internaGmal ity m d e a different watuation, after a confrontation the fall be-tween a W H C R oft-icialand a refugee leader, how11 by his last name, Gatefre. It became h o w n as the Gatete incident. UNNiCR media specialists saw that the incident received wide publiciv at h e time, and it was the first exaxnplc. of the important role emofciomlized incidents would come to play in crisis management. I will describe it in detail here, When h e rc.fugees crossed h e Rasumo bridge on Qril28-29, a handful w a e takm into Tclnzanian czxstody and bmught to Ngara town. One was Remy Gatete, the government leader of Muramhi commune in Byumba disbict and, of course, a H u b (Pmnier 1c3Ca5:241). Gatete was arrested on April 22 at the border by the Tamaxl;ian border officials at the request of Rwandans who accused him. of being a ringleader in the genocide. He and kis family were housed in a knt b e h d the Ngara t o m jail. The Tanzanians were presented with a * d a y : What to do &out such distasteful figures who had not committed crimes on Tanzanian soil314 Furthrtr, Gatetcz was i d e n ~ i e din h e inkrnatictnat press as being a leader of' the Irzfcmizanswi.and as such, the press believed, would make a good candidate for a m r trims trial.. As long as he stayed behind tlne Mgara jail, the issue somehow remained outside the purview of the international refugee relief regim. However, m about June 14, Tclnzanian authorities released Gatete from custody and told him that he could join his people, as Long as hct did not go to Benaco. Neverheless, of his w n volition he went to Benaco to join hjis poli~calsupporters. The UNHCR field dices in Bmaco, facques Franquin, heard about this and called Gatete into his office to inform him that he was ineli@bLefor refugee s h h s under international law because he did not have a W&founded fear of persecution and was therefore ineligible to live in Benaco. Wnder inkrnatcional lawf individuats must demonstrak h a t thfty have a fear of persmution because of their political or tribal affiliationnot fear of prosecution for crimes they tted, h y ~ r a yGatete ; told Franyuin h a t he would pack his rn. He did so a few ~ n u t e r jlater, . followed by about 5,QQQ of his supporters (3 pment of the

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up


total camp population), who carried sticks, stones, and machetes, Gatete told Frmquin that he c o d not leave because "my people Mrilt not let me.'" Tanzdan police who were praent defused the sih~ationby giwing the megaphorn to Gatete so that he could urge his supporters to disperse. Two shots were fired in the air, and at this the Tanzanians srdered UNHCR to release Gatete. Gatete and the crowd left, and the W H C R officials left for Ngara, The codrontation itself was broadcast live to the NGOs via a VHF radio network established, the p i o u s week, which added to the dra~na.The most dramatic point ca~newhen someone from the USilHCR was head to say: '"If there are my dealins here, f am not answcrable! Do you hear, Npra, X am.not ms~erable!'~I~ The next day, an emergency meeting of all NGOs was called by tlne UNFJICIZ;:in Xllgara, f attended as the representative of LWE It soon became obvious that the puqose of the meting was to c o d i m a policy already established as part of discussions between MSF and IINHCR: that services by alt NGOr; would cease until Gatete left and refugee leaders expressed remorse for the incident, Franquin and Maureen ComefIy, dso of WHGR, described the incident and claimed that 30,000 Hutu refugees wcsc; ready to dn Gatetek bbiddilsg.l"Staf from the French and Dutch MSF agmcies tuld us what they fnad heard in the camp.17 Already, g appwnt that control of the ca~npwas in the they said, it was beco hands of criminals like Gatete, who had an absolute control over the Hutu population (MSF 1995:44). Maureen Coltnelfy felt the agencies should reach a consemus as to what they would do and poll4 the agencieshrepresentatives, s t a r ~ n g with the MSFs, for their posi~om.The represmtatives indicated that they wanted to discontinue all programs as a protest to the rcfugees against the invol~remcmtof war c r i ~ n d in s the camp.'Wnce this consensus was reached, Connelly indicated that all NGO activitJ,should be suspended pmding her m e h g with the Hutu. refugee leadership the followhg day If, after a meeting with thft leadership, she was sa~sfiedthat the ladem wodd cooperate \4iith the agmciesr Mivery semi-, it was agreed activiti.escould resume. MST; representiltives, ever indepedent resr-trvedj u d g ~ e non t the sihnatictn and Idt far the ScrengeCi, where they held a conference to disczxss the mord issues involved in workhg with the Rwandan Hutu pspulation in Benaco. They rehrned w o r k about one week later. At the meeting with the refugee leadership (not hcludjllg Gatete), Connelly and the leaders inevitably concluded that Food m d water distribution and medical activities must resume; Connelily said that the leadersfip was appropr?iatelyapologetic, m d the agencies Pesides MSF) resumed, their activities. More important for the overall funding of the pmpam was -that more ink was spilled about Benaco &I the world press, our work suddedy c m e to be viewed as dangerous, and fundkg for se-


The Relief Eflt~rtWinds up

curiv measures became e;t;peciallyeasy to get from USAID and ECHO (via WHCR). 'This incident, -though not the most siwficant to the refugee pogulation or Tamaxl;ims,'%as the basis for redefi g relations between the intesnatjonal refugee relid regim coodinated by the UNHCR and the refugees themselves. The headquarters of the NC;& operating in the camps were transhred to a remote hilltop, wkch was defensible against military a c ~ o n by the refugees, Thus, the Gatete incident set the stage for the adversarial relatiorrskp with the refugees that replaced the cooperative one initiated durhg previous weeks. Givm the iderent hequalities in the donor-refugee relationship, such a polariza~onwas probably inevitiJMe. The Gatete incident aceenhated fur&er Ike ""at any cost" approach to the eslablishment of relief operaljons, but this time the focus was on securiw for expatriates rather than cm feediYlg the refugees. :Most sipificant was that b e d i a t e decisions were made about resiting food stores out of the camp ;and to a more secure site on a hill, called K-9, some 15 kilomters from the camp and about midway between the ca~npsand the town of Ngara. This declisim was made by the UNWCR, Cogefar, which accepted the earth-moving cmbact, and CARE, whi.& operated the food warehouses on behalf of UNHCR and WX;I".zO Significarttly, it was done without an assessmcmt of needs, or for that matter of the site, wl.lich was "surveyed" ham the roadside. In addition, UNMCR suggested that all NC;O expatriates should establish housing for themselves there. (Several agencies had expatriate staff living among Ehe refugees in the c a q s , and m e w a e living in Rltgara town and on the hglican mission compound.) On the toy of this remote hilf there was to be a lrt@stiescater, food stores, vehicle s b q e and repair fadlities, and living quarters for several hundred expatriates and Tanzaniams, 'This was done without consideration of the building costs for a small town on a remote hill in the African bush; it was sirnply amorxnced h a t funding was no problem as the move was for securi? reasons, WHCR explained to us that '"the UNHCR would pay for everything involved with Lhe move, IVloney is not a problem.'Thhe UNF1CEI.was apparentIy able to m k e such statements because fears in the West of m hternatioml hcident hvolving an attack by Rwandans on, expah-iate refugee workers gave the ag"ncy great h ~ t u d e . The move had a long-term k p a c t on the refirgee oyemtion. h particular it m a n t that the costs of mainbI.nin.g a t o w on a hiHside without water, electric& system, mal-ket, or sallitaeon system would be borne inciependent of the Tamanian infrastructure in Ngara, and was also emerging around the camp, where a vigorous market quiclkly came into being. it also mwnt that there were wrenching shifts in propam. For example, my own agency had to suspend construc~onof vehicle mahtenamce fa-

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up

cilities, wlnjch had already been mderbken near Benaco, because it was explahed tlnat a new faciliv m s to be built. We also had to relvcate over 100 Tmmnian employees from the ca~npsto thft new town on the hilltop. Momnham was lost as employees actively involved in program of construction went to wait-and-see mode while another site was first surveyed, m d in Aupst, ft"nal.1~ leveled. As Eor Catete, he rehrned to his famjly in Benaco, He was not to remin long, thou*. krangements were made by the Tanzanian Mini.stry c-tf Home Mfairs, and Gatete was yuietly deported by h e 7'itnzaniam to Zaire in early f uly 11994.

The Second Crack Appears: Food Pipeline md Census T k second crack in the picture came from the food, pipeline. The prup m ' s initial success covered up lhrt logistical issues in\iolved with distributhg about 7,500 tons of food per week in the most remote corner ofl one of the must imyoverished countries inthe world." 0v e r ~ g h tMesa , went from being a small, remote disbict with a sUt)sjSiemewono~nypmducing enough food to feed the people there to being the site of a major city that did not produce any food. WFP responded by borrowing 10,000 meh.ic tons of grain from Tanzania's strategic gain reserw drive away; 51S h y m g a - a d purchshg a mo-month supply of bems locally. Even these relatively simple local arrangements, though, taxed Tanzania's trucking capacity (Jaspars 1994:5). Nevertheless, adequate food supplies we* avajtable Lhmugh June 151%. But, once nearby sourccs were exhausted, longer transport lines to the In&m &em port of Dar es Salaam, 1,040 kilometers (663 miles) away as the crow flies, were rewired. There is no palled road across central T m z b a , and the one rail line, built by the e r m a n coloniafists at tlne turn of the century, was subject to frequent breakdown. 'There was also inadequate rolling stock to meet the WFP" need to feed not only Xllgara, but also, later, Burmdi itself, and still later areas of Rwanda, Burundi, and Zaire. But in June 1994, the broader issue of coastal transportation router; still lay in the future. The nearby food stocks were exhmsted and WFP was still not able to catch up with the rising rehgee numbers; what had started as ZS0,OCK) refugees had reached 50(f,Ct(lOby the end of Junc, including 100,000 in Karagwe dislp-ictf/EEAR 1996:33; "Jaspars1994; Borton 1996). Now, finger-pointing at the large W bureaucraciczs started. WFP pohted out that a substatid portion of h e probkm was due to the lack of a cemus of the refugee popzllation; the refuge leaders provided the numbers of people needing to be fed, and these obviously wese higher than the camp pcly>ulaGon,which inflaltld tonnse WFP was required to deliver. The WFP, well aware of the prohlern, blamed UNNCR for detays


The Relief Eflt~rtWinds up

in t a h g a census. A census w a findly ~ held at the end of June, and the totat count of refugees in h z a n i a decreased by about 25 percent (see fEEAR, 1996:33, Figure l).?'" There was some short-term relief, hut the influx continued, and wi.thin a monlh, anotber 100,000 refugees had crossed tbe border into k z a n i a . The WFP was right hack where it fnad started. Ag"in it needed to supply 3,500 tom of food per week, ati the supplies in-coulltry were agah exhawkd. Short rations we= issued in July,August, and October, a situation Maurem Connefly in June 1995 described as "a continuous emergency m t a sudden inlux follwed by sbbiliq" " E A R 1996:108 n.3).

By July 1994, a number of factors wese exacerbating the situa~onin the refugee camps. First was a staffing shortage. Afer a vigorous start in May, NGO and URIHCR draslicalty cut staiffhg in July 1994. Emergemy staff contracts from tlne UNNiCR and other agencjes exgked, and about 20 people who had established systems m an elRergency basis left, includhg the fnur top UWHCK stdf.23 Second, ~ f u g e e conkued s to arrive, As RPF wits camohdated contrrol along Rwanda's souehem border with Tmmnia and Rurundi, tens of s to appeal- 40 kitoxneters (25 miles) thousands of Hutu ~ f u g e e began south, of Benaco, h a v h g acbally crossed a corner of Burundi in order to escape. Unlike the first: arrivals, these refwees were likely to be exhausted and suffering horn exposure to the elements, having wdked a su:bst;m.tialcillstancle and crossed swampy re@-. This also occurred at a time before the new agency facitities at K-9 were ready, anct remaining staff were LcA in a state of suspense over when, where, or how they would move, Third, W P in August challenged the m H C R % decision to site tlne food stol-cjs at K-3, which was at Lfne top of a hilt .where the loaded ( a d often decrepit) rented Tanzanian trucks were not always caphle of climbing wi.Chout atisistance from the Russian Kamaz arm): t?.uclts. WFP decided to establish food stores east of Lurnasi on the m a b road. The confrontation added to the sour abosphcse persisting beh.veen the two UN agencies. This sourness reached a head when CR-Ngara made m end run around WFP, and asked USAID to bypass WFP procurement and distribution nelkvorks UEEAR IS)95:92;Shoham 1W6; Jaspars 1994). The final insult, as it were, was the loss of Ngara" stahs as home to the biggest compla uC refugee c a w s in the world. In July and August 2 mil%ionRwmdans fled to Zaire wittn the defcated Hutu government* Press attention skfted 60 Zaire, where refugees were dying of cholera arl$ where there was an even larger relief program, A number of agencieri

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up

even pdled staff out of Ngara and sent %em to Zaire, w h e once ~ again the UNHCR was doling out large contracts for the startup of refugee assistmce programs using USAID anci ECHO ~noney Thus, by July the high-pawred relief system in Ngara district had been hit by a number of circumstances that weakened it hsGtzlGonally. Staff, agencies, anci goodwill were sucked out of the operation even as refugee numbers increased, equipment brake down, and food suppEes shed, The one bright spot was that there was still several months' worth of cash reserves in the accounts of agenciemunable to spend money fast enough. The period of "*spendas laist as you cm" "had not yet ended, even, though it was beconning obvious that it would, Atcordkg to the Joint Evultrution of E~zevencyAssistance to Rzmndn W A R ) : The extent to whxch h d h g was reactive to events was strikkg. There was ai m k & contrast in resource availabiEty between the "tap-on" "period horn mid-July to Sptember, when funding appeard limitless, and other periods when it was less readily available. The factors conbibuting to this reactive characteristic are many and their relatiomhip complex. Media coverage and the concern of almost all organizations (donor organizations, the military, as well as NGOs m d UN agencies) involved in the response for ""gcjfile" m a n 8 "visibiliEyn were clearly sipilicmt. What was clear frarn the study is that the way the qstern was raourced was sub-optimal, lirni~ngthe efktiveness of the response m d substantially increasing evenkral costs. . . (1996:15)

Out of this enviro ent two questiom emerged: how to react in the short run, and, what the long-term prospects were, 1x1the short tern., the queseion was '"S this still an e~nert;ency?'Tlearlythe continued arrival of refugees isrclicated that the sihation remalyled zrnsettied. The alsilit-y of the UNHCR was improved when it rnoved its offices out of tents and into a complex c-tf prefabricated offices erected by Sv;edisb tttcmcianti, contributhg to a new amasphere characterized by fnierarchy and attention to procedure. Even the reaction to new refugee eme~encieswas clearly much m m regular and efficient than it had been &I May. CertaNy, it was a long way beyond the sitraatlan a few m t k earlier when Bumatdims had stamed in the forests due to lack of food and resources, In July 1994, shortly before finisking her emergency assi reen C1onnef;lyanllcipathg a Burundi refugee crisis i,n the wa,ke of padiamntary electi.ons planned for that month, assembled representa~vcsof the :DJG& and. asked them whether their organizations wcre "read;V.'%ll agl-eed that they were ready for an innux of the salne size or larger %an what had colne from Rwanda. TThe agencies were probably exaggerating could even be posed was an their readinesrj,but the fact that the ques~on indication of the progress %at had been made in refugee mqtioat capac-

The Relief Eflt~rtWinds Up

ity durhg the previous two month. Over 280,000 people were being fed and provided with water and medical care. Mso, the assembge was a. poup of people now expwienced in the estabtishnent of large refugee camps, wbere prcrviously there bad been little such expert-ise. The camp had been successfully set up m d run wiZhout a majior disease epidemic, and a s s u ~ ~ i nIke g money was available, those assemhled were in fact prepared to do it: again if call,& upon. But the &iscussion was not limited to the question of readiness. Staff members also achowledged that when the world's attention had been focused on Ngara, they had enjoyed the press attention in a vicarious way. More innportant, perhaps, was that as long as press attention continued, political pressure was rnaintaiEled in Europe and h e Unikd States to '"do somethingf'-in otber words, povide the open checkbook to which the speration had become a.cc"ustomed.But the staff members also expressed a wmriness fro111 the rushing about at the expense of p1 or thought. Field workers began to wonder about long-tern wso:lions. What should be the foltovv-up for a successfuf emergency relief operatim? Field workers recowzed h a t h e statrus quo of a densely packd emergmy camp made of grass and plastic could not be maimtand. Dkease epidemics would always tl-tl-eaten,and politicd concerns would fester in an idle populatim so close to the border. This longe~termt hi g was also apparent: in discussions emerging about the two possible long-tern soluti.ons to the Rwanda refugee problem: permanent resettle~nentin eastern Africa, and quick repatrialFion to Marnda. ?'h only tnng-term solution the field workers did not consider viable was for the refugees to rernaiar in the camps in Ngara. There, it see~nedlik*, fiwwood, water, and security concern (i.e., prox the Rwmdan border) would doom Benaco to remain. an overcrowded Rwandan ""urban" area, Repatriation and Resettlement In fact lhrt overdl solu~on to Ike Kwandan crisis lay far beyond Ngara, or even Tmzania. Decisions were made at UN beadquartas in New York and Geneva that the only sdution was repabiation to Rwanda, despite the still tenuous cmtTOI m power en~oyedby the new RPF government in August and September (Reynqms 2995). In Ngara, this outcome looked extremely unlikely as tens of thousands of Rwandan refugees coneinued to arrive &ough November and into early 1995. In addition, corpses; many of whom were ayparently executim victims of the new WF rulers, conhued appearing floating in the :Kagera Ever at the Rasuzno bridge ''body catchnmt" on an almost daily basis. Policy-1nakr;rrs

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up

in camp start-ups in far away cities such as Washingtoil, DC, and Brussels, where the checks are written, quaked at the potential costs involved.. Into this mix stepped Preside& Ali Hassan Mwinyi of Tanzania in Oct&er 1994. At Benaco he amaunced to the press m d the hternaliund com.muniQ that Tanzania was prepared, to provide land for the resettlemerrt of all Rwmdan refugees along the soufiem boder with Mozambique, on the condition that the hternalional commudty picked up the resettlement costs. Underlying his offer was the belief, held also by other Tanzaniam, that the underlying cause of the Rwandm conflict was demographic pressures and structural jirrequali~es&at made my reconcaiation & h e m H u h refugees and the new Tutsi government untikely. In Ngara, W N K R and the NG& did some irdormal pla sew h w to move IO0,OUO to 500,OUW refugees across Tmzania" souChern hjnterland.. They worked on the assumption that atl transport would be paid for by the international co unity. Calculations *owed that an airlift of udeard-of p q o r t i m ~ o m b i n c l dwitb a one-and-a-half-year r a t a t of Tanzania's railways would be necessary, But irrespective of costs, the international community in the capitals failed to respond 60 President Mwinyifs offer, arld the proposaf soon sank, for two reasam. First, the members of Tmzania"s parliament that represented, the southern region oy>posed it. %c&, there was a smdden shift in Tanzanian public opinion &er the r n d a of-a Tanzaltian evmgelist in the Benaco market, The Murder of the Evangelist David

The Tanzanian public has hdiSional1y had a w d c o ~ attitude ~ ~ g toward refugees; it cmsiders it: a duty as a goad n&ghhor to see that they are received humanely (Rutinwa 1996; Gasarasi 1984).n t. poljcy of containkg the refugee ir~fluxin remote corners of Tmzania in 1994 helped Tmzanim s to maintain this belief. "I%eT;mzimi;zn puhlic assumes that refugees themselves will behave as good neighbors, as indeed the Rwandans see~nedto do. Alfso beneficialt was the fact that a substanGal new economy devclwped around the rc;.fugcc.s.The net result was that far most Tanzanians the refuges were out of sight; they knew only what the more enkepreneurial fric-tnds told them, or what h e y read in the newspapas. And up until October, the newspqers were reportimg that the efugees were accepkg TTanzanian hospitafity with gatibde. In October 195Nf here was a sudden shift in this perceptic-m as a result of m incident in the Benaco c m p . David was a well-bown and popular Tanzanian, a 195-cen~meter(six-foot-fie) evangelist in a t>ar es Salaam church who origir~allycaxne from hmska. David and a Swiss colleawe

The Relief Eflt~rtWinds Up

named Werner arrived in Benaco in C)ct&er 1994 to deliver Pentacostal Bible tracts to the refugees. They went into the camp after notifying the Tanzanian authorities, but without consulting with the UNHCR. The tracts were inSwhili, not Kinyarwanda, and had on the cover a drawhg of serpents aromd a man.. David disappeared white distributing the Bible &acts in the camp; he disappeared in Glrre middte of the cmwded marketplace after a mysterious-sounding whistle was blown. Apparently, David" height and, the tracts wese dsintespreted as being ' W F . r " I1: took three days of negotialFiom by the Tanzanian authC)Tities to recover bis body. The day after David had disappeared' refugee leaders produced the body of a murder victim, claiming that it was David. The Swiss missionary who was the only m in the area able to idenlify David refused to identify the body as David's. On the third day David's body was produced; his head had been crushed, apparentjy shortly after his disappearance (see Wakrs 1995b, 19993). Tmzanian artthorities provided an escort. lor the body to the airstrip, where an aircraft: chrkred by his church took him back to Dar es Salaam. fn Dar es Salaam there was a large fweral, which was wll-covered in the Tmzanian press. A swond incjdent in catty November led to furher Tanzharn remvations about the presence sf the Rwandm refugees. As part of the normalization of diplomaec relations with Rwanda, the gov agl-eed to sec that refugees rehmed a number of vekctes that they had bmught with them when they came to Benaco, The refuug"es did this, but in the c m of a vehicle brought by the for~nergove w r of Kjbmgo prefechrre, they switched licenscl plates and sent back an older car, This deception was qu.ickly discovered, and the governor was called into the pdice stalFion. Zn rapowe, a large crowd mshed the police shtion, and the police fixed shots into the air. Refugees in turn blocked access to the camp by p d i n g culverts across the road, as a demotlstration of their power. livo Rwandans were beaten to death in the melee .when they j w e d out: of a car o w d by Concern Worl$Wide and tried to run away from the crowd. The governor was soon deased by the Tanzanians, and agency activities resumed nor~nally The T a n z a ~ a n seized s on both ksues to drive publjc o p i ~ o n in the direction of I-ejecting permanent resettlement in the southern re@on, fronically international =action was muted. In part this was because a number of UNNCII officials had been cycled out of tbe camp, and those r e m a i ~ n gwere not wiEng or able to use the potential emo~onafismof the confrctnbGons to &&act more press attention. %is stance probably also reflected the distmce the UNHCR, took from the Tmzanians, who had effecGveity delegated all daily management decisions fctr the &andan refugees to the UNHCR. In late 1994, when there were 500,000

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up

refugces in Ngara, only three Tanzanian adxnjnistrators and a small con&%gentof police were assigned fuH tirne to r e b e e issues.

Ngara, Navernber 15394

By November 1994, Ngara had settled into the routines, relationship, and procedures that were to do ate the rest of the operat-icm..As Rifauember after a four-month absence) seen Connelly (whcz returned asserted, the crisis continued. Rut the m b r e uC the crises had changed; they were m.magt.d and routinized afmg the principles estafolished by the staff in the first six weeks, very few of M.lhom remained. The problem was that these routines were dependent: on norms est&lished in the setup staige of the operation, when informa~onwas plent-iful, CNN"s presence was taken for granted, and tion was un(q~eS~oned. Durhg the next two years, the newly estabgshed bureaucmcyls abiliw to cope with refugce influx impmved. The WFP's food pipeline functioned better, and rehgee health stabilized, bcsco in mmy respects better than it h d bccn in Rwanda or was in neighboring Tanzanian villages (S= Essay I). As for food distrjhutian, the refugee leaders' control was challenged, and the camp management agencies grac-lually took respcrmihiEties for food distribulion away from the more corrupt refugee leaders. Despite the fact that the operation was functioning successSully, the camp's days were numbered. Particularly in the UN's New York headquarters, and in Geneva, Washhgtort, and Brussels there was bcreasing dissatisfaction with the pclliticrat conditions in the Great Lakes region, and funding by ECHO and, USAID soon w i t h e ~ dXn . the end, 2 fnillion refugees were remved h m the UNHCRrs rols in the largest forcible repatriation since WrId Ww II. Notes I. A number of papers have been written about different aspects of refugee rectjiption in Tanzania, See Malkki 1995; Gorrnan 1993; So rs 1993; Daley 1994; Smith 1995; Waters lW5b, 19139, and 19813 for a few ~ 3 fthe more recent papers. middu-Makubuya 1994; Mitaker 1999; Prunier 1995; m d S d t h 1995 discuss the history of Rwandan refugees in Uganda. Stein (5996) and Gasarasi (55184) have written general kstories of refugee relief operations in Tmzmia. Cuenod (55167) wrote the earliest scholarly account of Rwandan refugee reception in Uganda and T a n z d a that I know of. I?, The agency X worked for, Lutherm World Federa~on,had been involved in resett-ling these refugees in large wttlements between I972 and 1990. However,

The Relief Eflt~rtWinds Up

by 19533, headquarters in Geneva had begun to ask whether there was need for a '"refugee service" in Tanzmia, since at that time &ere were no new refugees in the region. 3. Several nongc3vernmc;ntal agencies did arrive in time tc3 set up operations (notably LWF in Ngara m d Kibondtz, Caritas in Ngara, MSF-France in Kasulu, and Ehe Tanzanian Red Crc3ss in Ngara). In addigon, the hglican church" h c ~ p i tals in the area such as M u r a p m z a (Ngara prefecwe), Kabanga (Kasulu prefecture), and Shunga (Masulu prefecture) were overwhelmed by the refugee influx. They received little support from the intematitjnal rehgee relief regme durjing the early days of &e influx, 4, Up until 1993, Tmzania had a pdicy of hc3using refugees in permanent settlements. Refugees placed in permanent settlemen@Mreregiven access to enough g until they were able to rebrn to land to support themselves through far their home c o m w . Xn t s e settlements UNHCR conshcted permanent infrastructure, including brick schools and dispensaries, roads, and administrative buildings. Burmdians received in the 1970s and Mozambictms in the 1980s and early l WOs were mainhined in such settlements. The category '%semipermanentuwas introduced in 1993 for refugees fleeing from Burundi. These refugees were prc3vided with house plots and a small area to farm. The area for farming was not enough for subsistence, however, and it was expwted that they would receive WFP ra~clnsuntil &ey were rqah-iated to Budi. When the Rwmdans arrived in April and May 1994, they were placed in "temporary" camps, because of their large numbers. No permanent buildings were ccmsEructed, and refugees received only enough land to build a g a s s and plastic hut; tl~eywere not perdtted to farm, m d it was assumed that WFP rations would be their primav fcmd source. 5, This brou@t the total n m b e r of UMHCR expabiate staff in Ngara to tl~ree at the end c36 April. Both Maureen Conndly and Jacqua Franquin remained involved in Ehe reception of 'the Rwmdan refugee influx, & coc>rdinatc3rtComelly was to play the key role in establishing how assistance was delivered. The third UNk-TCR expatriate on site was Andres Jlmenez, k-Le fhished his assigment in Ngara in late May, and as far as X know, did not become involved in the long-term tion from Bemhard Stauh and Adamasu Sirneso, Aphl d L,azarus Mezza also told me about visiting these rehgees in April 1994. 7. Pubfished accounts usually refer to a figure of 250,000 refugees. This was a fipre. On the basis of census data, the total nurnfirst p e s s and/or a p ber who crc3sxd into a is believed to be about 170,000 (see JEEAR 3:2-5 and Jaspars 1994:&5). 'This f i p r e may also be high, but is crtrtainly closer tc3 the h t h than the more widely cited 250,000 figure. 8. As described in Chapter 2, UNI3CR is not allwed tc:,impiement lief propams itself, Rather its brief is tcz use money donated by gove shape relief programs by contracting with other agencierj for yecific services to rehgees, UNHCR then "monitors" "sbursements. in most comtries, this means that the tJN-I--fCRmakes payments to and monitors gc>vernmentalagencia within the host country who provide sewices within rehgee camps. The excepGon is

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up

when there is no capaciv within the host count^ government to prc3vide skilled staff to provide such services. This is the case in Tammia, and other poor cauntries. In these casm, the UNHCR contracts with international NGQs like the IFRC flntemtional Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies), CARE, Rilbdecins sms Fron~eres,etc., to provide the services. Consequtmtly, t h e e agencies oAen have an odd relationship with the UNHCR; they are not commercial contractors per se, but partners, or implemmters. Independent of this fkancial tie, UNHCR is also often the d a i p a t e d coclrdinator for the agencia who rush in to assist in a refugee emergency. 9. Food ratic3ns were measured in a variety of ways, depending on which point in Ehe pipeline was analyzed. In 1995, WFP needed tc3 make 5,500 tcms available weekly in the Ngara complex of camps, which included the four camps near Bemco and Kiblj. Hills, This involved bucking the c odities received at the distant port of Bar es Salaam across Tanzania tcz warehouses, typically cm 40-ton tmcks. The trucking NGO, Lutheran World Federagon, was responsible for taking what was needed from the warehouses and delivering it tcz the disbibution point in each camp, where the camp management NGO scooped it into the reIugees9bas. This process involved receiving and dispatching 37.5 $0-ton truckloads per week and was coordinated by UNHCR. Distribution cycles in the camps were either w ~ k l yor eveq other week. At these distributions, the camp management NGQs would scc>c>pinto the bag of each family a ration for one or two weeks, for each member of the family, The formula used was based on a daily per capita raGon of 420 g m s of maize pain or 350 grams of maize meal, 120 pams of pulses, 25 grams of vegetable oil, and 5 grams of salt. Theoretically this provided a per capih r a ~ o nof 2,045 caIc?ries(see Shr?han1996:342). Frequent breaks in the pipeline meant that this ideal was rarely met. The equiv of the food distribution system was checked in at least two ways. First, a third NGO periodically ccmducted fmd-bag suweys, randomly checklng how much of each type of food was in a refugee's bag as he or she left the distribution center. This is how we knew that the actual amount of food received per rehgee was typically beween 1,660 m d 1,900 kilc3calories per day. Mainukition rates were also regularly calculated using height-to-weight surveys ccmducted by the NG0s c~erat-ing outpatient clinics, 10. Church= in western Tanzania are amc3ng the strc->ng@tit elemmts of civil society. Nevertheless, they were effectively excluded from the set-up of the operation by the UNHCR, even though for the first months of the operatic>n,the UNHCR had offices in the hglican mission compound in Ngara, and ccmtinues to have offices in the Anglican compound in Kasulu. Qne Tanzanian related to me how a t hglican bishop bringing a skipment of used dot&ng provided by Tanzanians was c h a ~ away d f-rc?mBenaco by the UNHCK field officer, The ehmches of his diocese had &ready been deeply involved in the response to the Burundian rehgees t.hrou& the provisiczn of medical care, "ohre the UNHCR arrived. "We are professionals," it was explained to the bishop, and do not need minor agencies. Iro~cally,in 1999 the UNHCR approached this bishop to take over social ~ r v i c e fso x a number of camps for Congolae and Burundians.

The Relief Eflt~rtWinds Up

UNf-tCR's aloof rejagonship with Tanzanian agencies reflects its current ""rllef only" policy, The Tanzanian agencies often are relatively weak and are therefore in need of "capacity- building," but those at UNHCI;",do not view tl~ernselvesas responsible for develqing local capaciq to deal with fuhre refugee influx. This at ~ m eleads s to acrimonious relations beween the UIVIHCR and what "Ianzanim instit-utions are present. 11.World Vision was the agency that learned mr>stquickly how heay-hmded UNHCR cc>c>rdina.lion was to be in Ngara. In the first days after the influx, Mlorld Vision took blankets to the border tcz distribute to rehgees, despite UMHCR orders not to do W on the grounds that this would provide an incen~veto atabl-ish settlements on the border, away from Benaco. Despite World Vision's long experience in Tanzania, they were not awarded a sector by trNHCR when the contracts were organized. Consequmtly, World Vision never did become involved in the Rwmda relief operation in Tmzania, My own agency LWF, had a policy gc3ing in of a "i"0/30 split between UNHCR fmds and church-generated mc~ney7'2th was relaxed a bit when it became apparent that tradiitional sources of funds from Eurc>peanCommuniiey gc3vernmmts would not be available. MSF had a policy of establishingclinics and systems with their own funds, but very quickly switched over to 100 percent UNHCR funding. The Red Cross socieGes had independat s m c e s of funds around the world and were never overly dependent cm UIVHCR. CARE, World Concern, Christian Qutreach, and other agencies were virtually 100 percent dependent on UNMCR fmding. 12. See Jaspars (1994) far a complete account. 13, The bridge was first installed in July "fM4, during the dry season. Highwater marks were miscalculated, and Cogefar received a second contract in 1995 to raise the bridge. 14. Another was a man who was made gc3vernor of Kibungo prefecture shortly after the genocide began, apparently assisted in Ehe irnplementatian of the genocide, and then fled to Tanzania. 15. Quote from Rehlaender (1994:5).Trmlation from G e r m by the authc:,r, 16. UNHCR representatives asserted to reporters the same day that it had det e r ~ n e dthat he had musual power wifiin the camp, and that "at least thirty thczusmd refugees dmce tcz his tune" (see ReHaender 1994). This as~rGiicznwas made without consultation with the Tanzanians or any broader understanding of the volaGle nahre of charismaGc power (in the sense of Max Weber" descriptions of charisma), such as Gakte did indeed have at that moment. Tronicallgr, the Tanzhan pdice officer who gave Cat&e the megaphone seemed tc3 have a finer sense of this. It also did not reconcile the fact that this same population had turned Gatete in at the border, N o indictment for war crimes or genocide had been listed for Gatete on the Web site for the Lntemat-ionalCrirninal T~bunalfur Rwanda (ICTR) as of July 1999, As of autumn 2000 the indictments were nc:, longer (m the Web site, 17. MSF-Hcjlland had operated clinics inside Rwanda during the early days of the genocide, Many of their lr3cal employees were Tutsis, and a large number were killed during the genocide, sometimes in front of their expatriate colleagues. As a result MSF as an agency closed its clinics in Rwanda and the expa-

The Relief Eflorf Witzds Up

triates and the surviving It->calstaff fled to Tanzania. These staff, who by and large were Tutsis, became &e s3urce of their information about plots within Ehe Hutu camps. This information, which in July and August 1994 included accusations and mmors of poisonings wi&h MSF facilities, was-to bomow Barbara Tuchman" term-amplified in the mee~ngscoordinated by the UMHCR. 18. As a repre~ntaGtivefor LWF, 1 indicated that we saw no reason tc:, diwmtinue programs, but would defer to the consensus of the gmup. 19. Interviews with refugees and Tanzanians at the time indicated that there was little undastanding of why the international cc~mmuniQwas peeved with the refugee leademhip. This was because discussion arnc>ngthe expatriatm took place in English, in Ngara, 40 kilometers away. The Tmzanim gov time was changing district commissioners, and this meeting was the first h r the new head of district government, a military mm, Brigadier General Sylvester Hamedi. Refugee leaders, who dealt with the expathates in French, did not pass the gist of the discussion on to Ehe Khyarwmda-speaking refugee masses in any orgmized fashion. Indeed, they had little irrterest in doing so, 20. Both CARE and tfNHCEt staff making this decision had had immediate expehence with Somali refugee programs, where such comporlnds were considered standard. In large part, this was due to security cc>ncerns,which had been fc~remost during these crises. As described in previous chapters and in Walkup (1997), there often was an adversarial relationship befiGlieen relief agencies and the refugees during this emergency, In many respects this mentality surprised me. My own experience with refugee work had been in mailand m d Tanzania, where expatriates lived in towns or camps mc3ng the populaGons they were assisting. 21. The per-refugee, per-day ration for a food supplement in the Great Lakes region was 420 g a m s of whole cereal, 120 grams of beans, 25 g a m s of oil, and 5 grams of salt. If the fot->dpipeline worked well, this is what the refugem would receive, Fifty grams of "cam-soya blend"" was alsc:, included at the time Ngara was atablished gaspars 1994:45). Note that these are synthetic figures, and in pracGce Ehe refugees received a food distribution every one or two weeks. This supplemmt was a rather bland mix of food, but adequate to sustah life, assuming that it was equitably distributed across the populafrion. Dqending on the type of food distributed, this was usually resulted in an average food basket of 1800 calories per person per day. Pis mentioned in the text, distributions were hxgher earlier in the crisis, Later in 199S96, in some camps, figures dropped below 1,800 kilocalories per day in =me weeks (see a a g t e r 8 and Essay 1). 22. As Crisp (19%) recently pointed out, refugee census5 are critcicinl for management and accountability; However, there have been few systematic studies of their accuracy; As he also points out (and as is discuswd in Chapters 3 and 4), such censuses are iherentlly difficult to a d m ~ s t e involvhg r as they do d e f i ~ tions of who is a reiugee and &erefore countable and who is not, 23. Maureen Comelly, Jaccpes Fraquin, Karl Stehacker, m d Cryrrime Faletto all left in July. Cc>nnelly,Franquin, and Steinacker were all assigned permanent1y to Ngara some months later. In the interim, the senior posts were either vacant or held by temporary appointees. Gonnelly Franquin, and Steinacker all rehxmed with permmen t assignments to Fiigara in October and November.

