U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

24–832PDF 2017

EAST AFRICA’S QUIET FAMINE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, 

GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND 

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

MARCH 28, 2017

Serial No. 115–16

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

PAUL COOK, California 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

LEE M. ZELDIN, New York 

DANIEL M. DONOVAN, JR., New York 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

ANN WAGNER, Missouri 

BRIAN J. MAST, Florida 

FRANCIS ROONEY, Florida 

BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania 

THOMAS A. GARRETT, JR., Virginia 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

AMI BERA, California 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania 

DINA TITUS, Nevada 

NORMA J. TORRES, California 

BRADLEY SCOTT SCHNEIDER, Illinois 

THOMAS R. SUOZZI, New York 

ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York 

TED LIEU, California

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, Chairman 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

DANIEL M. DONOVAN, JR., New York 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

THOMAS A. GARRETT, JR., Virginia 

KAREN BASS, California 

AMI BERA, California 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

THOMAS R. SUOZZI, New York 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

Mr. Matthew Nims, Acting Director, Office of Food for Peace, Bureau for 

Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance, U.S. Agency for International Development .......................................................................................... 3

Mr. Ken Isaacs, vice president, Programs and Government Relations, Samaritan’s Purse ............................................................................................................ 29

Mr. Michael Bowers, vice president, humanitarian leadership and response, 

Mercy Corps .......................................................................................................... 38

Mr. Thabani Maphosa, vice-president for food assistance, World Vision International ................................................................................................................. 53

Ms. Faustine Wabwire, senior foreign assistance policy advisor, Bread for 

the World Institute .............................................................................................. 64

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Mr. Matthew Nims: Prepared statement ............................................................... 6

Mr. Ken Isaacs: Prepared statement ..................................................................... 32

Mr. Michael Bowers: Prepared statement ............................................................. 41

Mr. Thabani Maphosa: Prepared statement .......................................................... 56

Ms. Faustine Wabwire: Prepared statement ......................................................... 67

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 86

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 87

The Honorable Christopher H. Smith, a Representative in Congress from 

the State of New Jersey, and chairman, Subcommittee on Africa, Global 

Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations: 

2017 Bread for the World Hunger Report .......................................................... 88

Statement of Sean Callahan of Catholic Relief Services .................................. 96

The Honorable Thomas A. Garrett, Jr., a Representative in Congress from 

the Commonwealth of Virginia: Statement of the Embassy of the Republic 

of Sudan ................................................................................................................ 104

Mr. Thabani Maphosa: 

World Vision East Africa Hunger Crisis Overview ........................................... 108

World Vision Somalia Emergency Appeal .......................................................... 109

World Vision South Sudan Situation Report ..................................................... 110

(1)

EAST AFRICA’S QUIET FAMINE 

TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2017

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH,

GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in room 

2200 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Christopher H. Smith 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. SMITH. The hearing will come to order. 

I will be joined momentarily by Ranking Member Bass and some 

of the other members of the subcommittee. But there are some 

votes that will be coming up on the floor so we will start right at 

2:30. 

Thank you and welcome to each and every one of you. According 

to estimates by the United Nations, more than 28 million people 

in east Africa today desperately need immediate food aid. 

Three countries in the region have emergency level food aid 

needs—Somalia, South Sudan, and Sudan. Meanwhile, areas of 

Ethiopia, Kenya, and Uganda also face crisis level hunger with 

some households already in emergency conditions. 

In Somalia, at least 6.2 million people need food assistance and 

that’s more than half that country’s population. 

In South Sudan, nearly two-thirds of the population requires assistance and in fact about 4.9 million South Sudanese, or about 40 

percent of the population, face severe life-threatening hunger with 

that number expected to rise to 5.5 million by July. 

In Sudan more than 5.8 million Sudanese are believed to require 

assistance, 3.3 million of them in still-embattled Darfur states. 

Unfortunately, the devastating impact of the current famine isn’t 

confined to the hardest hit drought areas. Uganda itself, struggling 

with the effects of drought in some areas, has had to contend with 

nearly 800,000 refugees from South Sudan. 

By the beginning of this month as many as 3,000 South Sudanese a week cross the border into Uganda. Lest we get caught up 

in the huge numbers involved in this crisis, we must always keep 

in mind what those numbers actually mean for the people in the 

long-term as well as the immediate and short term. 

According to the U.N.’s World Food Programme, calculation’s in 

January, global acute malnutrition rates for Somali children and 

pregnant and lactating women entering Ethiopia reached a whopping 78 percent. 

2

That means that Somali children in the womb won’t have enough 

nourishment to complete their growth in utero. Most, if not all, will 

be born stunted, which will be made worse by their continuing lack 

of nutrition once born. 

Their mothers will be severely weakened and may not survive 

childbirth. All of them will have damaged immune systems and 

will be susceptible to diseases such as cholera or acute diarrhea 

and may die a preventable death. 

In any event, the futures of far too many children and their potential contributions to their society will be forever limited and 

stunting cannot be reversed. 

In 2011, the first U.N.-declared famine since the 1980s occurred 

in east Africa, directly affecting more than 10 million people. 

This subcommittee held a hearing on the crisis on September 

28th of that year and worked with humanitarian groups to ensure 

that aid was available and provided in the most in-need areas of 

east Africa. We will follow this hearing with a similar effort. 

Six years ago, there was great attention given to the famine 

then. It was a catastrophe that caught the world’s attention. 

Somehow, the current famine has been caught up in the numerous global crises we face today and is not as much in the news as 

it ought have been and it is one of the largest disasters we have 

faced in recent years. 

In 2011, we struggled with how to get humanitarian aid to those 

in Somalia who lived in areas controlled by al-Shabaab. That problem has not been eliminated 6 years later. 

In 2017, not only is the ongoing conflict in Somalia hampering 

humanitarian efforts there but the continuing civil conflict in South 

Sudan has amplified the impact of the drought. 

In 2015, a congressional staff delegation visited the historical 

Equatorial provinces of that country, which still produced food, 

even though poor transportation prevented it from being distributed beyond the borders of that region. 

There was no conflict there at the time, only internally displaced 

people. Now all three of the former Equatorial provinces are seeing 

a spreading conflict and with farmers unable to plant or to harvest, 

the lack of food will only worsen over time. 

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has accused South Sudan’s Government of ignoring the plight of its own citizens struggling through the famine. 

He accused that government’s leadership of refusal to even acknowledge the crisis or fulfil its responsibilities to end it. 

At a time in which access to food is so critical in South Sudan, 

militias in that country supported by both the government and the 

rebels have been accused of intentionally destroying crops, looting 

cattle, and damaging vital water supplies. 

In July of last year, it is believed that government soldiers were 

responsible for looting 1.5 million metric tons of food from the 

World Food Programme’s warehouse in the capital city of Juba. 

As a matter of fact, Greg Simpkins and I traveled to South 

Sudan last August. We went to Juba and we raised all of these 

issues, started with Salva Kiir, to the Defense Minister, to the 

head of the U.N. mission, and many others including Catholic 

bishops, trying to underscore our concern about food insecurity, the 

3

violence that was escalating because we were in a place where just 

about a month before that about 200 soldiers had killed each other 

from two warring factions right at the Presidential palace. 

It was absurd, and we did raise the concerns of our colleagues, 

our Speaker and the President. But not much has happened in response, sadly. 

The conflicts in Somalia and South Sudan affect the entire region 

and place added burdens on their neighbors, who must also cope 

with recurring drought. 

These two countries, along with Eritrea, remain the largest 

source of refugees globally. We cannot control the weather patterns 

that lead to recurring droughts in east Africa but we must find a 

way to end the conflicts of those two nations so that manmade disasters don’t outstrip the impact of nature itself. 

I’ll never forget how the famine in Ethiopia during the Mengistu 

regime was made all the worse because he used food as a weapon. 

We can’t see a replay of that atrocity today. 

The term famine, like the term genocide, should not be used 

lightly. To be considered a famine there must be an extreme lack 

of food in at least 20 percent of the households in any area, acute 

malnourishment must affect 30 percent of children, and accrued 

death rate of more than two deaths per 10,000 must exist daily in 

the affected areas. 

As our witnesses will describe for us today, the situation is already or soon will be in a state of famine in areas of east Africa. 

Our mission today is to better understand the parameters of the 

crisis, its causative factors and the most effective action that must 

be taken now to save lives and end the threat of an even greater 

casualty count. 

So I want to thank again our witnesses and begin the witness 

testimony with Mr. Matthew Nims, who has more than 17 years 

of international development and emergency programming experience. 

He has been with USAID since the year 2000 and has worked 

in Indonesia, Guyana, Afghanistan, and here in Washington. 

Starting in August 2011, he began serving as the deputy director 

of the Office of Food for Peace and since January 2017 has been 

the acting director of the office with a $2 billion budget. 

Food for Peace is the U.S. Government’s lead for addressing food 

insecurity worldwide in both emergency and development situations. 

Mr. Nims, the floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF MR. MATTHEW NIMS, ACTING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF FOOD FOR PEACE, BUREAU FOR DEMOCRACY, CONFLICT AND HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE, U.S. AGENCY FOR 

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 

Mr. NIMS. Chairman Smith, esteemed staff, thank you for the invitation to come speak with you today about the food security situation in east Africa, especially the threat of famine in Somalia. 

Thank you for drawing attention to the plight of the world’s vulnerable people and your long history of support for humanitarian 

efforts. 

4

This year, massive humanitarian crises are occurring around the 

world, demanding an immediate, substantial, and creative response. 

Our famine early warning system network, FEWS NET, warns 

that an unprecedented 70 million people will need emergency food 

assistance this year due to ongoing conflict, severe drought, and 

economic instability. 

These crises are largely manmade with other compounding factors like the drought in Somalia, making the situation even more 

untenable. 

East Africa is facing one of the worst droughts ever recorded and 

as many as 15 million people in Somalia, Ethiopia, and Kenya are 

facing food and water shortages as a result. 

In many areas, vegetation conditions are the worst on record and 

if the rains fail this spring, the situation will continue to deteriorate. 

We are seeing the worst in Somalia, where the effects of drought 

are being compounded by insecurity. In 2011, nearly 260,000 Somalis, half of them children under five, died in a famine triggered by 

what was at the time east Africa’s worst drought in 60 years. 

If current trends continue, famine, a term we do not use lightly, 

could happen again in Somalia. Already, more than 6 million Somalis, over half the population, are in need of humanitarian assistance and the rate of severe acute malnutrition is rising. 

The crisis in Somalia also has regional effects, as people leave to 

look for food and support in neighboring countries. This migration, 

as well as refugees arriving from South Sudan, strains already depleted neighbors Ethiopia and Kenya. 

But even with these challenges, these governments are 

proactively responding to the drought and USAID is aligning its investments with these country-led efforts. 

USAID has rapidly scaled-up and redirected its efforts, providing 

vital food and malnutrition treatment as well as safe water, improved sanitation and hygiene, and even in the midst of an emergency we look for opportunities to build resilience and strengthen 

the communities’ ability to respond to future shocks and stresses. 

I recently visited a livestock market that is part of these resilience-building activities in the arid lands of northern Kenya. 

The market, and others like it, support the livelihood activities 

of the pastoralists in the region, providing livestock trading and 

veterinarian services and in turn spawn opportunities for entrepreneurs in the local economy. 

Jacob, for instance, fixes the motorcycles of people traveling to 

and from the new markets, and Mercy runs a restaurant to feed 

traders using locally grown food. 

These efforts across the region are expanding economic opportunities, strengthening drought cycle management and improving 

health and human capital. 

Over the long term, a British study estimates that every dollar 

invested in resilience results in nearly $3 in reduced humanitarian 

spending, avoided loss, and improved wellbeing. 

Challenges remain, however. In South Sudan, years of intense violence has transformed the world’s youngest nation into one of the 

most food insecure in the world. 

5

Nearly half of South Sudan’s population faces life-threatening 

hunger this year, and famine was declared in several counties just 

last month. 

In northeastern Nigeria, more than 5.1 million people are facing 

severe food insecurity and nearly 450,000 children will experience 

life-threatening, severe acute malnutrition this year. Famine likely 

did occur in 2016 but access has made it difficult to confirm. 

