Adults too, not just the children. The operation was initiated several years ago as an ad-hoc measure to treat Syrians who came to the border asking for help from Israel. The effort developed into an expanded program in June as humanitarian needs continued to grow. The military has transferred more thangallons of heating and cooking fuel as well as 40 tons of flour, tons of food, 12, packages of baby formula, 1, packages of diapers, 12 tons of shoes and 55 tons of cold weather clothing.
Smugglers, businessmen, Western aid workers, and Turkish police greet each other with warm familiarity. Hundreds of trucks loaded with food baskets, tents, and other essentials hurtle out of town every day, headed for the nearby Kilis crossing on the rebel-controlled border to Syria.
Inas the Syrian civil war escalated into the deadliest conflict of our day, a pop-up humanitarian aid city sprang up here virtually overnight. After the wars in Darfur, Afghanistan, Somalia, Bosnia, and Rwanda, aid groups and the governments that fund them refined their approaches, drawing lessons and crafting new tactics.
As a result, messy as the Syrian conflict is, aid here has been a considerable success. International groups have continued to deliver vital food to areas that have switched hands over and over. Though an estimatedhave died, the famine and epidemics predicted early in the conflict have, so far, failed to materialize.
Advertisement Even so, many Syrians are still deeply unhappy with the aid effort here. Get Today in Opinion in your inbox: Sign Up Thank you for signing up! Sign up for more newsletters here At the source of the tension is the political decision by the most important aid power of them all, the gargantuan United Nations agencies, to work with only one side of the conflict: Related Links The world according to Bashar Assad Aid groups always face criticism in conflicts and natural disasters, the most piercing often from within their own ranks.
But in Syria, the relatively effective technical response has intensified the focus on the political calculations of the aid industry and its overarching impact on the conflict. Even aid that seems impartial, like the food and blankets distributed by Western groups over the Turkish border, arguably extends the war, by taking good enough care of civilians that militants and the government are free to pour their resources into fighting.
Critics who study the aid industry point out that for all the short-term relief it provides, the flow of aid money can also help prop up warlords and militia leaders. And the more professionalized and better-funded the aid industry becomes, the more it can help prolong the very conflicts it is supposed to alleviate.
The UN High Commissioner for Refugees was established in response to the catastrophic displacement of millions of people across Europe, while Red Cross and Red Crescent societies expanded their reach and ambitions as well. By the s, after the well-chronicled famine of the Biafran War in Nigeria, a host of smaller agencies and independent organizations sprang up to work with refugees, child soldiers, women, and others affected by conflict.
Advertisement Under international law, humanitarian aid rests on the principle that people have a universal right to food, shelter, health care, and education even during a time of war. All the United Nations powers formally agree on this principle—even Russia, which this year used the threat of a Security Council veto to remove the enforcement provision from a resolution supporting equal access to civilians in all parts of Syria.
This broad rights umbrella dictates that unarmed refugees should be free to leave conflict zones, and that neutral aid workers should be allowed unfettered access to provide medical care and deliver aid independently of combatant groups.
In real life, however, no one in a war zone can operate without regard for the people who carry the weapons. Aid workers, like everyone else, have to negotiate for access, and the more powerful the fighting groups, the more they may try to manipulate aid agencies and co-opt the flow of resources to their own ends.
In the early years of the conflict, when the regime was on the verge of collapsing, it overlooked some aid groups that operated on both sides. But as Assad regained his footing he began to enforce the rules more aggressively, and today any aid group or individual who enters Syria through a rebel border crossing is blacklisted by the regime.
In Syria, this has resulted in a stark split, in which aid groups must choose to serve only one side of the conflict: In May, the aid group Mercy Corps—one of the only groups still helping civilians on both sides of the conflict—was given an ultimatum by Assad: Stop working in rebel-held areas, or be evicted from Damascus.
Reluctantly, Mercy Corps officials said, they closed their Damascus operation, which reached fewer people and had less freedom than the independent operation from Turkey.
The message resonated with the rest of the aid community: The major player in aid, however, has chosen Damascus: The UN had a Damascus operation in place to deal with refugees from the war in Iraq, and political staff handling negotiations between Assad and the West.
Banned from Damascus, the UN would not only lose the ability to reach at least half the population, but it would be unable to conduct diplomacy between the regime, the opposition, and international powers.
UN personnel feared harassment or violent retribution from the regime if they begin working on both sides of the conflict; some also saw the foothold in Damascus, and the relationship with the regime, as crucially important in the long run if Assad wins the civil war.
As a result, billions of dollars worth of supplies now go to areas designated by Assad; the president can essentially order the UN to send supplies to areas filled with his supporters or funnel it through Syrian nonprofits controlled by his allies.
He can also cut off aid where he sees fit.Hospitals have become military targets in Syria, making it difficult to provide aid to victims of the country's civil war, according to leaders of NGO and human rights groups working in the region.
Hospitals have become military targets in Syria. Washington D.C.
(CNA/EWTN News) - More than No, but what did contribute to the Syrian civil war was Obama and Hillary, who did give and are still giving aid to so called “Syrian rebels”, who we now know to be ISIS.
Russia is using Bashar al-Assad and Obama is using ISIS in a proxy war between Russia and the US. War Leaves Syrian Children Without Adequate Health Care before the three-year anniversary of the civil war in Syria.
conclude — since gathering data in a war zone is hazardous and. The –13 escalation of the Syrian Civil War was the third phase of the Syrian Civil War, which gradually evolved from U.N.-mediated cease fire attempt during April–May , deteriorating into radical violence in June, escalating the conflict level to a full-fledged civil arteensevilla.comon: Syria (with spillovers in neighboring countries).
Hospitals have become military targets in Syria, making it difficult to provide aid to victims of the country’s civil war, according to leaders of NGO and human rights groups working in the region. The Office for Veteran and Military Academic Engagement (OVMAE) is building a tool to help attune faculty, advisors and staff to military culture and student veterans.