October 1994December 1996: Normalized CrisisThe Operation Winds Down

By November 1994,a, shstt-term, successful but expensive relief program was in ptace. "Thepolicy cmsemus was already clear, at least at h e New York a d Geneva levels: there would be a repatriation. The UN secretaygeneral's spedal envoy for Rwanda, Ambassador Shahrayar Khan, arrived in Bertato from Kig& k~early Novelder to reiterate this poht in a meetkg h r the NGOs. The assumptions behind the repatriatjon p o k y were that the presumably apolitical HTutu refilgees would welcome the oppodunity to return, and they would be welconted by Ike new WFdominated gov en.t.1 Furfier relief qerations and programs were to be undertaken with these assu-tions in misrd, Repatriation was a policy h a t the blituticlnal players-fie Tanzanian and Rwandan governed Nations agencies and their NGO parmers, and the as dilferent, and questions we= raised about whether it was realistic to expect a substantial volmtary repatrriation at a time when refugees were still fleeing h a n d a fur TTanzmia; the number of bodies recove~ddaily from the Kagera &er was a c b l l y increasing. Maureen Comelly fitiated a pl ng exercise on November 14 whose purpsc was to solicit cornmen& frsm the staff on repatriation and on resettlement M J i ~ n Tanzania. Repah.iagcm:in h e November 1994 memo was considered udikely, primarily for two rc?wons:

* Spontaneous repakiation cannot be supported immrtdiateiy *

both for the internal situation in Rwnda and the political pressure put on people inside the k z a n i a n camps. [Repatriationl requires close, coordinated planning within fiwanda to ensure that repatrciatjon dues mt:lead to a deteriora-

Keza camp was atablitihed in February 1 9 6 for Rwandans and Bur~~ndians fleeing Burundi, (Photosby D a ~ aWaters.) r

The Opcmtiotz Winds Glow@

ticm of the conditiom fcquired to sustajn repatriation and develspment witEn Rwanda, thus leading to firrtEler violmce and a breakdown of the tiocieq. b c a l officers of the UNHCR and NGOs were also interested in resettlement hTmzania and presented a pl g document described as a '"ncmpaper," that sketckd out a scenafio where ,U30,00t) refugees would return to Rwanda and 300,000 would be resettled, in various regions of Tamania. Despi-le such iniliatives, however, inlate 1934 assumptiom of quick volm h r y t-e3&n and reconcilia~onwi ted Egher-kvd policy development, even &.roughwen& in T m z ~ aRwanda, , and Zaire in&catcd that such a sotutim was rrnlibcely. Oddty, the UNHCXt in Tmzani.a was cauglnt in the xniddl., Its k l d offjctzrsreported the conhlxing arrival of Beeing Rwandms, massacPc?reports, m d other Micators fhat volrrntary repatriation was not possible in the short term, But UNPICKS dons= In VVashington, New Vork, and Europe accused thiern sf discouraging and delaying voluntary refugee repabiation. In part, this reflwted Ehe g of the Western gove ts to the new gov wkch had been recognized by all and had assumet RwandarsUN seat. 'The donors' leverage c m e from the power of their purse, and .tow& the efld of 1W4, NCO requsts for lurther UNFZCR funding became more difficdt to fill. The first NC;Cl)sto feel the phch were the specialized me& ical agencitzs like MSF, which had used the bulk of its lnoney to develop expatriate-imteme oupatient c l i ~ c sIn , particular, UNHCR staff inNgara aiiricizeet the France-based food agency, Agcnce Internationale Conbe la Faim (AICF) (Shohm 1996). AKFs focus was on qeciatized ftecting of malnourished chldren; this was labor-intensive, and as a result had a hi@ cost-per-beneficiary ratio at a time when overall refugee nutriSion was improvir~g.Donalions to the Wrld Food Progam~nealso suffered when policy-makers in Europe and Nor& Arnerica apparently acted on their hspes for repatriation by resisting requests to expand food deliveries .to central Africa, despite the new arrivals m d Iheir additional food requiresnents. The consequence was that breaks began to appear in the h o d piptine, This pipeline began in warehouses in the West, where maize m d bean surpluses WE stored, extended in a slow ant( ponderous fashion to Western ports, into ship holds, to docks in the ports of Molnbassa and Dar es Salaam, by &U& and rail transport across Afrira, and fin* to a gmwing pop-talatim of refugees in Tanzania, Burundi, and Zaire in central Africa (see JEEAR 11996:87-110). It took several m t h s for tlne food to travel the piyeline's length, and keeping it filled with the proper amounts of food required anticipating how many refugees wodd be p ~ s e ni1t7 the fut-u~"~, and how m c h they wodd eat

The Opemtion Wilzds Down


The donors in the West optjmistically predicted that many of the refugees woufd be repatriated m d put less food in the pipeline, No one anticipated what actudly hppened: that refugee populations throughout the Great Lakes region would continuc to grow into 1,996. Thus, even as tl-recapability to recehtz and house refugee actually improved, field workers precilicted an ever-hepeasing disaister, though the type uC disaster prcrdicted varied. The MSF agencies focused on the role that muderers played in the c a v s in Zaire and TTanzania, and used this as a rationale to wizhdraw from an operation &at was also seeing the end of the wett-funded esnergency cmt-ractts.T Other agencies were angered by breaks in the food pipeline. The local UNHCR dices in Ngara and Karagwe remained silent while this happened; they had orders from Geneva to avoid codronbtion with WFP. UNHCR did, though, encourage NGOs to c o ~ t a i foudly, n which they did, in a strongl.y worded and widely disseminated memo in which they predicted food riots and armed ksurrecliun in Tanzania in the event that WFP did not increase fmd,deliveries."ut despite these womies-and several.weeks of half ratiom-no such exnergency ever exnerged in Ngara, as Shoham (1996:342) has pointed out. The =ason was that, indepadent of the N o s , refugees had dweloped sources of food, and cash within the local economy to suppiemat the WFP rations. The dramtic at;pects of the sihattion agak hecarne important in this context. i"tssumpt;ionsabout the nature s f refugee srgmization and politics nahrally gravitated tow& the sensational; m d the role of genocide irnagimtion, even in creathg the refug= crisis was central to the W ~ t e r n as the event itself became more remote in time, Since the sensational genocicfe had successfutly gctnaated sympathy and finmcial support in 1994, the UNHCI.2 agalm emphasized this aspect, along with threats of conbgious disease, threats to security of exphiat=, and tlne threats to the operatian's inkpity posed by a further refugee influx. The chfonic irony of the condition was that the United Nations adopted an aggres"ive voluntary repatriation policy rooted in the assuxnp~onthat concfitiom hKwanda werc. appropriak for a return, even s arriving in 199546, Mding to the irony was the as new ~ f u g e e were fact that the hternat;ional refugee relief co unity inNgara was becoming more efft.cciveat h n d l h g the crisis through the quick receplion of refugees and the establishment of new refugee camps. At the same time, new pred.ictions sf disaster conhualfy emerged-whether the cause was seen to be disease, political instability insufficient water provision, refugee urnat, Interahami~ueacliviv, etc. The JEEAIC. observed: "The situation has never quite stabilized and agencies have been conhually needing to increase the scale c25 their programmes. h o t h e r factor cmtribuling to the post-emrgeatcy situation in N p r a was that from mid-July 17.9941

The Opcmtiotz Winds Glow@

onwards the focus of irrternational attention moved to Goma [the headquarters sf the Zairean operation], resultin: in the transfer of resources and persomet away from Tmzania" f12).

November 1994-4 Remote Camp, Water Crises, and Emergency Agencies Depaz1: Hopes had been, raised fsr a quick sesolut-ionof the refugee crisis &rough voluntary repatriation by the visit of A~nbassadorKhan in early November 1994, Arriving by helicopter in Benaco and accompanied by a very cibviously a r m d bodyguard, he mrtt with NCXl mpresenti3tives in a tent, I-ie emphasized that in his face-to-face meetings with President Bizimungu of Rwamda, the safcsty of rewning refugees had been assured. When 1 queried Khan about the continuing arrkal of bodies in the Kagera Kiver, ke expressed su~ritie,since the p~sicfenthad assured him that the sou&east of the country was under contmt,We also expressed &e view that if a repatriation did not occur in the comhg weeks, he bclieved it would not occur at all (see Waters 1999a). But irr. the mean&rne,p o t i ~ c dm d msitary cc2nditiom in Burundi were again deteriora&ng,and in &-November 1994, a new influx sf refugees appared to the south of Ngara at tke sarne time h a t tke number of bodies floating down the Kagera River increased. It is not h o w n exactly where the bodies were comjng from, but these refugees were Rwandans who had b e n housed in refugee camps in Buruncti in the mmths since Marnda's ggenocide. A few Burmdians also arrived, fitialty, the new influx was housed in the Benam colnytex of camp, crea.ting further demands for food anci water and aggrawatint;cmwdhg at a time when sporadic cases of cholera were being treated (see FEAR 1996:69). Even &ou& this epidemic was dealt with capably by the established water, sanitation, and public health agencies, the cholera warning Bag,MJhick had dready been raised in Gsma, was now raised at Benaco.5 A positive d k c t of these circunstavlces was that a new camp at Mitali Hills, some 50 kilonteters (about 30 miles) w a y , was yuickly approved. "I%esite had been surveyed in Sptember 1994 as a possible decongestion site for sefugees already in tlne Rmaco complex, Mrhich, UNHCR pointed out, would be unsust&able in Ihe lmg-run because c,f shorbges of fifewood and watel: The only s w e y that Plad been done there, though, was a "wind-screen" survey of water and firewuod resources done by UNHCR and :NGO consdtmts horn inside vekicles. This survey haci indicated that the site was umujtablc for a camp owing to a lack of susface water and a pmba:fole lack of groundwater. But despite &ese shortcornings, the con~nuingarrival of rehgees demanded its use. By March 3, 195, there were only 23,K35 refugees h i n g there. This caseload was

The Opemtion Wilzds Down


managed easily from food wat.ehouses in the Btjnaco area, and by means of two new water trucks that began transporting m t e r 60 kjlometers (37 ~ l i e sfrom ) Benaco. Back at the m a h camp centers, progress was consolidatd. In Karape, a second decmgestion camp was establish4 at the end of 1994 odate 4f),OC)0 refugees who had settled in a floodplain durIn.g the initial innwx. The ww camp, Chabalisa 2, was the first to have a semblance of plami;ng, whicl-r was possible only because there was no further d u x in the north after about August 1994 (see Essays 1-3). As a result, transfers were made to the camp some four hiornetas ( a b u t thee mites) away ina systema~cfashion.,Carchlly sumeyed house plots were assiped, and h e refugees systematically resettled over a t w o - m n ~ pe riod that ended in & c e d e r 1.994. In Ihe Wenaco camp complex, the economy, especjajly, the markets, blossomed, and Benaco camp became hewn for its urban alnenities, including bars, guest houses, retail outlets, and, as t-radrrg in WFP refugee rat-ions took place, its grain market (Wters 1999a). In the midst of this, the expatriaks were focused m two k c h c a l issues and two pditical ones. The two tec7nical issua we= a percclived emerging water crisis with a tkreat of a cholera epidemjc, and the establishment of a dependable food pipelinc of WFP commodities. The tvvo poli,t.icalissues were, first, the d e m n d of Western donors that voluntary repabiation be encouraged and, second, the need to generate sympaw for the refugees who wcre still arriving in Tanzania. Thus, the picture presmted needed to be one of technical competence at the same time that technical systems were falling apart. C)m. the pslitical level tlnese was a need to explain why refugees should volurzteer to return to Rwanda at the same time others were beIrt.g expe21d from their homes there. h the context of these contradic~ons,the expaMates adopted fundhg, pubficity and political policies h a t had inherent inconsistencies. This was especially apparent in the water sector, where the field workers repeateay strcssed the cholera danger in memos and at meetings of the medical, water, and sanita~onagerzcies. The Cholera Card

Cholera perhaps kspires more terror in Westerners than any other disease (MlcRleitl 1977:230--31).Not wi"Zhoutreason: its p o w r had. most recently been observed in Zaire, where m estimated ZI),0I)C)to 30,000 refugees died of the disease in July 7994 (IEEAIS(, (iS75). Death from cholera i s quick and horrifying, following an excruciahg loss of fluids from violent dysentery, Cholera is caused by a bacterium h a t is usually water-borne; it break out in conditions of crowdhg and poor smitation.

The Opcmtiotz Winds Glow@

h the West, its effects were most devastat_ingin e t e n t h - c e r ciEie such as London, whercz it xnoved amund in, the piyed water supply. fn Africa cholera is still seasonat, appearing in many East African towns tow a d the end of the J r y season, when wa,kr supplies are not flushed by periodic rains, clemhess standards decline because of scarre water, and crowded condieam facstate feed-oral t r m s ~ s s i o nof disease. Sanitarians can easily control. cholera, like other fecal-borne diarrlneaienteric dixases, by adding chfori.ne to the water and by providhg enough water to promote ctediness. Thus, provision c-tf money for water supply is central to an operatic>nw b s e puvase is the basic survi\ial of refugees. In a context where money and h m e i a l efficiency were m t central to successful engineering, and population concentration was viewed as a political given, medical and engineering solutions guarmteeing refugee protection from cholera and other watef-bome diseases w r e yuicuy acl-tieved. For the water sector, this mcant that millions of do:llars wtrzre made available for quickly comeived projects. Special isrrlation units were also established in late 1994, in the event that cholera cases did occur. Urbaat Societies;?The Refugees' Mlottd WEle the expatriate Good Samaritans were focused on the logistics in providing adequate supplies of food and water to a group of people they were beginning to view as of politically dubious moral worth, the refugees themselves were establishing a large funclio ni..ty. Concerns about 8wanda continued, to be domhant, m d mouncemerrts on RPT; radio we= deconstruckd assiduously by refugees. More d e v m t to daily life were the establishment of the new relalionsfips and routines in their nclw "homes" in the Tanzanian refugee camps. g of 1996 the four calnps of the Benaco camp co~nplex had 400,00(3 to 500,000 refugees a d took on the chamcterislics of an urban congfomeration.. There was a specialization of actjviq &ere too. For example, the food and water that the expatriates were so concerned about quickly became ntatketable crr dities; the rented truck defivering the World k o d Programme commodities were known ta arrive and then retrum with supplies of gain, oil, and beans purchased by Tmzitnian &aders. Refugees also dealt with the wakr shortage from the five litcrs per day provided by the water system by developing sources of their own. D~lringthe rainy tieason (eight mmtl.rs of the year), this included sources horn roofs;, and the swampy areas along the lower reaches of the camps. Othcr uiban activi~esquickly developed too, Church= and mosques were establishctd, bars opened, Eu-miture mmufacbred, and handiccaft induskies clevelop&,

The Opemtion Wilzds Down


HIV infection probably expanded rapidly as new relationships were establkhed, and jud.ging from the number of births in the camp in late 1995, new family relationships established (see Essay 4). The militia training that had been so prominent before. the death of David apparlow profile emu* entf y deched to a point where once agai.n they to be at least ""sc~t,"mea g it was no longer an issue in UNHCR coordination meetings. Primary schoolif.lg was reestablished ushg a Kinyarwmda curriculum developed by UNESCO in schoolrooms built with UNHCR plastic. Cultrxral koupes were also reestablished. Food distributiun came under closer control of NGOs, which est&lished a variety of mmitorlng system, Un2ike in Zajre, there was ns evidence that the preexisthg leadership from Rwanda controlled substantial food distribu~on,NGOs like Concern International in Lumsi were in fact jus.tidiablq; pmud of havfng changed leadership wi&h the camps &I late 1994 and 1995 when ciali paymen& to refugee leaders were withdrawn (Pattier 1996a).As Shoham (1996) noted, most dkt-ributionin the carnps was done by NGOs di.rect_tyto family groups, and not through the refugee leadership. Finally, by early 1995, sptenatic "food basket monitcrring'"rogramwere irrtpemented to check refugee nutritionaf, status both at the distribution pohts and via establish& mother-child heat& provams which o r g a ~ z e dhome visits (see Essay 1). In many respects, the c a q s had the el-iaracterislicsidm uri3m scxriety. Time perm_itted the resiliency of refugee self-initiative and market forces to fill the gaps in Mihat the UN and affihated agencies were able to provide in terms of material- sustenance, and a broad number of services emerged among what had become an urbm popula~on,The existence of the ca~npsremained dependent on WFP Iargesse, which fm the Ngara camps in 1996 lincluded approxim,ately 1,501) metric tomes of maize, beans, and oil per week. 'The success from the refugee perspective is pePhaps best viewed %mugEt %e tens of the demographjcs, After the horror of a fight from Rwanda, genocide, and war the populati.on settted into a very consemative wait-and-see atti2ude. Somehow safisfied with the otherwise grim circumtances of the boringI unwentful fcfugee :lJ.fesQlefound in refugee camps everyhere, refugees developed routines to fill their time. Days revolved arwnd couecki; raeions, w a W ~ gto and from small and distant fields, ;angling for the few jnhs available with agencies, &urc.h activity, and penerat hustling in a forcehl and sometimes seff-protecting manner. Most important, like other Third W r l d refugee poplxlaticrnt;, the Rwandans began to reestahlish Lrlmilies aad have chitdren. WrtaSity rates dropped from the high rates that occwred shwtly after arrival, and birth rates began to climb in mid-1995. Statistics available h m Chahaba 2 camp indicate that by tbe end of 1995 there were approximately 30


The Opcmtiotz Winds Glow@

bi,t-hs per week, i17 a population of 37,000, which is a crudc bir& rate of 4.2 percat (see Essay I).

April 1995: Food Crisis, the Border Glases, and Massacres in Rwanda The expa&iatesrcancerns were different, locused on m;aintaiming a degendeflt popula~onthat was stiU groTNiRg because of continued arrivals from Ilurundi. The influx from Ilu~undistretched the capacity of the Ngara-headqumtered operizf-Ion,which was given respomibifitry for providing water and food. Local sources of water were considered unasailable? so trzlcking operations were begun from 60 kilomrtters (,'27miles) away. Tmcks also were detaild to br?ingfood from the WPP extended delivery point (EDQ in the Benam complex. Camp mmagement, smiti-ltion, and ~nedicalsewices were delivered by the small=, more resilient agmcies Eke GOAL (an Irish NGQ), Xllorwegim People's Aid (NFA), m d the Tnternational Rescue Commi.ttet.(IRC), which had made good use of Tmzanian and =fug= labor but wP1ich in the past had been considered too weak to compete with expatriate-do~nateCi.agencies like CARE, AICF, and MSE Addillg to the seme of chsis were v a p e complaints about food delivery and uncertainties in debery schedtltes, I-he passions of which were i17fluenced by con.tjnuirng verhal attack i17 meegngs on WFP, Fimlly, aerial reporb from the border in March 1995 indicated that the influx from Burundi could continue indefinitely. With the UNHCRcoordinated operaljon near its emotional and financial ljmits, resignaticm begm to set in. Agencies became aware that they could n s Xongcr indefinitely expand programs, and the luster of working in Tanzania w r e The Tmzmian gover ent, which under the direction of Kagera Regional Com~ssionerPhilip Mmgula had mahtained a policy of open receprcion, also was being stririncd, and elements of their d i t a r y became more cmerned about border securiv. In Esponse, on April 8, 195, for the first time since the influx began, Tanzania foscefufly closed the bor-der to furtPler refugeedrom Burundi and Rwanda. The Tanzami sized that this policy was consistent with international wishes that all refugces rehm to Rwanda voluntari the earliest possible date, and that there be no resettlement*To a ce depee, the border closktg had the desired response, as under presurtr from the growing anarchy in Btlmndi, Rwandans began to rekm to their own c o n e y without seeking asylum in Tanzania. Finally taEks conce g the possibility of volrantary return began, UNS-ECR in Ngam switched sides and joined the repakiation drumbeat mast enthusiastically as it becme apparent that their own analyse?;c-tf the situaticm: in ICwanda, based on reporb from the con~nued arrival of refugees, w a e not being wcll received in Geneva.

The Opemtion Wilzds Down


Mopes of this rehrrn were deraiied, though, by massacrc~sin Rwanda itself. Between April 16 and 20, at least 4,C)UO refugees in Kibeho Uisplaced Person Cent= in wstem Rwanda died after being fired on by the Rwandan ~ l i t a r jn y a ~ l i t a r movement y that lasted several days. h the short term the result m s that the trickle of voluntary repatriation.$ from CR to accusaeiom Tanzania virtually dried up, which opened the U from domrs of discowaging repatrciatjon, despite the supposed reemerg e e of peacehl con.diGons in Rwanda itself. NOW,though Mii&out any pal-ticulmly clear cwidmce, W U N R became more convinred that there was h fact intimidation of potential ft~tumees witfnin the camp complex itself*To countc?rthis, the UNHCR helped fund a refugee camp newspper and radio station h o u * tke Jesuit &&gee %rvice.We stated purpose of this effort was to provide unbiased infor:mation about condi~onsin Rwanda, in the belief information coming from the UNT?(I:Rwould be acceptcsd as morc l e g w a t e than what the refugees bead from each other or how they interpreted Radio Rwandafs gm-aPF broadcasts. Summer 1995: Rationalizing Genocide and b l u n t a y RepatTiatian "I%eGbeho massacres wtrzre the end of the hczneymocm period beween the governmat of Kwanda and all but its most enthusiastic supporters.7 The massacrcjs presented a c o n u n d m ~b ~r the UNWCR in T a m a ~ atoo. , Refugee arguments about the political ckcumtances J"rr Rwmda made more sense in the context of what had hagpeneel in Kib&s, so in spite of the enlreaties of young expatriate UN1-Irepatriation officers, programs dowed. And in h-away capitals, donors continued to be frustrated m d pleas by the UNHCR for rnoney to fund existing gmgrams went unheeded. But a problem emered. Zn the heady days of generous fhmchg, Both Ngara and Karagwe htad dweloped budgeting assumptions that savings could be generated d y by a decline in refugee caseload generated by repatriaeion. But the fleet of eight buses brought from I(igal,i to transport the expected repatriated refugees often roamed the camps with few if any rehrnees on board, The UNHCR btlreaucracy sought to develop a plausi:ble story as to why the voluntary repatriation policies were effective. As with all such explanations, they soutght justification thmugh an arrangement of the most compellhg social facts. A descriptjon of this view follow. At the same time, I talked to two African leaders about the sihaation, and they had ma& different analyses of the same sihxatian. Their views bear repeating here, Philip Manpla was the re@onal c Kagera and had been heimately hvolved with the development of Tm-

The Opcmtiotz Winds Glow@

zaPlia's open-door refugee policy since 1994. The Bishop Mciurubanda was from Gahini, Rwanda, and had been introduced to me through Robert m d Pabicia Wilson, British ~ssionarieswho had worked with biln in Rwanda for s w a t e m yeal-s.

The UNHCR was found& cm the pr.inciple that all persons with a legitimate? fear of xbieary political persecurj_onhawe the right to asylum.T'his

implies a legal proceeding %at generaXly does not: have the potential to be implemted, and tl-tis was the case for the Rwanditns. As a. result, assereon of this right is typically made on h e basis of a partticular sifuation, the idea being that refugees will volunhrily return home owe political changes have occurred.. Implied in this are a whole series of evaluaGons undertaken by refugees, hosts, and the hante coun&y At its root, the assumption is that the rehgee is Ihe one best able to evatuate a situafion, Mrhich. is why tlne UNHCR will for the sake of princjple resist the forced repatriatbn czS refugees. The focus on voluntary rqatridion resdts inthe W H C I Z ' s classifyinf; the refirgees accordi.ng to perceived repatriation a:fojlity,which is important for their own purposes, rather than in ways h a t are based on ~neaningfuI social dislinctiom in &e Rwandan population itself. In July 1995, Maureen Comelly first related the social divisions to me in a h r m that becme d o g ~ throughout a the CR and other agencies. Zn large part this ~flectedthe classic need of her bureaucracy to defr'ne and classify in order to rationaitize decisions and policy. She explained that there were three social groups within thc? camps: (f) the vast mass of peasants, Miho bad no&ing to fear from returniq, (2) the illCelfectual elite, who would rekm to Rwanda but would lose their prokssional and social stahs under the new regme, and (3) a small grortp of leaders who were ~ ~ i lc-tft y genmide, and therefore rrnable to *turn at d. "I"t-relogic foHowed &at the only r e a m that the first two groups remained in Tanzania was a, fear c-tf the latter group, who were the ""intinliclators," and who were usin; the others as a humm sKeld.8 Evidence from the camps in Zaire indicated that there was probably some merit to this argument, altho-ugh even when the H u b militia were ~ there was back-and-forth at the kight of their power in t h o mmps, nnovemcrnt to Rwanda, &spite evidence to the contrary, the focus on the power of a mysterious g o u p of intimidators was assumed to be similar in the Tanzanian camps.-is happened even though there was much more evidence of back-md-forth movement beween Rwanda and the Tanzanian calnps (see Essays 5 and 6). More cmftniently, it provided a

The Opemtion Wilzds Down

bogeyman to explain the failure of the voluntary repatriatim program behg emouraged by the UNHCR,

sioner of Kagera Region In mid-July 1995,I met with Regional Co Philip Mangula to discuss his cc2ncern with the refuges. Mmgula had been, active in receiving refilgees from the first day of the crisis, Often traveling to remote sites where r e h g e e ~ r o s s e dinto Tanzania. Withir~ the Tmrzafim gov ent, where there was a diversiv of opfion about how to handle the refugee crisis, his was an infzuential voice for maderation and refugee recep~cm.In this position he was sometimes at odds with dlitary au&ori~es,who advocated stricter controls at the borders and fctrcibte repatriation. At times, he was also at loggerheads with UNHCR over overall policy, pal-ticularly with respect to security, enforcement of Tmzanian labor law, and advocating on behalf of Tmzani-. arts m k i n g with the expatriate-dominated organizations. As a consequence, hr! was in a politically tenuous pmition both within Tanzania arl$ with respect to the UNMCR.This led to the loss of his seat in Parlia1995 elec~ons,tl-tough he did remain regional cornmn,t in the missic-lnc-rof the Kagera regjion. Our talk in July 1995 focused on a trip to Rwanda he had just corngleted. :flc had attended a memorial service at a church in Kihungo, where 8,000 covses had been lyir~gin the church and its yard since April 1999- He was shocked, particularly when told by the Rwmdan aut.hodties that two of the refugees he knew (the ex-governst of Kbmgo and the administrativehead of Rusumo disb-ict)were guilq of organizing the massacrcJ. Ho was shocked at the descriytrion and the guilt of f i e men he knew and tafjked at lttngtlz about how the killings had taken place with the use of chlorohrm and had been organized by the one with "red eyes'' My slxvrise was at his suvrise. In exgatsiatcl circles it- had been long accepted h a t these two were war cri als. m a t sbuck.me as odd was that Mangu1a"s undmstmding uC this circzxmstmce was based on what he heard and saw from the Rwartdam, and not what could be read in the N m York Times. Manguta also tal,ked about the wider refugee p b l e m . He was concern& about the 400,000 to 600,000 '%Id case" Tutsi refuges, who fnad occupied the homes of the refugees in the Tmzanian caxnps. But hct was also concerned about the human rights sihation in Rwanda; Rwmdafs leader, Paul Kagame, agparentty had sffcered to come and speak to the refugees at Benaco, a move that Manpla thought too risky to attempt.


The Opcmtiotz Winds Glow@

He joked that the only place the refuf;ee;r;would be movhg back to was h a g e r a National Park in Itwanda, and acknowledged that not all would ever be able to return.

I also met with the Bishop Augusth Mvurubande of G h h i , Rwanda, in 'July 1995 (see Essay 8). Bishop Augustin was fiving in the Anghcan church co~npoundin Nf;;itrafand was trying to facilitate cross-border communication to further peace and reconciliation, a position notably different than that of the Rwandm g~vernment,which was cdling for "justice.'"But Bishop Mvuntbande beliwed very seongly that the church had a special role to pIay in retonci,lia.lion, and had =qu,cst-czd the chance to rebm to G a h i to put his conviction into practice. This process was svnlied by his fear that mce he reentered Rwanda he would no longer have refuge stabs, and would be unable to return to lammia. His proposal, made a great deal of sense to me. fn Tmzmia and :Rwmdarbishops and churches are among the strongest ele~nentsof the phenommon political scientjsts describe as civil society. Unfortumtely, the UNHCtl, which is mturiously secular in its outlook, preferred, to m f r c &rough government charnels, and avoided church relaltions as a result. G h h i , where the bishop" church was, had been subjected to athck by both fnterahamwe and later the RPF (see also BiXinda 1996, and des Forges 1949:7M). As a resultf Ihe bishop had a distnrst of both elemenb. His wife, whC) is Tutsi, had had a major portion of her fad1y killed by Interahamxue, Ten pastors from his church had perished during the codict, roughly half at the hands of Interaltanzwc and half at: the hart& of RPF invading forces. Parts of his own f a ~ l had y been licjlled by RPF as well. December 3995: FinanciaX Crisis

During a visit to Ngara in &taber 1995, USaxD Adnhistrator Rrian Atwood m d EU Com~ssionerEmna Bonk~asbessed to the local UNHCR office and NGOs that: they w a e closing the financial tap in an attempt to force quick repatriaGon.f"?espi& the fact that this was contrary to international law and UNHCR manciates, UNHCR-Ngara no longer had the heart to object- The UNHCR made h & e r attempts to induce rc-patriation through bmadcasts, and they o ~ a n i z e da series sf "go and see" visits. The slow-dawn in the USAID and ECHO cash flaw resulted in UNHCR"s not paySng its :NGO yarhers3bills. f was acutely aware of this because in December of 1995, the financial crisis included outsbnding unpajd bills of $4.1 million from the agency I worked for, the htheraan

The Opemtion Wilzds Down


Micrrld Federation. LWF felt it necessary to threaten suspension of diesel disbursemen&to UNHCR vehides to induce payment from UNHCR. Apparently UNHCXZ was being forced to jug& payments to c~ditors, ofl whom we were one, i17 an attempt to prcserve the program. Field staff from NGOs and UNHCR blamed each other for the financial mess, even though h e people in the field were faP beyond thft p r s b l e ~Chonicalb ~. over-cornxnincrcl, the relafiomhip bemeen UNHCR and its p a r t n e ~was further skained at all levels.

RepatriaLion policies were more and more hustrated durin of 1995, to the consternaGm s f UNHCR donors, A crisis in ~ c u m e din Sptember 1995, when Tmzania expelled three patxialies, includhg facques Franquin, on 24 hoursf notice. The expulsions were in response to UNHCRrs provjsim s f food to refugees who had illegally snuck into Kitali C m p after the border haci been closed. The expulsions caused a further decline in expalriate-Tanzanian rdations, a situatjon exacerbated when 100 expatriates wmt to the airstrip to bid the expelled WHCR expan-iates farewell, and F m q u i n made a dram a farewelt, ~ ~ speech, Despite the cofltinuiPrg influx and escalathg confrontations betcveen the cash-st-rapped operation anct its parh~ers,hopes for repatpiation cmtinzred to hcrease. Runrors were rife. It was rzrmored, b r example, that entire ~ f u g e communes e would rehm. There was even a modest acceleration of repabiation when h e WF-selected prefects of Byumba and Kibungo p~fecturesin fiwanda, visited and made spewha to refugees asking them to sehrn. As m u 4 the xefwes dissected, and analyzed events and Inessages from Rwanda for their real meaning. A quote from the new prefect of Byumba, who visited the Ngara c a p s in Ctctoher 1995, was wjdely cited: "Today you are guests in Tanzania, tomorrow you will be cows, and the next day you will be dqs.'T?"kisstatement was every bit as mbiguous to Rwmdm ears as it is to mine. Its passible me widely dkcussed by refugees, O f particufar concern was the comparison to dogs, which is a strong ins& in both Tanzania and Rwanda. Rid it mean that the Tclnzanians would treat &em lice dogs after the hternational community stopped looking, or if they did not return? The refugees' analyses of this statement wodd have done any posmodern semiotician proud, Nevertheless, the visit did iul a modest way have fie desired result, ancl there was a brief uptick in voluntary xepabiation b n n Bemco. hbout t3lfO refugees per week began to return voluntilril?l,thrt ma-


The Opcmtiotz Winds Glow@

jority of whom seemed to be peasant women and children. According the repabiation drivers, none of them could read or write.

Mbuba and Keza: The Maturation of Rekgee Reception Gapabilities In January 11996, the Burundi military moved into Muyinga camp for Rwandans in nsr&western Burundi. Refugees were srdered to rekm to Rwanda, tke caxnped was burned, and over 20,000 refugees fled into Tmzania. "I%eTmzmian maitary relaxed dlitary controls, and they were received at the border by Tanzanian villagas. BrieBy 'lBnzania resumed its generous refugee asylum policy. 'The response to this influx by the internalianal cornxnuniq in Ngara was qtlick, refleeting the matura~onof the refugee reception capabiliv in Tanzania. The Tanzanian Red Gross and Concern International quickly organized tratnsjl. camps to distribute hi@-proteim biscuits. Oxfam estaihlished a m t e r puri.ficahon pfant, while LWF mobilized UNHCR-owned bulldozers, gmders, and othrtr heavy equip~~ent and activated the Russian truck EIcet (which had been idled as szrrplus) to remove the refugees from the bol-der areas. 7'kvelve thsusand refugees removed behit.een January 20 and 25 in tbis fashion; by February 3,&,000more had arrived. hlso contsi,bubg to the success of the aperillion was the experience of the refugees. The lnajority were Rw who had lived as refugees in cl-i far up to one and a half yeas. ania,they quickly organized er &at could be dealt with easdy by Ef-reWe. This inctuded a genclraf cooperation with the bureaucraGc norms of the intematimal rcll'ugee relief re@mefor the distribulim of food, provision of ~nedwith lcaders, registration, water, a17d sani.tary conditions, and other conditiom ftlcifi.tatingthe d i s ~ b u t i m of international aid. Also c o n ~ b u to ~ gheir resettlement: was the fact that they bmraght with them the blue and white W-supplied plastic h r n the Rumdian camp" which they used to quickly build mdimentav shelters. The net result of the effort was a humanitmian and logistical success. The capakility of the Ngara operation had e x p a d d grclatly since the first h f l u x from. R u m d i only a, year and a half previously. Rut, as the forcibIe repatriation was to demmskate ten lnonths Iater, this was politically irrelevant. In retrospect this caufd have been seen from tbe responses of the UNHCR and their donms to influx. As described above, UNHCR was alrady hard-pressed to mcc?their obtiga~onsto thft LWF and others. In January 1996, internal squabhljng withi,n WSIJMClZ dso meant that the most senior positions at the UNHCR Mgara office w a e again vacant as a result of transfers and extended leaves. Confronted with the refugee Mux, on-site WHCR staff did respond by drawing m

The Opemtion Wilzds Down


as yet unused stocks uC food and financial accounts m hand, and perdtting the use of UNHCRlowned equipment. However, this was done without promises from their donors at USAXD or ECHO fm replenishment, ~ f t e c t h g htwood and Koninors continuing '"quick repatriation only" policy. Ullimately the IFRC stepped into the financial void with exnergctncy fun&. 7-he L u ~ e r a nWrld Federation also responded by soliciting churc"ndoc?rs in Europe and North Anterica for independent m e y to sperate heavy equipmat to set up caHlps and drill for water. Xt was also apparent at this time that dkisions were exnerght; within the T a m a ~ mgovernment. h response to the breach of the Tanzanian border by the refugees and continued fligh~ngnear Tanzania's border with Burundi, arellery began to appear along roads. The elnce of Krigadia General Msuya, a hawk w i t h the Tmzanim government, became more prominent, and it was whispered (not so quietly) that an invasion of Burundi was i m ~ ~ eduring n t the dry season of 7,996. Oddly mough, this occurred at a time when analyses by George Chponda, a U N W C R specialist in repatriation programs, were indicating that any votunmy repatriation to Ewanda was unlikly. Chponda, who ultimately took over coordimtion of the Ngara office in early 1995, exnphasized in his report Ehaf the banstan refugee situation was among the most complex he Ztad ever seen, and that claims (or rather wisher;) to the contrary should be discounted. Summer 1996: Aging Infrastructure, Perpetual Refugees, and Forcible Repat;t.iiation "I'he refugee c;rperaljon was mhlre by the summer of 1996, Over 500,000 refugees were living. in. Tmzani.a, and a local cornernus was reached that the sifruation in the existir~gcamps w u l d conkue indefinitely*&I the broader international front, new infarmatjon was emerging through which outside obsemers began to view the operation. The hint Evaluation c$ E~rzerfjencyAssistance ibo Rwand~,puhlisbed by tlte Danish htematimd Developmat A g m y Uatlida, pmised the overall effecliveness ud c'he operation in Tanzania. But it also blamed the international refugee relief regime, particdarXy as it operated in Zaire, for the failed prosecu~onof the perpetrators of genc?cj.de. The lintcmatioml rrzfugee relief regj,,, oddly enough, tacitly accepted this blame, even though no agency had po&cingor judiciaf a u ~ o r i t y More imyortamt, the Mohutu regime i,nZ a k hegm to fragment, owhg in part to the destab.ilization in the east associated with the Rwandan c group-uppmted refugee calnps. Rebels from the Banyamulmge e by the RPF govemtnent in Rwanda and led evenhlally by Larrrent Ka-

The Opcmtiotz Winds Glow@

c3nquaed subsmt-jal portions of Zaire*Hutu mifitia gained the upper hmd in the Zairean camps and began to assert sovereign@,often violently, over tlne ca~npsand the corner of Zaire h e r e they were located. The Rwamdan gover ent in Kigali responded by supportirrg the B a ~ ~ y a m ~ I e nrebels, ge who were spposing the rump Rwandan government. The response of the international community was to prepare a Camadiarn-l& force that would rmstablish security amlrnd tbe camps on behalf s f the international humnitarian community, The Canadian trroops never arrived, thou&, because in tRe meantime, ehc Danyanzulenge d itheir allies directly supported by the Rwmdan Patrio~cArmy wcupied the Zairem camps and dispersed the refugees, about 650,000 of the 1 d l i o n refugees mowed silerrtly and apprehemively back to Rwanda, where they were ordered back to their home districts. 'The other 350,000 fled into Zaire, where they became the focus for mjlikry activity in coming mmths. Oddly the United Statc-lsled a p o u p of gove time denying there wero ~ f u g e e left s in Zajre. C)f thcse 350,000 many died of vicltmce, hmger, disease, and other causes, A portion were repatrriakd by air later in 1997 (Human Rghts WBtch 1997:13, k ~ n m h a n d 199) Eventually s o w we= airlgted by UNHCR back to Rwanda from central Zaire. But hundreds sf thousands of Rwandans disappeared into Zaire by fleeing, dying or simply disappearhg into surrounding countries well beyond the lenses of CNN. This human mgedy has been call,& a "quiet genocide" by &servers like Ren&Lcmarcfiand (2999). 'The activiq in Zaire/Congo did not necessarily have anyfiing dkectly to do w i h the refugee sihration in Tanzania,ll Nevertheless, the Tmzani-. am, with the acquiescence s f the UNHCR and its donors, organized a forcible repatria~onhorn Tanzania back to Rwanda. Most refugees resisted by disobeyin;, marching as a sexniorgdzed colu Tanzania either along main roads or into an unpopulated, game reserve near the camp. This Riijht cmtin~edh r t-tL.0 days until relaGvely peaceful ermfrontat-jonswith the Tanzaniam military occurred. Under orders by the mifitary, the refugees halted, the direc.tion of flight was reversed, and a ~nassretzlm to Rwanda began. Simultaneously, f i t h e Tanmniiin military organized a massive refuge cotu 51Karagwe, which walked 130 kilonneters (80 miles) over a period, of about one week, The UNHCR facilitated this by providing high-protein biscuits and water at specified sites, while complyjng wit-h Tmzanian orders that afl relief operizf-lms in the camps were to be discontinued.. During a t-tL.0-week period in late December 1996,400,OC10 .to 500,000 refugees crosxd back into Rwanda by fnwt (Lemarchand 199""1:1(36). Objections to the moire from the hiternational c nity were muted, even though there were not the lnilitary rntperatives found in Zaire. 'The gen-

The Opemtion Wilzds Down

eral assumption was that what occurred was best; that d e s s the issue were forced, the refugees would nst return, and would continue tu be a drain on the k~temaGonalCO unity, and a &eat .to regonal po&tical stabiiiQ.2 2 the interest of expedience, the rhetoric of p r o t e c ~ g international humanitarian principles agaimt forced repatriation was dropped. Only small numbers of refugees, n u ~ ~ b e r i ning the hundreds, remahed of-ficidyin Tanzania. The Karagwe camps were closed and. the camysites rehrned to bush. Benatlo and Msubura c m p in Ngara district were also closed. Lumasi has been kept T e n , and as of mid-2000 conthues to be used as a spillover camp for Burmdiam who have continued to arrive in Tanzania, Other camps, including Kita1.i Hilts and Keza, have been kept open for Bunlndi @erations to expel Wandans from Tanzmia conainued in 1997, dthough Tanzania did reopen the transit camp at Mbuha For RwandaPl refugees in 1998. By late 1998, there we= some 4,090 Rwandans housed there under the proteclion of the WHCR; this was less thm 1, percat ofl the number of Rwandans who ha.d sought asylum in TTanzania since 1994. This mmbw was again increasing in 1949, with reports on thrt '"did itax;imAffairs indicaCing Web'Web site of-the UV Departmat of Mu that 20,000 to 40,000 Rwmdms were beistg housed in Tanzania. It is also cwdibfy pok~kdout h a t many of the putatively Bumndian rclfugees in Tamania arc in fact: from Rwamda. In Tanzania, &ough, they pass as Bumndians in order to receive a s y h .