Lastly, I would be remiss not to mention the situation in Yemen, 

which is experiencing the largest food security emergency in the 

world. 

Conflict, political instability, economic crisis, and rising food and 

fuel prices have left more than 17 million people food insecure. 

This situation has repercussions in east Africa as refugees flee 

to Somalia and Djibouti, who are struggling to handle the influx 

even as they face their own domestic crises. 

These broader challenges are important to note because we are 

never focusing on just one country or region at a time. The United 

States cannot do it alone. 

We need the United Nations, affected governments, donor partners, and NGOs like the ones that will be testifying after me to 

work together to tackle these challenges. 

I want to thank these partners and our staff at USAID for their 

tireless efforts and dedication to helping those affected around the 

world. 

Thank you, Chairman Smith, for your attention to these issues 

and for congressional support provided to USAID, especially our 

humanitarian programs over the years. Please know that your support transforms and saves lives every day. 

Thank you for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Nims follows:]

6


24832a-1.eps

Statement of Matt Nims 

Acting Director of the Office of Food for Peace, Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and 

Humanitarian Assistance, U.S. Agency for International Development 

Before the House Foreign Atl'airs Committee 

Subcommittee for Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations 

March 28, 2017 

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the 

invitation to come and speak with you today about the food security situation in the Horn of 

Africa, and specifically the threat of famine in Somalia. We are grateful for your long history of 

support to humanitarian efforts and for drawing attention to the plight of the world's vulnerable 

people, such as those in the Horn of Africa. 

My name is Matthew Nims, and I am the Acting Director of USA !D's Office of Food for Peace 

(FFP). The United States has been the largest provider of emergency food assistance in the 

world. We use a mix of tools to respond to emergency food needs including U.S. commodities, 

locally and regionally procured food, vouchers, cash transfers and other complementary 

activities to reach the world's most food insecure with lifesaving aid. We also support 

development programs that address the root causes of hunger in areas of chronic crisis to build 

resilience and food security of local communities. Last year through the work of our many 

implementing partners, including those testifying on the next panel, our food assistance reached 

over 60 million people in 52 countries. 

In 2017, we are confronted with major humanitarian crises around the world, which demand that 

the world provide an immediate, substantial, and creative response. The USATD-funded Famine 

Early Warning Systems Network, or FEWS NET, has warned that this year an unprecedented 70 

million people across 45 countries will be in need of emergency food assistance, largely driven 

by persistent conflict, severe drought and economic instability. Famine was declared in parts of 

South Sudan in February, and three other countries-Somalia, Nigeria and Yemen-face the 

threat of famine, putting a combined 20 million people at risk of dire food insecurity. That's 

more than twice the populations of New York City and Washington, D.C. combined. 

Famines are rare, and we don't use the term lightly. In most cases, people face extreme food 

insecurity and are in need of emergency food assistance without the situation being categorized 

as a "famine" The global standard for classifying acute food insecurity, the International Food 

Security Phase Classification requires the most extreme conditions to be present before a famine 

can be declared. Tn communities in which famine is declared, at least 1/5 of households face an 

extreme lack of food and/or inability to meet their other basic needs, nearly 1/3 of children are 

already severely acutely malnourished, and men, women and children are already dying because 

of an extreme lack of food. 
7


24832a-2.eps

When we think offamine we naturally think offood, but the provision of safe drinking water, 

emergency health care and proper sanitation and hygiene are equally critical during these crises 

to battle opportunistic illnesses like cholera and diarrhea. Hunger weakens people's immune 

systems, leaving them susceptible to these often largely preventable and treatable aft1ictions; in 

situations of extreme food insecurity and famine, they can tum deadly. When Somalia faced 

famine in 2011, the impacts of cholera were devastating. That's why we work closely with our 

sister office, USA !D's Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance, along with the Department of 

State's Population, Refugees and Migration bureau, to ensure that the United States' 

humanitarian response to these crises is a comprehensive multi-sectoral one. 

Over the past few months, I've traveled to South Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Somalia to see the 

situation first hand and fully understand the scope and scale of the challenges people in these 

countries face. Today 1 want to share with you more about the ongoing crisis in these countries, 

what we're doing to respond, and the challenges we face. 

HORN OF AFRICA 

The Hom of Africa is facing increasingly severe drought conditions that are quickly exceeding 

many households' ability to cope. The scope of these conditions is so great that relief agencies 

estimate that as many as 15 million people in Somalia, Ethiopia, and Kenya are facing food and 

water shortages. Latest findings indicate the drought is now the worst ever recorded in some of 

the most vulnerable areas within the Hom. 

In this region, we are most concerned about Somalia, where the effects of this latest drought are 

exacerbated by insecurity. In 2011, nearly 260,000 Somalis died in a famine triggered by what 

was at the time the Hom of Africa's worst drought in more than 60 years-half of them children 

under five Recent analysis by FEWS NET indicates troubling parallels to conditions which led 

to the 2011 famine. In many areas, vegetation conditions are the worst on record, surpassing 

those observed during the 2011 crisis. The below-average rainfall of the 2016 October-toDecember season has resulted in a harvest forecasted to be 50-70 percent below the five-year 

average, and if the rains fail again this spring, the food security situation will continue to 

deteriorate. In addition to these factors, the situation is further exacerbated by ongoing conflict. 

Famine may again be possible in the coming months if drought conditions persist, purchasing 

power continues to decline, and insecurity prevents relief actors from reaching populations in 

need. An estimated 6.2 million Somalis-more than half the population-are currently in need of 

immediate humanitarian assistance as a result of the combined effects of the drought and 

ongoing conflict. Malnutrition rates are also rising significantly, with 71,000 children suffering 

from Severe Acute Malnutrition-a 42 percent increase from fiscal year (FY) 2016. 

2 
8


24832a-3.eps

Severe malnutrition places children at high risk of disease and death, and last week, health 

partners reported there have been nearly 12,700 diarrhea or cholera cases and 268 droughtrelated deaths since January in Somalia. 

The crisis in Somalia also has regional effects, as people leave to look for food and support in 

neighboring countries. This migration compounds the already tenuous situations in Ethiopia and 

Kenya. We support the food security needs of the refugees in these countries and are seeing 

highly concerning malnutrition rates among those arriving into Ethiopia from southern Somalia. 

According to the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP), as of January, global acute 

malnutrition rates for Somali children and pregnant and lactating women entering Ethiopia are at 

78 percent. These countries are also facing inflows of refugees from South Sudan, making the 

impacts of these food security crises regional in nature. 

Over the last several months, US AID has worked to rapidly scale up and redirect our efforts in 

Somalia, providing vital food and malnutrition treatment; and ensuring communities have safe 

drinking water, as well as improved sanitation and hygiene. USAID has provided more than 

$151 million in emergency food assistance since FY 2016 for Somalia. USAlD partners are 

distributing food rations to the most acutely food-insecure people, as well as food vouchers and 

cash transfers where markets are functioning. FFP's assistance in Somalia is typically linked to 

activities designed to help build the resilience of the Somali people, including vocational training 

or productive asset building activities, such as rehabilitating community water and sanitation 

infrastructure or roads. However, due to the rapidly deteriorating food security situation, many of 

these productive activities are on hold until households' food security improves. 

This is the first time since Somalia's devastating 2011 famine that FEWS NET has explicitly 

warned of famine risk in the country. Lessons learned from that famine indicate that immediate 

action and a robust mobilization of international resources are needed to prevent a worst case 

scenario. At the same time, it is important to recognize the differences between the region's 2011 

crisis and now. Today, host governments, and Ethiopia and Kenya in particular, are proactively 

responding to and managing the current drought. And even Somalia's young government formed 

a drought response committee focused on providing Somali support to Somalis. Tn fact, in 

February, the governments of Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia all publicly committed to 

regional cooperation and cross-border collaboration to tackle both this drought and, through 

longer-term investments, the underlying fragility that tips vulnerable communities into crisis in 

recurring droughts. 

We are aligning our investments in the region with country-led efforts such as the Government 

of Kenya's Ending Drought Emergencies initiative and Ethiopia's Productive Safety Net 

Program (PSNP). The Government of Kenya's initiative provides a common investment and 

programming framework for government and donor investment. The Government of Kenya has 

3 
9


24832a-4.eps

committed $1.6 billion against the initiative, complemented by $1.5 billion from donors, 

including the U.S. government. 

I recently visited with members of the Partnership for Resilience and Economic Growth in 

Kenya (PREG), which works to build resilience in the vulnerable pastoralist communities of 

Northern Kenya which are largely arid and semi-arid lands. PREG brings together USAID's 

$291 million in development programs in this region of Kenya with work by the country's 

national and county level governments to promote resilience and economic growth. In just two 

and a half years, there was a 12 percent reduction in the depth of poverty in this region due to 

these investments. USA !D's contributions through PREG are helping more than 700,000 people 

to build assets to withstand chronic shocks and stresses; more than 100,000 people to have better 

access to water and 70,000 to have improved sanitation; and to manage more than 2 million 

hectares of grazing land through community-based natural resources groups, directly supporting 

the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands ofpastoralists in these arid and semi-arid zones. 

As part of my trip, I visited one of the 12livestock markets that PREG has constructed in 

Maras bit and lsiolo counties. Livestock trading and veterinary services were available, but what I 

found of equal interest were the entrepreneurs that have seized on the dynamism these markets 

bring to local communities to establish their own businesses and secure a livelihood for 

themselves and their families. I met Jacob, who started a small business to fix the motorcycles of 

those traveling to and from the new markets. I also met with Mercy, a local woman who opened 

a restaurant, which serves local food to the traders. Not only are the investments through the 

PREG benefitting the pastoralists and local communities they were designed to help, they are 

also forming the basis for thriving commercial hubs that offer services previously unavailable in 

Kenya's arid lands. 

The Government of Ethiopia-led PSNP annually addresses the basic food needs of approximately 

8 million chronically food insecure people through the seasonal transfer of food and cash 

resources, as well as the creation or improvement of assets that generate economic benefit to the 

community as a whole. With U.S. support, the PSNP has helped lift 1.5 million people out of 

poverty, reduced the annual lean season for vulnerable households from over 3 months to less 

than 2 months, and reduced the proportion of households forced to engage in distress sales of 

assets from 50 percent to 25 percent. 

Even in Somalia, where the federal government formed just a few years ago, investments in 

development and resilience helped better position some communities to endure this drought. 

USATD continues to help build the capacity of the fledgling Somali government to support its 

own population. The Federal and State governments also formed Drought Coordination 

Committees, work to raise funds and coordinate the delivery of assistance to communities across 

Somalia. 

4 
10


24832a-5.eps

These efforts across the region are expanding economic opportunities, strengthening natural 

resource and drought cycle management, and improving health and human capital. A 2012 study 

by the UK's Department for International Development (DFID) in Kenya and Ethiopia estimated 

that, over a I 0-year period with two large droughts, every $1 invested in resilience would result 

in $2.90 in economic benefits consisting of reduced humanitarian spending, avoided asset losses, 

and increased development benefits. 

THE BIGGER PICTURE 

Challenges remain, however, particularly since Somalia is not the only country currently at risk 

of famine. As mentioned in my opening, famine has already been declared in South Sudan, and 

Nigeria and Yemen are facing credible risks of famine as well. It's important to stress that these 

crises are largely man-made with other compounding factors, like drought in Somalia, making 

the situations even more untenable. There has been a remarkable shift in the drivers of 

humanitarian crisis over the past decade. Ten years ago, conflict caused just twenty percent of 

emergencies. Today, that number is 80 percent according to the UN. The number of people in 

need of humanitarian aid has more than doubled over the past decade, and more than 65 million 

people are displaced. This shift towards conflict-related crises brings with it different challenges 

like ensuring critical and safe access to communities in need. 

In South Sudan, years of intense violence has transformed the world's youngest nation into one 

of the most food insecure in the world. An estimated 5.5 million people-nearly half of South 

Sudan's population-will face life-threatening hunger this year. Civilians are targets of violence 

from armed actors on all sides of the conflict, local markets and harvests have been disrupted or 

destroyed, and families are being driven from their homes, forced to survive on whatever 

sustenance they can find like wild grasses and water lilies. More than 3.5 million South Sudanese 

are displaced, including 1.6 million South Sudanese refugees who have fled into neighboring 

countries. In the month of January alone, more than 90,000 South Sudanese fled their country, 

many to neighboring Uganda, where the Bidi Bidi refugee settlement, which did not even exist 

seven months ago, has rapidly swelled to become one of the largest refugee camps in the world. 

