Between a tank and a tent
It looks as though Jordan will be accepting US troops and refugees. Michael Jansen reports from Amman
The plans by the administration of US President George W Bush for a war on Iraq have put Jordan between a tank and a tent. On the one hand, the kingdom, a long-standing US ally, has been forced, very much against its will, to accept a US military presence on its soil. Amman has admitted that there are several hundred US experts training Jordanians in the use of 16 new F-16 warplanes and three batteries of Patriot anti-missile missiles. There are also unconfirmed reports that at least 6,000 US troops are based in the desert near the town of Ruweished close to the Iraqi border, 390 kilometres east of Amman. Members of US special forces wearing civilian dress have been staying openly at a hotel and going to health clubs and pubs in the capital.
On the other hand, Jordan has been reluctant to make preparations for a new influx of refugees. There are already 300,000 Iraqis living in the kingdom -- half of them legally, the other illegally. During the 1990-1991 crises when Iraq invaded Kuwait, Jordan bore most of the expense of providing sanctuary to third-country nationals fleeing Kuwait and to Iraqis escaping war. This time round, Jordan said it would seal its borders and insisted that funding must be banked before refugees could be settled. But Amman was forced to allow the establishment of facilities without funding because the UN and international relief organisations have not been able to raise money to deal with a long-anticipated catastrophe that no one wanted to happen.
While the financial burden of caring for thousands of refugees could break Jordan's back economically, the kingdom must also deal with the political dimensions of a new influx of homeless people. Jordan did this in 1991 by confining refugees to camps in the desert near the Iraqi border.
It is doing the same thing once again. Since its establishment in 1946, the kingdom has had to provide for and absorb waves of refugees. Those who have stayed on, mainly Palestinians driven from their country by Israel, have changed the demographic composition of the country. If Jordan accepts Iraqi refugees at this time, it is feared Israel could use this as a precedent for expelling more Palestinians. "Transfer", the euphemism for ethnic cleansing, is a real fear both here and in Palestine.
For many months, both Jordan and international humanitarian bodies were caught in a bind. They could not prepare for a US war on Iraq without appearing to somehow accept conflict or be colluding with the US. They had to rely on diplomacy to avert war while making low-profile preparations for a conflict that might not come to pass. But when it became absolutely clear last week that the Bush administration could not be diverted from the war path, Jordan and these organisations began to work in tandem to provide accommodation, food and health care for floods of Iraqi and third country nationals fleeing the war zone. Forty international non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and a dozen UN bodies that did not have a presence in Jordan have been registered on a temporary, emergency basis and have, under the umbrella of the Jordanian Hashemite Charitable Organisation and the Red Crescent Society, begun to openly address the task at hand.
Two camps are in the process of being established in the wide band of Jordanian-held territory between Ruweished and the Iraqi frontier post.
Camp A is for refugees and asylum seekers, accommodating from 10,000 to 35,000 for at least six months, and Camp B is for third country nationals, the majority of whom are expected to be Egyptian labourers. It will provide shelter for an expected 60,000 for 72 hours before they are transferred to Aqaba and put on board ferries for Egypt. Tents are positioned near these sites, and can be erected in time to receive the first waves of refugees.
According to Simon Springett of Oxfam, conditions for the refugees should conform to international standards. On the eve of the US onslaught, one out of four boreholes was operational (once all are on line, 20 litres of water per day per person should be produced), 3.5 metres of space are to be made available per person and one latrine was being provided for every 20 people. Oxfam, charged with responsibility for water, Springett said, will provide a piped system and storage for 10,000 and can quickly double its capacity. Oxfam has taken the principled decision -- which could be adopted by other organisations -- not to accept funding from governments attacking Iraq. Springett said that Oxfam's "line is that we will not accept money from belligerent governments: we will not hold a gun in one hand and give bread with the other."
Under the Geneva Convention, an occupying power is responsible for the welfare of the people it occupies. But as the case of Israel's occupation of the Palestinians shows, occupiers not only ignore international obligations, but also abuse and brutalise those they occupy. This means relationships between occupying powers and international relief agencies are highly charged and extremely difficult. Ray Jordan of the Irish NGO Goal said that UN and assistance agencies had to keep their distance from occupying military authorities.
"It is imperative that the military give space to NGOs to do their work. NGOs have to be honest brokers." Furthermore, they must not impose themselves on the countries or people they are trying to help. "Iraqis must take the decisions on what they need. If the correct approach is not followed from day one," he said, "it will be difficult to change course." If the US military is left to "run its own show", this could be "catastrophic". While UN agencies and NGOs cannot determine "the outcome of military activity, we can influence the post-conflict scenario".
Al-Ahram Weekly Online : 20 - 26 March 2003 (Issue No. 630)
Located at: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2003/630/re4.htm