Postmortem: How Sustainable Wre the Tanzanian Camps? The threats to the Tmzanian c m p s were, during their existence, perceived as k i n g mated in materid needs. Th%ater,firwood, food supplies, security, ddisease outbreaks, and ovcxrowdhg were perceked, as potential causes for heir damfall. UttimateIy, &ough, none of these conditions were the cause of the b ~ a k u pof the camps. &&er, the breahp was because the hterna~onalc nity mderestimated the refuges' rdience, even in conditims of privation. Far from being on the v c s r ~of ecological, cdlapse because of water and fisewood; short-ages, as p e dicted, the c a m p were at the time of their d e e r s a l in late 1996 differentiating into communiities facing more and more towad Tanzania and away from Rwanda. Even the internd camp polif-ics were improving. Dstribu~onsf relief item in the Rwandan camps in Tmzania was nut tigbtfy controlled by Interahamwe, nor was there evidtence -that the camps had a milihty capabiiity Cor invading Rwmda. Xdeed, the camps were not that different h m , camps in oher parts of the world that lasted many more years and cmtinuct .to cxist.

The Opcmtiotz Winds Glow@

The Rwnda.n repa&iati.~n was settled not: on the basis of the technical masons typjcatly poirtted to, but because Western donors were unable to sustain mord imperatives for the assistmce propam to con&~ue.The sitrrat-ion of the Wandan efugees in the camps was m longer frmed as one whose driving imperative was kurnmitariart need, but rather as one ddined by perceptions of how gmocide had occurred. As a resutt, the largest fal-cible repabialion since Worfd Mrar I1 hecam possjhle.

Notes 1.There had in fact been flip-flops on the issue in UNHGR. In July 1994, confronted with the mass ft-ight tc:, Zaire, LINHCR quickly nego~tiatedm agreement with the approximately week-old governmmt in Kigali, wlhich was still fighkg a war. In September, UNEICR pronomced the situation in Rwanda as being too unsettled for a quick return and reversed themselves again by Nrzvember (Pottier 196:324). 2. MSF-France at the same time also wificlrew from UNHCR mdical conkacts in Kibondo for X'fur~lndianrefugees whc:, had no imaginable associaGun with the genocide. They withdrew from Kibmdo on the golands Ehat they were an emergency organization, and that these camps were in '"are-and-maintmanceff phase, and no Icjnger required their services. The Intematic3nal Rescue Co took over the contracts far medical services in Kibondo, 3, The memo, which was developed in March 1995, appears below, Notably, this is part of the context in which the Tanaanian border was closed to refugee for the first time in April 1995.

FORUM OF:N.G.Q"s in the Ngara District, Tanzania [March 19951 Regarding: the Prestmt Food Crisis in Kagera Bsbict (Tanzania) and Surrounding Regions . . . The sihxaGon is such that food ra~oningat the present level will only last for two weeks. The present ratic3n is 1908 KcaX which is the internationally recopised m i ~ m u m level, Implications for health m d nutrigon in decreasing relations below 3900 Kcal is disastrous-.. . . If no food is fort-hcorningirnmediately within the next two weeks, if:is mlikely that N,G.B"s in this area will be able to operate either efficiently or safely. The effect of 640,000 starving refugees from the Kagera regon is very wriotls bath in twms of securiv and the local pc)pulation%envirtznment, There has been no food donated to the Rwmdm-Burundi Rrtfuges since October 1994. . . . The forced mass rehxm of Rwandan Refugem is completely unacceptable in the present poligtical. climate, and so would be the widespread destruction caused by desperate refugees in Kagera regir?n.Tb avoid a pc3ssible out;break of mass violence and uncmtrollable instabiliv urgent food supplies are needed now. . . .

The Opemtion Wilzds Down


The situagon is such that the quc?rj-t-;ion of N.C.O. evacuagon has now become paramount. The safety of refugees, Tanzanians and aid workers within this region is likely to deteriorate. . . . [siped] AEF Dapm], AICF [Frmcef, CARE, CONCERN [Ireland], Christian Outreach/Tear Fund Alliance [UK], DRA [Holland], GTZ [Germany], IRC [USA], MSF Holland, MSF Spain, NPA [Noway], a f a m fUKf The memo is more interesting for how it frames problems than for its analysis. Rations drc3pping below 1,900 Kcal does not always cause food riots and result n organizing raids on expain refugees' marauding neighborhg T a n z ~ a fields, triate living compounds, or kidnapping expatriate workers. Yet such occurrences were predicted both in the memc:, and orally in meetings (see also Shoharn 1996). The central point is that this memo reyresenk a return to the management of "crisis" rather than qstematic inference and analysis of the existing refugee situaticm. Agencies from Ngara that did not sign the mernr? included LWF, the Tanzanian Red Cross, the Tntmagond Federation of the Red Cross, the Islamic Relief Organization, TCRC, and Garitas. I dc3 not know whether agencies working in Karagweflike Memisa or Save the Children! were approached or not. The point is that the major international NGOs in Ngara acquiesced to the UNHGKs verbal encouragement tc:, s i p the petiGon. The two MSIF agencies and AICF both left Ngara shortly after the mernr) was circulated. 4. Des Forges (1999:728-731) describs the context for this assertion. An internal report by Bob Gersony was prepared in Spternber 1994, which detailed RPP executions in eastern Rwanda. Qne of the pieces of data cited was that during the last week in August and the first week in Sptember, an average of five bodies were pulled from &e Akagera River (see Chapter I?). 5. A great deal of resources were successfulfy put into cholera prevmtion in Tanzania, Partly as a result, the major smitaticm problem throughout the crisis was not cholera, but bloody diarrhea. Indeed, since late 11993, when Burundian rehgees first anived, Moody diarrhea was tcz be the primary cause of death iul the refugee populations. The main outbreak in Benaco was from May to September 1994 UEEAR 1996). This distincGon was probably maintained in part because whenever choXera did appear, there was an efketive raponse. Bloody diarrhea, like chc3lera, is highly correlated with sanitation condi-tiions, water quality, and water prc>vi;slic>n, 6. Ccmtent of this radio stagon's brcjadcasts became an issue between UNkICR m d JfPS, %me at WHCR considered it to be "repatriation radio." JRS did not consider Ehe promotion of UNkICR repakiation policies to be appropriate, and resisted UNHCR effurts to focus the radio progams on this issue (personal cornmunica~(3n,Mark Raper, S.J.,JuIy 5%9). 7. Philip Gourevilch (1998:198-208) has written an account of the massacres and their aftermath frcim the perspec-t-;iveinside Rwanda. Matever the mo.liva were or whoever may be blamed for the massacres, it was clear that they had a chilling ef-fect on rqatriation efforts in Tanzania. See also Prunicsr 19;7:362-363.

The Opcmtiotz Winds Glow@

8. Another Lypology that gained some popularity was developed by the United States Committee for Refugees (15398) which said that there were five salient social groups in Rwanda: Tutsis who survived the gmocide; Hutus remahing inside Rwmda after the genmide; Tutsi refugees who rehimtd in 19% after having fled to Uganda in 1959-64; Hutu refugees who returned from the Zairean, Tmzanian, and Burmdi camps in 1996; Tutsis who returned from Zaire and Burundi. 'This may well represent a snapshot or realiv in 1997 and 1998. Htzwever, it also reflects the need of bureaucracies to cliassii%, even in a context where such realiy is fast-changng. lkis becomes a problem when one particular classification scheme become rigdified by bureaucratic fiat and has Ic?ng-lashng consequences for fuhrre social action. Johm Pottier has discuswd this prc3blern in his article "Relief and Repakiation: Views from Rwandan Refugees; L,essons for k-lumanit-arimWorkers.'" 9, The refugees inTamania were by and large H u h frczm eastern Rwarrda whrz arrived in May-Novemba 1994. In late 1994 and throughout 1995,400,000 tc:, 600,000 Tutsi who had lived in Burmdi, Zaire, Uganda, anct 'I-kmania resettled in Rwanda. Many occupid the houses abandr3ned by the Hutu refugees. 10. Observing before this visit P o ~ e (1996:423) r reports that refugees were predicting that camps would be closed for exactly this reason: the cost of the camps would become primary, and an infc~rmedpdi.tical reading secondary. 13. In 19;7 the name of Zaire was changed &e Democratic Republic of the Congo, 12. There are persistmt rumors that the United States was involved with the shift in policy. The expulsicln, it is speculated, was taken at the behest of the Clinton addnistra.tiun, which has established a close relatiomhips with t k new RPF government in KigaXi. The Clinton administraGon also had aggressive policies regarding the development of meclhanisms for the prosecuticzn czf war criminals, part-icularfythose who differ with official United Sates policy.


h Part I the elements of refugee crises were discussed: the polilical, financial, moral, and tcrcMcal a s p ~ t sThis . has been developed in a fashion to help undwstand and cxplain what happened to thft Rwandans in Tamania. The point of doing this is to iilust.rate the potent-lalrelevance ofl the concept of the "Rureaucrat-ized Good Samaritan" in understmding the streng&s and weaknesses of the intematicmal refugee relief re is, I hope, a fairly straightforwad stor?, told as wrative about how the internatjonal refugee reiicf regime developed., the mmd assumptions underlying it, and finally how it operated in one crisis, Rwanda. Irr Part Two, I show how the Bufeaucratized Good Samaritm shped decision-making in three d*erent s e w of the emergency effost in 'Tanzania: con&~gency pl ,water provi?;ion, and r e p o m e h,violent death m d genocide. M h e e sectors were qproached in a bwealxcral.ic fashion using rationally derived oqani.zat-imalprinciples. Indeed, each setor i s approached in this fashon in other sihtations. Irrdeed, in h e cases of water pmvision m d judgmenk about violat dea&f whole schooh m d collegs of e n g i n e e ~ g and law exht to train a body of specialists in a predicltal7fe fashion. However, in the context of the Bt~reaucralizdGood Sannaribn ,the prkcitrional press-driven dec4isionh field, wEch are by d e f i ~ t i m rationalized, are point out that I-hey hcome d.rstorted in a patts inequally pauerned The advantage of leaking at these sectors at such a "micro" level is that the patterns icfentified can be used to establish principfes for inferring what the broader weahesses seen in the Rwmda operation were. This permits us to go to the next step, which is ttll make inferernes about why the Rwandan operation ended up having such an unfo~seenresult: the forciloilc return of over one million Rwandans, despite the explicit goal of

a~ioidingthis result. As in the thee technical sectors, the conthuing need to generate emotion means that the sbeztgths of bu~aucrat-icsrgmization cannot be fully utilized, In this process of generating emotim, the analysis of the overall cclmplexiQ ideremit to '"cornpiex"' emergerncy was simplified. The cnd result was that the comple?tjv ikelf was never hctored into the way overall policies developed. hskad, in situatiom with multiple causes, simpte sofut.ons were offered, rejected, and then replaced with yet anotfner simple soluti.on or explanation. The rc-rlianceczxl simple solutions was made mcessary by the political need of funding agencies to 1egiitimt-edecisions to fund refugee relief i,n chunks digestible in the motion-driven, popular press, As a result, the burwucra~cimalysis, which was no re fhely t m d to the complexity in a complex emergency, was ignored, despite the fact that plenw of analyses of the Rwanda refugee sifruation, that emphasized the complexit). of the issue were mailable. Privileged in broader public discourse, however, w e '"one answcr'"jzlstifieations for action, iTncluding at different times primeval etMc habeds, chdera, and genocide. The ixnplicat-ionsof this simplification for the Rwmda emergency art. dtiscussed in Chapter 12. But what happend in Rwmda is not wique to the managers of that exnergctncy Rather, it is the comequence of bureaucratic norms and procedures eshhlished during the Last 51) yeas by succeeding efcments of the intclmational refugee relief regime. h y attempt at refor to take account of the fact that the ""irrationalitiesffdescribed in the Rwanda case are embedded in the broader bureaucratic sbuctures and relationships, These struchres and relationships reflect the history of refugee relief in places as diverse as Biafra, Tbailanci, Ethiopia, and Rwanda, where they developed. As 1 write (September 1999), a similar process is playhg itself out in Kosclvo and bef;innhg in East Timol: At the efld of the Allied war in Yugo"lavia, a nuxnber of countries pledged troops! police, and money with wKcb to police Kasovo. Two m n & s a& ter the pledges were made, only a small pmporhon of the enthusiastically pledged resources had arrived, reflecthg, agah, X think press conferemcederived wishes for operalional.capacity. As in Rwmda, when it actuallg; comes time to correlate needs on the ground with the capacity to mobilize, train, and equip actual persome1, the capacity is quite different, The Masouo situal,icm, like others before it, is estabkhing expectations for humanitarian capafojlities that are too high, The skength and w a h e s s e s of these rdationships are discussed in Chapter 13, Finally! Chapter 14 asks the broadest questim: How can the in,l-tereatf: iifitatiom of the Bureartcratized Good Samaritan be overcome"!ureaucratic decision-making ~nusthe separated from the requirements of the popular press for sbries, so that: the streng-ths of both can he realized.

Pnrf 2: Burmucr~tki-tlgthe Good Snmariturz


The press with its prabhg eye is importmt in mairrtai~ngthe ktegriq and honesty of bureaucrats in the internatimal refugee relief re@mt., who, like bureaucrats everywhere, have an uhealCSly need to be secreulation of humaktariarr, paticy to cater to perceived press needs is also unhealthy. It distorts the primary strength sf the refugee assistance agencies, which is the ability to coordinate the large complicated bureaucra.tic task uf humanitarian relief.

This page intentionally left blank

The Limitations of Contingency Planning

In retrospect, it is well known, that refugees have been Geing from di to Tmzania since 1993. It is also easy, in reeospect, to see specific fl,igl-rtsas resrrlting from precipitating political actions, such as the assasshation of President Melchior Ndadaye (Bumndi 29931, the d a t h of President Habyarimana ( b a n d a 1994), genocide (19%), advmce by the RPF fI994), fear of accountabilit-y.far gcncrcide (1994)' consolida.tion of authority by the invading WE: (md-I994 to early 19f15), attacks on refuee caxnps in mthem B u m & f1996), and the capof m Zaire by hnyamukfzge militja f199S). the Goma ~ g i of But these are all ex post-facto expfmations, made after men&have occurred and are then framed in a m er ~nakingsense in the context of the next poticy choice. When the events were occurrkg, they were not necessarily frarned in the same way. Most notori.ous as incvrrect h a m h p were the descriptbns of figh~ngin Rwanda in April anci May 1994 as '"civii w a r ' h d not a g genocide.'"^ critjcs are quick lo point out, framing the events as a genocide would have been a kg& and moral cmclusion with implications for M;kich policy choices were available. In the same vein, framing the attack on the president of Burundi in October 1993as a coup meant that the internationaf connmuni.v did not believe in the potential for mass refugee fli&t; in contrast, coup m o r s from Burun& in June 1994 and July 1996 led to the apeclation of mass refugee flight. Tn effect, the emergency itself changed the basis for how conditions were evaluated. As will be seen below, this analyticat shift depended irr part on which bureaucracies were present and what their interm1 interests were. Anlicipating fueUre evclnts and policy options r e q u i ~ mox s -than m after-&@-:actassessment of .what:happened before. Making usefut pre-


The Lint ifntktzs of



dictions it requires analpis in orcler to infer possibiliks in the luture. This is contingency planning, and it is done all the time in the refugee bushess, either explicitly in contingency plamir~gsessions, or implicit@ in dccisjom a b u t where to posi~onstaff, offices, materials, and, equipment, Such predictions are rooted in assumptions about how potential refugees will rclspondt to future events. How effective these predictions are (and by externion the uncleeing assuntpitions) can be evaluated logical@ There are four f.ogica%results:

l. Positive prediction: Analysis and inference accurately predict the nature of a refugee movement. 2. :Negativeprediction: No acticzrt is t-akm, and there is no a refugee movement. h exeeme example is the implicit policy along the border of Canada and the United States: there are no stocks or odate relugees on either sicie of the border. 3. False posi~vepredjction: A rt.fugee m0vernen.t.is predjcted, resources are xnobifized, and refugees do not appear. The little boy who cried ' * ~ o l fhad " a prhlem with too many fatse posiCive predictions. 4, False negative prediclrions: No refugee movement is predicted, and refugees do appear. 'The inkmational co urnwares by a refugee movernmt It will be demomkatttd hat when h e intematic-mal refugee re in place, there is a tendency to aniticipale refugee movements. This results in more Mse positives, and fewer f a t s negatives, than would occur if the

international refugee regime were not in place. haclion (i,e,,negatives), mems that there wiil be more false mgalivect. False negatives generaay sccur when the more conservative diplomatic and devetoy~~ent communities are present. Typically, false negatkes happen when prediclions are made by hystmders (for example, diplc.1m&) rather than speciakts from. the internaGonal refugee relief regime. Such anticipators do not necessahly have a vested bureaucratic interest in action. Bath Mse negaitives and fahe positives arc?,basicatly, mistakes, and are viewed as such by after-the-fact evaluators of a refugee relief operation. Mistakes of both types in turn affect haw Ike predictors are evaluated by each other. False Negatives and False Positives in the Great Lakes, 199696

h the context of refugee relid, the false negatives-when a disaster occurred despite predictions it would not-are the biggest problem. The reason that the flight of Kurudians into T m a n i a was unexpected iS that

The Lintitntio~?~ tlf Ct7rttirzgcncyPlarzrzirzg


it wa,s a false negalivt3; a sihratjon .where? there was an implicit assumption that refugee flight would rzot occur fclllowing elections and an assassination. htlically, much c-tf the success of the Ngara veration is attributable to the preparedness induced by the false negative presented by the earlier I993 Rumndi catastrofie. False positiws--cases when a refugee lnovement is predicted and nothing happens-also do occul: There was a rapid serjes of these false p ~ s i ~ vdWrjllg es the Ruianda crisis in Tanzania, I.eading to the '"boy who called wow phenomenon: successive warnings that did not result in the predjcted cr'isis we= taken less and less seriously. The orighs of t.he fahe positives is embedded in the need fsr press colrerage to s b u l a t e funding. nrlze magazine s h o w up for action, nrlt inaction. Thir; creates a structurat conundrum in the business of predicting refugce movements. 'The in.ternationat refugee relied regime, with iB emphasis on saving lives m d humanitarian aid, is acutely aware of the potential embal-rassment of being found flabfooted (false negatiw) when a refrrgce movement occurs. They point out, rightly that a vigihnt, proactive relief comnuniq can save lives. Not coincidentally, this also implies continued funding for contingency programs, stantlby capabii.ity, and m m o d i w stockpiles. All of this feeds the blxreaucratic need to expand. '"Anticipation'kn the part of NGOs became an important part of the opmatian in Tmzmia behiveen 1994 and 1996. Early in the crisis, anticipatjm of fur&er di.saster loosened the purse strhgs of Western donors.. UNHCR and NGO staff in Ngara were acutdy awme of this and mticipated furl-lser crises in which more ~ f u g c ewould s need to be accommo-. dated, and relief bureaucracies expanded, Hovv well we= refugee movements anticipatcsd in Tmzania betlilreen the first influx in late 1993 and the final fnrcible repatriatim in hte 1996? How were refu.gces"riews perceived, and their motivations for movemerrt-whether in Bi&t to Tamania or for potential rehxm to Rwandaassessed? Movemats both out of counbies of origin, and back to countries of srigin can be matyzed, in terms of the four success/failure positions described above; both types of movements are cxamples of bow the refugeesr decision-making is perceived by the adminislrators in the UNHCR and related agencies, (See W l e 9.1 for a synopsis sl this analysis.) In this analysis of NGOs' contingency planning, the views of the refugees are secondary What is irnpsrtant is how the refugees are per, 4 3 1 the basis of these perceptiom, preceived, not what they say or lin-?linaryconcf.usiomare reached about the mture of wbat successful pasit-ivepredictions, successful.negative pre&cGons, fadse positives, and false negatives tell us about Lhe conditions wder Mihich refugees move, and the condi~onsurrdcr which they do mt. This c m be fot,)owedan Table 9.1.

TABLE 9.1 Successes and Failures of Cczntingency PI Burundi Cristlr; in Tanzania, 1993-1W6


ing in Ehe R w m d a and

Policy Assumpfions

Actual Result

V o l m t q repatrialion of Burundians peaceful reh ~ t e g r a ~in o tBurmdi. ~

War, Oct. 1993, and fli@t back to Tauania.

Na major refugee Right foltowiI1g coup,

Tnlerp~la tbn

False negative

Establishment of "Tamanim camps for B u r w ~ d i a ~ .

R e h m to Burmdi, few stay in Tmania.

False positive

Jhath of president, clectioag result: in Bi&t to Tamania.

No flight.

False positive

Jhath of president rwultts in small number ct,f Rwanda~s, but big problem Bumndians

13artialpmifcive; size of flight undereslirnated

Arusfia Actcords call far systematic reil~tegra2ionof Tutsis.

l;af W posit.ix~e

Parliamenbry etec~onsin Burundi lead to flight pr\t.dic-gctns.

EXcct-itmshetd without major incident..

False positive

RPF victory and peace. Volw~taryrepatria~oi~ promoted.

More Rwandans flee.

False negative and false g m i ~ ~ ~ e

S m m e r 1994Early 1995

No policy; Old caseload resettled in in~;u,miiil,

20,t)OO %tsi repatriak.

False ~rzegative

Dec. 1994April 1995

Renewed viole~~ce in Burw~di leads to plans for the r w e p iritm of severat hundred thousand Burundians.

About 45,000 Burmdians and 25,000 Rwandans from n. Burundi arrive. Barder dosed.

Early 19%Early 1996

UNHCR aggc%sivelypromotes volmta~ repatriation programs.

About 400t) refugas accept offer, half of bvf~oxnare Bwundims.

hcreased fighling in n. Burmdi leads to cc)nEingency pjaming for 150,00QBurundians and Rwmdalw.

Abrrrlt 30,W11 arrive,

P a r ~ apositi~re; l size of flight o v e r e s ~ ~ted na


Few rehgees to "Tama~ia

Forcible wpakiatian.

False piirive (?)

July 1994

April 1996

fnclrmsd f i g h ~ n gin Burundi.

July 1996

Coup in Burundi.

The Lintitntio~?~ tlf Ct7rttirzgcncyPlarzrzirzg

Burundi, 1993-94: Voluntary. Repatriation F~lZoweBby Violent Expulsion The internalional cclmmurmitry focused on refugee movemen8 inTanzania between 1993 and 1996, Ironically the story starts with a large voluntary repatriation program. The first major population movement involving the Great 'Lakes region in 1993was the =turn of Burundian refugees who had been living in Tmzastia since 1972-74. Returns occurred surreptjtic-rusjydurIn.g the early 399C)s,reestablishing social ties behyeen Bu dians living inside and outside Burundi. Ironicailfy; Burmdians most hterested in repatriation were Found not along the border settlements, where s~xneassingarcion had ocmrred, but in the remote setitlemenb in the irmterior of Tanzania .where ethnic consciousness was most pronomsed (see Malkki 1^994)." Sllbstantial portims of thc Rurundian refugees, perhaps as many as fiO,t)UO, made their way back to K u n r n d i following the si tite agreement between Burundi, Tanzania, and the UNHCR in 1991 (Le~narchand1994:172-176). A formal provaln for lhrt expected repatriation of 60,000 more wa,s scheduled far 1,993, a process that: was apparently speeded up when tens d thousands qu.ietly left for Burundi spsntaneously following Preside& Ndadaye's election in July even before .ehe official repatrciatjon,buses made their first trip. The first UNHCR-sponsored trips were made in early OctOber 1993, and appxenlly about 4,000 refugees were mmferred to a &antiitcamp at that time. Fo2lowing the assassination uC President Ndadaye on October 21, the repatriation center beclame a target of the rebel2ious elements in the army m d all refugees were apparently kilted. C e r t ~ l y that was the assumption in Katunrba refugee s e t t h a t in western Tmzania when 1 asked about their fate in July 1994; nsne of their relatives had any word durlng the preceding year I-hat they were alive, alfiough small nu~nbers ofl survivors from earlier yeas had fnanaged to sneak back to Kahrntba, Following tlne Rurundi repatriation, there were two quick pof3ula&on movements to and from Tmzania. First, about 250,000 refugees left Burundi in late November and December 1993 far k a n i a , and perhaps anot.her 450,000 left for Rwanda and Zaire. This flight (described in Chapter 5 ) was not anticipated by I-he international community, MihicR subsequently blaxned itself for behg unprepared (it acknowledged the false-negative situatian).As a result, a popula~onthat arrived in Tanzania healthy sufl'ered from high rates of malnutrition and, ultimately, pulaEiolil would remah in Tanzadeath. O11 t_he asr;umptiun that nia, substmGal resources were ted to the region by tl-te WFP and UNHCR in late 1994. Howcwer, by I-he time these resources arrived, the


The Lint ifntktzs of



unanticipated happened again. By early March, 90 percent of these refugces had rcbmed to Rurundi, despite the fears of the international unity that that counby, which was pl g elecGons, was unskble, Irtdeed, they even rehrned as new slayings were reported in Bujumbura (Los Angel= Enres 1994). 'The intemational relief regime'?; reading of Burundian political and refugee sihration in 199S94 was pwr, Policy did not reflect welt what was happefing in Rurundi, and/or the refuge population, .Anticipators were ""zero for three" with a false negative (refugees could repatriate safely, and no preparalion was neded), follo-cved by anofier false negative (tht assassination would not result in refugtle flight, and no preparatim was needed), and findly a false positive (refugee relief in Tanzania was required-but then the refugees returned to Burundi spontaneously).

Rwanda and Burundi, 2984 C l n i"lpril0, 1994, the presidents of both Rwanda and Bwuncii died in a

pfane crash in Kigali,. This followed furthr negotiations on a peace agreement between the Rwandans of Habyarinrands ruling MEND (Mouve~nentK4volutionnaire NaGonal pour le DBveloppe~nent)and the WF in which the repatriafion of rhe Tutsi diaspora refugees from 1960s had been agreed to. Et also closely fotlowed assassinations in Kigalj in late Fe-bruary 19994 (Pmnier 1996:20&207) and massacres in Burundi in early Masch 1994 (Los Angeles Tinzes 7.994). During the early days following the crash, anticipators predicted a. refugee fight of Hutu from Burundi to Tanzania. The reasoning went that the coup and the dea& of a president in October 1,933 created conditions for flight, as they had, the previous year. The intermtionaf refugee e p i d less attention to Kwanda, where events becamrt morcl horrific, but Which had little history of flight to Tanzania. Unlike Burundi, Rwand.a did not have a recent tradi..tion s f refugee flight across borders, Nevertheless, with the recent events in Burundi in mind, UNMCI< staff were assigned to Rlgara in mid-April, in part to supervise the few remaining Burundi refugee assistance programs, but also to make surveys in -the interest of preparehess.2 These were tlne staff who were on hmd when the Rwatndams crossed the bridge on April 2&20 and were di.rected,to the campsite that was to become Benaco, Benaco was the first partial success in tenns of prepmdncss. In large part the success was due to what b,ad happened in K u r u n d i ; staff and eyuipment were on the ground when the refugees arrived. fn terms s f anticipation and p~paredness,this situaGon c m be viewed as a partiaf success. The size of the influx and its origins we= different than .what

The Lintitntio~?~ tlf Ct7rttirzgcncyPlarzrzirzg


was anticipated, but the degree of preparedness that was present contributed to the success in the operation &roughout mid-1994." 'The success of tlne Benaco operation put in Tanzania a large numb- of expatriates embedded in bureaucracies providing the services refugees would reyuire to stay or return. Tt atso highlighted the issue of what would happen next; more specifically what event would satisfy donors in the West who funded the operation. Very quick1.y it became apparent that a xnassive rebm to Rwanda was what was desired at the h i g h bureaucratic levels in Geneva, New York, and Dar es Salaam. As a consewence, field staff searched for signs ofl this during 1999-3.and 1995, even as new refugt.es colttlnued to arrive. The combhation of the two conflickg pressures, from the field anct from distant capitals, meant h a t field persome1 needed to reconcile policy pressures &at were not just hcomistent but mutually contradictory. Either refugee were coming from casetoads and demands, or they were goir~gback Rwanda and increasir~g m d thereby decreashg demands. Logically you could not have both; in Ngara, &ough, they did.

7Ke net result fctr thrtse conh;adickiorrs for pla ng assumptions was two false negaliva and t-wc:, false positives. Howf why, and when did this occur? :Meekgs of UN and NGO sBff were held in Ngara in May and June to discuss the potential for fur&a arrivals. "I%epariliamenhry etectians and national day celebrations in Burundi cm July 5 were of particufar concern. Uavid b1nb4 of -the Los Angeles nnles reflected hese concerns when he wrote on f une 4,11994: All but forgc3tten by the world, this na.t-ion[Bu di] hangs in nerve-racking suspension, bailanced beween forces that dare pray for conciliation and those who would turn this troubled land into another Rwanda. The slightest misstep could tip the balance. h d after a year in wKch Burundi witnessed its first free eIectic>ns,the murder of W Oof its presidents and a massacre that clairned as many as 100,000 lives, the specter of mcontrollable slaughter in a neigfibo~ngland is a very real, very chilhg. "Rwanda is terrifying and terrible,"' said henerand Bakeymusa ya, E3urundi" sinister of Xabor. "One would think it would have taught us to avoid that kind of madness, but there is a very real danger that what happened there could happm here. The calm you see here FZS)VV is not a reassuring calm. . . ." The deep rnisbust beween the Tutsi and Hutu in Burundi, combined with fears that chaos in Rwanda could infSarne extremists on both sides


The Lint ifntktzs of



here, has filled this ramshackle capital, with anxiety and a well-founded xenuphrzbia. The countdown is under way, but no one knows if it is toward war or peace. . . . The neiIr;hborhoods where Tutsi m d Hutu once lived side by side and often intermarried have become largely segregated-valuntari1y-after violent clashes in Bujumbura over the winter and into the spring [of 1994f.Vietims hacked to death were almr)st &ways Tutsi; those killed by bullets were Hub. . . .