For three years, the international community has employed massive etiorts to stave otT famine in 

South Sudan. Yet as conflict intensified, the food security situation continued to deteriorate. 

Famine was declared in two counties on February 20,2017, and significant humanitarian need 

can be found throughout the country. As we have said repeatedly, this is a man-made crisis and 

the direct consequence of prolonged conflict. We hold all the warring parties-including the 

government, the opposition, and afiiliated armed groups-responsible for the hostilities that 

upend and, even worse, target civilian lives and livelihoods. 

5 
11


24832a-6.eps

Despite the challenges of working in South Sudan, the United States has provided more than 

$2.1 billion dollars in humanitarian assistance since the start of the conflict in December 2013, 

including more than $221 million in emergency food assistance just this fiscal year. Our 

assistance, including the distribution of more than 600,000 metric tons of urgently needed food, 

has reached more than 1.3 million people every month. 

More than 5.1 million people are facing severe food insecurity in northeastern Nigeria, 

particularly those displaced in Borno State. Though insecurity limits access and information 

gathering, there are signs that famine likely occurred in 2016, and maybe ongoing in parts of the 

state that humanitarian actors are unable to reach. As humanitarian agencies access areas 

previously held by Boko Haram, they are encountering communities with dire levels of hunger 

and malnutrition, particularly among children. The UN estimates that in 2017, nearly 450,000 

children will experience life threatening severe acute malnutrition. The United States has 

provided more than $321 million since FY 2016 for people affected by the ongoing crisis in the 

Lake Chad Basin region, including more than $175 million in emergency food assistance 

operations. Our assistance to this area is critical for promoting stability. 

Lastly 1 would be remiss not to mention the situation in Yemen, where the effects of the severe 

humanitarian crisis there are felt across the Hom. Yemen is experiencing the largest food 

security emergency in the world. The escalation in conflict in 20 IS-coupled with political 

instability, the resulting economic crisis, rising fuel and food prices, and high unemploymenthas led to staggering levels offood insecurity. This has led to large scale outflows of refugees 

and returnees, when security permits, to Somalia and Djibouti, who are struggling to handle the 

increased caseload of populations in need. 

More than seventeen million people in Yemen are food insecure, including seven million people 

who are unable to survive without food assistance. More than 460,000 children under 5 are 

acutely malnourished, a 200 percent increase since 2014. FEWS NET is reporting that famine is 

possible in Yemen iffood imports drop or conflict further restricts markets and humanitarian 

access. 

The U.S. government has contributed more than $431 million in humanitarian assistance in 

Yemen since the beginning ofFY 2016, about $265 million of which is emergency food 

assistance through UN and NGO partners. U.S. food, including specialized nutritional products, 

has been a critical part of our response, as many local markets have severely contracted from 

reduced imports. Where possible we have used other interventions such as food vouchers, which 

have supported local vendors and stimulated local markets, crucial in crisis-affected 

communities. 

6 
12


24832a-7.eps

CONCLUSION 

It's important to note these broader challenges the humanitarian community faces. We are never 

focusing on just one country or region at a time, and the scale and nature of humanitarian crises 

in the world right now strain the capacities of the humanitarian system. The United States cannot 

do it alone-we need all our United Nations, NGO, affected government, and donor partners 

working together to tackle these challenges. 

We call on other donors to increase their contributions, and appreciate that some are beginning to 

rise to the challenge: on March 17, the European Union announced an additional 100 million 

euros to respond to the crisis in South Sudan, and 65 million euros to respond to the serious 

droughts in Somalia, Ethiopia and Kenya. In response to unprecedented support from the British 

public for their East Mrica appeal, over the weekend of March 18-19, the UK Government 

matched pound for pound the 5 million pounds donated by the public. The Government of 

Canada just announced $90 million for all four countries facing famine. 

Every day lam grateful to be part of this global humanitarian community. But lam especially 

grateful for the committed staff that serves in the Office of Food for Peace and at USA !D. They 

represent hope to those in need and bring the generosity of the American people directly to 

ordinary people in desperate situations. And it is because of the dedication of all our NGO 

partners like those on the next panel-Mercy Corps, World Vision and Samaritan's Purse-and 

those of our UN partners-the World Food Program and UNICEF-that aid reaches those who 

need it, despite how difficult getting it to them may be. 

In addition, we have worked with our international partners to identify strategic opportunities to 

make global humanitarian assistance more effective and efficient, including prioritizing needs 

and reducing duplication and costs. This will make every dollar the U.S. provides work even 

harder and help more people. 

We remain committed to providing humanitarian assistance around the world as both a moral 

imperative and as a direct benetit to the well-being of the United States. As provided in the 

President's Budget Blueprint, the FY 2018 Budget will allow for significant funding of 

humanitarian assistance. We do expect that we would focus resources on the highest priority 

areas and continue our efforts to make humanitarian assistance more efficient and effective, 

while also asking the rest of the world to do more. 

Thank you for your attention to these issues and for the support Congress has provided to 

US AID and specifically our humanitarian programs over the years. We do this work not only 

because it is the right thing to do, but also because it is in the interest of the American people and 

promotes global stability. Please know that your support transforms and saves lives every day. 

7 
13

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Nims, for your testimony 

and above all for your work, which has been tremendous over the 

years and, obviously, during a crisis like this it is needed now more 

than ever. 

Let me just ask you a few questions. About a month ago, you had 

testified that Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, and Somalia all pledged regional cooperation and cross-border cooperation to tackle the 

drought and the underlying fragility of the region. 

Has there been any fruit to that effort? Are they truly cooperating? And are we ahead of the curve this time, are we just keeping or head afloat, or are we behind? 

Mr. NIMS. Thank you for that question. 

As far as cooperation efforts of those countries that you mentioned, through the IGAD network they have brought together 

leaders of those governments to work better together to address 

this crisis. 

I think the efforts, most notably in Kenya and Ethiopia, are 

showing the greatest strides. For example, the same drought that 

is affecting Somalia is also affecting those two countries. 

But those two countries are better able to withstand what’s happening. Kenya, for example, is putting $1.6 billion of its own resources toward helping people in Kenya that are affected by this 

drought. 

Ethiopia has a longstanding social safety net program in conjunction with USAID and other donors to be able to better withstand 

what’s going on. 

So the cooperation definitely has started and IGAD is in a good 

position to do this. 

Mr. SMITH. Let me ask you with regards to aid workers, when 

Greg Simpkins and I were in Juba, again, late August of last year, 

we kept raising the issue including with the military—with five of 

the top generals and the Defense Minister—about the need—this 

was after the Terrain incident where several aid workers were 

raped, many aid workers were beaten and diplomats—one journalist, a South Sudanese man, was killed—and as it turned out one 

of the aid workers, and I didn’t know this until about 3 days before 

we left, was actually from my district. 

She was not raped but she was sexually assaulted and the two 

military officers that broke in and broke up what was about to become a rape prevented even further tragedy to her. 

But she has been severely traumatized. She was actually going 

to testify at a hearing we had on South Sudan and then just didn’t 

want—she was going to do it by way of phone with no name attribution, anonymously. But it was just too much to tell the story of 

what an aid worker goes through. 

So my question is, the U.N. Panel of Experts for South Sudan 

said that South Sudan is the deadliest in the world for aid workers. 

It seems to me that whether it be USAID and our mission leaders and people on the ground or anyone else from the NGO community, we have got to just keep pounding away with these governments and all parties, including rebels, to leave the aid workers 

alone. 

14

There needs to be a sacrosanct—this is almost like when the Red 

Cross would show up even the most hostile of forces would at least 

allow the white flag for humanitarian purposes to go forward. 

What can we do to—maybe an initial assessment of how bad it 

really is in each of these countries and what can we do to make 

sure that that aid does then flow and that would include the indigenous aid workers because sometimes they are picked off and hurt 

because they are seen, well, they are South Sudanese and nobody 

will make a big deal about it. 

Of course, we look at their lives as equally important to everyone 

else’s life. So if you could speak to that. 

Mr. NIMS. Chairman Smith, thank you very much for that question, and it is actually incredibly relevant. We have just received 

reports as of yesterday that six workers from an indigenous NGO 

were killed in South Sudan—three Kenyans and I think it is now 

three South Sudanese. They worked for a local NGO. 

USAID does not have a direct relationship with that entity but 

they are definitely partners in trying to bring lifesaving aid to 

South Sudan for the greater humanitarian community. 

I believe that now, since the conflict began in 2013, that we have 

had over 80 fatalities of aid workers in South Sudan. It is an incredibly dangerous place to work. 

And I think you’re correct in saying that we have to ensure, all 

donor governments and all operating partners, that the safety of 

our people are of utmost concern and that we continue to take 

measures to ensure when they go out to do this work that they are 

protected and that all parties know that these are neutral actors 

in place. 

This has been an issue that we are not just seeing in South 

Sudan. We are seeing other parts of the world as well. As part of 

the World Humanitarian Summit last summer in Turkey, we 

talked about this issue and it is very concerning for donors, especially for our office where not only do we have our partners, we also 

have USAID staff in these conditions. 

And this is one of the great changes I think that we have seen 

in the last 5 years about the nature of conflict and what we are 

responding to is that conflicts are not driven necessarily by the natural disasters that they used to be. 

They are being driven by conflict. Conflict necessarily puts greater risk on our partners. I also think that the people that will be 

following will be able to talk in greater detail about some of the 

actions they are taking. 

Mr. SMITH. Let me just ask you, how much money are we allocating toward this crisis? Is there a low estimate, medium estimate, high estimate? 

What do you think is going to be needed? Will there be a request 

of Congress for additional funding or do you have enough that you 

could either reprogram or you already have? 

And, secondly, on the issue of prepositioning, again, just having 

been in Juba it was appalling that armed forces would go to WFP 

warehouse and pretty much strip it clean of all of the foodstuffs 

that were there which were intended for extremely hungry people. 

15

Prepositioning, GAO found that it does save time. It’s there in 

a way that could be accessed quickly. But it does cost money, and 

then there is the risk of theft. How do we balance all of that? 

And the idea of WFP tracking food delivery—are we on top of 

that with them to make sure that it gets to where it is supposed 

to be in a timely fashion to alleviate suffering? 

Mr. NIMS. Thank you, Chairman, for those questions. 

Let’s talk about some of the numbers. Right now, since FY 2016 

Food for Peace alone has provided, including South Sudan, close to 

$1 billion of resources have been allocated in food resources to all 

of those affected countries and that is primarily from the Office of 

Food for Peace. 

Our sister office, the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance in USAID, also has done over $500 million in conjunction with our 

funding. 

So I think that there is a robust response from the United States 

in these crises and we can break down by country some of these 

operations, even by partner at a later date if you would like that. 

Mr. SMITH. If you could provide that for the record as quickly as 

possible that would be very——

Mr. NIMS. Not a problem. We will definitely be on that as soon 

as this hearing ends. 

[The information referred to follows:]

16

WRITTEN RESPONSE RECEIVED FROM MR. MATTHEW NIMS TO QUESTION ASKED

DURING THE HEARING BY THE HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH

In FY 2016-2017, the U.S. Agency for International Development has provided 

more than $983 million to the Horn of Africa to date, including $762 million in 

emergency food assistance from Food for Peace. In addition, the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration has provided $286 million in 

humanitarian funding for a total of nearly $1.27 billion from the U.S. Government. 

In addition, USAID has provided more than $708 million to South Sudan in FY 

2016-2017, including $565 million in emergency food assistance from Food for Peace. 

The U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration has also 

provided nearly $123 million in humanitarian funding for a total of nearly 

$831million from the U.S. Government.


24832l-1.eps
17


24832l-2.eps

U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance COFDA) 

IMPLEMENTING PARTNER ACTIVITY LOCATION AMOUNT 

Action Contre Ia Faim (ACF) 

Concern 

GOAL 

lntcma.tional Medical Corps (IMC) 

lntemational R.c1cuc Comm ittee (IRC) 

OCHA 

USAIDIOFDA' 

Nutrition, WASH 

Nutrition, WASH 

Nutrition 

ETHIOPIA 

Health, Nutrition, WASH 

WASH 

Etlliopia Humanitarian Fund 

Humanitarian Coordination and 

Information Management 

A&ficu ltureand Food Sewrity, 

Oromiya 

SNNP 

Oromiya, SNNP 

Somali 

Countrywide 

Countrywide 

Oxfam/Gre:n Brit:~in (Oxfam/GB) Economic Recovery ~nd Market Somali 

$1 ,779,464 

$1 ,642,303 

$1 ,000,000 

$2,000,000 

$870,219 

$6,000,000 

$1 ,000,000 

$3,900,000 

------------------- ~~ASH _________________________________ _ 

Project Concern International (PCI) 

saus 

UNICEF 

UN HAS 

USAID/Ethiopia 

Agriculture and Food Security, WASH Oromiya 

Agriculture and Food Security, 

Economic Recovery and Market 

Systems, Nutrition, WASH 

Health, Nutrition, WASH 

Risk ManagementPolicyandPracticc 

Agriculture and Food Security 

Agliculturc and Food Security 

Agriculture and Food Security 

Afar, Somali 

Afar, Ot·omiya, SNN P, Somali 

Countrywide 

Oromiya 

Somali 

Countrywide 

$78 3,160 

$3,300,000 

$4,052,408 

$1 ,500,000 

$499,500 

$499,97<1 

$25 0,000 

Program Support $376,920 

TOTAL USAID/OFDA FUNDING FOR THE ETHIOPIA RESPONSE IN FY 1017 $29,953,948 

SOMALIA 

Agriculture and Food Security, 

Economic Recovery and Market 

Systems, Health, Humanitarian 

Implementing Partners Coordination and lnfonnation Countrywide 

Management , logistics Support and 

Relief Commodities, F\jsk Management 

Policy and Practice, WASH 

Program Support 

TOTAL USAID/OFDA FUNDING FOR THE SOMAUA RESPONSE IN FY 2017 

TOTAL USAID/OFDA FUNDING FOR THE HORN OF AFRICA RESPONSE IN FY 2017 

$46,385,93<1 

$32,523 

$46,418,457 

$76,171,405 
18


24832l-3.eps

lnt m:~tional g:~niution for Migration (1 0M) 

UNHCR 

State/PRM 

DJIBOUTI 

Contribution to Yemen Revised 

Regional Appe~ for Djibouti 

Protection and Assistance for Refugees 

TOTAL STATE/PRM FUNDING FOR THE DJIBOUTI RESPONSE IN FY 2011 

IOM 

UNHCR 

UN HAS 

ETHIOPIA 

Contribution to Yemen Revised 

Regional Appe31 for Ethiopia 

Protection and Assistance for Refugees 

Logistics Support and Relief 

Commodities 

TOTAL STATE/PRM FUNDING FOR THE ETHIOPIA RESPONSE IN FY 2017 

UNHCR 

UN HAS 

KENYA 

Protection and Assistance for Refugees 

Logistics Support and Relief 

Commodities 

TOTAL STATE/PRM FUNDING FOR THE KENYA RESPONSE IN FY 2017 

UNHCR 

SOMAUA 

Protection and Assistance for lOPs and 

Refugees 

TOTAL STATE/PRM FUNDING FOR THE SOMALIA RESPONSE IN FY 2017 

Obock 

Countrywide 

Countrywide 

Countrywide 

Countrywide 

Countrywide 

Countrywide 

Program Support 

Countrywide 

TOTAL STATE/PRM FUNDING FOR THE HORN OF AFRICA RESPONSE IN FY2017 

$ 1,200,000 

$3,300,000 

$4,500,000 

$ 1,100,000 

$3 1,150,000 

$560,000 

$l2,81 0,000 

$20,800,000 

$530,000 

$83 ,92-. 

$21,413,924 

$8,300,000 

$8,300,000 

$67,023,924 
19

Mr. NIMS. As far as prepositioning, especially in South Sudan 

but it really goes for other places that we are working as well, but 

South Sudan is a little bit particular. Because of the rains in South 

Sudan, our partners and the donors work very, very closely to ensure before the rains hit that food is prepositioned in warehouses 

throughout the country that needs to be there so that it can be 

accessed. 

Conflict will disrupt that—our ability to preposition into those 

warehouses. The case in Juba you mentioned, WFP in particular 

took heroic efforts to remove much of the food before the conflict 

actually began. 


24832l-4.eps
20

Not all of the food was taken out but that warehouse in and of 

itself they knew that the conflict actors were coming and the team 

moved actually the majority of the food out of that warehouse before the conflict. 

So our teams on the ground are very adept at being able to know 

what’s going on on the ground and to protect those resources. 

There is always a danger in prepositioning but because of the access we get when these conditions allow us not able to deliver having that food in place is of primary importance. So we are going 

to continue to use that tool to ensure we are best able to respond. 

Your final question about WFP tracking or being able to account 

for the resources—this is something of critical importance to 

USAID in general and definitely our office. 

We at USAID partner with WFP and the NGOs to ensure that 

those that have been targeted are the ones that are receiving the 

aid and there are several ways that we do this. 

First of all is ensuring that those identified are the ones that 

need the aid. In other words, the most vulnerable are getting it. 

Our partners are very, very good at ensuring when they go to 

communities, those relationships that they have they are able to 

identify those who are most in need. 

The second part, when we actually go for distribution, is that we 

have teams of monitors in place and we have certain biometric 

measures that we can employ to ensure that those that have been 

identified are actually the people that are getting the aid. 

This can go from a retinal scan, to an ID card, to even a fingerprint that we would employ to ensure that those people are the 

ones that are supposed to be getting the aid. 

And then finally, we would do, especially in places like Somalia 

and in other places, is a follow-up distribution testing to ensure 

that the people have actually received the aid. 

This can be done through cell phone surveys similar to our 

Nielsen ratings that we have here in the United States where we 

will do a random call of beneficiaries to ensure that they actually 

did receive the aid as well as setting up hotlines so that the beneficiaries can actually call in to ensure that they’ve got that. 

Finally, what we do is that we, the USAID, has employed thirdparty monitoring. These are actually groups of NGOs or other actors that we employ to go back to those areas to ensure that the 

food that was allocated to those regions actually was delivered to 

those people that we are supposed to. 

This all combines to make sure that we have a pretty good eye 

on what we plan to do actually happens and reaches those needy 

beneficiaries. 

Mr. SMITH. And before you leave, my good friend and colleague, 

Ranking Member Bass, one issue that we pressed Salva Kiir on relentlessly and have done so since our trip there in August, to his 

Defense Minister, his Vice President, who I have seen since, is zero 

tolerance for sexual violence—violence of all kinds but including 

sexual violence. 

The report on the Terrain installation suggested that they do 

that, which is what we were asking for. But it still hasn’t happened. 

21

And until the military up and down the command, every aspect 

of it, realizes that its security forces cannot rape and harass people, 

particularly aid workers who are seemingly one of the most targeted groups; we really have to raise the bar, I think. 

They have promised they would do it. Kiir told us he would do 

it, told Greg and I face to face, and it is about time to get it done. 

That was in August. 

I know you are absolutely on board pushing that. But know that 

we work in tandem, all of us. It is bipartisan. 

That has got to end and they need to implement a strategy that 

is zero tolerance because just like we had with many of the peacekeepers when they were deployed to Goma and other places, and 

I had several hearings on that. Went there. 

As you know, I wrote the trafficking laws for the United States, 

the Trafficking Victims Protection Acts. George W. Bush did a zero 

tolerance policy for our military and it holds today, and if somebody violates it, even to the point of prostitution, the Uniform Code 

of Military Justice is as clear as a bell. 

It is actionable and they can go to prison and they should go to 

prison, those who violate it. 

So, Kiir, we told him that. We said, we know that years back you 

had a fondness for President Bush—well, he did it with our military—please do it with yours. 

And he said he would and he hasn’t. So it is a point of great consternation and anger now that they have refused to actually do it. 

So I just would hope you would convey that too because, again, 

the people we want to protect are the indigenous South Sudanese, 

obviously, and the beneficiaries of the aid and all those wonderful 

women and men who put their lives on the line as aid workers to 

help. 

So thank you so much for your testimony. 

Mr. NIMS. Thank you very much, Chairman. Thank you for your 

efforts on that point. 

Ms. BASS. Thank you very much for coming and giving your testimony today and I just had a few questions for you. 

We have a markup in the full committee tomorrow and we have 

a resolution on the famine, and I just wanted to know what you 

thought about it. 

Right now the resolution is focusing on South Sudan, but whether or not you thought Somalia and Nigeria needed to be included 

as well. 

That’s one question. I also want to ask you about the role of the 

AU. Is the AU helping and what role they are playing specifically? 

And our chairman here was talking about President Kiir in 

terms of the peacekeepers. But I would also want to know whether 

or not they have stopped. 

I don’t know if you mentioned this, Mr. Chair, but whether they 

stopped. They had increased the fees for humanitarian workers. 

It was some crazy dollar amount—$10,000 or something if you 

wanted to come in and provide humanitarian support. They got 

condemned internationally for that. I don’t know if they have 

backed away. 

Mr. NIMS. Thank you, Ranking Member Bass, for those questions. 

22

On the first question about including Somalia and Nigeria in the 

resolution, the situation in both of those countries is very severe 

as well. 

In Nigeria, what we are seeing is over 5 million people at risk 

of severe food insecurity and even about the same level in Somalia. 

The difference in Somalia is that in about the next 2 or 3 weeks, 

if the rains fail, which it is still unknown exactly if that’s going to 

happen, we could be seeing even more need because those are very 

crucial rains at this time. 

So it is expected that the needs are going to grow pretty quickly 

in Somalia as well. And in Nigeria, the real issue has been the lack 

of access in some of those areas—in fact, zero access in some of 

them still, and when our partners have had access they are finding——

Ms. BASS. Because of Boko Haram or because of other——

Mr. NIMS. Boko Haram. Because of activities of Boko Haram, 

most definitely, and when our partners have had some access they 

are finding just horrific conditions on the ground with severe acute 

malnutrition rates that are really unheard of in quite some time—

over 50 percent in certain cases. 

So that is a very, very severe crisis and I can say that I think 

that the partners have really stepped up their game in Nigeria. I 

think that there are several issues to contend with but I think that 

we are better placed than we were as a better humanitarian community than, let’s say, even 6 or 8 months ago. 

That’s not to say there is a lot of work left to do and there is 

a lot of areas of access that we just are not getting into. 

Coming back to Somalia, what we are seeing, depending on the 

rains or not, we are still in midst of a very serious situation. 

We have lots of people—like I said, 5 million people that are really at risk right now. Again, what’s a little bit different about this 

is that Somalia definitively it is because of a drought that’s happening right now. 

It’s not to say that there is not intense conflict that is really 

what got us here but the drought is what is most concerning and 

what we need to do now—what USAID is doing is not waiting for 

this to happen. 

We are acting now. We are moving food into the country now and 

working with our partners to ensure that we are there. 

What’s a little bit different than the situation now is the fact 

that we have acted a little bit earlier than before in 2011, as the 

chairman was saying, and we also have better access, meaning our 

partners have much better access than they did in 2011 and really 

the viability of al-Shabaab has been reduced. Back in 2011, alShabaab was in control of the capital Mogadishu. That is definitely 

not the case now. 

What our partners are telling us is that in the urban areas of 

Somalia we have pretty good access. We have pretty good sustained 

access. The rural areas are still of concern. 

So around 600,000 to 900,000 people in those rural areas really 

are still getting limited to no access and that is very concerning, 

especially as the drought conditions worsen. 

Your question about the AU, I think——

23

Ms. BASS. Well, actually before you go there, the—so in Nigeria 

the Nigerian Government has also said that Boko Haram was 

under control. So——

Mr. NIMS. I would not be in a good position to talk about the 

military and the government’s efforts directly on Boko Haram. 