Refugee workers across the border h m . Burundi in Tanzania were w l l awme of what famb was w r i k g about. Ari Lamb did, they framed the potent-id for viofctlce against what had. happened in Rwanda durir.tg previous months, and as a result, expected iltlfluxes were described in the hundrctds of thousands. " M a t will happen in Buruncii will make what happemd last month in Rwmda look like a tea party,""thurt$ered one agency head at a UNHCR meeting in late 'June, IJNHCR hastened to point out h a t July 5 was Rurundi" nationd day, and the date for parliamentary elections, arl$ therefore was a parEicdarly propitious date for a coup and the outbreak of violence resulting in refugee flight. Border monitoring was increased, supply reqmisitims prepared, staff put on smdby, l a v a camcetd, ageatcies sol ly committed to preparedness. Despite the dire predi.ctzions, few Rurundi.a~rsmaterialized, and for the first time since May, there was acbally a lull in refugee flight into 'l'anzania inf uly 1994. tn term of contingency pl W , this was a false poitive. The refugt.e influx which did rnatcrialize came in August, and were in fact Rwandans fleeing the final RPF push in the tiouthwest, not Burundims. This w a n t that despite the misread s i t u a ~ o nagencies cod$ justif!. their preparations for the Burundian situation by pointing to the Rwandan influx. In fact the Rwmdans were not anticipated; in fact, they were not not-iccd until upward of 10,t10(1had ga&ered in remote border vjlfages near the point where the bmders of k z a n i a , Rwanda, and Burundi meet. The tens of &ousands of Rwandarts arriving in August 199.1, were p"nnarify residents of ssuthwest Rwanda, who cmssCd aver a small. corner of Buntndi before fleeing to T a m a ~ aThis . ~nomenthad not been anticipated, atthough fortunately the srastrucbre was estabfiShed to accommod.ate them, The infiux-ccurring at a time Mrhen Rwanda itself was h m h g to peace and the genocidal Inturnhamwe we= finafly being cmtrolled-was the opposite of what was eripected. Meed, the widespread speclxla~onamong the expatriates in Ngara was that with the decline in hostilities in :Kibungo prefecbre and the arrival of the plantir~gsctast:m, the vast propurlion of refugees in Blrcnaco would sponhneously =turn to

The Lintitntio~?~ tlf Ct7rttirzgcncyPlarzrzirzg


Marnda. In effect, there was a false positive and a false negative. Repat.riation, which, was expected, did not occur, and flight, which w s zot expectcsd, did occur. The rqatria(ci,onsitualion was even m r e muddlod loy the end of 1994. What did materialize in term of repatriation, though, was unexpected. &&gee Tutsi from earlier diasporas began to appear at Ike border seeking repatriat-ion to Rwanda. These ilittsi wcre supporters of the RPF who had lived in 1Panzarj.a durhg tke previous 20 to 30 years, From TTanzmia, prolrably 10,1100 to 20,000 Tutsi returned to Rwanda between su 1994 and early 1995. An eslimated 700,000 more l& Kurundi, Uganda, and Zaire; many of the Tutsi from. Rurundj took over the homesteads vacated by the Hutu refugees in Ngma. This r e k m was orchestrated by the new Rwandm gover ent, which at its core was an orga~zalionof the "Rwandans abroad." The influx of the several hundred thousand rebmees Mri&aut coardinaGon ar assistmce fmrn m intematia nity caugM the UNNCR off guard; the UN and international c were mart; interested in restori.ng the pte-crisis status quo than facilitating the payment of RPF debts to supporkrs. More important for the sihation in Benaco, though, was the perception by the Hutu that Tutsi from Bumndi had occupied their abandoned farms. This unanticipated lnove clearly complicated p ng, it was a false negative. return*Xn terms of conthgency pl

Rwanda and Voluntary Repatfiation 2W5-96: L% Series of False Positives The raolutian of the Rwanda refugee crisjs was the comistmt god of the UNHCR throughout 1995 and 1996, Special sfficers were hired to encourc age voluntarqi repabiation, buses were brclul;kt to Tmzania, m d sbategzing sessions were =tabfished in order to orgmize a '"rmd march" back to Rwmda. 1was working in K a r a p e at the end of 1995, and the field officers there were parficularly aptintistic about the potential for a grand march, They wme parEicular)l encouraged when the leader of one of the camys in the very nmth offered to go back and, consistent with he&& that the r h g e e s were peasants wable to make heir w n dwisions about safety assumcd that the e n ~ camp e uC over 10,000 refugee would 1-1~hirm. with him., He wentually rehtmed, but with only his own family. In I995 and 1996, I was part of this hope, and passed on the mEnors and hopes in a series of mennormdums fny head office in Dar es Salam requested: LINHCR Ngara cclntinues to believe Ehat refuges do have a l e g b a t e fear of persecution should they rehxm to Rwanda. They also believe that there i s


The Lint ifntktzs of



intimidation in the camp for those wishing to rehxm. . . . They [also] say that UNHCR Kgali, the Rwandan Goverment, and others c o n ~ u to e believe nda at any time safely*. . . itions within Rwanda vary LINIL-ICR ccmtinues to hold information meetings describing the conditions under which voluntary repakiation can occur thrcjugh official channels. UNHCR says that mass meetings are going well. According to UNHCR attendance at the mass meetings tc3 explain repat"iation is very encoura@ng and peaceful. . . . There is a standing order for five trucks on Wednesday and Friday momhgs. X talked to a few of our drivers today, and they indicate that they gather at the Benaco Pcdice Station each morning. Before the refugees had ta arrive at the police static3n on their C W ~ Pi new . policy is that the trucks are then sent to the houses of the refugees who have agreed to repabiate with a police escort. This is done in order that the profile of the repatriation can be raised among the refugee community*It also means that the volmteers have fewer chances to back out at the last miinute. . . . The drivers indicate that most of the repatriates are women and children, and that all are uneducated (accordingto one driver, there are S mm for every 40 women [and that1 ""none of the rehgees repatriated are able to read.". . . Tke drivers indicate that there is a great deal of fear, but [the refugees] are given no chance lo change their minds. . . . (August 31,1995) The Prefects of Kbungo and Byumba [Rwmda] visited the camps last Saturday in order to encwage the rekxm of refugees. These were the first visits of Rwanda g~3vernmentofficials to the camp. There is an indication that their visit is encouraging repabiation requests, Yesterday" repatriation was full for the first time (abaut 4 0 ) . . . . One entire commune of 4,0O p e c ~ ple has apparently applied to go back (October 12, lW5) [Note: The commune of 4,000 never materialized], . . . Repatriation in Ngara is picking up, . . . The repatriation is being encouraged by the UNX-ICR which has facilitated the flow of information back and forth from Rwmda. They have had two cross-border visits of refugees organized, and are using tapes and radio to send messages back and forth. . . . The gmeral imprasion is that intimidation is down. People returning to Rwmda seem happier leaving tX~anbefore, m d they are waved off by family and friends, . . . All concern& say that primarily women and children are going. . . . A number of NCQs are critical of the UNHCX;:for presenting a "donor-driven" kt-.oo-c)ptimisticpicture of political conditions in Rwanda. MSF Holland is most vocal, . . . Ml mail is read by Rwandan ~3ldiersat the border and the Rwandan Army at the border is not very pleasant. . . . The return of old-caseload Tutsi is con~nuing(Octcyber 31,1995).

None of the bureaucratized pushhg, cgalhg, bribhg, or coachg by UNHCR worked on, a large scale. Information shxing and, the "go and

The Lintitntio~?~ tlf Ct7rttirzgcncyPlarzrzirzg


see" F o g r a m were an especially p a t p a t of the voluntary repatria~onprogram. This involved taking refugees to Rwanda., who would go "nd see what conditions wercrt Like at their homes, and then would he returned to the T m z a ~ camp. a Each of the s was pre-elearcd for the visits by the Tanzanian and Rmndm go ts and the UNHCR, Despite these precautions, there were confr bemeen rebmees and pew.1" in the home communes, A number of the visitors returned with tales about how they had heard whi about the wisdom of not retrume. UNHCR could respond with more oriwal than assertions that despite the care with wfich the individuals were selected, those who bmu&t back negative accounts were simply lying (see Essay 8). In fack actual repatriation never did keep up with the birthrate, much less the continuing influ from dosing c a p s in BurnnJi*The rqatriation goals were pursued as a result of UNFTCRfs belief that the RPF would honor agreements to retwn land and homes. Ewen reports by UNHCIC repat1.ia~onspecialists that the Rwmclans were far from ready to repatriate votuntarify did not cause shifts in policy. The policy thoughout 1995 and 1996 continued to he that all refugees could and should rehrn to Rwmda, and resources were invested in makhg this expecta~oncome h e . g decisions for rqatriation were in effect a series of false positives. The assessment of the sltltzltion by the UNHCR and dons= was that the refugees in Enzania were ready to repatriate voluntarily, if only material incenit;iveswero offered to facilitate it. m a t later evidence indicaks is that these assumptions were wrong, and the r e h g e s wert, nst ready to repatriate. The mistake was si.milar to that made along the Runtndi border in 1994, when predictions wcre .made that Burundi was set to "*explodeuand send refugee movements into Tanzania. 'This time though, it reflected bureaucratic wishes from central headqtlarters.

di conkued to be w a k e d by violence in late 19% a d into early 1995. The poten~alfor flight: from Burundi was a chonic issue. On the basis of visits to Burundi in f995, a special fact-hdcr ('"apporteur"') , from &c United Nations, Paufo Serge P ~ e i r c zwrote: The Z;pedal Rapporteur cannot but reiterate the thrust of the final cjbservations in his initial report [submitted in 19951. The dangem facing Burmdi remain considerable and the situation in the country may at any time explode, entailing mbearable consequences for Burundik population, mcontrollable mass movements within the country and at its borders! and finally [leading] to a loss of conk01 or ta a destabilization 06 the Great L,akes Region. . . . Tb p e r d t such a situation to de\aelr?pwould be to show =ant regard for the re-


The Lint ifntktzs of



sponsibiliv borne by .Chose diredly concerned: Burundians, Africans-with the rulers of Burundi's neighbours in the front ZineEuroyetzns, and the other actors in the international communiE_y(PiAeiro 1996:11),

The idea that Burundi would "explode," as Phheko put it in his report, or was somehow balanced ""on the edge of a knife" (BaLzar 1994:A1), was a chrofic theme beween 1994 and 1996, The impl-lca~on was that when Burundi did explode, the result would be more catastrophic lhan what had been seen in the past in ter~nsof either violent death or refuge exodua Tn Tanzania, this resulted in a geari.ng up and relaxation of the contingenry apparabs on at Lcast four separate occasions. In each, the specter of the Rwanda crisis with its rmasshe and quick fiighl ofl refugem Loomed large, Less promhent in the planning assumptions was the more mundane experience with Burundi sinre 3999, in which refuees had "borderstraddled," mead% that there was a hack-and-fnrth movement across the border as local conditiom ebbed and flowed." :Many of the refugee movements were concentrated in northern Burun& along the borders with Rwanja and Tanzbit. h early W95, for the first time shce 2993, substanGa3 numbers of Burundians fled into Tanzania, a1thoul;h there was also a goodly proportion of RLvandans in thc refugee fIow- Predic-timsof massive flows of a xnawtslcle of hundreds of thausmds c m h u e d to be bandied about mtil the Tanzanians forcjibly closed the border to the refugee inftux for the first time inApril 1995. By the time the border had closed, there we= about 45,OUQ mare Burundims and 25,000 more Rwandans in Tmzmia.6 Thus, this was a partial success in terms of prqaration and p~dicticm;although the size of the d u x had been overestimted, the conkued influx was not a great surprise. As a result, the refuges were accomodated ina relatively efficient fashion. This was a partially positive prediceon. Renewed fighting in Kunrndi in Decexnber 1995 and January 1 9 6 1L.d to more concerns about a refugee influx, and contingency plans were established for the arrival of 150,OClf)in the event the Gnzanian government reopened the border. This did happen, and eventually agproximatety 30,000, most of whom, were Kwandans from refugee camps in di that had been closed, entered T m z a ~ aThis . was done relatively efficiently, inpart due to the overprepamtion for 1,40,OUO. Agaj-n, this was a partial positive prediction..

The Coup in Bumndi: 1996 The low-gmde fighkg in Buruncii had left kns of thousands of dead and was characterized by some as a "slow genocide," h m d i was widely

The Lintitntio~?~ tlf Ct7rttirzgcncyPlarzrzirzg


viewed as a country in chaos. Observers claimed not to be surprised when the former president Pierre Ruyoya took the country over forcibly in a coup czxl July 26,1996. A Time.com bullek amo-unced, ""8urundi Findly Blows" on 'Jufy 31. The coup resulted in a strmg reaction from neighboring countries, wkich i diately clarnped on a trade embargo. of the country, the aftemath of the Ironically, @venIke recent ki coup was nut any more violent than evenb in recenf: months when there was no coup, Flight to Tanzania was not acctherakd by the coup, but by events in November 1996 in Zaire. The victory of the Rwmdan army and Banya~pzule~gc in Zaire resulted in not only the emptying of Ruiandan camps and their ~ a b i t a n t s 9 e t u m to h m d a , but also she e~nptying01Bu dim refugee camps in Zaire. This ~ s u l t e din a move of approxbately 100,OQOacross Burundi and into Tmzmia; at the same time, to the nor&, Rwandans were being evicted by the Tanzanian military, Bo& movemats were the opposite ofl what was eripected: a false poitive fapectation of flight fstlowing the coup), and a. Idse negative (the receprcion of refugees folbwing a forced repabiation),

The Forced Repatriation The final expulsion of I"dnzaniarsRwandan refugees occurred in December 19% The bulk had left Tmzania by Chrishnas, but roudups in Tanzanian villages were to conehut. mtil mid-1997. The expdsion was carried out by the Tanzanian milit-ary, while the internatjonal community, apparently havlng dropped its previous objections to 1orcibIe expulsion, looked the other m y and in some hdirect ways actually facilitated the nnovement. G&rardPrunier (1997a) wrote about the expulsion in February 199'7: Seizing the c)pportunity where forceful act-ion would go almost mnuticed in the general cmmotion, Tammia declared that all Rwmdm rekgees, about 530,000, on i t s soil must leave by the end of the year, and the Tanzanian army quickly moved towards the camps. s i z e d by panic at the idea of return, and probably also coerced in part by their still-ract-iveleadership, several t.housand refugem fled in various directions in &e hope of reaching the borders of either Kenya or Malawi. The Tanzanian army quickly caught up with them, forced them back towards the camps and from there pushed them cm acrc3ss the border into Rwanda. There was no UNX-ICR protest and the few &d workers operaGng in the camps who complain& were expelled by the Tanzanian authorities. By Christmas, the camps were emptied (Prunier l %?a).

The Lint ifntktzs of




Thus, in one final unmticipated popdation movement, the official presence of Rwandan refugees in Tmzania carne to an end. The Rwanda crisis &I T m z a ~ was a over,

The Limitations of Contingency Planning Wh,at factors urtderlay the failures and successes incontinency pta in Tmzania? Can patterns in the imprecision, of refugee movement pdictions be found? Che common thead seems to be pl erskovrrelimce on proximate causes that they assume mderlie refugee movements. They focus on ""triggering wcmts" like assassination or elections, and don't analyze broader fi-\ceorsthat influence why refugees move when they do. m a t they miss is that a "trigtgering" event is a final, culmhating event and, as this analysis shows, d y sometimes causes a refugee njght. Such evmts are onky the u1eirnat.e proximate causa, Xx~lerprePhgkiggering events as the pmxilnate cause does not furnish enough iltformation for the anticipation of refugee movement. Not: surprisingly; bureaucracies atso use predictions to pursue their o m sdf-interest, wkch they &n do via the press, where both successful predictions and bureaucpatic competitors' incorrect predictions, or fail- to an~cipate,are highfighted. Of course a firndamental aspect of prediction is that there will always be same "f;lilureseM Having said that, I do believe h a t this assessment of the Rwanda and Bunlndr data point to some cmclwsions as to why refugees move and under what conditiom.

Why Refugees Mave There s e m to be six primary reasons why refugees move, Each o n has policy rntplicatiorrs. 1. Rising Political E;u~?r"cta fitlns

Mass refigl.c.(lightis most l i k l y la occur d u r i m a lime clf:risi~g politkal exprcfatio~s.It is less l&/!/ fo occur in tinzcs ofpoliftenf tension. Since 1993, there have been two major mass reflugee fligt-rts: in 1993 from Bumdi, and in 1994 from Rwan&* Both of these fights happened at a b e of rising political exyectatiuns: In the case of Burundi it followed the democratic election d a Huhx presidmt and the repatriah-m of b t u refqees after 20 years in Tanzania. In the case of Rwanda, the flight foamed a peace agreement and politicat. ageement beween warring parties. h both cases, there was a consensus in the national m d international cornmudties that the political situation was getting better.

The Lintitntio~?~ tlf Ct7rttirzgcncy Plarzrzirzg

For this rewon-the refugees themelves and the internatiod co ni.v-were unprepared fctr the s u b s e ~ e nrefuge t exodus. For the international comnunity it meant that relief progams were inadequate to receive both groups. The Rwandans were more fortunate than the Burundians, because the relief programs designed to receive Bumndiam (fiough they were t w late to help them much) were already in place. 'fRe mass exodus of Rwandnns was not anticipated. These exarnples suggest that mass refugee flows can occur at times of rising expectations, rather than durkg ti~nesof high poGtical or military ternion. Wring times of high ternion whm political violence is somehow expected, mass fight seems less likeb A possible I-eason why such times c-tf posiitive expectations are so volatile is that they involve reorientation in inkrgroup dmamics: "My enemy is now my neighbor, and aft is now forigiven." But such '"outbreaks sf goodwi21f'are fragile. W h such mass reorientation suddenly fails, as it did in the cases of both Rwmda m d Burundj in 199S94, confusion and fear erneGe quickly, a d the rcssuft is confused. Ri$t to a neighbming corntry. 'This circumstance does not necessarily precede every mass rehgee flight-the crnse of Rwandms into Zaire in July 1994 and the Camhodi in Thajland are obvious exceptims. Rut it does point to a politically l i d nal m a that shc>uld be &served by those responsible for assessing the potenlial of refuf;eenjght. From this observation follows the next cmdusion:

2,FlQlzt Across a Border Area Mass refilgee fliT multiple pump models, and a single training program fctr technicians. Then, the Danish submarine p u ~ ~w p us l d he replaced. Third, it wa,s noted that the reports of the WICEF drilfcltrs indicated that water supplies in the existing wells would be adequate? if all were developed to capacity Finally it was decided that LWF would instd and operak the prrm,s while Oxfam contkued installting pjpeLines Oxfam would quickly withdraw horn water-provision activities and would hand over its equipment to LIIVE These decisions were made with the limited data available at the time, but the assumptions behind them did not hold. TTbe resuft, as the foint Ewluation noted, was that by I995 the situaGon ""deterioratedr a ~ r t &an r improved." "(2'396:77) The first wata crisis began when the new wells began to cme in. As mntioned., the soifs around Benaco are composed mai.nly sf soft slates and crumbly quartziks. As water is p u ~ ~ p out e d of these sbnes, a cavity farms around the pump, and eventually the well itself caves in on the punnp. T11i.s what the Iinhg is supposed to protect against, Given, the k a v y pumping in knaco, this occurred in some wells in a matter of weeks. When the well caves h, the p m p is irreparabry damaged. This problm was first iden~fiedin August of 1.994 when two Nutwe@angeolqists made a quick visit. Subsequent visits by three British g e dot;ists and later an Aust.rian codirmed this analysis The lack of 1iniPlg m a n t that the wells around Benaco and Lumasi would slowly but surely collapse, and thrt water supply for a smhstmtial portion of the refugee p p u f ation with it. The i r s t well collapsed in September 1994, and slowly the other UNICEF-drilled wells began to follow. But, instead of us* the time bought by h e UNICEF-driIled wells to redesign the well-drilting program, the next series of quick water-

bllnter Crises


engineering decisions were made, using the same esnergency focus lin which the first tentative decisions were taken. TTbfee conditims in particular were to result from inadequate anatysis and pl b w spots for drilling were chosen again without any systemtic &tention to the hydrogeology of the area. This memt that only slates were drilled, even though quartzite ridges were atso nearby A seemjngly cornonsense assu~~ptjon was made that the lake would not sustain continued pumphg durhg the dry season. This was made without any survey of where water in the lake The u1tima.t.erefugee popdation was again underestimated. Chollesa Zs Coming-Let's Spend a Lat of Money

Wakr provision inrefuge camps is measured in fifers of clean water produced (and consumed) per person per day This is simply the total arnorrnt of watrtf p u m p 4 k o u g h galxgs, divided by the total number of people. Rut what is the minimum. r e ~ i r e dfor healmu1 lking? For b e subsistence? How are you sure you al.o countir~gthe right number of p m ple? Rght number of liters? W a t Lcvel is a refuge assistance program obligated to provide? Figures having le@thaey in the relief c ranged fmm the goal of 20 liters daily which the Wrld Health lteeded for healtMul livhg, to a jow of 5 liters per person per day The 5-liter firnit is considesed the bare minim m need& to control diseases, pal-ticufarlycholera (Chalincier 1994.). VVater amomts provided in the Ngara camps were closely wnitorctd, whttreas those in Karagwe, where the NGO presence was llighte1; were less so. :lnitiiaI esti_maltlsbased on regstration figures supplied by leaders in June I994 indic&d that between the O x f m plant and the wells, w t e r was bejng supplied at a rate sf about 10 fifers per persun per day (JEEAR 19"3:77). This f i p r e dropped as more rehgees an-ived, but then at the when popdirtion figures were adjusted dowftward fob ng lowing the UNNICR" registration program, it jumped batlk up to 10 litess per person per day. This admjrU:sh.a~ve adjwtmenl occurred as the Oxfam plant was bought to full capacity and Lhe new boreholes were brought sn tine in July and August. This proved to be the last me tlne water sitruaticrrz in Ngara was to be viewed with co~~placency. In *ptemher 19Hf plamers were presented with the issue of whet_her reholes with pumps, to continue eefuqping more of the UNICE h o w h g that they would perhps collapse a few weeks, or abmdon them until more borehoks were drilted. Monopumpq which cost

Water Crises

about E4,000 each, were in short supply; the original emergency order was late, owing to delays in the UK, and ri.sking them in the colhpsing boreholes was potentidly embarrassing.8 Concern also mounted as to whe&er the lake would last Lfnmugh the dry season, given a pumping rate of 1,200 cubic meters per day &ou$ the Oxfam treament plant. i t was obvictus to thft untrainc.d eye Ehat the level of the lake was dropping. Straight-ljne calculations based on the assumption that there woufd be no replenishment sf the lake frctrn underground aquifers, and that the lake wodd supply 40 percmt of the water for the new p1 1500,000 people, showed that the lake woutd be exhausted at various times throughout the dry season of 1994. Ea these drops ixnplied that the availability of water pmvided by the CR would fall below the magic five-iriter figure, which was feaed by all,. The possibility of reaching this statisticd watershed was the cue to raise the cholera Rag. ?"he t-hreat of cholera was a potent symbol, particularly fsllowhg the disaster in Zaire, where a cholera epidemic in July resdted in20,000 to 30,OUO deaths (S= Pmnier 1995:302-304). 'The apparent collapse of the boreholes in Ntgara and tke assump~onthat water provision under 5 litms per day would. cause (as opposd to risk)disease epidenics was widely touted at meetings by the engheers h r n Oxfam and LWF, as well as the prtblic health agencies, particular@ the staff of the MSF agenciczs. Oxfam advocated aggressive a c ~ o by n brhging in consultants to assess the situation. Three hydrogeologists were brouE;ht between September a d DecemRer to evaluate the situation. UNHGR pl-essed other engineers to make estimates for what it wodd cost to pump from th9 Ruvubu River, 10 kilometers away over the 400-meterhigh ridge, and down to the camps. Brought to attentbn by the cholera scare and dropping produclion figurcs from the urrlined welts, UNHCR"s d a m s quickly funded each new cffost.9 :Most ex&awagamt was a waltlr-lrucb~gprogram desiped to supplant the enlire Ktmco water system, which c m e to be viewecl as failing. The Rasumo River Filter Schem for Carnp Watcrr involved instalkg a waterpurnping plant at the intersection of the Ruvubu and Kagera rivers. Witfin, s m t of the Rwandan border stattion on the oyposik side of the bridge, a p w p station was to be installed that could had water trucks with wakr on a round-tl-re-clock basis. P\[otably, no for~nalsurvey was dcme, and permission from local TizllzaIIian officials wa,s not obtained; these actjms were postponed o w e to the erner,vcncy situation, a detail ed to take care of during a tvvo-week purchasing period. The urn-and-a-half-pagc pmposal, including a budget, w s typed on November 11,1994. This program was funded with $797,300 that an LWF mgineer was authorized by the UNHCR to spend on a two-week shopphg trip to the

bllnter Crises


UK and on airfreight to Mwanza. The 40 water trucks, fuel, and the spare parts m a h e d unbudgeted, even though the design implied by the purchases was an expenditure of over $2 million &I capital expenses alone. But by the time the engineer reached Dar es Salaam, the Tanzannt objected to the Rasumo site. Instead of behg canceled, s rescheduled for a remote lake near the Ruvubu River, some 17 kilornekrs (abouf: 10 miles) from the camp. M e n the engineer returned with the chartered airfreight flight after Christmas, the equigment was diverted to this site. A laterite road was built, at a cost of over $3CN),WOO,under a qwickly negot-iakd cmtract with the Cagefair cmstruction company. Ultimately, the gumpi% static-m on the Ruvubu was built with the eqtripment from the UK, but it still meded to be trucked to the Benaco camps. But by the time the water came on-line in February, only ten blNHCR-purchased trucks were available, and drivers were lacking. %e ofl the new drivers hired to drive a wakr h c k quickly roltd one. btel;, it was found that the en&e fleet itself was unstable, The trucks did not hawe bafRes in the tanks anci tlne sloshing of the water made them unstable, caushg them to tip easily. "I%enew water plant proved more expensive to operate than expected. Meanwhile, however, water supplies though the temporary Oxfam plant and boreholes uncxpectedly held up. A-s a result, the remote water plant and remai. g wakr truck were nnothtndled in May f994, after three m t h s of opera~on.. Two Tmzanian well-drillin,o rigs also mived, but then were dismissed when it wa,s detemined that l-hey cclutd not drill to desired specifications. In the rush to do sometking, no one from Ngara had taken the efementary precaution of determining h e t h e r the equipment was adequate for thejr prrt-poses- h rig donated by the Japanese government arrived, and the operator (not was deemed inadequate to the task, despite tlne fact that the U ad presumably preapprovclld the donation. Finally, N g m played a role in a, regional planning hilure. h July W 4 , the U ~ t e States d Ar~nyhad aidifted to Goma, Zaire, two reverse osmosis water pwification units cap"fDreof producing 57,600 lit- of high-qualiq water per day, These units produced tos little water for the large population in Goma and were mothballed in Kigali after three days of use UEEAR 11996:71). The United States ambassador to Tanzania was aggroached by UNHCR-Ngara in October-November 1994 to see if the units could be brought to Tmzania. The transkr was approved, and the units were brought to Ngara with some fa,nfal.e. Enginecrring staff in Ngam s m &iscovered that the units had arrived without direchons, and that operation required an expensive consufting conkact with a Texas company. Subsequently, the units were mo&balled in Ngara, al&ough

Water Crises


the uil.iEs were evenhaally c ihalizcd when spa= parts fos other equipment were needed,"" Finally in January 1995, the Auskian-prowided wll-$rillil-rg rig began driiling the first new boreholes, which wa,s the latest promised solution to the water problem.." This well-drilhg rig was the first of tke measures taken-rigs, trucks, tankerir~gpoints, pumping stations, and c m s u l ~ g contracts-to actuallly illcrease the volume of water pumped into the camps. They did this by redriZ1I.hgthe coftapsed UNICEF-drilled wells in the slates, despite cclaims that the water table around the boreholes was dropping as a mull. of overpumping, and also wi%out apparently consult-ing geological maps which. showed, that water-hearing quartzite ridges wcre within three kilo~netersof the camp-sz In the conkext of repealrtd failures, the apparent dropl>ing uC the water table, a f l d the escahtion of water-trucking costs, UNHCR solicited m stimate fct.nfngthe goal will have ripple effects on the entirety of m operation. But refugee Aief will never be as bureaucratiraX1y efficient as corporate or even social welfare bureaucracies. This is because the feedback mechanism between betneficiaries of the agencies' assist.ance (mfugees), field staff,and donors is ~ e r e n t l qweak. i There are no profits generated fnr sharltholders or elections held to measurt? rttfugee faith in program implementation. The inescapable fact is that evalmtion wi.31 continue to be dmor-centric to some degree. The beneficiaries are still the donors, a d must somehow must count the '%lesshgsNof extending mercy. h maral terms, success is mercy; and to extend mercy, as the Good Sarnaritan did, is simply the right thing to do. But it can be extended more or less efficiently when m e a s w d per refugee, per dollar spent, titers of water pumped, and Ikilmalories djstribukd. Relief as a Function of Development Ultimately, the abiIi_tJito provide refugee relief is a lunctim of general ecmomic development. It is somefiing the developed cowtries do automati,cally as a function. The United 5tat.e~accommodat-es Cubans, Haitians, Vietnamese, or others with littlie reference to the international refugee relief regime. En the same manner, G m a n y accommociates Kurds and Bomims, m d even Chha h 1978 received Vietnamese. The =ason such countries do this is that they have the resources to do so, and it is somehow consistent with poZirtical fnterests. They do so via domestic institutions, be they govertzmental, nongovernmental, or part of the Red CrosslKed Crescent movement, Notably they do it without thr prior diwction of CNP-J, although the press may well play a role h spotli,ghtingthe more dramatic portions of relief programs. It is in this context that the international refugee relief regime needs to develop refugee ~ c e p t i o ncapability in countries like Tanzania, which me likely to continue receivhg refugees. -The question of how

A Broader COBtext


s o m of the very poorest cot~11tric.s of the world, s o m of them producing refugees themselves, will be able to accommodate refugees in the future needs to be answered, and m e a s w s to help these countries need to be built into relief policies, Ironically, this was consider& elernmtal to rcljcf programs, particularly inAfrica, in the 19RUs, a time of skimpier budgets and a different attitude toward =&gee relief. Millions of rczfugees from Mozambique and Angola were removed from the fighting in those coumtries for years. In the process, the refugee reception capability of countries like Malawi, Zambia, m d Tmzania improved. The massive Burundian settlements in Tanzania continue to p v i d c a hvay for Bmndians to shield family and friends frm the fighting even today In this respect, the decisions of the 1970s to accommodate ~ f u g e e facilibted s the capacity of %mania's refugee reception capacity in the 1,9961s.

The Persistence of Refugee Movements Far irom being an anomaly in the postwar world, refugees are a product

of the ccmsolidation of the political authority of the modern natim-state and will continue to be so. By deihition, they are people socially located in the interstices where a nation-state: does not reach, As with the fire department, the question for humanitarians should not be one of "if"" or an assertion of ""never againefTatherit should be a qrxestion of ""vYhe~n'kand "how cast its effects be mitigated" when it happens? This means that =&gee assistance agmcies need to establish mechanisms for the long haul. 7'he relief and protectim issues rajsed when the governant in R:wanda changed arc rarely solved in the short term. Assuming that there are short-tern solutions to problems of refugee movemetnt only mems that- probletns are dekrred rather than solved. In, the case of Wands, long-term development m d humanitarian needs would have been better served by diverting the political focus of the c m p s away from the borders, and toward an organjzed dispersion of a substantial proportion of the refugee population across Africa, :In fact, this happened wfim the Zairean and Kwandans militaries forcibly dispersed the camps on their border, but at considerable cost of life and suffering. As it is, Rwanda has a substantial Hutu population, which is cmtrolkd by the Tutsi-dominated W F government throttgh the imprisonment of a substantial percentage of the male Hulu population of mi1i"cary age As Ren4 Lemarchmd (1999) pojnted out recently, such formulas of political exclusion have contributed greatly to the rewrent massacres in the region. Irmically, the Tanzanians achowledged the need for dispersion of the Rwandan refugee population in October 1994, when they offered land h the south for rural resettlement. rlhe refqees also asserted it in 1996 when they tried to walk (aftcleit improbably) en masse to Malawi or some

other distant destination. Though the Tmzmian proposal may well have been insufEiciesnt to solve the whole problem, it recognized that refugee movements are rarely ccmlpletely ~versible,particularly when there is a n ? onc entrenched political sudden and vident shiFt in poljtical power b party to a completely new one. It also recognized that one of the issues that Rwanda needs to ccmfrcmt in one way or another is tbe cclntinuk~g pressure on the lmd of the substmtial rural popdat.ion. This insight goes wefZ beyond. that of the international refugee relief regime" simplistic and implausible assrtmption that war crimes trials for 5,000, 40,0(10, or even 130,OOO people will "break the cycle of im,purity" and solve the broader questions raised, by such, violent political shifts, It is also probable that Rwanda will not be the last small authoritarian country to generate refugees along remote borders. Again, this is because often enough, the generation of refugees is a process of poli"ricalmodemization fn the ccmtext of regionaf poverty Asserting ""Never agai~t'krassunting that new rules oE international betnavinr will solve this paradox is counterproductive. To contixzrae the fire department analogy it is well mderstood that neither fire departments nor fire insurance cause very many fires. Rather, these institutions m acknowledgments that &ere are imperfections in human societies which have the potential for catafitroing for such catastrophe does not in and of itself i ~ ~ v iit. te

The Need to See Evil The analogy between fire p ~ v e n t i o nand the internat-ional refuge relief regirne is not perfect; the human element in a genocide is much greater than in,say, a dangerousiy wired building, Dealrzg with the emotions involved in genocide, and thc violence typically assocated with refugee fiight are a necessary part of the resolution of refugee crises. Une way to do this is to assign blame. We need tc:,find a bogey-man tc:,blame, to explain away the evil that is before us. h mailmd, Somalia, Ethiopia, etc., the bogey-man was just beyond reach of the courts legit.irnated the mercy offered to refugees in these crises. The Rutaneta sit-uationwas different, in part because the international refugee ~ g i r n had e becom more efficient than in the past and. was able to accommodate everyone outside the country but also because the really bad guys htst, and as a consequmce they tas were in the clamps being assisted. So we want and need a bad guy*But a bu~aucraticmechanism to provide this bad guy in a legitimate and just fashion is beyond the capabiliw of bureaucratbed relief operations; indeed it is a complex legd task unto itself. Crimind law, imperfect as it may be, is the best techni.cal means to legitimately put a face to the evil. Rut it is a very technicat process, and in the context of intenationaj laws about genocide and war crimes, still an


A Broader COBtext

i~sperfectlyunderstood tool. The different ways in which people as thoughtful and central to the refugee crisis as Maurcen Connelly, Philip Mangula, and Bishop hugustin f i u r u b a n d e interpreted reports of killing in Rwanda iiiustrate hokv difficult it is to establish a reliable w c h anism for meting out justice, even among well-educated people. Providing a smse of justice to the poor anci semiliterate, who have little concept of the roiie ol the state in protecting the rights of the innocent, wijl be more difficult. Likewise, such a system is more just than havirrg relief workers and reporters gaze into the eyes of refllgees i,n order '"sense eviY in order to identify who is deserving of relief and.who is not.1 :If for no other rcason, the emergence oE the war crimes and genocide trials will have the positive effect of Iegiti."izing relief progrms for the vast majoriFy of refugees who are as innocent of wrongdoing as the man lying at the side of the ancient fudem road. Cridiqui~2gflte It1 ferzatiOna1 RIftlgee Relief Xqime

I m well aware? that my analysis is different than most. Sbce U mant f i s t criticized UN agencies for their weak response to the Bangladesh emergency, there have been persistent critiques of the international refugee relief regime. The typical cornpaint has been that relief has been too chaotic and uncoordinated. The Qpical prescription has been to designate new " c ~ ~ ~ ) r C i i n afor t ~ different r~" situations. Sometimes this happens whesz the UN Secretary General assigns coordbating responsibility to a special representative (Ambassador Shahrayar m a n in R:wanda), a new agency (UNBRO on the 'T"hai-Cambodian borcier), or m old agency (U'NHCR, UNICEF, or UNW). Other tinnes, lCRC has emerged as a de hcto coordinator, even though, so far as :I can tell, they have never cmtered into the close relatiomhips with other field agencies that tbis implies, as it is against their care operational principles, And thus the "problem of coordination" reemerges. 'This occurs, I think because the prowrbial cart is put before the horse. Lack of coordhation-another name for weak bureaucratic cmtrol-occurs because the ultimate goal is too often weakly defined. This opens the "coordinatingf"bmaucracy to charges of &efficiency as the situation is defined m d redefined. In such a co~ztext,one bureaucracy fails and another is appoint& to take its place. Were the task more carefully defhed, one bmaucracy or the other would probably emerge as the 'koordi.nator" rdformers desircj, It is very likely that &&rent bureaucracies would. emerge in different countries and situations. Which agency &ough, is not at; important as the goal of

creating the powerful b~reatncraticmechanisns neccfcd to extend mercy to the hurt m d hungry lying along the world" hhi&ways, Notes 1. Agatha Christie in her mystery novel Nemesis ('p. 130-131) informs us that Miss Jane MarpXe had this sense. X have no doubt that Miss Marple did have this sense, as did Hercule Poirc~t.The ever-rational Sherlc~ckHoXmes of course, did not. However, as Miss Marple also paints out indirectly, such senses are just that, senses, and difficult to analyze. Meaning p u have to take the wcwd of the persc>n I-taving such a skill that it exists; uunfc3rtunately the mc~8e1-nrational world wc~uld need to license and certify such skills before they could be used to legitimate court decisions. received an umalicited mailing from MSF with a headh Oddly, in M a ~ 2000,I line ""Ian smell the fear." This is a good example of MSF's focus on generating emotions rather than evaluating critically, as Pattier Q1996b) advocates. The prclblem of course is that MSF's appeal is effective in raising funds in a fashion that the dispassionate (and competent) apprc~achPcjttier advocates is not. Ambiguous references to the ""sell of fear" are more effective in fundraising appeals than the actuarial tables of risk asxssment.