I can say that our partners definitely feel that there are places 

that are unsafe for them to access. And similar to Chairman 

Smith’s question about putting our partners in danger, without 

adequate control of a situation our partners are just simply not 

going to go to those places and that definitely still exists. 

Ms. BASS. Of course not. The AU? 

Mr. NIMS. The AMISOM troops have had significant impact in 

Somalia. I think that the combined forces of Kenya and the Ethiopians have really opened up those corridors and really allowed the 

NGOs to be able to reestablish a very good network and very good 

operations in there. 

It is hoped that that continues and with elections in Kenya and 

with continuing growth in Ethiopia, let’s hope that continues. That 

is a very, I think, good sign of how the AU in general has had positive impact on this and I think that will continue. 

Ms. BASS. So—and what about the AU and also President Kiir 

in terms of aid workers being able to come? 

Mr. NIMS. Correct. So we did hear about a week or so ago about a $10,000 per humanitarian worker fee to be able to do this. I can 

say for certain to you right now that that has not occurred—that 

our partners are still operating, that they have not been asked to 

pay those fees. 

Ms. BASS. Was that not true or he backed away from it or——

Mr. NIMS. I think many things——

Ms. BASS. Kind of important if it wasn’t true. 

Mr. NIMS. I think that the announcement was made. We believe 

that it was made. But I think the efforts of the donors and the U.S. 

Ambassador there has made it very clear that this fee is untenable 

and will not be paid and I think that has had substantial impact 

on it, going forward. 

Ms. BASS. So let me ask you a question. In the President’s proposed budget with a 30-plus percent cut to USAID, if that cut actually went through, how would you respond to this situation that 

you’re facing now? 

Mr. NIMS. So we at USAID, we have seen the President’s blueprint and it hasn’t specifically mentioned cuts to Food for Peace, 

and we continue to work on the budget. 

But I have no information exactly on the cuts for 2018 or the potential impacts that’s going to have on our budget. 

Ms. BASS. Okay. I thought that there was a significant cut to 

USAID that was proposed. 

Mr. NIMS. I think that there have been proposed cuts. As the 

exact impact of what that’s going to be and how that’s going to be, 

especially on the humanitarian side, we really have no information 

at this time. 

I feel that it is my job to make sure that with the resources we 

are given by Congress that we make the tough choices that are 

going to be there in the future and that we continue to stress the 

most vulnerable and the most needy in the world. 

24

Ms. BASS. Is there anything else you think Congress should be 

doing right now? 

Mr. NIMS. I think having hearings exactly like this that bring attention to what’s going on not just in Somalia but I do think Somalia needs attention—but other places in the world is incredibly crucial. 

I think the chairman’s efforts on highlighting the safety of humanitarian workers as well as the protection issue that is definitely apparent in so many of these conflict situations is incredibly 

useful. 

When we are able to get you all to come out to see some of these 

programs that is phenomenal as well. Your visits to the field have 

tremendous impact for your understanding but also for us to elevate the situations. 

Ms. BASS. So is the chairman going to go? 

Mr. SMITH. Yes. 

Ms. BASS. Maybe I’ll go with you. 

Mr. SMITH. That would be great. 

Ms. BASS. I yield. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Garrett. 

Mr. GARRETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Very briefly, the ranking member asked about the situation in 

Somalia and Ethiopia. I would just give you carte blanche to extend 

whether or not there is a relevant crisis in any other nations and 

leave that open ended. 

But specifically, obviously, when you look on a map you see the 

Republic of the Sudan, obviously, North and South Sudan and 

other surrounding areas and these sorts of humanitarian crises, 

particularly as it relates to famine, generally don’t respect borders. 

Are there other areas where we might consider the application 

of assistance? 

Mr. NIMS. Thank you, Mr. Garrett. 

What I had not talked a lot about, which was a little bit in my 

opening statement, is the situation in Yemen and I think the numbers alone in Yemen where we are looking at close to 17 million 

people that are severely food insecure and with the pending conflict 

and the existing conflict and how that’s going to go is definitely 

cause for concern. 

And because of the proximity of Yemen to east Africa, that is a 

place that will be impacted by maybe refugees coming in or large 

movements of population. Yemen is a place where access is very 

difficult. 

Ninety percent of Yemen’s food is imported and, quite frankly, 

the humanitarian assistance alone is just not going to be able to 

impact that situation if there is a full collapse of the market or 

even the ability to import food. I think that we should be keeping 

a close eye on Yemen. 

One aspect is South Sudan, and just yesterday, the head of the 

World Food Programme’s emergency division came in to talk to us 

about some issues. She’s here in town and is going to talk about 

these four areas that we are talking about. 

And what was surprising to me is that she brought up as bad 

as South Sudan is and how it has just trended down, quite frankly, 

over the last 3 years that she is most concerned about that moving 

25

quickly into an even worse status and a lot of that is because of 

the continued conflict and what she is seeing. 

And I tend to agree that South Sudan is on a simmer and could 

very easily go into a boil very, very quickly and I think that we 

have to continue our vigilance on what’s going on in South Sudan 

and the conflict makes it incredibly difficult for us to be able to do 

what needs to be done as humanitarians. 

Mr. GARRETT. So, Mr. Nims, you’re here and we are speaking 

about a humanitarian crisis that the vast bulk of the world is not 

aware of. 

To that end, is there something with which the common observer 

of world events might put this on scale with? Can you compare it 

to—this crisis to another humanitarian crisis to provide scale? 

Mr. NIMS. So what we have been saying in humanitarian circles 

is that we have not seen this level of need or population movement 

or refugees since World War II. 

So, in fact, this is unprecedented in, really, quite frankly, human 

history, the level of need. I think it is important to say that even 

in the case of Somalia where we are seeing a drought that every 

single one of these four major conflicts in northern Nigeria, in 

South Sudan, in Yemen and in Somalia, are all primarily due to 

conflict. 

These are man-made situations and I think it is important for us 

to understand that as dedicated as the people in USAID, as dedicated are the people who will be talking afterwards, humanitarian 

assistance cannot solve these crises. 

We really need to have political solutions. We need strong leadership from the U.N. and other places to be able to bring cogent solutions to what’s going on. 

We didn’t talk about Syria or what’s going on in Iraq. These are 

similar longstanding crises that really exist because of manmade 

conflict and we cannot, in the sense as we say ‘‘HA’’—humanitarian 

assistance—ourselves out of this. 

Mr. GARRETT. So are there any regional players who, if they were 

to change attitudinally, might be of key assistance as it relates to 

getting the aid where it needs to go. 

Obviously, in Yemen, for example, there is real challenges just 

getting on the ground much less getting aid where it needs to go. 

Are there any countries where if they were to sort of change the 

current status of their activities in their own region would be able 

to be particularly helpful, and who and how so? 

Mr. NIMS. Thank you for that question, Congressman. 

I think you’re getting into a realm of me as an operator. You 

know, I definitely can look at the situation——

Mr. GARRETT. Sure. I respect that. 

Mr. NIMS [continuing]. That’s going on. I think that we have 

talked to our State Department colleagues and they are in a much 

better position to answer some of those questions and I appreciate 

that. 

Mr. GARRETT. Sure. Yeah, no, I get that. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Garrett. 

Mr. Castro. 

Mr. CASTRO. Thank you, Chairman. 

26

Thanks for your testimony today and I apologize if I ask something that’s been asked already. I had my Western Hemisphere 

Subcommittee hearing at the same time so I’ve been in and out. 

But let me ask you, how will the reduced U.S. contributions to 

U.S. peacekeeping affect the humanitarian situations in South 

Sudan and Sudan? 

Mr. NIMS. Thank you for that question, Congressman. 

I am really not able to say exactly how reduced funding to any 

one group, especially on that level of the U.N., would have a direct 

impact. 

I do know that the peacekeeping force in South Sudan, for example, has a critical role to play. But the level of funding from the 

U.S. or other agencies I am not really able to say what that exact 

impact would be. 

Mr. CASTRO. But I suspect that reduced funding probably 

wouldn’t be helpful, right? 

Mr. NIMS. I would agree that probably it would not be helpful. 

Mr. CASTRO. Yes. Let me ask you, as far as you know what is 

China’s commitment to humanitarian aid in Africa and in this region in particular? 

Mr. NIMS. Thank you for that question. 

I am not fully versed on exactly the levels that we have seen 

from the Government of China in humanitarian assistance. 

I do know that USAID and the State Department have been engaging with officials from China to increase their role in humanitarian assistance and I believe that China recently has announced 

some bits of funding for Somalia, for example. 

But I don’t know those exact numbers and we can definitely get 

back to you on what those figures have been. 

Mr. CASTRO. Well, and part of the reason I ask, for example, is 

because China has been more active in Africa, the continent generally, in terms of economic development investment and I wonder 

if they have also stepped more aggressively into the humanitarian 

aid role. 

Mr. NIMS. I do think that they have increased some of their funding in certain ways and we are hopeful that it will continue and 

I know that we have efforts to engage them in the humanitarian 

sphere specifically on how to engage with the U.N. and other actors. But we can get you more of that information at a later time. 

[The information referred to follows:]

WRITTEN RESPONSE RECEIVED FROM MR. MATTHEW NIMS TO QUESTION ASKED

DURING THE HEARING BY THE HONORABLE JOAQUIN CASTRO

At the 2016 U.S-China development cooperation dialogue, the United States and 

China agreed to enhancing collaboration on global food security, deepening coordination on humanitarian assistance and disaster response, and working collaboratively 

with multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and United Nations to implement sustainable development goals. The United States has also urged China to increase its contribution to humanitarian assistance, both to countries directly and to 

multilateral agencies. Recent Chinese humanitarian assistance funding includes:

• At the second Forum on China-Africa Cooperation in December 2015, Chinese 

President Xi Jinping pledged $156 million in 2016 emergency food aid to 

countries faced with food security crisis caused by El Nin ̃ o, including approximately $88 million in support for Ethiopia, Somalia, and nine other African 

countries.

27

• In September 2016, China announced plans to provide $100 million to the UN 

Peace and Development Trust Fund in assistance to refugees facing humanitarian need.

• In 2016, WFP received $5.94 billion in contributions, including $18.6 million 

from China—an $8.1 million increase from the 2015 Chinese contribution of 

$10.5 million.

• In 2016, UNHCR received $3.34 billion in donor contributions, including $2.8 

million from China. This is an increase of $1.86 million from the 2015 Chinese contribution of $941,841 to the UNHCR.

• China is one of the top 10 donors to the FAO, with a 2017 contribution of 

$14 million. Other Chinese contributions to UN agencies for 2017 are not yet 

publically available.

• On the development side of food security, China has a long-standing strategic 

alliance with the FAO to support tripartite cooperation in developing countries, and has contributed $80 million to the FAO-China South-South Cooperation trust fund since its inception in 2008.

Mr. CASTRO. Sure. And, you know, and of course we want the aid 

to get there regardless of where it comes from, right? You want 

people to be helped when they need help. 

But I have said before that the President’s posture toward many 

nations around the world and his scaling back of funding for things 

like humanitarian aid are making the United States take a back 

seat to other countries when it comes to being a leader in the 

world. 

And part of that is not only economic engagement but also this 

kind of aid, and when you couple this scaling back with the hostility that he’s shown toward countries like Mexico, for example, allies around the world, or Germany, Australia, I think it puts the 

United States in a very precarious position and also allows a nation, an economic competitor of ours, a nation like China to step 

forward and really become an even stronger leader around the 

world, and that Xi Jinping, the President of China, probably sees 

Africa as a further opportunity in addition to what they’ve done 

economically there to step up and be helpful in ways that it looks 

like this administration is committed to backing away from. What 

do you think about that? 

Mr. NIMS. I think that USAID has been, and especially the Office 

of Food for Peace and our sister office, OFDA, have enjoyed tremendous support from Members of Congress and what we have 

been able to do over the last 3 years has really saved countless 

lives. 

We look forward to continued support to be able to do what we 

do because, as I said earlier, I think we are looking at an unprecedented time of need and I hope that we will be able to continue 

to do that. 

Mr. CASTRO. Well, I appreciate that, and we want you all to be 

successful. I worked with USAID on the global development lab 

legislation that we got through the House and couldn’t quite get 

through the Senate. Hopefully, it’ll get through this term. 

But I would hate to see the work of this Congress and, you know, 

the chairman, I know, has worked on these issues a lot—I would 

hate to see your work and the work of this Congress undone by a 

lack of commitment, going forward. 

Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Castro. 

28

Mr. Nims, thank you very much for your testimony. We do have 

a series of four votes, and I apologize—we will have a brief suspension of this subcommittee. 

But I would point out that the President does propose and we 

dispose in the House and Senate. I’ve been here 37 years; I’m in 

my 37th year as a Member of the House and we fought hard and 

back—pushed back when Obama wanted to cut tuberculosis and 

cut it significantly. 

He wanted to cut neglected tropical diseases—we had a major 

bill that I have introduced on neglected tropical diseases—down 

from $100 million to about $82 million. Thankfully, in a bipartisan 

way we pushed back. 

I don’t know if it is OMB or it is the President but we always 

seem to have people in the White House that talk a good game and 

then we end up not getting what we think we should get. 

I do think the Congress will very carefully, both the authorizers 

and the appropriators, will look at these budgets and make sure 

that we get humanitarian aid to where it is needed most and to 

do it in a way that does our American public proud that we care 

for the least of our brethren and I mean that by situationally, of 

course, because they are disadvantaged by famine. 

Thank you so much, Mr. Nims, and we stand in recess. 

Mr. NIMS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[Recess.] 

Mr. SMITH. Subcommittee will resume its sitting and, again, I 

apologize for the delay because of the votes. I don’t think we will 

have another vote for a long time. So thank you for your patience. 

We will begin now with our second panel, beginning first with 

Mr. Ken Isaacs, who serves as vice president of programs and government relations for Samaritan’s Purse. He has served as the director of the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance within USAID. 

He coordinated the United States Government response to the 

Indonesian tsunami, the Pakistani earthquake, the humanitarian 

relief efforts in both Darfur and southern Sudan as well as the 

Niger and Ethiopia emergency responses. 

He led Samaritan’s Purse’s organizational efforts in Liberia in response to Ebola and testified before this subcommittee on that very 

issue in 2014. 

We will then hear from Mr. Michael Bowers, who is the vice 

president for humanitarian leadership and response for Mercy 

Corps. 

In this capacity he is responsible for leading and supporting 

Mercy Corps’ global emergency operations, enhancing their quality 

and accountability, and ensuring that they bring the greatest benefit to people in need. 

Mr. Bowers has directed the agency’s activities in sub-Saharan 

Africa, the Balkans, and Asia, managing programs in food security, 

shelter, agriculture, and economic development. 

Mr. Bowers recently led Mercy Corps’ humanitarian assistance 

programs in Turkey and in northern Syria in 2017. 

We will then here from Thabani Maphosa, who is partnership 

leader for food assistance at World Vision International and acting 

senior director for the food security and livelihoods team at World 

Vision, United States. 

29

In these roles, he leads a global team of technical specialists 

across the World Vision partnership to deliver quality food assistance programming. His careers included 12 years at World Vision 

working in numerous countries in southern Africa. He currently 

serves as the representative to World Vision International on the 

World Food Programme’s executive board. 

Finally, we will hear from Ms. Faustine Wabwire, who is Bread 

for the World Institute’s senior foreign policy analyst at the institute. 

Ms. Wabwire provides policy leadership on issues including climate change, global poverty and hunger, social protection, the need 

for strong institutions and local capacity, and the role of effective 

U.S., partner country, and multilateral assistance in providing solutions. 

Prior to joining Bread for the World Institute, Ms. Wabwire held 

a number of positions in academia, research, and international development at the national, regional, and global levels. 

I would like to now yield the floor and welcome back Mr. Isaacs. 

STATEMENT OF MR. KEN ISAACS, VICE PRESIDENT, PROGRAMS AND GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, SAMARITAN’S 

PURSE 

Mr. ISAACS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank you 

and the representatives, all the fellow guests to the committee for 

the opportunity to speak here today on behalf of those suffering as 

a result of what is being referred to as a quiet famine in the Horn 

of Africa, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, and 

Uganda. 

And the numbers have been gone over in much greater detail 

this morning than I need to enumerate now but I will say a couple 

of things, that the crisis is a result of many factors. 

Certainly there is the weather. There is market influences. But 

what I really want to focus on is South Sudan. 

We are working in an area, Mayiandit, that has officially been 

declared as a famine zone, and between South Sudan, Sudan and 

Uganda, Samaritan’s Purse is feeding probably 2 million people a 

month. So we have a large presence there. 

We have large activity. We have solid relationships with Food for 

Peace program, with OFDA, and particularly with the World Food 

Programme, and I want to acknowledge their great contribution to 

everything that is going on there. 

The most significant driver of the current crisis in the worst hit 

area of South Sudan is political insecurity and brutal conflict and 

it continues to engulf the region. 

In South Sudan alone, I have got a number here—1.85 million 

people have been internally displaced, leaving their homes and 

their crops behind as they flee for their lives. 

A week ago Sunday, we had 15 of our national staff were abducted. They were taken at 2 a.m. They came into our compound 

and they kept them for 3 days. Thankfully, no one was hurt. There 

was no ransom made, but it had to do with the local dynamic over 

humanitarian assistance and this shows some of what was being 

talked about earlier from Congressmember Bass about the dangers 

to humanitarian workers, and it is a growing problem. 

30

The seven that were killed just 2 days ago—the problem is that 

the central government doesn’t control the people with the guns 

anymore. They have control over the main elements of the SPLA 

but there are so many factions and factions of factions and factions 

of factions that you can make a deal with somebody, you can get 

a permission and you don’t know that that’s going to extend into 

the next village. 

As a result of the insecurity there what Samaritan’s Purse has 

done is, to be honest, it has caused us to create our own security 

department that reaches all the way back to headquarters. 

So we have a separate analysis and can monitor our people 

whether that is electronically—we track them. The negotiations 

that go on are all-consuming, but the safety of our staff is important. 

I think that the United States needs to maintain its leadership 

in humanitarian response around the world, and with all of the 

talk that’s going on of budget cuts, I don’t know where that’s going 

down and I don’t want to get into the politics of it. 

But there is criticism going around about development aid or a 

lot of times you hear sort of a broad term we are going to cut development money. 

I think that there needs to be a clear delineation in the thinking 

in people’s minds between humanitarian assistance and development money. 

Even at the end of wars America has always fed people. We fed 

our enemies, and I don’t think that food should be a bargaining 

chip and I don’t think that food should be a tool of diplomacy. 

I think that giving humanitarian aid represents the best of the 

heart and the spirit of the American people and I think that whatever it takes to do that in supporting Food for Peace and supporting the World Food Programme I believe that we need to make 

that effort. 

I think that there are also some things that could be considered 

that would be very beneficial in food aid reform. 

The system right now—pretty much there is some flexibility for 

local purchase with cash but I think that if that could be reviewed 

for even more flexibility and that means to buy commodities out of 

local markets, arrange local logistics that would not only stimulate 

local economies but frequently you would be able to get more food 

at a better buy. 

In Uganda, 1.5 million people are in phase three of a food crisis 

situation. Eight hundred thousand of them have come from South 

Sudan. 

Right now, we are feeding about 60,000 a month. In 2 weeks, 

that number is going to go up to about 300,000 a month. 

The pressure that is being created in the region from the insecurity is going to breed more insecurity is what’s going to happen. So 

you have a situation where the lack of food is not only causing suffering, people are moving for food. People are selling their goods for 

food. They are sort of using up their coping mechanisms. 

A famine is—here is a great analogy of a famine. It is like a big 

tree when the wind blows. The wind blows and the tree leans and 

it comes back up. And the wind blows harder and it leans a little 

bit more and it comes back up. 

31

But there is a point if the wind blows over the tree can’t get back 

up and in those areas that the FEWS NET has declared as a famine zone it is there now. 

So what this means from an optical perspective, just speaking 

candidly and from a human perspective, is that a lot of people are 

going to die. 

And I think that it is important that that be said, that people 

know that, that the Congress knows that and that we carefully 

consider the role that we want the United States to play in that. 

So I think that I’ll leave you today with four points to sort of 

simplify this. One is that the famine and the situation is severe. 

Two, the crisis is a result of many things but in the worst areas 

it is resulting from conflict and lack of access and insecurity. 

Three, I think it requires sustained American diplomatic leadership to have an effect there. Somebody asked earlier about the AU 

and what they are doing. You know, I can’t pass judgment on the 

AU. I can just say look at what’s going on in South Sudan and 

make your own conclusion. 

And I think also that the situation requires sustained U.S. leadership and the provision of humanitarian goods. 

I think saving lives is representative of American values. Thank 

you for letting me talk to you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Isaacs follows:]

32


24832b-1.eps

KEN ISAACS 

VICE PRESIDENT OF PROGRAMS AND GOVERNMENT RELATIONS 

SAMARITAN'S PURSE 

MARCH 28, 2017 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS. 

AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS 

Chairman Smith, esteemed Representatives, and fellow guests of this committee. 

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak here today on behalf of those suffering as a 

result of what has been called a "quiet famine" in Ethiopia, Kenya. Somalia, South Sudan. 

Sudan, and Uganda. As we sit here today, more than 20 million people are facing the 

terrifying reality of starvation. UNICEF has warned that over 1 million children are at 

imminent risk of dying from severe acute malnutrition, and over 6 million do not have 

enough food to meet their basic needs. My organization, Samaritan's Purse, is currently 

working to save as many lives as possible by feeding some 2 million people in Sudan. 

South Sudan, and Uganda. 

This complex and horrific humanitarian crisis is the result of many factors. Poor 

performance of crops because of lack of rain, increased food prices, disease outbreaks, 

deteriorating water and pasture conditions, and livestock death have all contributed to the 

catastrophe that is now before us. The most significant driver of the current crisis in the 

worst hit areas of South Sudan, however, is the political insecurity and brutal conflict that 

continues to engulf the region. In South Sudan alone, 1.85 million people have been 

internally displaced, leaving their homes-and crops-behind as they flee for their lives. 

Because of this, many people are calling this a manmade famine, and it is hard to 

argue with that assessment South Sudan is a nation with fertile soil, abundant water from 

the Nile River, and 12 hours of sunlight each day. It is also a country that has been 

embroiled in civil conflict since 2013, creating a swirling mass of people seeking safety 

and a way to meet their basic human needs such as food, water, and medicine. 

The only way to save lives and reduce the suffering of these vulnerable populations 

is for the United States to provide sustained leadership in bringing immediate, large-scale 

food relief to the area. 

To accomplish this, Food for Peace (FFP), the Office of Foreign Disaster 

Assistance (OFDA), and the World Food Program (WFP) must be robustly funded. Let 

me be clear that what I am suggesting is not development programming. The 

effectiveness of this type of long-term intervention is still hotly debated. Instead, I am 

calling for immediate humanitarian assistance to save the lives of potentially millions of 

people who are now facing severe food insecurity. 
33


24832b-2.eps

Samaritan's Purse is working closely with FFP to distribute monthly food rations 

provided by WFP to nearly 1 million people in South Sudan. We also are partnering with 

OFDA in South Sudan and many other countries to provide clean water, agricultural 

support, and lifesaving nutritional support to vulnerable women and children, where over 

100,000 people are currently experiencing famine conditions and another 1.46 million are 

expected to reach emergency levels of food insecurity. In the last six months of 2016, we 

distributed over 20,000 metric tons offood to nearly half a million people in South Sudan. 

In February of this year, we provided food to approximately 123,000 people in Mayendit, 

one area of South Sudan where famine has already been declared. 

In Uganda, 1.5 million people are in a Phase 3 food crisis situation. This means 

that acute malnutrition levels are above normal levels and households are only marginally 

able to meet their minimum food needs. The influx of hundreds of thousands of refugees 

fleeing conflict in South Sudan and other areas is exacerbating this alr-eady highly 

insecure environment In partnership with WFP, we are currently distributing food to tens 

of thousands of these refugees with plans to support the food needs of approximately 

300,000 individuals in our upcoming distribution cycle. 