This page intentionally left blank


Much of my thinkng has been done through witing, and much of this writing was clone in the context of my burclaucratic duties while working in Tmzania and the Unfted States. This book is a srtmmary of such writing, a process wh,ieh has been goi.ng on since about 1985. Much of my this writing emrged. while 1was puzzling through what people said at meetings or in refugee camps, and my efforts at advmchtg the vision that I and my colleag~~es at LJWF ( h o w n in Tanzania as TCRSTanganyika Christian Rcftlgee Service) bad for how refugee work shoufd be done, The fotlowing essays were all in some way part of this thinking pmcess. The essayhcluded here were writtell between 1989 and 1997, and refiect many of the issues that challenged us in our day-to-day activities. They are ir-tclulied here not as a part of the general arg bureaucratized Good Smaritm but as examples of the types of discussions we had in the field, 1have tried to choose essays ilustrating the parameters in which rc-rfqee issues were discussed at the time. Those prirrted here are the followkg: "The Demogmphy of a Camp for Rwmdmsff ""Chabalisa 2-One Year Later'' "The Chahalisa 2 Market Ucvelopment Project" "HIV and M W in the :Nf;ara Reftxgee Camps"" " ~ Many 6 Refugees ~ Are mere in.Ngara?" "Wishing for Repatriation, Late 1995'f ""A Bishop in Exile: The Anglican Church in Ngara Campsf" "Some Practical Notes on a Names Taboo in Wester11Tanzania" The essays were all witten at specific times and pkces, and for a specific purpose, I wodd :like to both put them inlo a specific context as well as indicate how they relate to the main. theme of this book, Three of the essays reflect the vision that I shared with my colleagues at IMF for how rtlfugee work should be done (especiaw Essays 2,3, and


Part 3: Bnckgmzr nd Essnys-Irttroducf ion

6). Much more s s than other agencies, we believed that Tanzania's refugee relief issues were a long-term concern that Tanzanian institutions should be helped to deal with. In contrast, oher agencies believed that their role was to deliver relief, save lives in the short run, and protect refugees from abuse, irrespective of the capabilities or views of local. institutions. This is a legithnate difference in vision, and is reflected in mnny of the different- ways that agencies developed policy in Ngara (also see Waters 1999a). I think that the different views of refugee programs at LWF were in large part l.he result of the agency's longer history in Tanzania. As described in Chapter 2, LWF began its programs in Tmzania in 1964, The work conthued in the 1960s and 19ms in camps for Mozmbicans and Burundians. 'The work with Burundians, most of whom arrived in 1972-74, continued through the 198Qs,as large settlemnts in what had been sparsely populated bush were established for over 100,000 rczfugees. The development work involved programs buildkg schools in Arusha and general development programs in Singida and Aruha region, and Kibondo district. n e s t . progrms were far fmm Ihe lintclight and, as described in Chapter 1, were chaotically funded. Oste conseFence was that there was a heavy emphasis on developing local capacity, which tryas both cheaper and consistent with the morc general developmetnt goals. h the process of establiishhg the refugee senlements, as well as development programs in different parts of Tanzania, LWF necessarily developed pmgrams emphasizing the skills and capabifities of Tanzanian staff. They were so s u e cessful at this that in the late 1980s m d early 1990s LWF was one of the largest and most influential NGOs in the country And, consistent with developmel-rt agencies in mmy cotmtries, the relatively few expatriates who worked for LWF development and rdief programs often spoke the national lmguage, or leanled it (in the case of Tmzania this was Swahili). In essence, LJWF was a Tanzanian agency with an expatriate presence rather than the other way around. The relief prcljects in Ngara and Karagwe in 1994-96, however, were domhat-ed by hiernational. agencies run by expatriates who often had s o m experience with relief projects, but little experience in Tanzania, h the rt;fugee relief operatrim in Ngara and Karagwe, this meant that LWF's nnzanian managers sometimes had a tough time presenting Chemselves as possessing the s a m level of competence as the expatriate engineers and administrators brought in from Euwpe. For this reasm, the Tmzanians working for LWF and other age~nciessometimes became scapegoats ior the probkms the operation suffered from. At the time of the rt.fugee emergency in 3994, most agencies, i n c l u d a the UNHCR, responded by hirkg more expatriates at ten times what a

Tanzanim professional cost as described in Chapter 8, This spendkg did not matter in financially flush times. As USAID and ECHO kept their checkhooks open, expatriates were hired by UNHCR and other NGOs fairly easily But when the checkbooks closed in late 19994, pressure mounted to lay off expatriates m d curtail expatriate-intensive programs. This led to bureaucratic attacks on LWF's programs, some of Mthich were legitimate assaults on our befficiencies. mese assaults (typically verbal, sometimes written) were often expressed as doubts about whether Tanzafiian managers were capabte of managing complex programs tike trucking and water delivery. The bureaucratic assault on LJWFfswater programs even made its way into the Joint Eudzration of the Erne~qencyAss i s f u ~ c to e Rzua~zda(199h:volume 3, Chapter 4).1 But at ZJWFwe cmtinued to maintak our ide~~tity as an. agency able to work well with Tanzanians, The bright spot in our programs was the quality of camp management in Chabalisa 2. 'f'his ~lirgtrecamp had a deserved ~ p u t a t i mas beixlg one of the most efficiently and fairly m. The nutritimd standards of the refugees were high, and unlike other camps, there were never rr.fut;ee demcmstrations or ccmfrontationp; (""rots'" the emotion-laclen term oZ1 the olfner camp rnanagentent agencies) about the mfairness of our dktribution policies. Nor were there mmors of major food sales to traders as occasionatly wcurred in some camps. The expatriaEe project coordinator, who attended the coordi,natix~g meetings at the UNFlCR office in Karagwe town, was typicalily given credit for the good record in Chabalisa 2, even though the actual on-site stafl: was Tmzanian m d Rwandan. This is why a number of the e s s q s (Essays 2 , 3 , and 6) reflect our need to brag about the capabilities of our Tmzmian staff in this context. In effect, they were p r t - a p t h e defenses of the capability of our Tanzanian and Rwandan staff. In rl.scadi,ng them, I recognize that the essays were very much written in the context of the moment h e n bureaucratic maneuverings were taking place..As a result, in retrospect, they appear perhaps too flippmt for thc serious book I hope this volurne will be considered. FXowever, I want to include them because they, like much of the operation, are an emotional res t my atsponse to what was really a bureaucratic problem, It is j ~ ~that tempts at diciting emotion were different than those of the CJNHCR and other agencies seeking to perpetuate generous funding policies. S m e phenmenan, djfferent god. A proper burearncrat would prefer a costbenefit comparison assessing food distribution in Chabalisa 2, with a comparison to the expatriate-intensive camp management programs run by Concern International or CARE. Such a comparison never happened. In this context, ""cute" essays about our camp management programs in Chabalisa 2 were the next best bureaucratic defense we had to offer. They are present-ed here by and large as they w e hvritten during the


Part 3: Bnckgmzr nd Essnys-Irttroducf ion

time I was in Ngara. The date attached to the essay title is the date it was written. Essay 1 is also about Chabalisa 2. Wi-th the assistmce of the two LWF project coordinators, Michael Hyden and Denise Barrett, m d during my own brief tenurcl there as actjng project coordinates, I was able to coUect data about food deliveries, health, and demographics, At the time I thought this data, would be useful i,n managing the camp in the most eMicient bureaucratized fashion. In Tmzania, though,I never had a chance to organize the data to my satisfaction Notably, thou$ the W N M C a was aware that I was colfrltcting data in this fasfiion, thejr staft: had little interest in, using it, and as a result my data analysis was put on hotd.. After retumir~gto the Llnited States, I diif begin to andyze the data; at one point, I had an interest in publishing the data as an article in an acad m i c journal, While writing this book thctugh, I became more and mort. m a r e that as long as refugee relief programs are &pendent on emotion in order to achieve efficiency rather than systemtic data colkction, Ihe delivery of refugee services remains problematic. Thus tbe data arc included here as an example of what could be, rather than what is. I think it ~ne is intpmtant to include the data in an abhrcviated form, inthis v o l ~ ~ for the benefit of readers who may share my interest m d hope that rehgee work will became more rationalized. Essays 4,5, and 7 werc answers to spceific questions asked by visitors we had k m church agencies in Europe. Since they were intended for a church-based audience, I also rttspollded to requestti tc:,personalize the writbg in a fashion which appeals to that audiexzce. HXV and AIRS (Essay 4) are important concerns in any Rwandan population. It is also an issue of great interest to the West; imdeed, it was one of the best-funded programs in Ngara, being directly fuxzded by USAXD via CARE. Esaay 5 is a response to the many normal bureaucratic questions we fielLied as to how many refugees thrrl, were im Ngara. We never had a good mswer. 'This essay is about the reason why. As described in Chapters 3 and 7, it was one of the first questions asked, because of the obvious need of the bureaucracies for calculabitity. Refugeefihave an interest in frustrating this purpose, therczby nbtaining more food in order to supplement what is, after all, a fairly mager ratjon. This is a nat-ural conflict in refugee c a p management. As described in Essay 5, though, the numbers published with such certahty are often based on shaky assumptions, This is not due to any ill-will on the part of the international ~ f u g e e~ l i e regirne; f rather it is due to the very natlrre of the process. Despite the certainties of bureaucratic and press accolmts, refugee n m bers are inherently difficult to determine, and reyuire specialized (bureaucraitized) attention.

Just how much specialized attention is required is illustrated by my own efforts at census taking in 198'7, which are described in Essiay 8. (h earlier ven;ion of this essay was published by the journat Dir;~r?;tcrs in f 989.) 'This is one of my favctrite essays, and X am trying to raise its profile a bit by including it here. As a descriptive essay it also fits in well with the bureaucratic pursuit of calculability. Essay 7 is a short stmy about how the hng[iean church hvctl-ked i,n the refugee camps. The international refugee relief regime is of course a firmly secular operation, even though it relies on a number of agencies that have a base h various religious communities. This essay about the Anglican church was written in response to LWF" own church donors, who often had questions about what the church was doing in the =&gee camps*1 hope it is stilf of interest to people wiCh those concerns. But 1believe that the essay is also of m m gmeral interest, as it reflects well the "situational" nature of ethnic identity, especially that of Hutu-Tutsi elation~,and is included here primarily for that reason. Notes I. The attacks that appeared in the JEEAR reELected the problems we had with the management of our water delivery prc>gramsin the Benaco camps. In my view, the assertions made about LWFrs performance in this sector were erroneous. But this was the program with the most expatriate involt\rernent, and as a result the prc~blernswere brc~adcastmost widely, eventually reaching the ears of the JEEAR consultants.

This page intentionally left blank

The Demography of a Camp for Rwandans

It is well known that the demographic structure of migrant groups is unusual; migratian is a process that selects by age, family status, and gendey: The most likely age af immigrants is in the ecmomically active years (15 to 30 years) when unmarried people seek work, Immigrant groups may have a disprcsportionatety large number of either males or females, depending on the nature of the work sou&t (Weeks 1996:218-220). Refugee grctups, though, differ from the typical immigrant group in matters of motivation-refugees, by definition, are not pursuing economic gain but fleeing persecution. The specific demographics of a situation have an efkct on the ethnic groups that are subject of the persecution. They also have an effect on age and gender of refugees, for flight itself is demographically selective process (Munz 4983; Harrell-Bcmd 1986)-The elderly and very young, who are the most vulnerable in any population, are more likely to die during a difficult flight or to be un.abte to Ree in the first place. This in turn can effect the demographic gs~tentiai within the refugee populations: women in peak fertility years are more tikdy to be present within the pctpulations, whereas thc.se at ages where mortality is mc)re likely (the very young and the very old) are less likely to be present, Understanding these issues is impc~rtantfor three reasoJns. First, in the short run, rmberstanding refugee demgraphics is important if relief services are to be delivered efkctively. Poor understanding of refugee dynamics has led to policy errclss in the provision af relief supplies for targeted portions of the population, as will become apparent betow, For example, child mortality is systematically overestimated by formulae which assume that 20 percent of a refugee population is under five (as it is in most rural African areas-see Quist 1995; Mkdecins sans Fronti&res 1995); an unusually large number of younger fertile females in the pc~pulationcan mean that fertility patterm will be incorrect1y estimated (Waters 1996; Quist 1995; /EEAR 1995); ~Jverestirnationof the rmbe~fivepopulation leads tcr vaccines and medicines" being aver-ordered. The size of the elderly population is also likely to be overestimated.

Tn a longer term, demographic generallizaticn are often made having implications for political claim, For example, claim are often made about refugee fertility patterns, death rates, and the relative health of hosts compared to that of the refugee population.l The latter claim is often the most palitically sensitive owing to the impressian held by many that refugees, who are the recipients of international largesse, somehaw have an "easier" life than locals if health indicators are better.Us is described below, there is some factual basis to such arguments. However, this variation is not due only to international largesse. t o w mortality in ChabaXisa 2 was also the consequence of the absence of the very young and old who are the ones mc)st iPik1y to die. Third, a broader theoretical literature dealing with the scjciobgy of refugee p~pulatic>n~ has emerged, some of it fc~cuwdon central Africa (Malkki 1995; L). Newbury 1998; Lemarchand 1994; Long 1993; Cl. Newbury 1995). Implicit tcr this discussion is how refugee groups grotv, contract, and h r m new social groups (Sommers 4994; Waters 1990; Malkki 4994). The demographic infc~rmationhere describes the basic social material among whom new social account's, ar *'ethnohistories," will be generated. Be that as it may, it is hoped that the following data will form a stmnger foundation for discussions in the future. Admittedly these data are from only one of the 30 ar 40 refugee camps in the Great Lakes region and are subject to all the disadvantages of a "'sample size of one." Hc>wever,given their empiricaly grounding, in cmtrast to the impressionistic demographic canclusic>nsso quick1y drawn in policy circles, a number of salient points can be made, including the following (see also Table AI .l): Total fertility rates-an estimate af how many children a woman would have-in Chabalisa 2 in 1994-95 may have equaled those in prewar Rwanda by the end cE 1995.11:toc~kapproximately ane year for the fertility rates to recover to prewar levels. Crude birth rates-the actual number of children born in a poputation-on the other hand, were higher owing to the dispmportionatc)iy large number of fertile females in the refugee population. Reparted child mortality rates (children under five years old) never equaled tho>seof Tanzania or Rw-anda, even during the period shortty after the establishment af the camp, ar during the succeeding 45 months (see Tkble A I .l),Crude mortaliv levels were also low. This was prcjbably due to a cornbination of the very small pmpc~rtionaf the papulatiun between zero and two years old, and the high lwef of medical care delivered by the UPIiIHGR and Mernisa, a Dutch Catholic agency ass i p e d by UNHCR to provide medical service, There was no apparent correlation between d e l a y 4 food deliveries in April 1994, suboptimal patable tzrater deliveries in late 1995, receipt of a ration rarefy exceeding 1,1700 kcajts per day, and the regc~rtedmol"cality rates. Presumably the low rates of delivered supplies were supplemented by refugee foraging in surrounding areas, Neonatal death rates were about 10 percent of all births.

TABLE A1.1 Mortality and Fertility Data far Chabalisa 2 Refugee Camp in 1995 Week

B bf Its

Deaths under 5

Denilzs otter 59

4 10



II II 5 7 8 4


9 3 4

It 9

12 28 18 18 15


25 20 25 24 25 26 30 38 (to 9/24] 20* nia

October 1995: 156 (35 births per week) November 1995: 162 (36 births per week) Total: 927 births for 4995. Crude birth rate of 2.5 percent (X/I,U00) on po~putatic>ns of 317,026.4.2 percent assuming 30 bit.C.E.rsper week. GDR 517/378026, i.e., 4.4 percent, Natural grc~wthrate wautd have been 1.1percent for 11995, Sottree: Complimentary records for ChabaXisa 2 were photocopied by the author.



Mortality peaks were reached just after the camp was estabtished in late 1994, and during an epidemic of gastrclenteric diseases in February 1995. Othem-ise mortality rates were IOW. Approximately one third of all deaths tzrere attributed to malaria. Nevertheless, as with deaths from gastrointestinal disease and matnutritic~n/starvation,there were notable decreases acrrlss time.

The Data: Chabalisa 2 IRekgee Camp A chance to more carefully specify refugee demographics came up in 1994 when Chabalisix 2 camp was established in western Tanzania. ChiabaXisa 2 war; established in September 19% to accommodate refugees who had arrived in Tanzania between ApriX and August 19% frcwn two communes in Rwanda. All of the refugees had made a difficult trip by foot across swamplands on the TamaniaRwanda border between Nay and August 1994, and were then received at a campsite named Chabalisa. By the end of August 1994, refugees were cxeupying swamplands that threatened to be flood& by the rains in Sc?ytc?mber,As a result, a new campsite was established four kilometers away and apprc~ximately40,000 refugees were moved there. At ChabaXisa 2, the refugees were r e g i s t e ~ dand assigned I-rouseplots. At the time of registration, each refugee family had to present itself to the nongovernmental agency managing the camp, LWF. The name c~fthe head of household was recorded, as were the age and gender of the household members, This infc3rmation is repc~rtedin Figure Al.l. In December 1992, a sample of 1,4M famiries (17,480 individuals) was entered into an Excel computer file. From this infc>rmation,it was p~~ssible to calculate age and gender distribution and the f a d l y structure of the arrivals. Data regarding camp fertility was also obtained for the period January 199SDecember 1995 from the camp hospital which was run by Memisa (see Quist 1995). fn adciitic>n,death registrations for the period October 1994-December 1995 were also obtained for the camp management agency LWF, which maintained a death register on the basis of inhrmatisn from the hospital. Refugees had incentive to register deaths, in order to be provided with a burial shrc>ucland burial plot. Tnfc?rmation about fc~oddistributicm was ava iXable from ApriX to December 4995. This infclrrnation was generated by Mernisa, which did random sui-veys at food distribution points every I-mro weeks or so, Water deliveries ranged from two to five liters per refugee (about one half to one U,$. gallon) per day during the period discussed. Water deliveries were by a combination of piping water from a spring and trucking. W t e r distribution was cuordinatd by the agency Oxfam.

The Demographics of Chabalisa 2 Tofnl Population At the time the camp was founded in Spternber-December 1994, 42,000 refugees were registered. Throughout 1995, a population of 43,000 was assumed for food

FIGURE A l . l Age Distribution of Pc>pulat.ionat Chabalisa 2 Refugee Camp. Data collected at Chabalisa 2 refugee camp indicated that the refugee pupubtian had an unusual age distribution. Unlike most African gopulations, the largest age grc~upis not the very young. Rather, it is the 7-t0-15-year-a1ds of bath sexes. Compared to other African poputations, there are also relatively few people ower 60. (Sazirce: Sample of ChabaZisa 2 pc2pulation dcme by the author; data collected under the supervision of Michaet Hyden.)

distribution%plot allocations, and other administrative tasks. This figul-e tvas adjusted downward to 33,000 in December 1995, after a district-wide UNHCR census of four camps indicated there was a 21 percent overregistration in aXI K a r a p e camps. It is not clear how much of this overcount had occurred in Chabalisa 2, as camp-by-camp statistics w e l not ~ released by U N H C R , Because of the mare systematic prrjcedures at the initial registration at Chabalisa (the other camps relied primarily on refugee generated lists as the refugees arrived directly fram Rwanda), it was assumed that Chabalisa 2 had the most accurate count in the area. For this reason, this paper assumes a 37,000 refugee camp pc~pulationin the calculation of rates.

Age S ~ t r u ~&fa y Records of 7,480 refugees from 1,401 families were examined. This is assumed to be 20.2 per-cent of the total populatitsn, and a multiplier af 4.95 was thel-eEt>reused to generate camp totals for age-specific rates. Half of the records sampXc3d were Erorn each of the two Rwandan communes in 611abalisa 2 present in the camp. Ages for 300 heads of househafds were randomly assiped due to missing data caused by an omission by one clerk.

Food Distribtttints and Morta tify As part of the food distributitic~nprogram, rations w e l distributed ~ to refugees at a central distribution point every week two weeks (Table A1.2). During the year,

TABLE A12 Food Distribution in 1995 Week

Kcnts per pcrs.son 4,647 1,600 4,692 1,710 4,468 1,770 1,409 1,614 1,641 4,655 1,677 no records 3,401 (1700) 3,647 (1823) 3,748 (1874) 3,596 f 1798) 1,829 3,438 (1719)

This table shc>wsstatistics Ercm Food Basket Monitoring developed by Mernisa on behalf of the World Foo>dProgramme. Sampling started at week 16 of 4995, when there were weekly food distributions. After week 42 distributions shifted to a biweekly schedule. Estimates of the weekly rations are therefore given in parentheses. Generation of the data involved random assessment of the ratians received by individual refugees as they left the distribution point. Food basket marketing was done by weighing what each family actually received at the faad distribution, and then converting the amounts into a figure for kilocaXories per day per person,

monitoring data showed that mean rations prcjvided per person ranged laeween 4,41)0 and 1,900 kilocalaries per person. Low points in distributitic~ndid not have an obvious correlation with fluctuations in fertility or mortafiq. This data do not include what the refugee actually ate, These rations were supplemented by refugees through a range of activities such as fcjraging, day-labor work, tilling small plots, etc.

Cause5 of Death The under-five population had a brge proportion of the deaths, as is common in a rural African poputation (Tabte A13).Ffc>wever,as Table A1.3 shc)ws, the nature of the under-five deaths varied over time. Indeed, in the course of the year there war; an owerall improvement in the health of children. For example, in October 4994 there w e l ~ 24 deaths of children between one and five years 018, and two neonataI deaths. In contrast, a year later, in Octc~ber1995, there were no recorded d e a t h of one-to-five-year-oldsfbut there were nine nematal deaths, and gasThe cames of death were primarily malaria, rnalnutriti~~~/st;larvation, trointestirral diseases classified as both diarrhea and dysntery (rI"ableA4.4). The TABLE A1.3 Monthly Mortality Data

Morlalify darn


Tofaliday Under S/&y Under 5 per l0#000 per 20,81)0

Neonatnl T~?fanl CMR l nzorz. ur2der l mod$ed"


Oct, 94 Nov. 94 Dec. 94 Jan. 95 Feb. 95 March 95 April 95 May 95 June 95 July 95 Aug. 95 Sept. 95 Oct. 95 NCW.95 Dec. 95 "Mc~difiedCMR is done with a population of 5,000 under 5. Neonatal deaths are excluded, as these reflect primarily the increase in the birth rate and not overall public health and sanitation standards. Compiled from the death register maintained lay the camp managers. Rates are calculated using an assumed population of 37,000 persons.

TABLE A1.4 Mortality by Disease for Chabalisa 2 Refugee Camp, October 1994Decernber 1995

Cause of dentll


Under 5

Ulzllsr I

Under iT monf h

Malaria Malnutrition/stawation Gastrointestinal, diarrhea, dysentery Pneumonia Neonatal Childbirth AIDS/ElIV Kidney Bacterial Other Totals

total number of deaths was highest during the period i diately after the estabiishment of the camp, but dedined tc>wardDecember 1995 (Table AZ.5). This decline correlates not with fluctrratic~nsin fcmd prc~visictn,or wa ter provision, but with time,

Standard demographic indicators for Tanzania and Rwanda are fc3und in Table AZ.14. These data indicate I-hat relative to Tanzania and Rwanda, the fe&ility rates of the refugee pc~pulationin Chabalisa 2 were higher and the madality rates we= lower, In large part this is to be expected fram the data in the age pyramid in Figure Al.l. There was a deficit in the age levels vulnerable to mortality and there was a large proportion of fertile women without small children.

Discussion: The Demographics of Chabalisa 2 Refugee C m p The arriving population had, by African standards, a deficit of children under five. Typical African populations in rural. Tanzania and Rwanda include about 20 percent under-five-year-olds, with the largest number under one year old. The arriving population in Chabalisa 2 had 13 percent under five, with larger numbers at ages four and five (see Figul-e A4.4). This probably reflects high death rates of small children on the trip to Tanzania. Two demographic consequences of this rmber-five deficit seem to be decreased overall ma&ality rates for the camp as a

TABLE A1.5 Mortality by Cause and Month, October 199kDecember 1995

Oct. 94 Nov. 94 Dec. 94 Jan. 95 Feb. 95 March 95 April 95 May 95 June 95 July 95 Aug. 95 Sept. 95 Oct. 95 Nova95 Dec. 95


TABLE Al.6 P>evelo>pmentIndicators in Tanzania and Rwanda, 1989-1 994

TbtaI fertility rate Maternal mortality /100,000 Dependence ratio Population growth rate Life expectancy Child malnutrition under 5 Ax~erage;?household size GNPlcapita IMn Under 5 mortaIiv Demographic indicators far Tanzania and Rwanda show that the Rwandan refugee pc~pulationhad low martality ratesf and tctward the end of their sta5 comparatixrely high fertility rates.

Source: Socinl Indimfors of L)evel~7pmertt,1996, Washingtcm: world Bank,

wholie, and the rising fertility rates, which were apparent during the latter part of 4995.

The mortality statistics indicate that the mortality rate of the population of Chabalisa 2 skeadily decreased throughout 1995. lnfant mortality rates, when corrected far the neonatal death, dwreased to an amualized rate of about 12 per 4,OUO. NeverZheless, about 10 percent of the newbarns died owing to a variety of conditions. There was an epidemic of diarrhea diseases in February; which resulted in a climb in death rates. Tn sum, the Chabalitia 2 population was healthy. This is reflected in both declining death rates and increasing fertility rates. This occurred during a time when official fcmd and water distribution Ructuated at levels welt belc3w international standards.

The Elder DCficif Over-65-year-olctswere a small proportion of the populatian in Chabalisa 2. This could mean two things. First, it could mean that fewer over-65-year-olds Bed in the first place. This would g e m unlikely, as in Rwanda, the elderly population ws~uldhave had the same reasc~nsto flee as the younger Rwandans. More likely it could be due to the fact that elderly were more vulnerable to death on the road to Tanzania.

Though there was a deficit of elderly and young in the Chabalisa 2 pc~pulatic~n, there was an unusually Xarge prcyportion of youths beh-een the ages of 7 and 22. This will have a long-term fertility implications as the bulge of females enters the reproductive years between 1995 and 2003. A similar bulge in the male side of the pogulatic~nwill mean that there will be a surplus of males entering military age, Given that most Chabalisa 2 refugees have since returned to Rw-anda, it: is not known what effect this issue will have.

Conclusion Systematic demographic informatian about refugee camps is not generally availabte (for exceptions see Harrefl-Bond 19% and Lcmg 1993). As a result, it is not known tzrt-rekher the data from Cl~abalisa2 is typical for refugee pc~pulationsin general, or even far Rwandan refuses in particular. The data, though, do clari@ a number af commonsense assumptions about refugee pctpulaticms. For example, it is generally assumed that mortality is high during Right, and that as wcial systems become remtablished (a process that took about one year in Chabalisa 21,

fertility rates increase and mortaliq rates decline. Significantly; a similar pattern seems to have been described in the sketchy demographic data generated by Lynelyn Long for Ban Vinai refugee camp in Thailand. Had refugees remained in Chabalisa 2, the camp woutct probably have developed in the same way as Ban Vinai.

Notes I. See Mkdecins sans Frctnti&res(1995:444) and M M W (1996) for discussions of the upper limits of refugee mortality They report that death rates of 5 to 2 0 per 30,000 per day are ""fequent." This was not the case in Chabalisa 2.; judging from the age survey, this seemed to be due to the demographics of the population which actually arrived. In effect, high mortality either in Rwanda during the trip to Tanzania meant that few were Left in vulnerable age groups in the camp population. 2, Clear-cut evidence of this difference was pointed out by a surgeon who OPerated on both refugees and Tanzanians and refugees who lived in Karagwe district, Tanzania. He told me that refugees had more subcutaneous fat than locals. Such dialogue about health status often shapes discussims by nonrefugees about qualiv of refugee life. Health status, though, should not be coni-used with overall living conditions. The health status of refugees in the Tanzanian camps war; retatlively high. FTc>wever,much more significant for refugee quality of life was the lack of freedom, denial of basic civil rights, and, most important, the lack of a permanent h o m e t h e defining feature of refugee status.

Essay 2

Camp Management 1994-95 By Tony Waters and Michael Hyden

In August 3.994, the UNE-IlCR approached LWF-Ngara about assuming carnp management respomibilities for a new camp being v e n e d in K a r a p e district in Tanzania. From April to August 1994, the camp at Chabalisa had been receiving wave after wave of refugees from Rwanda. In respome, the carnp managers, Caritas Tanzania, two other agencies which had withdraw-n from camp management, and the UNHCIZr had been crowding more and more refugees inta the camp. Compromises were made, particufarly during the dry seaso)n, when it was agreed that the cmly place to house more refugees tvas in the lowlands. This cl-rmpromiw was made even though all were aware that the land would be uninhirbitable once the rains started in Octobe~ LWF-Ngara was iXI equipped to cope with this request, It meant establishing an operation ower three hours' travel time to the north of our office in Ngara. It also meant putling staff out of an already stretched operatim. In the p ~ v i o u July, s we had begun to accept respc)nsibiiiity E c x the water system. Our trucking operation also cmtinued to be challenged as further waves of refugees arrived, and more water needed to be trucked h r n the border with Burundi and Rwanda into the Ngara camps. In these respects, however; rmfortunately cjur Ngara operatim tvas the urgency of the request from no different from other agenciesf. Con~quentXy~ our partners at UNHCR tvas respected, and LWF agreed to begin operations in

m a t Is Camp Management? The camp managers in each refugee camp are the hands and arms of the UNHCR. in many respects, the carnp manager is like the town cauncil, The agency that takes over the camp manager function is the one responsible f o x assigning plots (120 square meters, or 144 square yards for each family) to refugees,

maintaining registration recods, and coordinating other agencies such as medical, social senjices, education, and water in their day-to-day work, Mast impartant, though, the camp management agency organizes the distribution of bctth food and nonfosd items on behalf af the World Food Programme and UNHCR. UNHCR and WFP prwide general guidance on such matters in accordance with intei-na"tona1standards, but it is the camp management agency that organiz;es the refugees into lines, and then literally scoops the rations into the refugees3ags. B e c a u ~of this, the refugees in the carnp are very aware of who the carnp managers are. More irnportant, the refugees are aware of how fairly and openly their subsistence-level rations are distributed-. Mr. Pantaleon Cambona is LWFs camp manager for Chabalisa 2 refugee camp, and he is justifiably proud of the job that he and his staff have done during the last year. In particular, he paints to the fact that there have been no major incidents during distributions during the last year, a claim that none of the other agencies serving Kwandan refugms can make. ""Memake sure that the refugees understand clearly the limitations under which we veraterf%e says. "It is irnpodant that they understand that when a shodage occurs in WFPs food pipeline, LWF deals as equitably as possible with the situation. This is a sensitive issue t-o deal with when you might be cutting a weekly maize ration by thirt.y or fifty percent. After all, this fo'oitd is what they must live on; by cutting it you are threatening their very existence. In such a circumstance, it becomes very easy for the refugees tor blame the distribution agency for the shortage, rather than, say, the shortage of railway wagom, which is the actual came." Refugees are by definition vulnerable, What little they do receive they tzratch carefully and even jealously. For this reason, it is important that they understand the reasons why sc:,me people receive more than others, and how- target poputations are identified to receive b d and other items.

Starting in Chabalisa 2 Much of the success in Chabalisa 2 comes from the quick planning that began in September 1994, The camp tzras laid out in 2'7 blacks, and each hut received an 8by-15-meter piece of land. On tlljs land, the refugees were required to build a small hut, typically of grass and sticks that they collect, and covered by one cjf the most valuable commodities in a refugee" life, a pIitstic sheet. Shared latrines are dug in the rows in between the huts. Chabalisa 2 is located around a gentle valley, the camp itself situated on opposite hillsides, Standing on the hilltops, it is possible to see the finit- work of the plot allocators. The carnp itself is in 27 clearly defined blocks of 280 family huts each. The distribution center is a lang building with 44 stalls located near the camp headquarters. Because of the dependent nature of tbe population, the distribution center is critical tor camp management, and tzras one of the first common buildings to be constructed. The building was designed this way so that the refugees coufcl go to the same stall each tzreek, To avoid ccmfusictn, in and out stiles were installed. Because of the urgency of the situation, the camp manage-

Essay 2: Camp lLlnnage~nent 1994-95


ment jnfrastructure-the survey distribution centex; latrines, etc.-were installed even as the refugees moved in. Most impc~rtantwere the toilets, which were being installed by Oxfam. Tbilet construction involves the organization of large teams of labowrs, and this was the factor that slowed movement into the camp. At times in 1994, it looked as though the state of the new buildings wc>uld not keep up with the need to mclve the refugees out of the old Chabalisa lowlands. Fortunately, thou&, hard work and good cooperation between the refugees, Oxfam, and UNHCW meant that the rehgee population did not expand more rapidly than LRrF's ability to receive them.

Effective Camp Management

Ref'llgce Regr'sfmf ion If a plastic sheet is a refugee" most valuable visible possession, the family" ration card is the most valuable document. The ration card is what gives the refugees access to fooct, a place to build a grass hut, and occasional distributions of jerry cans, soap, plastic sheets, clothing, or other ncjnfc>oditems. Accurate registration is a difficult chore for the camp management agency. There is incentive for refugees to exaggerate the number of people in their family or to double-register and receive two ration cards. Registratictn and issuing the cards is a tricky matteu; in which norms of strictness and fairness must be observed. Like income tax fraud, cheating is more likely if it is believed that "everyone else is doing it." born this perspecthe, it is important for the camp management agency to instill a spirit of '"eke all in this together, and we had better make it tzrork." Tn the case of Chabalisa 2, this was easier than in other camps; because LWF was able to accept only refugees tzrho had already established themselve at Chabalisa, we did not have to deal with a disorganized arrival fram across the border, Refugees were selected at Chabalisa, received a numbered card at that time, and then were transported to Chabalisa 2. At Chabalisa 2, each family presented itself for a ration card which was punched to indicate family size. Aid workers dubbed "shepherds" then took them to the plot that had been saved for them.

Plot AElcteafioit.2and Dauda Musa Plot allocation is an ongoing process, and this is where LWF assumes its t o m coundl role-.Dauda Musa, the head of the plot allocation section, spends much of I-tis time tzralking arcjund the camp making sure that zoning standards are met, meaning that he boks for abandoned huts, and new huts built outside allocated areas. He also checks to see that all families are maintaining fuet-efficient stoves constructed of mud, dung, and ash, rather than the traditional *'three-stone" mcydel. Musa takes great pride in his work, and likes to take visitors up on the top of the hill so that they can see the straight bloxk pattern. "Yc~ushould be able to see where everyone is, and easily know how many huts are in each block, This has to

tally with the distribution lists which IEWF uses for the weekly food distributic)nff' he explains. Among Musapsprc~radestaccomplishments is LWF" plastic rcmf policy. "Look, every hut has a piece of plastic. And because they are in mws, we know that some are not cheating by building a second hut just tcr get an extra piece. Finally, all plastic is blue side u p w o white tops in Chabafisa 2!'The color is primarily a matter of aesthetics agreed tcr by Dauda and the camp management, who prefer the blue color, When asked about a single white top in the distance, Dauda sheepishXy explain&, "We have a few who have sheets of plastic that are white on both sides. That is one of them. But what else can we do?''

Equitable Food Distribution Fcmd distribution in ChabaXisa 2 begins with the storekeepes; who receives bulk food from the central WFIP tvareh~use.Each week, the bulk bags are received for distribution. On each Wednesday; the emptying of the warehouw begins as the food is moved into the distributic~ncenter. At the distribution center, refugees queue with their registration cards. After presenting their cards, the week's rations is then sel-roped into their bags. There is potcmtial for a perception of unfairness at each stage of the process, At the warehouse, refugees might wonder why bags are left over after the distribution. The same happens at the distribution center. TAlorse, scoopers may run out of a commodity before finishing with the entire group of refugees, The key to keeping the distribution fair and accurate is to have the proper scoops. This is not as easy as it sounds, since the hags are measured by weight, while the ration is determined by nutritimists t v h ~ measure by kilocalories. The scoops themselves are measures of volume, Finally WFP supplies food that is available for distribution to the refugms, and that depends on what their dc~nors have provided. The staple grain may be sorghum, maize, maize flour, or a highprotein corn-so>yablend. If there are chronic shol"cagesof the high-prc>teinblend," the nutritionists may substitute the equivalent kilocalories in maize. The list of variat.ic>nsgoes on, with the resuit that there may be some confusion and misunderstandings beween refugees and the camp managers.

The UNWCR purchases and collects donations of nonfoc>ditems from a variety of saurces. Among the basics are plastic sheeting tcr cover the grass huts, coc~king pots, jerry cans, and blankets. These items are typically purchased in bulk, so that every family can receive a basic issue. Other items come in varying quantities. Among the biggest and most generous nonfood item donations that LWF has been involved with was a major clothing donation frc~mthe Salt~atlionArmy in 1994. Lutheran World Relief (USA) made similar donationti through the Christian Council of Tanzania. Soap is also regularly provided. The distribution of both donations was ultimately coc~rdinatedby the camp management agencies, which in the case of Chabalisa 2 was LWF. Smaller donations also arrive, and might include extra plastic, hoesf craft kits, maternity kits, etc.

Essay 2: Camp lLlnnage~nent 1994-95 Now that Chabafisa 2 is estabtished, the smaller-quantity items are the fc~cusof distribution, Typically there is not enough to give one to every refugee, so LWF works to target the nonfood item donations for the most appropriate or needy refugees. This requires a lot of focltwork on the part of the staff, and gocd comperation with the other agencies, like Mernisa, which has public health visitors, $we the Children (U.K.), tzrhich comrdinates sclcial welfare seivices, or Helpage, which is developing income-generating programs for the elderly and vulnerable. These agencies come in contact with refugees who are particularly vulnerable for one reason or another and make recommendations about haw to target danatians. As the camp managex; though, 1EWF has the respc~nsibiliityfar ensuring that the lists accurately reflect needs and verifying that the targeted populatim actually receives the donation.

The Importance of Effective Local Staff From the beginning of our work in Chbalisa 2, LWF has been relying on Tarnanian and Rwandan staff to manage the camp. That they have proved effective managers means that systems tzritl be maintained past the paint when UNHCR funding for the comparative1y expensive exy atriates employed by other camp management ends in 1996. The heavy reliance on locaf staff was in large part made passible by LWF's long experience in Tanzania. Experienced LWF staff frown Ngara, t i k u y u settlement for Mozambicans, Mishamo, Kigoma, and Ulyankulu project for Burrmdians, and Handeni settlement for Somalis are all now working in Chabalisa 2 programs. Irr>nicalty although it is often o~bservedby the UNHCR that Chabafisa 2 management is a model for other camps, the fact that heavy respomibifities are assumed by Bmanian and Rwandan staff is not often cmnected to this success. One of LWFs recent expatriate volunteers in Chabafisa 2, Tda Grum, fmm Bemark, complained about this problem. "When visitors come to see the hodelkcamp, they look to me for answers. T in turn simply turn to the Xocal staff for the answers. This happenti despite the fact that peapft? like the camp manager, Gambona, and Dauda have been here longer and indeed deserve much of the credit for the gocd tzrork."

What Future for ChabaXisa 2? LWF staff at Cfiabalisa 2 are justifiably prc~udof their work. Tn one short year, they have built on a bare hillside a commrmity of 41,000 people who are able to live tug~etherreasrrmably well. But of necessity, Chabalisa 2 is a temporary settlement; it is still a crowded refugee camp in which people can only wait out a permanent solution to the Rwanda refugee crisis, Certainly the 220-square-mew plots o~ttferlittle to a population of what were recently self-sufficient farmers. Assuming land is of good quality, a minimum of about two hectares per family is required for self-sufficiency. Clearly Chabafisa 2 does not even offer a fraction of this opportunity. Currentty, the refu"uges resist suggestions of vcduntary repatriation. 'They continue to hear rumors of killings in Rw anda and point out that the t and in the com-

rnunes frc~mwhich they come has been occupied by others. As farmers, this is an important question. When can they start farming in order to sustain themselves again? One year of living in the crc~wdedconditions of Chabalitia 2 has yet to offer an t~bviousanswer to the vast majority. As camp managers, it is our hope tl-zat we can offer them a safe if austere haven from which the search for more permanent sc~lutionscan take place.

Essay 3

The Chabalisa 2 Market Development Pr

An Introduction, to the LWF "Building Code Inspector"" Consolata meikiza" oofcial title is "assistant plot aUocatorMh r LWFs camp management prc3gram in ChabaXisa 2 camp. Chabalisa 2 is a compact "urbanr' area of 41,000 people in a remote corner of Tamania, As with any urban area, the camp requires sclme discipline and organization if people are to live together in as healthrrl and safe environment as is possible under the difficult circumstances. Consolata, a Tanzanian in her early twenties, is in effect a building code inspector, It is her job tc) see that the rules that are adopted for the well-being of the camp are enforced as effectively as possibleConsolatak rather dry title of ""assistant plot alfocator" obxures the enthusiasm she has for what ig from her perspective, exciting and challcsnging. Ch a recent Saturday afternoon, she explained to me her latest problem: "We had two trucks for hauling garbage from the marketplace yesterday. But it wasn't enough. We need more! When can you send them?" I had to swallow a couple of times. Frankly, 1 hadn't heard that the marketplace was in such bad shape; refugee camp marketplaces are usually chaotic places, and to be honest, I had never given the issue a second thought. But Consulata continued anyway, describing what she had been organizing with the camp" l'market cc3mmittee." "Now we are getting everything in the market organized, The traders have to build proper tables of sticks. And we want the trash out of there. No more heaps of garbage just behind the building. We have tcr have proper pits, and then get the garbage out of here." Ever the buwaucrat, I quickly asked who was going tcr pay for this. This came up because Z know that the giant camp at Benaco has a separate line in the budget for markeQlace garbage collection. E knew that Chabalisa 2 had no such line. But the question of who would pay had nwer w e n occurred to Consolata,

"hay? She " exclaimed. ""Nobody has even brought up the subject. They have to do this themselves. The same goes for building the tables, and they better do it in a straight line, and. leave five meters on either side for the road, to~c)." ""Oh?" 1 asked. "And if they do not, who is going to make them?" couldn't forget that Consolata was talking about a population that had recently gone through a war. Likewise, I was awaW also that at least same of the young men in the camp had been members of the Hutu militias that had committed the genocide last year. Who war; going to keep thern in line? Consolata was not worried about these questions and had a quick answer: ""Mef of course, See that stove over there? 'That is going to be moved out of the five-meter road easement by Rllonday"7a emphasize the point, she painted to a nearby hut where a new fuel-efficient design was being finished. "%e, she is getting ready already." An alder man passing by overheard us and started to laugh. I: asked him if the stove woufd be moved by Monday. "Oh yes, of course it will. This is going to be the road." Consoiata's assertions went against every theory of refugee participatian that has been preached by the UPIiIHClR and LWE The theoxy is that outsiders, be they Tanzanian or Europeans, simply facilitate the "felt needs" of the refugees, Nowhere in the thmry is there rc~omfor a brash young woman to run around ordering refugms to pick up trash, make tables, and move stoves. The theory is a product of past practice and is grounded in concrete experience. Such top-down approaches are avoided because they do not work. Refugees, like most people, do not respond well to arbitrary orders from strangers. Consolaka has never read of such theories, but she knows what she tzrants for ""her market, "Now' we are organizing a1l the sellers into sections. On those tables over there, tornatc~es.Onions are over there. And no more banana beer [pombe] drinking or eating is a l l w e d on the road. It just makes a mess. The houses for prittrzbe drinking are ower theref and the restaurants are over there. Fish is sold way there in the back; you h o w it stinks. And way over there in the carner is where they slaughter the pigs. Some people don't like that, you knc~w-." Consolata's next goal is to enact building codes for the mud and stick buildings that make u p the marketplace. ""took at that wall," she says pointing at a leming wall that has started bedding lumps af mud. ""Not anly is it u g l but ~ it is also a hazard; the house can crumble at any time on whoever happens to be sitting inside." %e then shifts my attention to another building. "NSIW;compare it to that one. They have only w e d local materials [typically sand, clay, cow dung, and ashes], but there is a thin plaster wall to hold things to>gethez:And most irnportant, the walls are straight. That is the tzray all of the buildings should be done,"

The Importance of Language Skills in Chabalisa 2 Later 1 asked Jean-Claude Bucysengef one of our senior Rwandan staff members, how Conmtata does it, He explained that it was difficult at first. "You know, at first the peapfe in the market did not want to go along with it. But she talked and talked with them, and now they see that it is best for thern to organize together in


Essay 3: The CIzabalr'sa 2 Illal.ket L)e.tlelollment Pmjecf

order that the marketplace is better for at1 cmcerned. Tt also helps a lot that she speaks our language, Kinyamanda well. She can talk tcr the people easily, and gets along with them well." Consolata, tvhose first languaga are Kinyambo (the local tribal language) and Kiswahili (Tanzania" national language), explains that she began teaming the refugees" language, Kinyarwanda, in April 1994, when Rwandan refugees began to arrive in her home village of Bugene, some 40 kilometess (25 mile) from Chabalisa 2. "I have always known Rwandans, as there were Tutsl refugees from the 1960s living in Bugene. Howwer, they learned our languages, Kswahilti and the local Xanguage, Kinyambo, and we did not learn theirs. In April 1994, though, things changed. Thousands of refugees began tcr arrive in the area, and 1 began to learn a little, Later, I started working for LWF and living near Cltabalisa 2, so then I really had incentive to learn, as did all of the other LWF employees, N o w , most of us speak Knyarwanda, even though it is so different fram Kiswahili."

A Meeting with the Market Committee The Wedneday after Consolata gave me her tour, Dauda Musa, head of the Plot Allc9cation Unit, took me and Consolata to a meeting of the "market c~mmittee,~' a group of 2 5 to 20 people who have stalls in the market. Dauda has a philosophical bent, and he explained that for Comolata to make the market project tvorle, it was necessary to "force" the market vendors to cooperate. He elaborated later, though, that this was a "fc3rce" h a t came from verbal persuasion, and not from violence, He says that this is difficult with Rwandan market vendors. Everything for them is business, which is fine, but sometimes they do not see that a day's work together to dig a garbage pit, or make proper tables for their food products, is related to the success of their business." Nevert.heless, at the meeting, the cornmittee immediately cmfmnted me with a number of requests. Could LWF provide tools for the sanitary needs of the market? The answer was yes but only if a plan was presented that would insure that the toc~lsw e l not ~ stolen. CczuXd LWF provide gay a salary to the market committee members? UNHCR was paying camp security to provide a similar public service, so why not pay the market committee? The answer was no way- WUNF-XCR and LWI; have similar polities about many matters, but not this. After all, the market committee were among the most economically fc>rtunatein the camp, and keeping the market clem and safe tvas at least as much in their interest as in LWF's. Out of this request thaugh, came an explanation of how market deanfiness policies work. The market ccjmmittee wanted LWF to pay for cleming the market. Currently, the committee members explained, the vendors hire other refugees, typically the handicapped, to clean the market. Each vendor pays the refugee with a bit of produce, so for the day's work, a refugee receives a banana from one person, a bit of cXothing from another, some local tobacco frc3m another, etc. These '%axesnare obligatory, and vendors who refuse to pay are sent tcr the refugee leadership for punishment.

The market committee also wanted additional cleaning in the market. Would LWF provide money to pay them to clean the market another two times per week? This was a trickier question, but still the answer was no. Again it war; explained that they tzrer-e responsible for the market and LWF would cmly support their own efforts. X even quoted the former president of Tanzania, 'Julius Nyexre, who had always emphasized the importance of "self-reliance and self-help" in projects such as market improvemrtnt.

Warking with Rwandans and Tanzanians: Dauda Explains After experiencing Consc~Xata" enthusiasm, 1 went away from the meeting a bit concerned. Had my presence as an expatriate raised questions of payment and money that would damage the good work of our plot allocation team? 1 do not have an answer tcr this question. Dauda, though, offered an explanation of what he thought-had transpired. "You were offering them the solutions of Tanzania, where we have been brought u p believing that individuals must work together for public goods," Dauda explained. ""The refugees from Rwanda do not have this backgrc~und,and are more focused on what is in it for them as an individual*This m a n s that our approach must be adjusted. They are used to the 'forceQof physical compulsion or money, and not the Yorcekf persuasion, to accomplish group tasks like main.taining the marketplace. 1 do not belime this is goad, but- it: is a fact that we must work with."

Urban Planning for a IRekgee Camp? Despite the difficuXties, Camp Manager Pantaleon Gambona is highly supportive of his plot allocation team" attempts to establish a good standard for what might be called urban planning. "LWF is very proud of the way that Chabalisa 2 looks, whether it is in the neat and pleasing way that the refugee houses are laid out, or the way the market is conducted," he says, "W find that when, in consultation with the refugees, we enfc~rcegocd planning habits, the results are pleasing for most, and cedainfy serve the broader benefit of the public. It is bad enou$ that these pclople must live as refugees in the first place. There is no reascon we cannot work together to make the best of a bad situation, though."

HIV and AIDS in the Ngara Refugee Camps

September 2995 I spent sc~metime in August talking with Jucly Benjamin, of CARE" HIV cmtml prc3gram in Ngara, and Dr. Rwenkyendele, of the ELCT (Evangelical Lutheran Church in Tanzania, the Ncrrthwest Diocese) AI E)S prevention prc3gram in Bukoba. HIV and AIDS will become a very important: issue for the refugee pogulatic~naver the next few years, and I think it is worthtzrhile briefing LWFs church donors in North America and Europe about how the issue is being handled now. Before the war liw-anda had a very high HTV infection rate. The best survey indicated that 30 percent of all women seeking prenatal care in u&an areas were HIV-positive. The rate in rural areas was considerably lower. These different rates reflected the greater number of sexual cmtacts by people living in the relatively anonymous world of Rwanda's cities (especialXy Kigali) than those Iiving in rurat areas. Furthermore, social control of sexual behavior remained stronger in the rural areas, where informal social monitoring is easier because everyone knows everybody else. Benrlco camp has a population that was orignally half urban and half rural. However, the social habib o~bservedthere during the last year indicate that the habits of prornixuity are more like those of urban Rwanda. For this reason, the HIV infection rate is expected to climb toward at least 30 percent of all women seeking prenatal care, as it was in ul-laan Rwanda. Presumably, a similar number of men could also be infected. There is sc~mefeeling among A I M workers that prc~mixuityis a bigger problem in the camps than even in urban Migali, due, they claim, to the lack of activity for the yomg adult pcjpralatic~n(nor secondary schools, and no jobs), and to difficulty in maintaining normat ""social control monitoring" by parents and othersa condition creatd by the camp envirc3nment. There are anecdotal descriptions of despair among young people who have witnessed the death of their peers and family; and have themselves fled to Tanzania. Under such conditions, young people can become very reckless in their sexual habits. The attitude described reminds me of the way sodat workers in South Los Angeles describe gang mem-

bers there. The young people say that they have nothing to live forr, and will prcrbably die solon anyway. Commercial sex is available in the camps for about 2W Tanzanian shillings (about 33 cents), and many young men and women engage in casual sex, A new fashion for same young men is to baast about their sexual ccmquests by wearing the rings fram condoms as wrist bracel&s, The anonymous nature of a refugee camp adds to this lack of social cmtml. It is easy for young people to avoid monitoring from parents or peers by disappearing into another corner of the camp, where nobcrdy knows them. Because of this anonymity they can behave in ways not possible in a more settled rural or even u h a n envirc>nments.The anonymous nature of this situation will have impacts on the camp papulation, both immediately and in the long term. Short-term impacts include high rates of crimef higher rates of fertility and public health prc3blems, in addition to incwased promiscuity. In the long-term, AILIS is expeded to increase dramatically as a public health concern for the Rwmdan refugee pogulatic~n. So far, AIDS itself is p ~ s e n at t relatively low rates in the camps. It is hypothesized that this is because only healthy pclopte were able to Ree from Rw-anda; individuals with AIDS were too sick to Ree, Howwer, the incidence of AIDS is now increasing as those who were HlV-positive when they entered the camp come to the end of the latency peric~dand develop full-blown AIDS, CAREfs HIV-cmtrol prc>gramfc~cuseson prevention at several levels. Education programs emphasize abstinence by singleg fidelity for those who are married, condom distribution (currently 150,000 per month) to the sexually promiscuous and H1V-positive, and control of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) such as gonorrhea and syphilis, STD control is perhaps the must effective concrete anti-AIDS measure that can be undertaken, as the ulcers created by gonorrhea and syphilis made the i..ransmissianof HXV much more efficient. Convincing the medical NGOs t c ~act aggressively against such otherwise nontethal diseases, though, has been difficult. Emergency-focused medical agencies tzritl treat acute diseases likely to result in immediate death first. CARE has had some trouble persuading them to take treatment of STDs seriously as the problem is neither acute nor the consequences of treatment i ediate. On the other hand, in the context of a long-term public threat such as AIDS, cmtrol of STDs can prevent great loss of life. For example, a 1 percent decrease in the HXV transmission rate in the Ngara camps would be expected to save 4,080 lives in the long run. Care of the terminally ill AIDS patient is also consider& to be part of AXDSprevention proIgrams. Current protocols at Red Crcrss Hospital call for the referrat of terminally ill patients to the home far care. Rwandans do care well for the terminally ill at home, and. CARE has been attempting to reinforce this with the targeted Bc~nationof cc~mmoditiesand supplementary food. This has become more difficult since adult supplemental feeding programs were discontinued as part of the recent budget cuts. As a result of the AIDS cawload, the need for adult supplemental feeding programs will prcshably rise with the AIDS rate. It is unclear how or if this need will be met.

Essay 5

How Many Refugees Are There in Ngara?

Inquiring minds often want to know haw many refugees there are in Tanzania? It is a fair question; after all, much of the refugee assistance prclgram is dependent upon refugee counts. Most critically, policies about haw much food and water need to be distributed and pumped require a good head count. Medical statistics, mortality rates, and birth rates are based on number of cases per 10,000 people, which implies a good census. Donors are interested, because they want to know how many dollars are being spent per refugee for a particular service, D m it cost $50 per year to maintain a refugee, or $15Q?Both WFP and UNHCR set budgeting figures tzrhen doing their planning. Officially; there were 472,811 refugees in Ngara as of February 2% ,1996. Arriving at such a figure inevitably involves compromises and approximations, a result of practical Xogistical reamns, bureaucratic inertia, "cheating the system" by refuvees, and wishful thinking by agency officials and journalists eager to make the veration seem as big as possible-

But 1%"Not That Easy This may be a legitimate question for inquiring minds. But even the total number of refugees is a hard number to get a fix an. People move here and there. Refugees exaggerate numbers to get more rations per person----if you wilt, rations for ""ghosts."Turing census times, there are inevitably rsxrnars that local Tanzanians are "rented'" for the day to make head counts higher and get a higher number punched on the ration card. h addition, mast people simply like bigger numbers. As a result the numbers go up and up. A good example of how difficult it is to keep numbers dow-n was in the first days of the Bmacu camp. This was especialy apparent at the beginning of the emergency when efier)rone wanted to know how many people had crossed the Rasurno River bridge fmm Rwanda into Tanzania. At that time the LINHCR, claiming that 25Q,QQQ had crossd the bridge, called the period April 28-29,1994,

Essny 5:Caunt ing Refidgees "the largest and fastest exc>dusnh mc>dernhistory Estimates of the total that actually crossed the bridge ran from about 130,000 to a high of 400,000. In a recently published book, whose author shoujtd have known better, the number war; again reported as 250,000. What was the actual number? Probably about 70,000-which is a lot, but still is an overestimate of about two times the lowest figure that was bandied about in May 1994, The 70,000 number, thou*, was arrived at only after the refugees had been in glace in refugee camps for seven to eight weeks, and was obtained by means of a large wristbanding exercise in which every single refugee had a non.remc>vablewristband gut on in one day. The resulting figure was 229,008, which included not just the 70,000, but also the tens of thousands mow who forded the river in May and June. In contrast, the Lists provided by refugee Leaders at the time, which cmstituted the only source UNHCR and WFP had for population, said that there wwe well over 400,000 in the Ngara camp complex in June 4994. This number was arrived at on the basis of repods of refugee leaders and the distribution of ration cards which had been given to the arriving refugees at the border during the previous weeks, Both ways of counting are easily undermined: refugee leaders had incentives to exaggerate family sizes: it meant more rations for the fc>Ilowerswho had elected them, As for the cards, a second card could be obtained by f'recycling," i.e., walking back to the border from Benaco and then reappearing in Ngara and getting a second card. Many young men did this. Aff involved in the wrisl-banding initiative knew this, and were aware that the actual nurnbers tzrere in fact much lower, Indeed, in order to facilitate planning, different programs were using lower figures. As a result in June 1994, fmd distribution was done on the basis of a count of about 450,000; water systems were being developed far 350,000; and medical statistics were gathered using yet another figure. No matter haw much we all were aware of the potential for fraud, we still like big numbers, and the tendency is to ""round up." h a betting pool conducted by the UNkICR staff in Late June 1994, before the wristbanding exez-cise, most estimates were in the 300,000-plus range, which was 33 percent lower than what was actually being used for food distribution. The actual number of people banded was under every single guess, and came to 229,000, a substantial number by most standards, but disappointing for many in the context of the former figure-.The 229,000 confirmed in the camps at the end of June, atso called into question the count of 258,000 crossing the bridge in the first day.

How Counts 'Mfork A look at three counts that were released by UNkICR for the Ngara area camps in June and July 1995 points at how- much numbers can vary (see Table A5.1). The June lists tzrere estimates develitsped by the UNHCR in cooperation with refugee leaders. The UNHCXZ was suspiciom though, and let the refugee leaders know it..As a result, they requested the refugees tcr provide Lists of people in their administrative units, which they did, and the number dropped by $5,000 people.

Essay 5: Cc~zintifigRefigees TABLE A5.1 A Comparison of Refugee Counts


Previous lists f l ur2e)

Lendcrs' lists




This is apparently the number that the leaders thought they couIcl get away with without incurring too much wrath fram UNHCR and WFZ3. At a verification exercise conducted in mid-July in which every refugee had to show u p and be sprayed behind the ear with Rorescent dye, the number dropped another 26,000 people, a total decline in population of about- 16 percent. AccordingXy the WFP rations provided to all of the camps was cut by 16 percent. The total amount of water grc3vided stayed the same, so actually nc>wthe paper figure of water provided to each refugee actually went up 44 perccmt. Whm calculated on this lower total popmtation, the birth rate, mortality rate, and other statistics which had been using the 502,000 figure also went up.

Haw the Population Count Xs Done The best counts in the Tanzanian camps have been done as part of vrzrificatian exercises. This was last done in July 4995, in Ngara, and December 4995, in K a r a p e . All refugees were required to arrive with all family members on one day All refugees are s p r a y 4 with fluorescent dye behind the right ear. At the first booth, each refugee is checked for the Ruorescent dye, If they d o not have any dye, they are sprayed; the dye is difficult to remc>veduring the first 48 hours after it I-tas been sprayed. The family then reports to the next booth, where the name of the head of family is checked against computerized lists..Finally, they are given a numbered card in which the camp they are assigned to and the number of people in the homehold is punched. This can be used for collecting rations as well as tcr verify plot assignments. This is a verification of physical presence, and not individuals. In effect the e x e ~ i s ei s desiped to see if an actual body is there. Attempts are made tcr keep the day of the verification exercise secret so that refugees cannot hire Tanzanians to be part of their families. This seemed to work in the December 1995 verification exercise in Karagwe District. A small number of families went from previous counts of say, ten persons, down to three who actually shcjwed up. Overall, for the district the count in all five camps was dc>wn 22 percent.

Essny 5:Caunt ing Refidgees

How lnfiuxes Are Caunted-The Case of Keza Much of the initial number reports are made when the refugees arrive. Refugees do not arrive i-hrough a border control, so the counting is often haphazard. Fur example, during the January 1996 influx from Burundi, different numbers were pmvided from least five different sources. A soldier told me how many had passed a particular point that day. A driver then told me how many trips he had made to the transit camp, carrying 60 refugees each time; you could then multiply the number of trips by 60, 'The manager of the tramit camp also had a rough idea of how many he was putting wristbands o n and feeding; while the head of the ti-ucking operations had added together the manifests of the number of refugees being sent from the transit camp to Keza. At Keza, the UNMCR took off the wris&ands, issued ration cards (as above), and c a m up with another number.

How Caunts Came Undone Despite the hard work that went into reaching the 421,059 figure above, or the 25,0(20 figure for Keza, such numbers can become obsolete very quickly because refuge p~pulatic>ns can be very fluid.. Refugees repatriate bc,tfi through offidal channels and on their own, tots of babies are born in refugee pc~pulations,and a few refugees die, However, the annual natural rate of increase (births minus deaths) is prc~bablyabout 3 to 4 percent per year. Other refugees have disappeared into Tanzanian towns and into Kenya and Uganda. Tanzanian police even picked up seven Rwandan refugees on the Mozambican border last month who were on their way to that corntry! Now that 1 think of it, even a number of refugees 1 know have done the disappearing act . . . Ana went to Rwanda tcr have her baby . . . Mary went to Kenya with her E C ~ Uchil~ dren . . . Mary" husband went to Poland (I) on a Ee1Sawship to get a 1Ph.P). . . . Petrel moved from Chabalisa 2 to Benaca to start a small store. Then there tzras the 'Tutsi family I: met in Msuhura who picked up and went to ratvanza, in Tanzania, one day. And those are the ones I know; what about the hundreds of thousands I've nwer met? But then last October it was pointed out to me that a number of the huts in Lukole camp were new, and had been built by refugees who had recently arrived despite the legal restrictions on entry, and who did not therefc>rereceive fc>odrations, Presumably they tzr ill be added during the next verification exercise. Oh, and then there were the 25,OCf0-plus who slipped across the border legally in January and are now wttled in Keza. I talked to a few of them, whc~were in fact Tanzanians who had been living in Burundi. They had had it with rdugee life, and plamed to leave for Mwama as scion as possible. Others were Burundians who had lived in Tanzania some years and had plans already to slip surreptitiously into Tanzania to begin farming in the countryside. And another one 1 remember was talking about slipping back to Burundi to find his wife and children. 1 don't know what side of the border they ended up on, even though they were counted as refugees at one cjr two points.

Essay 5: Cc~zintifigRefigees


TABLE A52 Fluctuation of Refugee Population in Ngara Camps

5% annual growth rate to March 1996 (9 months) Official repatriation since July J a n u a influx-Keza ~ Voluntary rmofficiat repatriation Leaving for other countries Unofficial1y moving into camps Recycling and double registratbn

add subtract add subtrad subtract add subtract


Okay, but Horv Many Refugees Are There in Ngara? Despite this confusion, we can do some quick adding and subtracting to figure out how the refugee population is probably changing in the Ngara carnps (see Table A5.2). The UNHCKs official count was actually 4"i",811 on February 23, 1996. You judge now. Which is better? The UNHCR method, or mine? X like big numbers toa, sa I will acknawledge that we are prclbably bath a bit high. But campromise is always the preference in bureaucracies, so let's split the difference and say the actual number is in the middle, After all, this is how a lot of our figuws are arrived at, even if it is not statistically a valid way to p! The net result is that when ail is said and done, a .\rerificationexercise done today would probably show that there are slightly more refugees today than in juty 1955 The Keza influx, poor response to voluntary repatriation prc)grams, low mortality, and high birth rates all point at such a canclusion. Sa, how about 458,000 as a figure for the number of refugees in Ngara camps? This can be roughly translated as "half a millim" by people trying tcr impress (say, in press releases and donor appeals), and ""up to 500,a00m by the more p ~ c i s e l yinclined. Both effc3rts keep with the tradition of rounding all figures upward, tzrhich has been going on since the first day.

Essay 6

Wishing for Repatriation, Late 1995

1 was acting project coordinator at LWFs project in Marawe during the last two months, The permanent project coc~rdinator,Denise Barrett, arrived in early January, and I have been handing over the operation to her during the last ten days. This involves briefing her on the myriad of daily issues about which a prc>jectcuordinator must make decisions. Most are mundane issues: leave schedules, night allowance payments, lorry servicing, and so on. Something came up the other day, though, wlzich Denise, at least, thinks is more illustratirre sf the unique problems that a refugee service agency occasisnatly faces. At its most simple level, it is a story involving the theft crf an employee" belongings, In the background, thaugh, is enough refugee politics, duplicit_r;and even international intrigue to make the story worth retelling to a brc~aderaudience. But to get the whole flavclr of the situation, it is necessary to step back to 1994, when the refugee emergency in Tanzania began.

The Story of Pieme and Petso The story started in September 1994, when LWF-Ngara ageed to take over as the ""camp manager" ~ a g c for y Chatralisa 2 in K a r a p e district. One expatriate, MichaeI Hyden, two refugees, and three Tanzanians were hired to set up the camp and went off in h - o Russian Karnaz lorries to do so. As an afterthought, Michael hired ansther Rwandan refugee, Petro, as a cook fclr the camp he planned to set up. For the refugees to move from the Ngara area camps to the Karagwe camps, it was necssary to get permits from the Tamanian goverment. After getting the necessary permits they set off. A year later Petro was still a cook in the camp. Pierre, one of the tvvo original Rwandan refugees, had become LWF" head of distribtrtim. Neither Petro nor Pierre was satisfied with refugee camp life, and by November 1995, both were dreaming of returning to Rwanda. Both had received messaga from friends and family in Rwanda saying that it was safe for them to return. 1 alsc. knew that both young men, though nominally Hutu, also had Tutsi in their family background. Some months ago, Pierre had told me that his mother is Tutsi. Petro, while work-


Essny C;: Repatriation

ing in Michael Hyden" house some months previously hha eevn sung Rw-andan Tutsi songs, which, he told Michael, he could be attacked for in the Hutu refugee camp. The dream of return was so powerful that Petra volmteered for an UNHCR ""g and see'" visit, which is a trip back to the home village of the refugee so that they can see the conditions of their home and family. Each volunteer was screened by the UNHCR, Tamanian government, and Rwmdan government, so that they can avoid sending somec)ne who may try to sabotage the prc3gram far political purposes. During the visit, the refugees are permitted to visit privately with their FarniJies so that there can be a frank discussion of conditions in the refugee camps, as well as in the home village, The refugees are then accc~mpanied back to their home camp in Tanzania by the UNHCR. The purpose of the program is to build cmfidence in the voluntary repatriation pc~licythat UNHCR is advucating. f talked to Petm and Pierre just before Petm Left. Both tzrere excited, and speculated that they would soon be able leave the refugee camp and return home, Pierre in particular wanted to find an opportunity to study languages at the postsecondary level. So Petrc~went to Rwanda in Nc~vernber39%. 1 ran into him just after he returned, in early December, and he tzras breathless tcr tell his story. IIe very much wanted to start at the beginning, and narrated how the UNHCR Karagwe office I-tad taken every care to eni;ul-e that the refugees on the trip w e l comfc~rtable. ~ He continued to narrate about how he had been searched at the border by "unfriendly" Kwandan soldiers. Later he was received by the prefect of the pmvince, who was cordial and gave him a letter to facilitate his visit. Finally; he got to the point of the story which was his visit with his mother: He was pleased to find her well, and was received cordially. But after that, things went wrung, grievously wrung. He narrated to me that his mother told him grivately that he should use his exit permit, and never come back to Rwanda; that he was fc>rtunateto be in Tanzania where he was safe. He went on to relate how he was told that all the young Hutu men w e l ~ either in jail or dead. That people continue to disappear in the night, and that the govmment soldiers have sealed the border; stopping all illicit refugee exits. He was told that the head af the district where he Xived had spread rumors that Hutu men were not welcome in the area. 1 drove away with my head spinning. There had been encouraging signs that the voluntary repatriation prcjgram would take off during the previous mo)nth. Two to three thousand refugees, most af whom w e l ~ women and children, had volunteered to be what were presumed to be "scouts" k ~ the r men. The UNHCR and the government tzrere issuing press releases about how they expected thousands to be returning to Rwanda daily. The UNHCR even bragged that the Kwandan government had committed itself to accepting 10,000 per day. Buses were p u ~ h a s e dand positioned in Ngara for what was expected to be the repatriat.ic)n of 1996. Who was telling me the truth? Mras UNHCR engaging in wishfuI thinking about the Rwandan government and refugee safety in Rwanda? Were the political leaders cof the Hutu refugees manipulating this situation?





A n y a y , Petm went on to tell a number of people, including other refugees as well as expatriatesf the same story he had told me. I assumed that Pierre of course would no longer have any interest in repatriation as a result of what Petro had told him. I also l~eardthat one of the refuges in Petro's ""g and see" group had just about been lynched when he was accused of genocide; only the prexnce of a UNHCR officer had saved him, sa the story went.

The UNHCR Talks About:the Visit Two weeks later, in early January, there was a regular UNHCR coordinating meeting. At the meeting, a UNI-XCR repatriation officer explained the situation in Rwanda. The driver of 13etro's car in Rwanda had heard 13etro and another refugee concocting their story to discourage repatriation, he said. This refugee I-tad indeed almost been lpched, but I I ~had encountered an unusual situation, the repatriation officer asserted-.The officer pointed out that the matter had been discussed at the na"tic1nal-level tripartite meeting beween UNHCR, Rwanda, and Tanzania, where all ackn~wfedgedthat such t-hings were unavoidable in such a charged situation. The situation is cmfusing for everyone, after all. Further complicating matters was the fact that one refugee who had participated in a "go and see" visit in early January had been arrested for genodde, after being duly screened by the UNHCR, Tanzania, and Rwanda. On the visit, he had gone to his home commune in Rwanda and there he was promptly arrested. The subject came up at our meeting, and UNE-ICR explained to those at the meets to go, as it was ing that this refugee had been warned earlier by his f ~ e n d not welt knawn in the Tanzanian camps that he had participated in the April 4994 massacres. Oddly enough, this came to light only after the fact; it was not apparently well enaugh known for the UNHCR or Tanzanians who screened him to have caught wind of this explanation before he left in early January. Finally, at the concluslion of the meeting, we received a stern warning fro~m both the UNHCR and the government that we staff members of NGOs were not to discuss any such issues with the refugees; anything that could be interpreted as discouraging vc~luntaryrepatriation wc~uldresult in our expulsion from Tanzani a. My own view is that there is same truth on all sides, It is apparent that cmditions are safe far some in Itwanda, and not for others. finally, there are at feast as many accusations aE lying and duplicity as there are actual lies. Mcwt significant, there is a lot of wishful Illinking on the part of refugees =arching for a future and of the UNHCR searching far a workable policy. Identifying such a policy is extremely difficult, given the emotional, suspicious, and fearful atmosphere in which such decisions are being made. Anyway; this is all just background to the problem that Denise will c~jnfront, which has to do with theft and not rei-ugee repatriation policy. Her problem involves Pierre and, indiwctly, Petrel. I was briefing Denise m expense vouchers, ar one of the other mundane points of Marawe ad&istration, when Pierre c a m in with an agitated loc~kan his face. He explained that while he was on a LWFsponsored trip to see the distributian system in our Khondo camp, his home had


Essny C;: Repatriation

been burglarjzed, and all of his possessions stolen. It seems that he had left Petro in charge of his house. During the two days when he was on the study trip, the UNMCR had informed Pest-ro that he would lose his refugee status in Chabalisa 2 because he was really from the Ngara camp, whence Michael had taken him the previous year, Shortly thereafter, he went back to Ngara. And Pierre" money was gone, The coillcidental departure and disappearance of the money looked suspicious. But was Petro the thiefwr was he the witness? Pierre, agitated, wanted to follow Petro to Ngara with a policeman so that he could be brought back to Chaballsa 2 as a witness or be placed under arrest, or something. Likewise, it wcju1C-I not do to simply call on the radio for a policeman from Ngara tcr go find Petro; he was in a camp of 150,000 people, and Pierre tvas needed there in order to identify him. So, Denise, what to do3 She quickly ticked through the standard adrninistrafive decision tree. Sending a car for this puryuse, a personal matter, would set a bad precedent. But Pierre is an important employee, SO is there another way? What about that Kamaz with the two flat tires? (The Kamaz is a heavy-duty Russian truck maintained in Karagwe as a recovev .\rehide).Didn? you tell me that those tires could only be replaced in Ngara, and don't we have to pick up generators far the UrVWGTC a n p a y ? Okay T think we have a solution our prc)blems. Generators, tires, and Pierre, I think we have a go. Let us know haw things go. . .