We are grateful for the strategic partnerships with FFP and OFDA that have 

enabled us to bring critically needed humanitarian relief to hundreds of thousands of 

people at risk of starving to death. Unfortunately, it isn't nearly enough. 

In addition to adequate resourcing of food and funding for FFP, OFDA, and WFP, 

consideration must be given for food aid reform that allows local purchase providing the 

necessary flexibility to buy food where it is most affordable and can be delivered as quickly 

as possible. In situations like the current food insecurity crisis gripping eastern Africa, we 

are in a race against time to save as many lives as possible. If more funds were made 

available for local purchase, food aid could be frequently bought at lower prices, and 

closer to the regions in need, than what can be grown and shipped from the United States. 

This may not always be the situation but the flexibility for these kinds of decisions will 

result in saving lives while stimulating local agricultural production. 

This isn't just a matter of compassion. Food insecurity only brings further instability 

and insecurity to areas already plagued by conflict When people are starving, 

governments are undermined, and the situation supports the brutality of the brutal. 

Three weeks ago, Samaritan's Purse staff working in Mayendit were abducted by 

armed actors who threatened to kill them-an action directly connected to the famine 

conditions in that area. Thankfully, they were released safely, but the security conditions 

in the region remain highly unstable. In this environment of desperation and ongoing 

conflict, it is imperative that the United States and the world continue to support 

humanitarian assistance in order that millions of people do not die. Humanitarian 

assistance cannot fix political problems. There must be significant and ongoing political 

engagement to deal with the underlying cause of the instability. This means that we must 

be willing to work with weak governments, brutal governments, and strong-armed political 
34


24832b-3.eps

actors that are at the forefront of the current conflicts. These things are achieved through 

diplomatic and military channels 

Does the United States have a respons"1bility, and an interest, to feed starving people in 

east Africa? I believe yes we do. It helps maintain security in the region and helps prevent 

the spread of radical extremism. It allows the United States to have more connectivity 

and influence in difficult places. 

Nothing shows the heart and the compassion of the American people like helping others 

who are in desperate need. The United States has always led the world in both strength 

and compassion-even feeding our enemies at the end of conflicts. The world cannot 

ignore a famine or shirk the responsibility to attempt to save the lives of those at risk. We 

cannot turn our backs on innocent people, especially children, who are emaciated and 

weak, right now as we sit in this hearing. 

Are we prepared to watch them die because we failed to act? 
35

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much for your testimony and even 

more importantly for your extraordinary leadership. 

We have been joined by Eliot Engel, the ranking member of the 

full committee. 

Mr. ENGEL. I will be brief. Thank you very much. Thank you, 

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass. 

I am very grateful at the ranking member to the subcommittee 

for calling this hearing and bringing attention to the grave humanitarian crises that’s worsening in east Africa and worsening—it is 

really scary because it has been pretty bad up until now. 

The U.N. estimates that nearly 300 million people in east Africa 

don’t have the food they need. Right now Somalia, South Sudan, 

and Sudan face dire food needs while parts of Ethiopia, Kenya, and 

Uganda face a crisis nearly as bad for several years. 

Seasonal rains have failed in the Horn of Africa, a direct result 

of climate change and looking ahead, this crisis holds potential for 

massive displacement. 

So we have an extreme weather condition caused by climate 

change. We have a worsening famine. We have a brewing displacement crisis. 

These sound like the sort of issues our State Department and 

USAID are designed to grapple with. So I will reiterate the points 

I made this morning at our full committee hearing. The administration’s request to cut our international affairs budget by a third 

would be devastating. 

The lack of leadership in senior roles including USAID Administrator, director of USAID’s Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance, the Assistant Secretary for Africa, Assistant Secretary for 

Population, Refugees, and Migration, it makes it impossible for our 

agencies to do their jobs because these slots have not yet been 

filled. 

American leadership is vital and so far this administration by its 

actions is undermining our country’s role in the world. Among the 

two worst cases we see are in Somalia and South Sudan. I would 

like to briefly focus on those. 

Between 2010 and 2012, Somalia suffered through the worst 

drought and famine in 20 years. Failed harvests, a spike in food 

prices, and insecurity that impeded the delivery of food and aid exacerbated this crisis. It exacerbated and was exasperating. 

A quarter of a million Somali refugees lost their lives including 

133,000 children under the age of 5. That just breaks your heart 

to see that. 

And the main lesson learned from that tragedy is that humanitarian assistance came too late and we need to remember that lesson today. More than 6 million people are in need of assistance in 

Somalia and nearly 3 million face crisis or emergency levels of food 

insecurity. 

If the April to June rains fail again, this situation could worsen 

quickly, potentially leading to another humanitarian tragedy and 

massive displacement in the Horn, which in turn could lead to instability in Kenya and Ethiopia. 

I will soon offer a resolution supporting ongoing efforts by our 

Government along with the U.N. and the donor community to help 

36

meet the challenge of drought and food insecurity in the Horn of 

Africa. 

Turning to South Sudan, more than 40 percent of the population, 

nearly 5 million people, currently face severe life-threatening hunger. By July, that number will likely rise another 1⁄2 million. 

Last month, the U.N. declared 100,000 people to be coping with 

famine conditions. The security situation on the ground remains 

dire. This past weekend, six aid workers were ambushed and brutally murdered in South Sudan. Since December 2013, nearly 80 

aid workers have been killed. 

The United States and our partners have taken on the tall order 

of distributing food and other necessities to those in need. Many of 

the worst off communities are inaccessible by road for most of the 

year and last month famine was declared in two counties in South 

Sudan. 

So we need to continue providing humanitarian support and 

pressuring the government in South Sudan and the armed opposition to put the needs of their people first. 

And I’m pleased to cosponsor Ranking Member Bass’ resolution 

calling for strong support to address the famine there. 

So I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m grateful to the subcommittee 

for addressing and dealing with these difficult issues. I’m grateful 

to our panellists, and I yield back. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Engel. 

Dan Donovan. 

Mr. DONOVAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for not 

being here earlier. I was at a budget briefing that my good friend, 

Eliot Engel, from New York was just talking about. 

I understand that part of the crisis is caused by nature and 

there’s nothing we can do about a drought. But some of the other 

difficulties is either a lack of aid or disruption of delivery of aid. 

What are—and you may of—this may repeating because I wasn’t 

here when you all testified, but are those the two main problems 

that we are facing—not enough aid and the disruption of delivery 

of aid? 

Are there other issues that we should be knowing about so that 

if this can be addressed congressionally that we’ll be able to at 

least understand the causations? 

Mr. ISAACS. Thank you, Congressman. 

Access is an issue. Access is an issue because it is insecure, because humanitarian workers are a target of opportunity or they can 

become a target of political opportunity. So that puts our staff in 

danger. 

That’s a problem. And there is some generalized breakdown over 

the last 15 years on this issue that humanitarian workers don’t get 

neutral space, I will call it. 

But I think that also some of the decisions in the steps that the 

Government of South Sudan are taking are hurting themselves. 

One of them is the $10,000 per person fee for a work permit for 

foreigners. 

Another one that is problematic is that they want to nationalize 

the staff. We understand that and we have always worked with 

that. They’ve said that they wanted 10 percent of the staff only to 

be expatriates. 

37

So we have in South Sudan about 900 staff and we’ve got, like, 

35 or 40 expatriates. But now they have actually come back and 

said this position has to be a South Sudanese—this position has to 

be—so you’re talking about complicated financial matters. 

You’re talking about the oversight that this subcommittee and 

other committees would be interested on the use of U.S. food and 

that requires expertise and skill. 

And if you look around you would see that in South Sudan 

maybe 75 percent of the people are illiterate. So they, just as a nation, have not built the capacity to fill the positions that they’re 

calling for us to fill and they are putting pressure on us and they 

have tied all of that together to the issuance of work permits. 

So they’re not creating an inviting environment for NGOs to 

come in and help and I think that at the very best they need to 

put off whatever roles that they think need to be enforced for 36 

months or something. They need, as a nation, to get through this 

famine. 

They have got all kinds of other wars and other issues going on. 

But it is complicated to work there. It is dangerous to work there 

and some of the government policies that we see being demanded 

are counterproductive, in my personal opinion. 

Mr. DONOVAN. Can you just expound on the disruption of delivery? Is that caused by government entities? Is that caused by some 

of the people that are involved in the conflicts? 

Mr. ISAACS. So we had 15 people abducted a week and a half ago 

and they are a faction of a faction, and no one is in control of them. 

So it was the local military garrison leader that made the decision that he was going to come through our compound at 2 a.m., 

threaded his way past an SPLM garrison. And I want to be careful 

here because I don’t want to point fingers—I have got to go back 

and work with everybody. It’s important. 

But what I’m saying is that the command and control structures—that’s multiple structures—are weak and they’re fragile. 

And so you end up with a lot of guys with guns out in the bush 

and then they develop their own political thinking and then they 

decide to take action and that could be exercised probably—what 

happened when these people were ambushed and killed 2 days ago 

on the way to Pibor. 

You don’t know how that’s going to be manifested. But it creates 

a atmosphere of insecurity and too often humanitarian workers are 

the target of that. 

Mr. DONOVAN. Does it create a black market of the items that 

are confiscated through a disruption, the folks that you are speaking about now? 

Mr. ISAACS. So I don’t know anything first-hand about a black 

market. That’s not unusual in a war zone. But I will say this about 

South Sudan is that their inflation has been so enormous over the 

past couple of years and the availability of food is so low I think 

that food is going to go to feed hungry people. 

Even if somebody steals it they may get some money but it is 

still going to all feed hungry people. Having your trucks looted is 

not what you want. But I don’t have first-hand knowledge with 

large black market activity there. 

38

Mr. DONOVAN. All right. Thank you. Does anyone else want to 

comment on that? 

Mr. SMITH. Maybe if we could just get through all the witnesses——

Mr. DONOVAN. Yes. 

Mr. SMITH [continuing]. And then we’ll——

Mr. DONOVAN. Absolutely. 

Mr. SMITH. But great questions. They are very good questions. 

Maybe you could incorporate that into your—into your testimony. 

Mr. Bowers. 

STATEMENT OF MR. MICHAEL BOWERS, VICE PRESIDENT, 

HUMANITARIAN LEADERSHIP AND RESPONSE, MERCY CORPS 

Mr. BOWERS. By the way, I have worked with Mr. Isaacs before 

when we were trying to combat famine in North Korea. Mercy 

Corps and Samaritan’s Purse had a large program there and it is 

always good to be with esteemed colleagues. 

But good afternoon, Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass and 

members of the subcommittee. Thank you for holding this important hearing and I appreciate the opportunity to testify. 

Mercy Corps is a leading global organization that specializes in 

humanitarian development and peace building programs. We operate in more than 40 countries around the world including throughout east Africa region and all four of the countries considered at 

risk of famine. 

As you have heard, the current drought in the Horn of Africa is 

more intense and widespread than in 2011. Although severe 

drought plays a part, the regional situation is made worse by manmade causes that we have been talking about today, which include 

a deadly mix of conflict, marginalization, displacement, violent extremism, and climate change. 

Moreover, insufficient investment in conflict prevention, resilience and sustainable development activities allow these problems 

to fester, extending these crises unnecessarily. 

While the immediate priority must be saving lives, building resilience and addressing conflict and violence cannot wait. 

Across the region we are working with our local partners to deliver food, water, sanitation supplies, healthcare, and education in 

these emergencies. 

Where appropriate we try to provide cash assistance as well that 

allows families to buy the items they need most and, Congressman, 

to your point, where we are seeing opportunities and where markets can bear and food is available, giving people the dignity and 

the ability to buy their own food avoids the black market issue and 

it avoids, obviously, a costly pipeline of food where we can. 

In South Sudan, we provide communities with emergency water 

and sanitation services, including responding to the recent cholera 

outbreak, and we are distributing crop and vegetable seeds, fishing 

nets and agricultural tools so that people can get an option to 

grown their own food and rebuild their lives. 

In Somalia, primarily with private funds, we are rapidly bolstering ongoing livelihood programming while also responding to 

the increasing food insecurity. 

39

This includes providing water and emergency wet feeding to over 

21 schools in the central regions of the country that are most severely impacted. 