I went to ChabaXisa 2 two days ago, in F e b r u a ~1996, in order to buy some baskets for a neighbor, I saw Pierre, and again he had something urgent to tell me. 1 wanted to find out what had happened with Petru, the arrest, etc., but instead he wanted to tell me about his own "go and see" visit to Rwanda. He had gone in early January (when the refugee described above had been arrested). He had visited his house, which had been destroyed, and had walked into his neighborhood, He said that many of the refugees9ouses were empty waiting for their cjwners to return. He said that though 'kvevthing has changed," life war; returning to normal, and he was thimking of returning in May 1996, when he is due his annual leave from his duties at LJWE He also reported that he visited the LWI; office in Kibrmgo, was well received, and was considering asking for a job there in their repatriation program beginning next May. Certainly this was very different version of a ""g and see" visit than that offewd by Petro. Also encouraging for Pierre was that he had recently received a letter from his uncXe who is a Catholic bishop emeritus in Rwanda. Pierre had met a Danish journalist, Ulrik, in December wha was to visit Rwanda on behalf of Danchurchaid. Pierre asked Utrik to visit his uncle to deliver news of him. Ulrik did this, and the bishop, delighted to receive news of his nephew, immediately wrote him a letter. He then did the commonsenx thing, and posted it to Pierre in a Zetter clearly adclrssed to him at Chabalisa 2 refugee camp. He then gave it to the Rwandan post office, which had it delivered to Tanzania promptly. What about I-tis trip to Ngara, about Petro? Pierre told me that he had fc-ound Petro and had had him arrested. After the police threatened to beat Petru, he ad-





mitted to stealing the 2Q0,OQOshillings Pierre had saved from his work with LWF. Rfty thousand shillings were returned to Pierre there, but the other 450,000 shillings had already been sent to Mwanza to purchase the stock necessary to open a small retail shop in the Benaca camp. I was told that the police have agreed to seize the stock when it arrives, presumably so that it can be turned over to Pierre,

What About VaXuntary Repatsation"! The question donors and visitors always ask about the Rwandan refugees is, when will they go back to Rw-anda? Is it safe or is it not? Some pmpte working here have quick answers to these questions. They say that if the Hutu intimidators guilty of genodde were arrested, the rest would go back. They think that the only reason the largely peasant refugee population stays in Tanzania is that they are manipulated by clever leaders who, guilty of genocide, need their ""potection" to avoid Rwandan and international caurts. Others say that the government in Rwmda is so hostile to repatriates that few refugees tzrill go back. Those who say this can point to the influx af 20,000 to 25,000 Rwandans into Tanzania fram refugee camps that had been closed in Burundi in late January 1996. Given the option of a lorry ride back to Rwanda c>ra risky night to Tanzania, this many chose the latter, Now, the rumor is out that the Rwandan government has requested that the Burundian military government forcibly return all Rwandan adult males. My own inclination is tc:, usually side with those staying. Tf I were asked to make such a choice, I would be hesitant to return under such unce&ain circumstances. I d a not believe that large nurnZaers of Rwandan refugees will go back voluntarily in the immrtdiate future and agree that the recent influx of Rwandans into Tanzania is a bad sign, However, this an outsider" s a y of reasoning and is not how refugees like Petm or Pierre think about their future. Individual refugees fc3cus on what they hear from people they trust on both sides of the border, rather than on the larger glc>balpolitical issues that outsiders fc~cuson. The people refugees listen to might include LWT: or UNHCR staff but are more likely to be their friends, eenmie, and families. They took at their c>wnindividual situation and future and assess their chances. What do they hear in letters sent from Rwanda? Is news permitted to go back and f a r t h W h a t do those who go back and forth say, and what personal motives shape their views? The messages they receive, though, continue to be and will continue to be canfwed. Leaving one's home war; an emotional decision that many made quickly in a dangerous situation. Likewise, any decision to return will be an emotional one that is based in the individual relationships refugees have on both sides of the border=

Essay 7

A Bishop in Exile-The Anglican Church in the Ngara Camps

I first heard about Bishop Augustin Mvurubande from Trish and Rob Wilsan, British medical missionaries who had lived in Rwancla b r 15 years, The Wilsons had fled to Tanzania in late April 1994 after the haspital in Cahini, where they worked, had been attacked by the Hutu Irtteraltatrzluc. During the attack, many of their staff and colleagues w e l ~killed. Later, advancing Rwanda Patriotic Front (Tutsii) hrces entered the town of Gahinii and ordered many of the remaining Hutu to leave. The o n a who left became the refugees we nc>wserve in Tanzania; many who remained behind were killed. The Wilsons had met Bishop Augustin in Gahlni, where he had been an Anglican pastor and later bishop. He himself was Hutu, whereas his wife tvas Tut~i, The couple fled Rwanda fctr Zaire in mid-1994. Frc.m there he moved to Ngara in Tanzania because that was where many of his chul-ch members and other pastors had gone. The Wilsons had also stayed in Ngara, where they helped provide medical services in the camps. Rob and Trish mentioned Bishop Augustin to me last January because he had a special desire to return to Gahlnl" in order to promote peace and recmcil-iat.i~>n. He proposed to d o this by taking personal messages back and h r t h between refu"uges in Benaco and those who had remained behind in Gahini. First, though, Bishop Augustin needed transpc~rtto Kwanda, and then he needed travel papers in order to be able to return to Tanzania. As a refugee, he would lc~serights to internatic~nalprotection at the time he stepped back into his home cormtry, Rwanda. LWF was unable tcr assist with the bishop's request. Despite claims to the contrary by all sides, visits to promote peace and reconciliation never actuaXfy seem to work out, for a t~arietyof legitimate reasc>ns.For example, the Rw-andan (RPF) government wants to examine every returnee to see whether he has committed war crimes, the UNMCR wants only elected '"official" "leaders involved, and the Tanzanians tvorry about cross-border security. Finally, many of the leaders in the Tanzanian camps have ambitions of one day seizing power in Rw-anda and view

the camp population as ""leirsn-theif future political supporters. They, too, have an interst in frustrating cross-border ccjntacts and keeping the camp population in their sphere. Despite the fact that this request tvas denied, we have been able to cmtinue in our relationships with the Bishop Augustin and begin better to understand the difficulties of the route toward peace and reconciliation that he is trying to develop, which he calls a "middle road." By that he means participation by Hutu and Tutsi in all spheres of society. Fundamental to this is building relations between individuals, without recourse to revenge. Today, he lives in a modest house in the AngXican compc~undin Ngara, where he is the guest of the Tanzanian Anglican bishop of Ngara, Edwin Nyamubi. k-le is the only Rwandan bishop in the area; cJtherswho Red I-ravegone to Nairobi, Zairef or other places. In cooperation with Bishop RIyamubi, he is helping tcr rebuild the Christian community among the 6M,000 Rwandan refugees in Tanzania.

A Visit to Gahini Cornmtme/Msrrhura Camp: The Pressures af a Mixed Marriage Last J a n u a 1~spent my first day with the bishop. 1 had asked Trish for a chance to visit with the ordinary refugees she h e w from her days in Gahini. I had been spending much of my time in offices doing such thiings as writing reports, meeting with other expatriates and Tanzanians, escorting donors to project sites, etc. In other words, despite my ctairn to be a refugee worker X am usually doing things that administrators any-here in the world would do, without reference to the fact that the purpose of LWF's work is service to the refugees. Trish offered me a break from these necessary routines. She speaks Kinyarwanda fluently, and as the high-status wife sl the former director of Gahini Hospital, she felt a respc~nsibiiiityto visit the people she knows who fled: her gardener, the woman tvho had done the ccjoking in her house, t l ~ neighbc~rs e she had known for so many years. As we were leaving far the drive to the camp on a Saturday afterrnon, she was asked whether the bishop, w h ~stays ) in a neahy hc>use on the Anglican compound, could get a ride to the camp. This is a common request in transportation-pc~orTanzania, so we went to his house to pick him up. There X met his wife and chitdren. As we were getting ready to leave, Trish relayed the request of the bishop's wife to come along, Without t)rinking, X said yes, not at first realizing the unusual nature of the request, Virginia is a Tutsi, and we were going to go into the heart of a Hutu camp where in previous months anyone resembling a Tutsi was murdered. Since we were going to a place where many people knew Virginiia and her ethnic background, she was obviously at great risk for her life, I asked her why she would take such a risk. At the time, she replied that God would protect her, and left it at that. Later she explained that there are many Tutsi living quietly in the camp. Many of them are Tutsi women married to Hutu men, although the bishop claims that there are also a few men as wefl, "even tall ones," referring to the physical height that is considered basic to Tutsi identity, Nevertheless, tensicjn beween Hutu and 'T'utsi is high at times, and so the bishopis wife usually CJCEG

Essny 7:A Bishop i~zExile


not spend the night in the camp, whereas he does. Virginia claims that relations with her Hutu friends in Benaco are better than they have been in the five years since the Tutsli-dominated Rwanda Patristic Front invaded Rwanda from Uganda in 4990, and especially since the massacre of the Tutsi by Hutu Intcraflamw last year, This is the backdrop against which Bishap Augustin and his wife are attempting to develop a ""moderate" mad. "Their work is though the church, which is for many the focus far sociaX activities within the camp. The centraj point, the bishop explains, is to welcome, not alienate, This is difficult because of what many refugees have seen in the past; many hold onXy a very distant hope for life beyond refugee camps in the future. For this reason, Bishop Augustin pc~imtsout that reconciliation with Cod must cc~mefirst. Only when a reconciiiation has been made with Cod for the crimes committed, wrclngs suffewd, and I-tate felt tzrill it be possible to make a reconciliation with other Itwandans. Currently, much effclrt is being put into what is haped will be a chair competition four times a year for the church youth groups. Choir competitions are almost like a sport in Rwanda, and the refugee youth of Ngara are enthusiastic. The Anglican church is currently sponsming about 140 choirs, each with 20 to 30 youth members. Each choir writes its own sc:,ngs for the competition around a particular biblical theme. The theme of the current competition was deliverance, not a particularly surprising theme for a population that has so recently fled its own country. Next quarter" theme will be peace, justice, and reconciliation. Ephesians 21%-16 is the passage fram the Bible tl~atthe bishop uses in talking about these issues. These verses reflect well his goal of peace and recanciliation through the church: "But now in Christ Jesus you who once far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulatic>ns."

The Choir Competition. The chair competition itself took place under the tumasi Camp ""circus tent,"" tent donated by a missionary sociev from Canada. Trish, Rob, and 1 were introduced to the audience and then ushered into a nearby mucl hut, where we tzrer-e fed a lunch of rice and peanut sauce and given a soda. There was also a calabash of traditimal Itwandan brewf not yet fermented in deference tcr the Protestant pastors in attendance, In the hut, we prepared the prize envelopes for the winners, while the competition continued in the backgrc:,und-.There were 30 prizes in all. The 15 semifinaXists received 2,000 shillings ($3.30)each, and the grand prize war; 30,080 shillings ($39.50). Later, Trish brc~ughtout a letter from a British missionary who had worked in Gahjnj in the 1970s..The missionar)p wanted to know what had happened to the pastors he had tzrorked with sa he could include them in his prayers. The answers that Trish received illustrated well the difficulties involved in focusing their choir pmgram, or any other subject dealing with Rwanda today?on subjects like peace and reconciliatian.

Essny i": A Bishol1 i1.1Exile They went through a list of about 30 pastors. Perhaps 15 to 20 were in the Tanzanian refugee camps. One or two were still in Rwanda, and one tvas in a Burundian camp. One or h - omore had disappeared. The rest, 5 or 6, they repc~dedhad been killed. By their reckoning, about half of these had been killed by the Hutu Interahanrw during their attacks in Cahini in mid-April 1994, The other half they claimed had been killed by the ftPF after they took over Gahini in late April, Trish was surprised somewhat that they were willing to discuss such a subject after lunch and viewed it as a positive sign that the recent terrible past was moJving further away. The bishop later explain& to me why the choir prcjgram was important for the process of peace and recmciliation. He said that the choir competitions expose the people to the gospel in an enjoyable way. This expcJsure is impo&ant, he explains, because pectpie must become united with God, because itiis Cod who protects, not the politicians and big government who promised protection in the past. "Forgiveness cl-rmesfrom God and passes to those arc~undus," he explains, In effect, he argues that the vertical comes before the horizontal, meaning that without God% forgiveness far our own sins, we canno>tforgive those arc3und. us. And until Hutu and Tutsi forgive those around them, reconciliation carnot beggin. The bishop views the discipleship training required to produce good choral singing as a way to preach the principles of Christian forgiveness. He is well aware that this is by itself not enough, but views it as a start. Particularly important is the fact that the competitions are particularly interesting for the young people, a few of whom were active in the horrors of the past but in whom the future of the refugee commrmities in Tanzania nevertheless lies. Because af this paradox, he emphasizes that all must be welcome; the point of choirs is not to directly coni'rcynt, but to present all with the need to seek and offer fc~rgi~~eness.

Reconciling People Who Don't Talk to Each Other When 1 first met the bishop earlier this year, he had hopes of returning to Rwmda himset f to persc>nallyfacilitate the reconciliat.ic>nprcxess. Sadly, he no longer believes this is passible. Since I met him in January, pc->sitionsan both sides of the border have hardened, and cross-border communication has decreased as a consequence. There are also further restrictic~nsto travel across the barder. In the case of the Rwandans, no one can legally leave the country to visit Benaco, although the UNEiCR is trying tcr initiate a "go and see" prclgram (see Essay 6). Tanzania has also sealed the border as best it can in order to prevent further refugee infituxes, Thus, even though relations between Tutsi and Hutu within the Ngara camps may be improving, the refugees are more separated than ever from their families back home. As a result, cammunicatic)n has been reduced to radio broadcasts from Rwanda which refugees ciaim inciude veiled threats; contacts are occasionally made at public ccjnfewnces in other cities. The bishop recalls attending a cmference in Hairclhi in December 1994 at which many public daixns about peaceful ct~ex&tencewere made, In private, though, his colleagues frc3m Rwanda warned him not to return.


Essny 7:A Bishop i~zExile

What is the next step? No one has a good answer. Everyone is aware that something must happen tc:, alleviate the crc~wded,unstable cmditions in Ngara's camps. The grc>undwatersupply is being depleted, firewood supplies are dirninishing, and the crowded cc~nditionsconstantly present the passibility of epidemic disease. T-heseconditions can only be alleviated by spreading out the populatian, whether in Rwanda, Tamania, or elsewhere. Everyone involved, including the bishop, believes that voluntary repatriatian must play a role, but no one knows what is next. One thing is clear, though: as long as there is no cross-border dialogue, nothing-no matter how necessary-will happen. The bishop and his wife have a few suggestions about how this prc>cessmay begin, but little means with which to implement them. T k y suggest mediated meetings in neutral cities such as Dsdoma in central Tanzania, where refugee leaders could meet with represntatives of the Rw andan government. They are also critical of current efforts being made by the UNHCR and the governments of Kwanda and Tanzania to design mechanisms for voluntary repatriation because no representatives of the refugees are involved, They point out that without such involvement, the mechanisms designed could very well prove meaningless. Neve&heless, they claim that Tanzania, with its history of mediating the 1993Arusha Accords, between the RPF; and the ErIrrner Rwandan go>vernment,has the best reputation for neutrality and is the best site. Can the church play a role? Bishop Augustin and his wife believe it must. Hotvever, they also note that divisions are deepening between the church in Rwanda and I-hat in the camps of "Tanzania,In this respect the church is like other institutions. They paint out that the positions within the church that w e l ~'%acated" when they Red have been taken over by Tutsi returnees from Uganda, Tanzania, and Bur-imdi. Indeed, there is now a new bishop in Gahinii who is a returnee fmm Uganda. In this respect, the church is not unlike many other institutions being rebuilt in Iiwanda after the terrible genodde and war: life in Rwanda will move m, whether the refuges return or not. Perl-raps the church in Rwanda has good reaso)ns for doing this; after all, they need to get the wcjrk of reconstruction under tvay for the Rwandms still left in Gahini. Unh~rtunately,the reasonable dialogue needed to include the 25 to 30 percent of Rwmdans living in Tan.zania and Zairean refugee camps is not occurring. At the root of any solution is such a dialogue, Howwer, even with good and well-meaning Rwandans on b d h sides of the border the pain is still recent, and suspicions high. Overcoming this will be a stowydifficult, and necessary process.

Essay 8

Some Practical Notes on a Names Taboo in Western Tanzania

In July 4987, I had occasion to distribute rice and household goclds to a small village of Burundian refugees in the Kigoma region of western Tanzania. The refugees I-tad been in the area for about 45 years, and had established themselves in association with a village of the Waha, the most numerous ethnic group in Kigoma region. All were agricultural people who considered tl-temselves tcr be Hutu or Ha rather than Tutsi. Notably, the groups spoke mutually intelligible languages, and also had very similar cuftural practices and beliefs. Nevertheless, as a result of an expulsion order issued by the Tanzanian pvernment, the Burzmdian households 'had had their houses burned, and a small relief program was mounted (see Wters 49813). The relief goc)ds were distributed by household, with special allowance made for unusual circumstances, especially large family size, The final count tvas that there were 796 persons living in the village, of whom a slight majority were adults. Most families had 0,1, or 2 children, though there tvas one family with 8, and another with 12, The tow birth rate indicated by the count surprised me somewhat; this area of Tanzania was known for a high population growth rate, and in addition, local people had indicated to me during the previous three years 1 had lived in the area that the refugees from Burundi who were living in the village were even more prolific than the Waha. 30 why would they say they have only one or tvvo children or none at all? Particularly in these circumstances, for the refugees there was a potential material incentive to have more children, for they could then claim a larger share of the relief goods. Yet they did not have even the fc>ur, five, or six children i cl-xpected, To rationalize the survey results with these other reports, i simply assumed that there must have been an unusually high infant mc>rtaliv rate, Thus satisfied, I sent my report to Dar es Salaam,

Adapted from Di$aslrrrs 13,2 (1989):f 85-186,


Essny 8: Notes on n Names Tizboo

But the prc>blemstill bothered me. 'Two weeks later, l visited a Catholic sister who had been working as a nurse in the area for over 30 years. Somewhat smugly I told her about my little survey and indicated to her that there must be an unusually high infant martality rate among these people because the family sizes were so small, She lau&ed, and told me no, that it was impossible to take a cm.sus among the Waha or Burundian people in the area. Mentioning a child by name, or even counting a child, it is believed, makes that child potentially visible to maXevolent spirits. Thus, any ackncjwledgment of a child, particularly to strangers, is taboo. The same restrictions apply to cattle or goats, which are an important fc~rmof wealth in the area. In effect, asking hc>wmany children, cattle, or goats a person has is the same as asking a Westermr about his or her salary or bank account. A light went on after her explanation, for it shed light not only cjn the prcjblems with my census but on a number of other obsemations 1 had made during the previous three years. It also explained a number of anomalous circumstances 1 had &served during my time in this part of Tanzania. Several are of interest,

* A Dutch doctor once told me that the Waha women did not know how




many children they had; even when three children were standing around a mother, obviously hers, the mother would sometimes acknowledge only one pregnancy in response to a direct question by the doctor, A contractor I worked with, a mason, was knc>wnfor being a man rich in cattle and goats. Inded, he would periodically suspend his work for me because it: was his turn to herd the flock. When I casually asked him how many animals he had (1 was trying tcr be polite in a Western sense by showhg an interest in his afhirs), he said that he had one goat and one COW Later, when I was married, he gave me a goat as a wedding present, Presuming this was his entire Flock, X was taken aback by his generc3sity Rethinking the matter in the contczxt of the taboo mentioned above, t h u @ 1 was still i m p ~ s x dwith his generosity, I was relieved that he had not been completely impc~verishedby his gift for our wedding. The sister who described the taboo to me in the first place explained same of the anomalous situations that developed for her clinic as a consequence. Children's names would inexplicably be changed, presumably because the child had attracted the attention of malevolent spirits. The names were changed so that the spirits would be fooled as to who the child was. This made maintenance of health records, a major tool far such health clinics, a chancy affair at best. l needed a g u a d at the compc~undwhere l worked, and l hired a man who remembered when the Germans had occupied Tanzania, and therefc>re must have been about 85 years old in 1987. One day be proudly announced to me the birth of a son. I asked him hilw many children he now had, and he indicated that this was his first, Pressing my question fitrthel; 1 expressed incwdulity that a man of his age and

Essny 8: N o t e ou a Ntzmes Taboo


experience would be having his first child at age 85. He insisted it was true, sa I dropped the subject, once again puzzled by the nature of communication. Having by now- establish& for the reader that I spent my years in Tanzania as a cultural maladroit, I hastcm to add a ctdicil: 1 am an American, fox whom Tanzanians graciousiy make exceptions when dealing with spirituaf matters. As 1 was told by the Tanzanians an occasion: it is not passible for me, as an expatriate, to camp~henctsuch spiritual matters, no matter how much my Western-derived rationality asks me to do sc~.NCXis it considered desirable or purposeful by the Tanzanians for us to focus on the local spirits, for they are not believed to bother outsiders. From the Tanzanian perspedive this is a blessing, as who really needs the malevolcsnce this implies? Although 1 may not comprehend Tanzanian spiritual matters, T think it is irnpc~rtantfor expatriates at least tcr acknowledge the significance such beliefs can have for their work. Aside from the benefits that good manners and crosscultural understanding always bring, there are material benefits as tvell. Most expatriates working in Third World countries are there to assist with the material development of physical and human resources. Effective adaptation of these improvements depends on how well such development is adapted to local perceptions and beliefs. Certainly, the taboo described here did not destroy the effectiveness of my smalf,relief prc3gram. Nor did it cause the sister's ciinic to collapse, nor did it mean that the Dutch doctor was not able tcr treat the patient who refused to acknowledge more than one pregnancy. H~fo-wevex;questions of program quality are also involved, Accurate record-keeping is likely to imprc~vethe quality of many of the types of programs that are comp~nentsof development, a view shared by Westerners, Tanzanian government officials, and, in a samewhat different tvay even Tanzanian villagers. Record-keeping is inherent to the operation of both schooXs and clinics, institutions badly needed and wanted in even the most remote villages, and by the most isolated villagers. Other activities of modern life are also involved in such recod-keeping, from the maintenance of payroll forms to the provision of relief supplies. Ultimately; Ic>calcultural institutions such as this naming taboo are incompatible with development cjbjectives. I suspect that as the schools and clinics that are being developed by the Tanzanian government (sometimes with the assistance of fc~reipers,often tvithout) take rc~ot,this particular taboo, along with other saciai activities, may well withe5: Until it does, though, it should be treated with a sensitivity that will serve both the more traditional W h a and the new institutions emerging in the area,

This page intentionally left blank

Bibliography Adelman, P-ic~ward,and Astri Sufirke, 4996. "Early Warning and Response: Why the International Community Failed to Prevent the Genocide." Disnslers 2q4) :295-304. Balzar, John. 1994. ""Brundi Battles Its Demons in Fight to Survive,'" Los Angeles Ernes, August 15,4994, p. A1 Bieu;bauer, Charles. 19%. ""Ereward" to Larry Minear, Colin %at%,and Thornas G. Weiss, The Riezus Medin, Gizlz'l War, and Fi'zrnznnifnrinnAction, pp. vij-viii. Boulder: Lynne Rienneu: Bit hda, Lesley. 1996. The Colour of D~rkrzess.London: Hc>d.derand Stoughton. Bnrton, J c I ~ 1996, , An Account of Coordination Mechanisms for Humanitarian Assistance During the International Respc~nseto the 1994 Crisis in Rwanda. Disnsfers 20:305-323. Chalinder, Andrew. 1994. Water and Snnr'tntion irz E~rzergeneies,London: Relief and Rehabilitation Network, Cornell, Stephen, and Boughs Ha&rnann. 19%. Etlznicity and Race: Making Xdentities in n Glmnging Wol-ld.Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press. Crisp, Jeff. 1999, "Who Has Counted the Refugees'? UNHCR and the 130filicsof Numbers." Nezu Iss~tesiz'n Refidgee Resen~ll,Working Paper No. 12, in Journal of Hzkmnnitnriatz Assista~lce, posted on August 1, 1999, at the Web site tzReview 23(2):249-237. Gorman, Robert E, ed. 19433. Refugee A 2 and Development: Tlzeory and Brcrctice. New York: Greenkvocld. Gourevitch, Philip. 1998a. We Wish to Itform You Tfznt Tomorrow We Will Be Killed zoitla All Our hmilies. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux. . 299830. "The Genocide Fax: The United Nations was Warned About Rw-anda. Did Anyone Care? The New Yorhr, May 11, pp. 42-45 1996. "Is Burmdi Next?" The New Ir'orkel; February 19, p. 7. 19535. "'AEter the Genocide." The Mew Yorkr, December 18,1995, pp. '78-96. Cowing, Nick, 1998, ""New Challenges and Problems far InEc>rmatic~nManagement in Complex Emergencies: Ominous Lessons from the Great Lakes and Eastern Zaire in Late 4996 and Early 4997," Background paper to Dispatches fiim Disaster Zolzc3s: R e Reporti~zgI?(H-fumnnr'tnrianEmergencis. London: Reuters Foundation, 1998. Posted on Reuters Foundation Web site, May 28, 1998: .ewww-foundatian.reuters.com/>. Gutekunst, Marc-Daniel. 1995. "The Mille GolIines and Kigali at War." kszte: A )t?urr-ze;tlof Opiniorz.23(2):Z-27, Haggard, Stepban, and Beth A. Sirnmons. 1987. ""Theories of International hgimes." lnter~zrafionnlOrpnizaliorz 44(3):494-517. Hall, Edward T. 1976. Bqond Culture. Mew York: Anchor Books. Harrell-Bond, Barbara, 1986. Imposing Rid: Enzcrgency Assisfn~ceto Refugees. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hochschild, Artie lizxssell. 1983. The Managed He~rt:GomntercinlizliC1ion of Hziman Feelir~g,Ber kdey: University of California Press, HoXborn, tc~uise,19175. R, U.K.: Write Net. Quisc Konald.1995, End of Mission Repc~rtto Memisa, Holland. Unpublished report. Octobeu: Reed, Wm. Cyrus. 1995. "The Rwandan Patrit)tic Front: Politics and Development 23(2):4&53, in Rwanda." "sue: A Jaumnl c?fOyifi:nio~~ RehlaenderfJens. 1994. "Fluchtpunkt Benako." Gm, August. Keptjens, Fifip, 1995, ""Sbjects of Concei-n: October 4994," Issue (Africa Studies Association) 23(2):39-43. Kitzer, George, 1996, Tke McDorjntdizal"iarz of- Society. Rev. ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif .: Pine Forge f2ress, Kosenblatt, Roger. 1994, A Killer in the Eye. New York Times Mlzgnzinc-r, June 5, 1994, pp. 39-47, Rutinwa, Bunaventure. 1996..""Te Tanzanian Government" Response to the Rw andan Emergency.'"jclumnl of ReJti'qee Studies 9(3):291-302, Sabpek, Paul. 1995. "Mountain Gorillas of Africa: Threatened by War.'" National Geogrnplzic, October 4995, pp. 5%83. Schechtman, Joseph B. 1963. Tfze Refigee izz tlze World: Displncetnenf and I~zl.egrnf&n. New York: A. S. Barnes. Shawcross, William. 2000, Delr'z~erUs from Evil: Pencekceyers, Wndords, alzd n Wodd of Endless ConfZict. New York: Simon and Schuster. .1984. Tlze Quality of Mere!/: Catr~badia,Ilolocaust, alzd Modern Conscience. New York: Sirnon and Schuster. Shoham, Jeremy. 1996. "Food and Nutritional Programs During the Rwandan Emergency" Disasters 2Q(4):338-352. Slim, Hugs. 1995. The Continuing Metamorphosis af the Humanitarian Prt-tfesslisnal: Some New CoXc?ursfor a New Charnelm. Disasters 1153(2):110-126. Smith, Charles David. 1995. "The Cec)poliZics of Kwandan Settlement: Uganda and Tanzania.'" Issue (Africa Studies Asmciation) 23(2):48-53. Smith, Richard Norton. 4984. Alz Uncommo~t1Clnn: The 'Eizrmplr. of Herbert Hoover, New York: Sirnun and Schwteu: SoXberg, Richad W. 1991. Miracle in Ethiopia. New York: Friendship Press. Sommers, Marc. 1994, ""E-fiBng in Bongoland: Identity Formation and the Clan.dest-ineLife for Burundi Refugees in Urban Tanzania." ".l>. dissertation, Depadment of Anthropology, Boston University, Stein, Barry. 1996. ""Older Refugee 9ttlements in Africa." On FT-Net. Humanities and Social Sciences on-line: ~ h t t p/:/ h-net2.msu.edu/ wafricai sources/refugee.html>. Stoessinger, john G. 4956. The Reft~gcrea~zdIlrc World Commzrnity. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. TCRS (Tanganyika Christian Rehgee Sewice). 1995. "The Karnantendele Aquifer System." Draft report, November 1996. Thompso~n,Joseph E-. 1990. Anterican Policy and Afiicnn Famir-zc:The Nigerig-Binfi~ Mmr, 1966-70. New York: Greenwood.

Tuchman, Barbara W 1978. A Distant Mirror: The Cnfnnzito.oztsFourteenth Cenluy, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, United States Committee far ReiFugws, 1998. life After Death: Suspicion and Reir-zlegrafion in Post-Getzucide Rzuanda. Witten by Jeff Drumtra. Washington, D.C.: US. Committee for Refugees. USAID (U .S. Agency for International Development). 1999, Kosovc) Fact Sheet #52, May 17, 1998. Statement to House Committee on Internat.ic>nalRelations, Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Kghts, May 5, by XGchard L. McCall, chief of staff to the USAID administrator: Unpublished regc>E"c. Uvin, Peter. 1998. Aiding Violel~zce:The Dez~etupmenlEnterprise in Rzunnda, West Hartfc3rd: Kurnarian Press. vanden Heuvel, WiIliam J, ""America and the Holocaust." Rmericarl kieritage, July /August 1999, Vansina, Jan. 1991. Paths in the kinforest. Madison: University af Wiscc~nsinPress. Von Besnuth, Rudolph. 1996, "The Voluntary Agency Response and the ChalStudies 9(3):282-290. lenge of Coordination," "tuzrmal I?J:Refi~gee Walkup, Mark. 1997, "Policy and Behavior in Humanitarian Organizations: The institutional Origins of Operational Dysfunction." ".D. dissertation, University of Florida, Depadment af Political Science, A m Arbor: University Microfi 1ms. Waters, Tiny. 1999a. "Assessing the Impact af the Rwandan Refugee Crisis on Organizatio~ Development Planning in Rural Tanzania, 1994-1996,'~~u?rt~n 58(2):452-IQ. . 1999113. Critrre alzd X~nmigrantVozltrlt, Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications. . 1997, ""Conventional Wisdom and Rwanda" G e n o c i d e a n Opinion.'" Afiica Studies Quarterly 1(3).On-tine refereed journal. Posted to Relief Web, UN Department of Humanitarian Afhirs, Geneva, December 9,1997. . 1996. "The Demo>graphicsof the Rwanda Crisis, or Why Current Vc~luntasy Repatriation Policies Will Nut Solve Tanzania's or Zaire's Refugee Crisis." journal I?(Humnnr'larianAfiaijvs, On-line refereed journal at www.fha,ac. 1995a. "Towards a Theory of E t h i c Enclave Formation: The Case of Ethnic Germans in Russia and North America," "Xler~ntianaEMigrathn Review 29(2):515--544. . 1995b. "The Social Construction of Tutsi in Mudern East Africa." "jclumal of Modern African Studies 33(2):24>248. . 1990. "The Parameters of Refugeeism and Flight: The Case af Laos." Disasfers. 1 4(3):259-258. 1989. "Some Practical Notes on a Names Taboo in Western Tanzania." Dz'sasters 13(2):185-86. . 1988. ""Pactical Problems Associated with Refugee Protectic~nin Western Tanzania." Disasters 12263): 189-195. . 1984. ""A Comparative Analysis of Water Provision in Four Thai Refugee Camps.'" Disasters 8(3):169-173. Weber, Max. 1958. The Proteslnrzt Ethic and ttre Spirif of C~piCnlisrrt.New York: Macmillan,

. 1948. From MQXWeber. New York: Oxford University Press. Weeks! John, 4996. Poy~Ialz"orz.6th editian. New York: Wadsworth. Weiss, Thornas G., and Leon Gc>rdenkerr,eds. 1996. NGOs, Clip UN and Global Gsvenzance. Boulder: Lpne Rienner. Whitakex; k t h Elise. "199.""Changing Opportunities: Refugees and Host Cornrnuniities in Western Tanzania." Mrking Paper 11, New Issues in Refugee Research. jclumnl c?f HuvirrnnifnrianAss-istalzce, on-line editian, posted on August 2, 3999: .=http://www-jha.sps.cam.ac.uk/c/eO11 .pdf>. Wilson, James Q, 2989. Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It. New York: Basic Books. World Bank, 1995, World Dez~clapme~zf. Report. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, .1988. World Develapmenl. Report.. Washington, P.C.: World Bank.

This page intentionally left blank

Index Addis Ababa (Ethiopia), 60 Administra tive systems, 114-119, 236 Afghan rek~gees,33j116) Africa Watch, 107 A f ~ c a nrefingee crises, 17,21-22,242 SLY a k a Btrrundian refctgees; Rwandan refugee crisis; ittdividtrul rrf'ilg~t? clzlnps A f ~ c a nrelief operations, 27-29,33(n7) Agence Internationale Cuntre 1a Faim (AXCF), 136,142, 153(n3) Agnes, Sister, 20s1214 AXCE Sc.e Agence Internationale Contre Ia Faim Aideed, r-lussein, 62,63,66,221 Aidirzg Molt.?zce: T%rDer~clc?pnterztEnfrvprise in Nulaz~dlz(Uvin), 14, 81 AXE, 141,250,2X-2'75 Air Force, U,S., 119 Airlifts, 27, 28, 117, 119, 183 Ajobe, Mark, 208-2W Akagera Nalic>nalPark (Rwanda), 108,146 Albania, 18 Albriglrt, Macleli~~e, 193, 195, 196, 215, 216 Alnericnn &rif.aXe, 219(n12) Amin, Idi, 93 Anglican church 130(n3),Z31(n10), 146, 251,28&290 Angola, 22,26,27,242 Aman, Kofi, 235,538 Argument by anecdote, 77 Arusha Accords, 84,85,92,197,290 Arusha (Tanzania),831, "L?, 248 Assumptions, 98,231-232,239 Asylt~m~ 5,2&21,144 fear of persecution and, 49-51,56,120, 144 5 ~ also e H c ~countr"ies t AWood, Brian, 146,149 Auscfiwitz, 216,219(n12) Dakevymusaya, Avmerand, 165 Ban Vinai (camp), 263

Band Aid, 61 Bangladesh crisis, 32(nl), 244 Bantu people, 82 Rarzyan~ule~ge militia, 149-150, 153,171 Barre, Siad, 28,f;l Barrett, Denise, 250,281, 283 Etastable, Andy, 1191(n6) Bazungu, 1tlIl(n2) Belgium, 82,8%89,96,97 Benaco Dam, 190(n2) Benaco refctgee camps (Tanzania), 109, llgr 204--205,221 development of site, 106,115 preparedness at, 164-165 site identification, 106, 175(n2) as urban community, 126,1412-142, 221-222 violence in, 120,210 SLY also Rwandan refugee crisis; Water systems Benjamin, Judy, 274 Biafra operation, 18,23,33,44 Bie&auer; Charles, 52-53 Bizimtmgu, Pasteztr, 138 Bodies in Kagera River, 108,126,134,138, 153(n4), 194-l95,20&209,218(n9) removal prc)ject, 208-2013,211-212, 218(n6) Boninc), Emma, 146,149 Border straddling#174, 175(n5) Bosniit, 9, 118, 217Cnl) Botswana, 27 Britis11 Overseas Development Agency (0DAj8111, 112, l19 Brown, Roger, 6"j)(n7) Bucysenge, Jean-CLaude,231-272 Bujrrmbtlra (Eurundi), 85, 164, 166 Bukoba (Tanzania),274 Bureaucracies, 8-9,34-35,71 catculabiliq and, 36, 4244,235236,250 calculation and, 240-241 contrrrl and, 37,4447,189,235-236,240

efficiency and, 11-1 2,35-36,42-44, 72-73,235236,241 elements, 35-36,235-236 expansion into poititical concerns, 227-228,237-238,240 goals, 353T,40-42,47,74,235238 organizational integrity; 230-231 parachute bureaucracies, 232-2311, 239 predictabiliq and, 36-37,4244, 23%236,238-239 rationality and, 37--39,4[7,50,63-64,66# 156,177,186,237-238 relationslGgs betwreen, 22,27-28,44 SLY also Bureaucratized Good Samaritan concept Bureaucratized Good Samaritan concept, 1-2, IQ,72,155-157 assumptiorzs, 231-232,239 identification of genocide and, 196,215 limitations, 226 paMerned mistakes, 155,178,184-189 water systems and, 18G188 SW also Bureaucracies; Emotion; fi7lernational refugee relief regime; Ratic~nality Bur~tndi,12,26,53, 79, 83 bodim in river and, 218(n6) contingenq planning, 163-1 71 coup, lf15,159,17&171 demographics, 98-B elections, 104,165, 166, 172, 197-198 events of 1%>ZW6,169-170 Hutu popt~lation,M-85,104 map, 4 October-Nczvember 19% massacres, 197-198 s&tlement schemes, 103 Tt~tsias ruling party in, 84-85,90,92-93, 97,100-101(n4), 197 SLY also Durundian ref~rgees Burttndian refugees, 152(n2) border straddling, 174 return from Tanzarriia, 163, 164, 172 return ta Bumndi, 163,172-173 in Tanzania, 204-106,151,161bllii;l, 223, 248 in Zaire, 171 5 ~ also e Burundi Bush, Gec~rge,29,52 D u y ~ y aPierre, ~ 171 Byumba district (Rwanda), 96, 108, 109, 119, 120 Cairo World Population Conference, 99 Catcutability, 36#42-44,235236,250

Ca tculation, 240-241 Cmbo?dia, 2>26,31,33(n4), 4M4,51--52, 544t1,68(m 3,4), 173, 217(n11), 228fn5), 225,227,232 refugee camps, 56-58 SLY also mailat~d C m p management, 249-250,264-269,281 defined, 264-265 local staffI 24&249,268 plot allocation, 26267,270,273 refugee registration, 266 Cmps. Sep Refugee camps; indk~iduul cam;?$ Canada, 85,150 CARE, 22,29,45,4S,132(n41), 133(n20), 142,206,249 HIV and, 250,274,275 Rwandan refugee crisis and, 111-114, 122 Caritas, 239, 264 Cader, Rosalyn, 57 Carter administratio3nfX Catholic cllurch, 205, 207-208 Catholic Relief Services (CRS), 18, 22,28, 50,61 CDR. See Coalition pour ta Dbfense de fa R4publique Censuses, 123-124,130(n7), 133{n22), 191Qn7),276 5 ~ also e Demographics Central Africa, dernographics, 98-99 Chabalisa 2 refugee camp, 77,104,139, 249 age data, 2%,259,2a, 262 causes of deafi~,259-260 demographic indicators, 261 epiclemiology, 262 fertility and mortality rates, 2.%256, 263Cnl) ftmd distribution, 258, 265, 267 language skills, 271-272 fayout, 26S2M market development project, 270-273 mortalitJr by muse and mo?nth, 261 nonfood diskl-ibution, 267-268 total population, 256257 Chabalisa re-efugee camp, 256,264 Chanda, Nayan, 56 Cl-raponda,Ceorge; 1149,224 China, 56,93,241 Choir competitions, 28&289 CI-roXera,139-140,153(n5), 178-179, 189-191I(nl), 191(n9) expenditures, 181-1% Ch~stianCouncil of Tanzania, 267 Christian Outreach, 131,112,132(nll)

Clzristh?~Scieftce Monitor, 205, 23(n1) Churches, 274 Anglican churcl~,130(nJ), 131(nII)), 146, 251,2862911 Catholic churclz, 205, 207-2418 SLY also Anglican cht~rch CIintc>n,Bil, 98 CIinton adinis~istration,29, lN(n12) CNN, 129,205,206,237,238 CNN effect, 72,74,229 Coalitic)n pour tiz D6fense de Ia Reptrblique (CDR), 84, (34 Coffee prices, 84, 88,93 Cogefar, 115,119,122,132(n23),183 Cc4d War concerns, 55-55,liO Communication, 210-211,248,271-232 Cc~mparativesocictogy, 73-75 Compassion, 6%66,69(n7") Compassion fatigue 221 Cc~ncernInternational, 241, 248,249 Concern Worldwide, 111,119,128 Cc~nfidentialitjli17/45 Congct, 21 Scle also Zaire Cc~nnelIyMaureen, 121,124125,129,205, 207#244 as cotrrdinator, 10T,130(n5) funding and, 191(n9) NGOs and, 113 press and, Z75(n3) repatriation and, 134, 144 suspension of activities and, 210 Cc>nstructio~7i projects, 12 Contingency planning, 10, IhW138,238 Bumndi, 1993-94,163?--16$ Bumndi, 1994,164-167 Bumndi, 19951996,169-1170 Bumndi cc>up,t 996,270-171 false neetives and false positives, 160-1 62,238 f imitations, 172 policy assumptions, 162 predic~c>ns, 159-1 51 preparedness, 125-126,161 repatriation and, 13&136,171-172 Rwanda and Bumndi, 1994,164-167 Rwanda and voluntary repatriatioi3, 2%%96,167-169 trigget-ir~g events, 172 water systems and, 176-1'77 Cc~ntrol,37,4447, 177, 189,235236,240 Cmrdinal.ian, 30,45,244-245 Cc~t-sharing,W Counts, 2762811,291-293 Credit, 2-3

Crisis management, 120,153(n3) Cross-sectional da ta, 76 C B . Sec Call~olcRelief 5ervices Cydes of impunity and justice, 91-92 Badaab, 45 Daliaire, Rc>meo,85,97-98, 197; 217Cnl) Dcmish embassy, 207 Banish Refugee Council, 114, 212 Dar es Salaam (Tanzania),85,106,123,127, t 28, 232(n9), 136,183 Data collection, 250 David [evangelist), 127-128,2212-215 Bavidson, Basil, 89 Decisiun-makzng, 9, 10, 15+15'7, 226 argument by anecdote and, 77 compamtive approach and, 73-74 contri>land, 240 patterned mistalnes, 278, 186-189,226 in Rwranda refugee crisis, 86-88 at UN headquarters, b%,126-127,129, 134, 137, 165, 197,217fnl) Democratic Republic of the Congo. SLY Zaire Demographics Benaco, 2%-277 central Africa, 98-99,174 Chabatisa 2,253-263 counts, 276-280 estimation of supplies needed, 253 fertility and mortality rates, 253-256 political impf ications, 2% pressures, 83-%,98-W Bes Forges, ALison, 24,81,97, ZQZ(n9), 153(n4), 217(n2) Deservedness, 13-1 4, 50, 65,222-223 Bestexhe, Alain, 225fnZ) Development, relief as function of, 27, 242-242 DE-IA. See United Mations Depa&nent of Humanitarian Affairs Disasters, 11, 188, 251 Diseases, 1058176 cholera, 139-140,153(n5), 1723-179, 189-190(n1>,191fn9) epidemiology, 262 HIV infection, 241 mortality rates, 253-256,258-261 SLY also Health issues Bodc~ma(Tanzania),290 Donors, 13-14, 16, 149,2416 ernotionrs, 4142,227 frttstration wit11 prcjgrms, 135, 143 mercy and, 2-3,31,4143,71,241

repatriation and, 136 victim identification and, 65,71,72 Drpsdale, Joltn, 63 Dtltc11 Aid, 112 Dutclt embassy, 207 East Timor, 156,220 ECHO. Sec European Cr>mmuniQ Humanitarian Organization Emfzomist, 110, 197, 19g199, 218(n7) Economy tnternaticlnal order, 92-95 in refugee camps, 127, 339,151,204 Efficiency, 3 1-1 2,35-36,4244,72-73, 235236,241 ELCT. See Evangelical Lutheran C h u ~ fin l Tanzania ELites, 88, 94 Emercorn, 111,112,138 Exnergencies, 10, 125 acute, 23Cb231 emotions aznd, 74-75, l56 planning, 238 retaxed standards, 177-1713 reliabifiv of data and, 75-77 study of, 73-77 T~ichman'sLaw and, 75-76 Emotional labor, 1 M 4 Emotions, 8-11,4142,47,227 crisis management and, 120 emergencies and, 74-75,156 funding and, 12-1 3, 156,222-223 water systems and, 17&177,186-188, 19{1(nl),191(rrn 9, 111, 230 5 ~ also e Bureaucratized Coc?d Sarnas-itan concept Engineering, 10,37;.176,186,189, 239 relaxed standards, 177-178 SW also Water systems Eritrea (Ethiopia), 60, 61 Etl-riopia,18, 2&28,43, 51-53, 229 United States and, 60-61 Etl-rniccategorizatic111,88-90,95 Eurcjpean Community Httmmital-ian Organization (ECHO), 45-46, 48(n4), 129 funding 111,243 Rwandan refugee crisis and, 110-424, 118,146 Europeans, IOQ(n2) Evangelical Lutheran Churc1-r in Tanzania (ELCT), 274 Evil, 243--245 Expenditur-, 2,3(nl), 9,1C)C),112,181-184 in Itx~docfnineseref~tgeecrisis, 6849(n5)

on water systems, 182-1 85, 192(n13) 5 ~ also e Funding False negatives and fabe pc>sitives, 160-162, 238 Famine relief, 16-19, 27-28,56 militay protectiorn and, 29,52, 62-63 Faubert Carol, 68Cnl) Field-level bureaucrats, 66 Food distllibtition, 26-27,57-58,62 at Chabalisa 2,267 memo, 137, 152-153(n3) monitoring prcjgrms, 141 mortality rates and, 25&--259 Rwandan refugee crisis and, 11.5-l 17, 123-121fj131(n9), 133(n21), 136-137, 141 type of camp and, 221-222 Ftlrd, Peter, 234(n1) France, 658(n3),86,96, IOl(n9) FranMurter; Felix, 195, 146 Free Khmer, 56-57 Frc~debtl.Srr Front des D4mocrates Front des Dernc>crates(Frodebu), 104 Funding for cholera, 140,153fn5) emotions and, 12-13,156,222-223 fi-nancialcrisis, 146-148 media infiuence, 434,121-122,125, 229-231,23if(xtl) political nature of, 30, 126-127,221 Rwandan ref~zgeecrisis, 105, 111, 113, 118,121-122,125 UNI-LCR, 17',22 SCea1s0 Expmditures; United Nations High Comrnissicmer for R e f ~ ~ g e a Gabon, 95 Gahini (Tanzania), 1(18,1&, 2%-289 Gambona, Panlaleon, 265,273 Gartock, Rick, 192(n9) Gamey Gerry, 191(nI;) Gatete, Remy, 120-123,132(n16), 210, 215, 231 Geldof, Bob, 61 Geneva Cc>nvention,30 Gk~ociclniri~s, 3 Genocide, 9,52,79, 137 agenciw and, 205 attacks from Uganda and, 35-96 bo~fiesin Kagera River, 108,226,134, 138,20&2@, 211-212 court evaluations, 201-202,216

cyclical explanation,91-92 defining#19&197,215-216 demographics of Central Africa and, g%%, 101-102(n12), 127 econcmic explanation, 92-95 explanations, 79-82,159 frameworks, 195,215-21 7 Hutu reporks of, 1%-200 international legal systm and, 216-217 intrigue and politics as explanation, 96-98 lack of response and, 91-92, 98 militias and, 85-86 numbes killed, 198-199,203,208-209, 212, 217fm 2, 31, 218(nn 5,8,9) primordial explanation, 88-90,229 rationalizing, 14S146 refugee repor%, 1%-201,21S(n5) rhdorical m. legat usage, 199 Ttttsi ethnic group and, 198-1W, 209 U.S. gc>licy,215-2165 witnesses to, 214-215 Gm,205,210 Gennany, ):.at3, 93,96,9i", 241 Go and srr. programs, 168--169,282-283,284 GOAL, 142 Goals, 35-37,40--42,744,235-238 Goldstone, Jack, 78(n2) Goma (Zaire), 21, 138,183,221 Gcwd Samaritan parable, l-2,49,53-.S, 228 SW atso Bureaucratized G o d Samritan cc7ncept Gore, May, 99 GoriIlas in thc Mist, 83 Gourevitch, Pl~ilip,153(n7) Great. takes regio1~6,103, 129,225(nl) Sec also Durundi; Contingency planning; Itwancta; Tanzania; Zaire Grum, lda, 268 Guinea, 22 Gutekunst Mare-Daniel, 198 Ha etlvlic gromp, 291 E-labyarirnana, Juvknal, 83-85,91-94 Arusha Accords and, 197 death of, 97,101(n9), 107-108,159,164, 211 France and, 97 repatriation and, 9C1,95 Hamedi, Syivester, 133(n19) Harrelt-Bond, Barbara, 26,33(n4), 65 E-lealth issues, 44,2%,263(n2) 5 ~ also e Disease E-learing process, 51,67 Helpage, 268

High Commissioner for Rdugees (League of Nations), 17, 19-20 E-listc>~cat approaches, 14, 71, 87-88,99-11115 HIV infection, 141,250,274-275 E-lmt~ngrefugees, 69(n8), 220 Hochscl~ild,Rt~ssctlX,12-2 3 Holocaust, 195,216 E-long Kong, 22,55 Hotrver, Flerbert, 16,18-19 Hospitality 26, 127,204 Host counb-ries,7,26,1217 See also Asylum E-luman Rghts Watch, 40, 81, 199 Humane deterrence program, 25,33(n4) H~tmanitarl'anvalues, 13, 2425,228 E-lungary 21 H~tssein,Saddarn, 69Cn9) E-lutu ethnic group, 79#82-83 in Burundi, 84-85,104 internally clisplaced persons, 96, 108 massacres of Tutsi, 83,iW, 91,94 as refuge= in Tanzania, 86,105,107, 124,154(n(a),172,199 reports of genocide, 19-200 as social category 82'88 in Zaire, 144, 129-1511 Hyden, Michaet, 250,281 ICRC. See International Committee for the Red Crc~ss Identiv cards, 82,83,89,101fn4) IDPs. See Internally displaced persons lfc~a m p , 45 Federation of the 1FRC. Set>Inter~~ationat Red Crc~ss IMF. See International Monetaq Fund Implementers, 22,210-1 2 2,115,130-131 (n8) Irnptmit~cycle of, 94-92 Incfncl~inclserefugee crisis, 17; 18,22-26, 32(nl), 53,68(n3) morality and, 54-60 United States resettlement program, 58-59 Indonesia, 55 Ingram, James, 33,46,47(n3), 237 Ittlemfianll.r?e*, 86,90, I(XX, 166,2(26,211,220, 289 chttrchw and, l46,205,286 in refugee camps, 1151,224 Internally displaced persons (TDPs), 17-18, 32,53,96, 108 1nternat.ionatCommittee for tl.le?Red Cross (ICRC), 17-18,21-22,24--2% 29, 44-45,228 goals, 2237-238

Tnduchinese refugee crisis and, 55 nonalignment policy 17,45,49-50 Rwandan rehgee crisis and, 107, 115-116 Somalia and, 62 International commrrnity, 5 capadty to receixre refugees, 103-104 cycle of impunity and, 91-92 fc3lrible repatriation and, 15G151, l%frt12), 171-172 lack of response, 91--532,98,20O Internatic3nal economic order, 92-95 Irzternatioml Federation of the Red Cross (IFRC), 106,129,2116 I n tert2aticttzazul Her~zldTrl"ribt4tz~, 199 Irzternatioml intrigue and politics, 9698 International Monehry. Fund (IMF), 4% 84, 88,% International rekgee relief regime, 3 critique, 24&245 goals, 40-42, 74 as Ittlmanitaria~~, 13, 24-25, 228 moral assumptions and, 232 organizational capabiliq, 222-223 osligin of, 16-20 overview, 29-32 patterned mistakes, 178,186-1 89,226 principles, 30-31 refc>rming,11, 72,235241 relations with retingees, 119-123,133fnn 19, 20), 210 Rwandan refugee crisis and, 110-114 strengths and weakness@, 34-35, 186188,228,233,235 victimhood and, ( i s 6 SW atso Bureaucratized Goad Samaritan concept; Decision-making; Irzternational regimes, 32-J3(n2) International Rescue Committee (XRC), 11-12,22,111,152(n2) IRC. SCe International Rescue Committee Ireland, 119 Iron cage, 38 Israel, 96 Italian Benaco Cr>nslfuctionCompany, 19Q(n2) Japan, 25 Jensen, Jasper, 200,218(n8) Jestlit:Refugee Service, 143, 153(n6) Jewish refugees, 17,19-20 Jimenez, Andres, 13Ofn5),175(n2f foirll Evaluatiotz qf Enzergency Assislnlltctr to Rzi?nndafIEEAR), 14, 31, 109, 125,

137-138, 149, 175(xzn 2, 3), 179-180, 190(n3),249 Joint Voluntary Agency OVA), 59 J u d m w t s , 49-51, l'?';",221 Justice, 91-92, 244 JVA. SLY Joint Voluntary Agency K-9 ( c w ~ ) ,122-123,124 Kabanga (Kasulu prefecture), 130(n3) Kabita, Laurent, 149-150 Kagarne, Paul, 91-92,145 Kagera (Kegic?n) bodies in river, 108, 126, 134, 138, 153(n4), 134-195,2Q&2119,211-212, 218(n6) WF conl.ful of river, 202-2133 Karagwe (District), 77, IQ?, 116, 123, 137 camps, 139,151,181,248,281 refugee column, 150 wat-er stlppty, 181 Kasulu prefecture (Tanzania), 106, 13Ufn3) Katumba refugee settlement, 163 Kayonza (camp), 119 Kenya, 44,61-62, 13Fi--119r136 Keza (camp), 135, 14&149, 151,279, 280 Khan, Sl~akrayar,134,138, 244 Khao I Dang (Rwilmd), 25,188,189, 231-232 Qartoum, 28 Khmer Emergency Group, 56 Khmer Rorrge, 23-26,33(n4), 44,52,5440, 217(n4), 218(n5), 221 Kibeho Displaced Person Center, 143 Kibondo (Distn'ct), 106, 152(112),248 Kibungc? (District), 108, 104, 128, 1145, 212-213 Kigali (Rwanda) government at, 5 5 l%, 150, l%(nl), 154(n12) WF capture of, 86,107,1(18 as urban capital, 83,tW-, 274 Kigc?ma (Region), 12,223/ 291 Kitali Hills (camp), 13&139, 147, 151, 185 Kosc3vo, 18,33(n7), 92, 156, 229, 233-234, 237 Kouchner, Bernard, 4748(n3) Kristullnaclif, 216 Kurdistan, 69(119) Lake, Antlnon~r,40 Lake Tangmyih, 21 Lamb, David, 165166, 175(n4) Laos, 58,68fnJ) Lac~tiant;,54,55, 58-59

League of Nations, 17,19-20 Leave Nvvle to R11 the Story (des Forge", 14, 81 Lemarchand, Rent!, l04,150,225(nI), 242 Liberia, 27 Lc~bbying,4 6 4 7 Local pc?pulationr;, 65 Lokichokio (Sudan), 50 Long, Lynelyn, 263 Lukole (camp), 175Cn2) Lurnasi (camp), 117,119,124,141,151,179, 288 Lutheran World Federation (LWF), 11,12, 14,46,78, 111,239 Africm relief and, 18,21-22,28 c m p management, 249-250 Chabalisa 2 and, 281 Etl~opiaand, 40 funding, 132(nll) genocide and, 201,207 Rmiandan ref~~gee crisis and, 121, 129(&), 231fn9), 246-147,148,149 Tanzanian staff, 24K-244 water systems and, 180,185 Lutker'm Wortd Relief (USA), 267 LWE Sec Lutheran Wc~rtdFederation Maisr~n,Jean-Piem, 99 Malawi, 27,205,242 Malaysia, 23,55 Malklu, Liisa, 223 Manguta, Philip, 142-146,211-21% 244 Marines, U,S,,62-63, 108 Market development prcject, 2701-273 Mason, tinda, 69(n7) Mass refugee mclvements, 67,242-243 meikiza, Consolata, 270-273 m u b a (camp), 148-149,151 Measuremeni., 4142,24(?-241 Mbdecins sans Frontigres (MSF), 22,40-42, 4647,4748(n3), 48(n4), 153(n3), 206, 228 funding, 236,24Ei(nl) judgments, 51,121,137,210 Rwandan refugee crisis and, 109-13 0, 111, 113-115,117; 119,142,152(n2) Tutsis and, 132(n17) M4decins sans FrontierwFrance, 117, 152(n2), 178, 211If 226 Mbdecins sans FrontiGres-Holland 117, 210 M4decins sans Frontt&res;-Spain,210 Media, 2, 8, 72, 237 in Benaco camps, 205,210 CNN effect., 72, 74,229 as emotionalized, 11,13

Ethiopia reports, 60-61 funding and, 4344,121-122,125, 229-231,2X(nI) on Tnduchinese mfrcgees, 24-26 influence of, 25-26,28,30-31, 4041,46,48(n4), 52,157,175(n3), 228-230 inter~~ationaf press, 113-115 leaks, 231 press management, 11, 223-114,226 singular fc~cus,52-53 Mdical programs, 119,206 Sec also M4decins sans Frc3ntiGres Mrmisa, 256,258,268 Mengistu government, 52,221 Mercy, 2-3,31,41-43r 71,241 Metlncx3ology %10,73-75 cross-sectional data, 76 data collection, 250 o?utliers, 74, 78 random sampling, 2411 Military bases, 7-8 protection, 29,552,62-63 virtuotls power doctrine, 91, 101(117) Mili~as,8S86,90,96 Milose~~ic, Slc>bodan,229 Mitt.&rand,Fransois, 97 Mobutu, Joseph D&ir&,93/ 97 Mobutu regime 8, 149-1-W Mogadishu (%)malia), 62 Mombetssa (Kenya), 136 Monoptmp, 2M-182,191 (n8) Mora-Castm, Daniel, 192(n13) Morality, 1-z2,47,232 defining victirnhood, 51-54 Tnduchinese reft~geecrisis and, 54-40 judments, 49-51,197,221 pctliticat concerns, 60-61 Mortality rates, 253--256,258-261, 263Cnl) Moumlzis, Pano, 114, 200 Mou~erne~It R6volrrtionnaire National porrr le D4velopment (MmD), 83,M, 86, 94,164 Mozambiqrre, 22,26,27,105,127', 242,248 MMB. *MauvementRbvalutictmaire National pour le D6vrlopment MSE S ~ Mkdecins P sans Frc>ntiPres Msuya, Brigadier Generaj, 149 Mtrragwanza (hospital and village), 130fn3) Murambi {Rwanda), 109,120 Musa, Dauda, 26&267,272,273 Musevmi, Yc~weri,90 Mtrshura (camp), 151

Mtryinga province (Bctrundi), 14aF1751n6) Mvuruibmda, Aupstin, 1&,146,21 3-215, 244,286288 Mvurubanda, Virginia, 213-214,287-2238 Mwanza (Tanzania),l123 Mwese settlement, 21 Mwinyi, Ali F-fassan, 127,198,211-212,224 Nairobi (Kenya), 118-119 Nansen, Fridtjov, 17, 19 NafiofraEGeogmyhk, 79 NATO, See Nort1.r Atlantic Treaty Orgwizatian Natsios, Andrew, 3(1-11),29,237 Nahralization, 103 Nazis, 1719-20 Ndaclaye, Melchior, 159, 163 Neutratity' 17,45, 49-50 New York Tirnes, 60,205,210,224 Newburyf Catl-rerine, 93 Newsztteek; 29 Ngara (mstrict), 14,46, 77-78, 106-107, 116, 138,248 UNHCR office, 106, 115 water systems, 17%181 SW atso Benaco refugee camp; Tanzania NGOs. Sec. P\Jongc>vernmentalorganizations Nigerian Civil War, 17,21 Nilotic peoples, 82 Nilssen, Egil, 207-208 Non r@oztlc>rnerat princlipfeg220 Nongc>vernrnenQIorganizations (NCQs), 2, 122-193 funding, 22 implementers, 110-91 2 independence, 31 SLYalso Relief agencies; indiul;ilual

agencies Norholt, Leor 211 North Atlantic Treaty 0rganizatic)n (NATO), 18,92 Norwegian Pecrple's Aid (NPA), 142, 207-208 Nomegian Refugee Corzncil, 112 NPA, See Nowegian People" Aid Nyamubi, Edkvin, 287 Obote, Miltc?n, 93,95 ODA. Sce British Overseas Development Agency Oliver, Thomas, 32(n4) Operatic3n Lifeline Sudan, 28 Operation Rwtore Hope, 61--63,6546 Operatianality, 21, 22, 30, 131, 130-131 (n8) Ort3mo (Ethiopia), 61

Outlie=, 7478 Oxfam, 22,42,47(n3), 117-218,119,148, 191(n6), 226,228,239 Chabatisa 2 and, 266 water delivery 179,180,256 Pakistan, 32fnl), 33(n6f Palestinian refugees, 17 Parachute bureaucrariiet;, 232-23,239 Parmehutu. SWParti btu Mouvement de ]'Emancipation des Bahutu Parti d e YUnion et dtl Prc~gr&s National (Ugrona), 104,197 Parti drx Mouvernent de VExnancigation des Bal-rutt~(Parmehutu), 82,8Y, 1011(n3) Partnerships, 22 Passpoes, 17 Patterned decision-making, 155,178, 186189,226 Peacekeepers, C;244,84,85,9T Persecc~ticn,fear of, 167-168 Phanat N i b u r n (camp), 26 Pingatrd, Denis, 4O4lF234fn1) Pid~eiro,Paulo Sergio, 169-170, 175fn6) Planning. See Contingenq plannir-rg Policy decisions. See Decision-making Politics, 10, 30, 220-223'254 bureaucratic expansion into, 227-228, 237-238,240 emotion and, 222-223 expectations, 272-173 genc~cideand, 9698 moraliq and, 60-61 victims and, 67, 71-72 Pottier, Johan, 68(m 1,2), 154(n10), 245Cnl) Predictability, 36-37, 42-44#235-236, 23&239 Predictions, 159-161 false negatives and false positives, 16l5-162 Preparedness, 125-126,161 at Benaco, 16&165 Presidential Guard, 85 Primordialism, 87-88,95,228 explanation for genocide, 88-9i5,22Y Prior connection criterion, 69Cn8) Prc~tection,5, 17 military pmtection, 29, 52, 62-43 Prunier, Gerard, 14,81, 92-93,97-99, 101(n9), 171 genocide r e p o ~ s 196, , 1"39,20t1-210, 217(nl), 21tZfneS),2,34(n2) Prubalis, Mare, 200-201,203 Quartzite, 173,280, 184-1 85,190-191 (n5)

Radio static3ns, 143,153(n6),199 bfidorn sarnpli~tg,201 Ratic)nality, 13,317-39, 50,63-M, 66, 156, 177,186,237-238 goals and, 35-37" Reception capabilitia, 148--149,242 Reconciliation, 214,286-290 Red Crc>ss,16,46, 106, 1131, 114, 115,207 funding, 132(n11) SLY also International Committee for the Red Cross Red Crtjss Hospil-at, 275 Reform efforts, 11,72,235-241 Refugee camps, 7 birtlrs, 142-142, 169, 223, 254,279 economy in, 127,139,151,204 11ealth slams, 254,2631n2) Kmya, 61-62 as military bases, 7-8 pusihlpult factors, 25 reception capabilities, 14&149, 242 ringleaders of genocide in, 109, 120, 132(n14),137; 144-145,149,202, 210,232 security 122,128 sernipemanent, 106,13U(n4) sustainability, 251-152 as tirban com~ntmities,140-142, 221-222,223,270 SLY also Benaco rehgee camp; Chabalisa 2 refugee camp; Cl~abalisa refugee camp; Rw~andanrefugee crisis; Thailand, refugee prolgram Refugee movements, persistence ofg 242-243 Refugee rigl-rts, 96, 151,236 Refugees as apolitical, 617,90,134, 1173-174,222, 224 border strzzddlina 174, 175(n5) counts, 11 genocide repo&s, 199-201,218Cn5) limiting contributions frcm, 223--.225 pemanence of, 149-151 reasons for moving, 172-1 174 repatriatic>n,5 4 , 12 self-sufficiency 27, 141, 148, 151, 223-224 as vulnerable, 55,265 SW also Burttndian refugees; Repatriatim; Rwandan refugees; i~zdiz~idadal canlps.

Refctgees Intentational, 200, 203 Reliability of data, 75-77 Relief, as a funceion of development' 27, 241-242 Relief agencies, 16,2415,231 SLY also International refugee relief regime; !;c>ngovernmenhf orgmizatic>ns;irtdividual ngcncirts Relief Web, 151 Relief workers, 69(n7), 69-70(nl0) as endal~gered,121-122 reporting by 14-15 Repatriation, 12, 15{nl), 126-127, 142-143,281-285 classification scktemm, 1%-145, 154(n8) contingency plannhtg, 134-136,167-169, 171-172 fc3rcible, 149-151, 154(n12), 15>156t 226-227,242 go and see programs, 16&-.169 Indoclthese crises and, 23-24 ininternational commtmity and, 150-151, 154(n12), 171-172 justificatio~~s for, 6-8, 156 nun r~foukemrtzfprinciple, 20 Pierre and Petrcj story, 281-285 politics and, 220-223 Tutsi diaspora and, 90,95 UNHCR policies, 134-1 38,144-145,209, 281-283 voluntary, 143--148,163-264,167-169, 209,239,285 from Zaire, 150 Resettlement prcjgrms, 26-27; 69(n8), 103, 126-1 27,13U(n4) Africa, 2627 Tndochinese refugee crisis and, 58-59 Tanzania and, 203,127, 130(n4), 224, 242-243 Retrospective interprdation, %, IOI(n10) Rigl~lsof reh~rn,96 Risks, 177-1 17%1% Ritzer, Gec?rge,38 RPF, See Rwanda Patriotic Front Ruden, Fridtjov, 184-185 Russia, 9, 18-19, 118 Rusurnu Falls bridge, 109, 120,126, 200, 276 Rustlmc?River Filter Scl~emefor Camp Water; 182-1153 Rusurnu (Rwanda), IO&I 09 Ruvlxbtt River, 119,182,183,1M,190(n4) Rwanda, 5-7'31 amy, 108 attacks from Uganda, M, 9(5,94-97,288 Befgium and, 82,88-89,96,97


civil war, 8%84,86,96,105,153 contingency planning#1&169 economic conditicms, 84, 88, 93 fc3reign aid, 83,93,94 identity cards, 82,83,W, 101Cn.t) impriwnment of I3lllt.r males, 242 internatic?nat relatic~ns,9&98 Kigati regiare, 5 5 l%, f 50, 152(nl)n15d(nt2) map, 6 massacres, 108,126,134, 138,142-143, 145, I53(m 5,7) SW atso Dernographics; Genclcide; k;tepatrialion Ru7und1-1Crisis, 7112~:His t o y of u Genocide (Prunier), 14, 81 Rwanda Patriotic Front (WF),8, 86,91-92, 124,146,159, 286 attacks from Uganda, tW-,911,94-97,288 capktrre of Kigati, 86, 107, 108 execution squads, 108,216 Zaire and, 150 Rwandan ref~~gee crisis, 164,16&167,173, 17575(n6),202-2M b0dii~3fiin Kapera River, 108, 126,134, 4 38

census, 123-1 24,13O(n7), 133(n22), 1911117) contingency planning, 166-16T 170, t 72-1 73 decongestion camps, 138-139 deparh~reof agencies, 138-1 39 emotion and, 8-11 ftmd distribution, 115-117, 123-124 food ctistribtltion and, 125-117, 12.3-124, 131(1%9),133(1121), 136-437,141 funding, 305,121,113,118,121-122,125 l-tistoslicalassessments, 14,711,87-88, 39-1 00 international refctgee relief regime and, 110-114 medical programs, 119 planning for repatriatic~n,134-138 relat-ic3nswith refugees, 119-123 security, 122,128 transpodation prcjgrm, 11&119,123, 142 water supply, 117-11 8 Zaire and, 124-125 SLY also ReEugee camps Sa Kaeo (camp), 25 Say, Teng, 6Y(nG) Save the Children (U.K.), 268 Scond-corrntry resettlement; 59

Stttement programs. Sec Resettlement progfams Sl~awcross,Williarn, 68-69(n5), 69(n6), 217(nn 1,4) Shinyanga (Tamaniit),123 Shunga (Kasulcz prefecture), 130(n3) Sibson, Gary 209 Sierra Leone, 27 Sindikubwaho, Theodore, 196 Singapore, 55 Singida ('Gnzania), 248 Slim, Elugo, 69(1C)) Sociolr>gy,73-75, 2% Somalia, 28-29, 331, M, 51-52,53, 133fn20), 221 Operatio3n Restore Hope, 61-63 Somalia Syndrc>me,63, 193 South Africa, 26, 175(n3),197,217(nZ) Soutl-teastAsia, 26 Soviet Union, 20 Spirihal bef iefs, 291-293 State Deparment, 12,59,98,216 Structuralism, 87-88 ana'iysis of Rwandm crisis, 93-95 Sudan, 26,27, 28,33(n4), 44,65 Swaziland, 27 Swedish Refugee Cr>uncil,112 Taboos, 294-293 Tanganyika, 21 5cc ~ ~ E s oTanzania Tanganyika Christian Refugee Service (TCRS), 245 5 ~ also e Lutheran Wc'trtd Federation Tanganyika Christian Refugee Sewice Water Development Unit, 190(nZ) Tanzania, 5, 27,44,53, 73, 79 border closings, 142-143,170,173-1 '74, 175(n6) Bumndian refugees in, 1(M-106,162-164 Chabafisa 2 (camp), 77,104,139 expulsion of rehgees, 5-45, 12 Hutu refugees in, 86,105,107,124, 154(n9), 172,t(39 K a r a ~ r eEstrict, 77 map, 6 resettlement pro~posal,127, 130(n4),224, 242-243 settlement schemes, 103 Tutsi refugees, 86,107-108,1%(n9)

SLY also Benaco rekgee camp; Chabalisa 2 refugee camp; Ngara (mstrict) Tmzmian Red Cross, 106, 115,119, 131I(n3), 14at 239 Tap-on phase, 221,231,233 TCR5 Set*Lutheran World Federation; Tanganyika f hristian Refugee Service Tl~ailmd,refugee pmgram, 18,22-26, 33(nn 5,7), 68(nn 3,4),73,173,227 Ban Wnai (camp), 263 bureauaacy and, 11-12,411: Khao 1 Dang (camp), 25,188,189, 231-232 Phanat Nikhorn (camp), 26 victimhood and, 51, .S40 water systems, 188, 189 Thant, U, 17,244 Tigrap (Etliispia), 40,61 E ~ P8,24, , 62,80, 89, 109-11 0,176,205 Transportathn programs, 118-1 19,123,142 Treves, R.W., 191-192(n11) Triggering events, 172 T1-ipartite agreement, 163 Tttcllman, Barbara, 75-77 Tuchmank Law, 75-76,233 Tutsi dhnic grc~up,79 diaspora refugees, 82-83,89, 164,167 genocide and, 19&199,209 massacres by Hutu, 83,84,91,94 Mkdecins r;ans Frontigrw and, 132(n17) as refuges in 'fanzcmia, 21,86, 107-108, 154(n9), 164,167 refused repatfiation, 90,95 repabiation, 167 as ruling party in Burundi, &85,90, 32-52 J,97, 100-1 Ill (n4) as scxial category, R2,88 in Uganda, &4,9U,94--97,288 Twa grc~up,IIM)(n2) Uganda, 27,7"5),8&85 Rwanda Patriotic Frcmt and, 84,530, 94-97,288 settlement scltemes, 103 UN Peacekeeping Operations, 85 UNAMIR. See United Naticms Assistance Mission to RwanJa UNBRO. See United Nations Border Relief Operation UNDP. Set4nited Nations Development Pmgrcmme UMHCR. See United Nations Eliigli Commissioner for Refugees UMHCR-Geneva, 192Cn13)

UNICEF. See United Nations Intentational Chitdren's Emergency Fund UNICEF-Uganda, 117,179,187 United Nations, 32(nl), 98 irrter~~ationat headquarters, 56,126-127, 129,134,137,165,197,227(n1) repatriation policies, 126-127, 234-138, 144-145,147-148,209,281-283 United Nations bsistance Mission to Rwanda (UNAMIR), 97,197 United Nations Border Relief Operation (UNBRO), 44,58,59,244 United Nations Department of Humanitarian Afi(i7irrj (DHA), 107, 251 United Nations De\relopment.Prt3gramnze (UNDP), 22,JS United Nations E-ligh Cc>mmissionerfor Refugees (UNHCR), 12,14,18,103, 206 administrative systems and, 114-119 asylum and, 20-21 bureaucratic power, 11tI-111 Chabalisa 2 and, 264 charter, 45,111 emergency response system experiment, 110-111 funding, 17,241, 22, 24, 105, 111, 113, 118, 121-122,125,136 l~earx'ngprclcess, 51,67 implementers, 22,4546,110-112, 115, 130-1 31(t38) Indc>cl-rheserelief operatic~nand, 22-25, 5541 internal sectors, 22 1 Karapre office, 137 Ngara office#1206, 115, 137,146, 167-168 Rlgara %curiq Advisory Committee, 211 as nonoperational, 21,22,315,111, 130-3 31(118) relief cmly poIic)i, 133(n10) repatriation policies, 126-127, 229, 234, 137,144-145,167-169,281-283 staff, 2207, 109, 121-113,122,124,128, 133fn23),147-149,ICrJ,24%249 United Nations in Ratrgladesl~,The (Qliver), 32 United Nations Irzternational Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF), 18,22, 227 Unit4 Naticms Relief and Works Agency, 17 United Nations Relief Operatic~nin h c c a (UN-ROD), 32fnl) United Nations Volunteers, 111, 112

United States, 28,154(n12), 241 Ellniopia and, 5041 genocide policy; 215-216 Tnducl2inese relief operation and, 23,25 resettlement programsf 58-59, Rg(n8) Somalia Syndrome, 63, 293 United States Agency for Internatic~nal rlevetopment (USAID), 18,28,45,149 fundir~g~ 111,249,250 Rwandm refugee crisis and, 210-424, 118y124,129 lB(n8) Uprona party. See Parti de Illinion et du Pmgres National USAID. See United States Agency for Interna tional DevelcIpment Uvin, Peter, 14, 81,99, 100(n2) Uwilingiyimana, Agathe, 97 Validity, 73-75 Vansina, Jan, 74,78 Velvet rage, 38 Victims, 88 definitions, 51-%,66--617,227-228 international relief and, 63-66 peacekeepers and, 62-64 politics and, 67, 71-72 Vietnam, 2%-24,33(n4),5440,68(n3) Vietnamese boat people, 23, 54,56 Wrtuous power dodrine, Y1,101(n7) Waha ethnic group, 291-293 Waldheirn, Kurt., 55 Walkup, Mark, 4042,4!%46,48(n4), 50,56 War crimes, 9, 132(n16),145,149,154(n12), 210,220,232,243 international comm~xnit;F. and, 91,92, 94-95

W~shir ~gtof~ 120sC,60 Water systems, 25, 37, 115, 1117-119, 138-139,190fn3), 239 bureaucratized Good Samarihm and, 18&188 collapsed wells, 180--182 emotitsns and, 176-177,18&188, 19O(nl), 191(nn 9, 11), 230 expenditures, 182-185,192(n13)

geological considerations, 179-180, 284-186, 19&1S%(n5) measurement of supply, 118-1182 Monopumps, 180l-182 N~jara,l7&181 patterned mistakes and, 186-189 plaming, 176-277 reverse osmosis purification unit-s;, 28%1M mailand, 188, 189 water-trucking system, 182-183 "We Are tlne World," S1 Web sites, 151 Weber, Max, 9,12,13,38, M, 47,177,229 WFF. 5 e Wc?rld ~ Food Programme Wl.-IO.See*World Healtl-t Organization Wijmans, Phillip, 2W207 Wilson, Rob, 286 Wilson, Trish, 213,286,287 Wc'trld Bank, 35,83,94 World Concern, 132(n?l) Wc'trld Food Frogramme WFP), 12,22,28, 42,44,45, 103 Chabatisa 2 and, 258,265 Indocl-rinescrefugee crisis and, 58 media clips, 237 Rwandan refugee crisis and, 110,112, 115,122-124,136,141-142 Wi>rldHealth Organization ( W O ) , 22,45, t 81 World Vision, 112, 131-132fnII), 237 Wi>rldTrVar f, 16, 19 Wc'trld War XI, 17,2@21,79 Zaire (DemocraticRepublic of the Cc?ngo), 5,7, 79,83,93 Rany~nzulenge,149-1 50,159,171 Etumndicm refuges in, 171 cholera crisis, 139 cholera epidemic, 182. H u b militia in, 144,149-1511 Rwandan exile gc~vernmentin, 97 Rwandm refugees in, 86,123,124-125, 13G137, 152(nl), 159,173,227 Zambia, 27, 105,242 Zimbabwe, 27 Zone Turquoise, 97