Not only are we saving lives there but we are ensuring access to 

education of over 4,000 school children continue. In Ethiopia, in addition to treating malnutrition in the Somali region we are responding to the drought with a commercial destocking project that 

allows income to households that derive their income from livestock, protects the livestock assets of pastoralists, and preserves 

the deteriorating rangeland. 

There, we are stimulating market linkages as well between traders and producers and supports the market prices of livestock. 

In Kenya—today we have talked a little about Kenya with Matt 

Nims—there has been little donor funding released for the emergency response due to the drought to help bolster the efforts of the 

government, which is sizeable, and is doing much what they can. 

However, funding which exists for the drought response has in 

large part been through private means. I was in Kenya in 2011 

during that drought response as unfolded in Somalia and witnessed 

the consequences of that ignoring early action. 

If we fail to respond now we risk a much larger and costly emergency response later with too many lives lost in the meantime. 

Although funding is also needed across the region, we are barely 

scratching the service with what we have, and I think a question 

that the chairman posed earlier today, is there enough money in 

FY 2017 from the U.S. Government, and I will say no, there is not, 

and I would implore this Congress to not rescind $360 million 

that’s on the table for current FY 2017. If that is done so, over 8 

million people almost immediately but certainly in the short term 

will be left without food. 

Another question that raised the issue—and I think Congressman Garrett brought it up—is why is this famine and hunger crisis 

not getting the attention that it did in 2010 and 2011. 

Well, in part we have seen before that the media by and large 

drives a lot of attention of your constituents. But if you think of 

it this way, 20 million people right now are at risk of starvation. 

That is the combined population of the State of New Jersey and 

North Carolina. So if you are speaking to your constituents, and 

then the American taxpayer is wondering why should we spend 

money there, or talking to the administration, I would remind 

them of what Mr. Isaacs just said in terms of our moral obligations 

but also just the sheer numbers. 

So in addition to funding we are also needing access in conflict 

zones, as has been mentioned before. Aid workers continue to be 

killed, injured, or harassed. 

Horrifyingly, these seven individuals that were lost last weekend 

in South Sudan are not a strange trend. That is something that is 

continuing. 

Without safe access to deliver food, water, and vital supplies, especially in areas which are on the brink of starvation, we will not 

be able to save lives, frankly. 

Besides the urgent need to respond now, I would also stress we 

can do more to prevent these food crises in the future and now. 

40

To improve food security in the region we need to implement a 

variety of programs that strengthen community resilience. 

New evidence that we have from a USAID-funded program in 

Ethiopia called PRIME confirms that food security resilience programs can help communities survive crises and stop the cycle of recurrent humanitarian disasters. 

Even as we respond urgently to the crisis in east Africa, we must 

continue to build these communities ability to cope with shocks and 

stress in the future. 

That innovation, that resilience approach, by the way, was better 

embraced with the Global Food Security Act, which I have to thank 

Chairman Smith as well as the rest of this subcommittee for helping pass that important bill. 

Finally, because conflict also directly and indirectly impacts hunger across east Africa, we need to support programs that address 

conflict where it is happening and mitigate potential spillover effects that further stress neighboring countries and exacerbate food 

insecurity. 

This is why we focus on enhancing the capacity of people and institutions to prevent and manage conflict and this is something 

very important for the Congress to take into consideration as they 

look through their appropriations. 

You in Congress have an integral role to play in helping prevent 

the spread of famine and create conditions that mitigate food crises 

from happening in the first place. 

I have provided a more detailed list of recommendations including budgetary issues in my written statement. But for the sake of 

time I am just going to summarize again that we ask the Congress 

urgently provide lifesaving assistance in FY 2017 and FY 2018 

through its appropriations process to address ongoing humanitarian needs by funding IDA and FFP fully, and that would be $1 

billion. 

Invest in building the resilience of vulnerable communities to 

prepare for, withstand and recover from these shocks and stresses 

and prevent and manage conflict by fully funding Food for Peace, 

nonemergency programs including the Economic Support Fund, 

and Development Assistance. 

And finally, encourage the administration, as Mr. Isaacs mentioned, to aggressively pursue diplomatic efforts by fully staffing 

the State Department and USAID to end these conflicts and remove obstacles for humanitarians seeking to reach populations in 

need. 

Twenty years from now when we approach this time we will 

want to say what we did to conclude everything we could to save 

lives and turn this story of starvation into one of recovery. 

I thank you and I look forward to answering some of your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bowers follows:]

41


24832c-1.eps

Testimony by Michael Bowers 

Vice President, Hmnanitarian Leadership and Response_ Mercy Corps 

House Committee on Foreign A±Tairs 

Subcommittee on AtTica, Global Health_ Global Human Rights, and lntcmational Organizations 

March 28, 2017 

East Africa· s Quiet Famine 

Introduction 

Good atlcmoon_ Chaim1an Smith, Ranking Member Bass, and Members ofthc Subconm1ittec, thank you 

for holding this important, timely hearing. I appreciate the opportunity to join this panel and hope that my 

testimony helps bring more attention to the increasingly dire leyels of food insecurity in the region and 

underscores the need for urgent action. 

Mercy Corps is a leading global organization that specializes in humanitarian, deYelopment, and 

peacebuilding progran1s. We operate in more than 40 countries around the world. including throughout 

the East Africa region and in all four countries considered at risk of famine in 2017. At Mercy Corps, we 

believe that a better world is possible. Our team of almost 5,000 people around the world work to put bold 

solutions into action, help people triumph oyer adYersity m1d build stronger communities from within. 

Famine Warnings 

Ci/ohal Context 

Although we are only focusing on East Africa today, it is important to first recognize how dire the global 

context is. Seventy million people in 2017 arc projected to need emergency assistance based on known 

threats to tood insecurity. Particularly disturbing is that the threat of famine is the highest it has 

been in decades 1 A famine has already been declared in parts of South Sudan, and looming threats of 

fmnines in Nigeria. Somalia and Yemen have put an estimated 20 million people -more than the entire 

population of New Jersey and North Carolina combined -at risk of starvation in 2017. Approximately 

1. 4 million children arc at imminent risk of death without inlllediatc action bv the intcmational 

community 2 With needs this high_ we arc deeply conccmcd that the PresidCI;t"s FY 2018 budget request, 

if enacted. would slash humanitarian and development assistance and hamstring the U.S. --and in fact the 

global response --to this crisis, with tragic results. For example. if Congress enacted the President's 

request and Food tor Peace and the Emergency Food Security Program were cut by 31%, approximately 

13 million hungry men_ women and children_ would lose access to lifesaving food assistm1cc. At a time 

when needs arc growing exponentially_ this request is not only irresponsible_ but Lmdercuts America· s 

humanitarian leadership role in the world 

Regional Context 

The current drought in the Hom of Africa is more intense and widespread than in 201 L and is the primary 

driver offood insecurity in Ethiopia, Somalia, Kenya, and Uganda. Although severe drought is playing its 

part, these are not just natural disasters. The regional situation is instead made worse by man -made 

causes3 which includes a deadly mix of conflict marginalization, displacement. Yiolent extremism, and 

climate change. Moreover. insufficient investment in conflict prevention and management resilience and 
42


24832c-2.eps

sustainable development activities allows these problems to fester. extending these crises unnecessarily. 

Within the region. the capacity and ability ofthe individuals countries to respond varies. While all could 

soon become overwhelmed depending on if/\vhen rains fail_ it is also important to note that Kenya and 

Ethiopia arc in far better positions to respond because they arc proactivclv responding to early warnings 

and current needs. 

These massive multi-country humanitarian crises will have flu-reaching impacts on security and stability 

in already volatile regions of Africa. Besides the tragic human costs. refugee flows are increasing. For 

example, approximately 1.5 million refugees have fled South Sudan since the conflict erupted. with the 

refugee population in Uganda more than tripling in the last 6 months alone, climbing to 698.000 by the 

beginning of February4 TI1cse crises arc stretching the already-overwhelmed humanitarian system. almost 

to the breaking point. 

In the Horn of Africa. 12.8 million people are severely food insecure. To address their needs, $1.9 billion 

was requested in the UN OCHA report published in February 2017. ··Horn of Africa: A Call for Action."'' 

As the chart below demonstrates, based on the current rate of donor response to humanitarian appeals, the 

global cmmnunity is falling drmnatically behind in responding to massive humanitarian needs. 

Ch art 1 E ast Af nca 2017 appe· a! san d tl d kdb h UN 6 response plan un mg progress current y trac e vt e 

Country/ Required Funded Percent Funded 

Region 

Global $20.8 billion $3 billion 14.2% 

Bunmdi $73.7 million $15.2million 20.6% 

Djibouti $43 million $1.2 million 2.7% 

Ethiopia $948.6 million $62.5 million 6.6% 

Kenya $165.8 million $.3 million .2% 

South Sudan $1.6 billion $303.2 million 18.5% 

Somalia $863.5 million $249.5 million 28.9% 

While the immediate priority must be saving lives, building resilience and addressing conflict and 

violence cannot wait. As the international community, national governments and local responders 

mobilize to respond, we ask that the US Congress simultaneously: 

• Provide urgently needed assistance and remove obstacles to htllllanitarians accessing populations 

in need- especially diplomatic obstacles; 

• Invest in building the resilience of vulnerable communities to prepare for_ ·withstand and reco\-er 

from shocks and stresses: and, 

• Address the root causes of conflict and violence. 

2 
43


24832c-3.eps

South Sudan 

South Swlan is a prime example ofho\\. when left unaddressed, long-tem1 con±1ict can produce 

devastating consequences. After decades of contlict \vith Sudan_ South Sudan experienced a brief moment 

of stability post-independence before conflict broke out once again in December 2013. Since then. tens of 

thousands of South Sudanese civilians have been killed and the ongoing civil war has forced more than 3 

million people to flee their homes 7 ''Which home? 1 !eji it 2 years ago and have been running since then, 

always hungry and aji-aid." a 20 year old mother of 4 shared with our team. Over 1.5 million people have 

fled to neighboring countries, including to Uganda (which is now hosting the largest refugee population 

on the continent), Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya. the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Central African 

Republic. with the latter two countries managing displacements from internal conflict as well." After more 

than three years of war and repeated warnings about the deepening of the crisis in South Sudan, we now 

have one final chance to prevent a famine from spreading and engulfing more than one million people. 

Of the many humanitarian needs \Vithin the country, the magnitude of food insecurity and malnutrition 

experienced by South Sudanese is unprecedented. Despite fertile land, conflict has made it impossible for 

fanners to tend their fields.' To make matters worse, militias have been accused ofintentionallv 

destroying crops. looting cattle. burning homes and villages, and damaging vital water sourees~10 

Currently, almost 5 million people are without enough food (IPC Phases 3-5), and of that some 100.000 

people are on the brink of starvation. 11 If nothing is done, by July 2017, it is projected that the number of 

people without adequate access to food may reach 5.5 million1 ', 

13 

HorrifYingly, one in four South Sudanese children under the age of five is already stunted due to 

malnutrition and is especially vulnerable to the effects of constrained food consumption. 14 

Somalia 

Somalia has been ravaged by decades of con±1ict and insecurity, making access to many parts of the 

country difficult. When overlaid by multiple years of±:~ilcd rains, the effect is catastrophic - as we saw in 

the 2011 Hunine that killed nearly 260,000 people 15 This year, rains have failed again- and we have seen 

the tripling of water prices. the wiping out of crops and the death oflivestock. Three million two hundred 

thousand people are in need of water. sanitation and hygiene services (WASH) and nearly half of the 

populations arc in need of food security assistance." Hundreds of thousands of children face acute 

malnutrition and potentially starvation. T11e Government of Somalia declared the drought a natural 

disaster at the start of March after 110 people died within 48 hours within the Bay rcgion. 17 Unless a 

massive and urgent scale-up of humanitarian assistance takes place, famine could soon be a reality in 

some ofthe worst drought-affected areas of Somalia. 

llt.1R§_·//INV111V.i r·innewS.QLillflfl2LI@...S:i2017/03t£O/so_LJ!b.§.1!f!2S.l:!l~iJ~--=P-~...fl.ee--:-1J.1dfb··food 

''um~~u~~~~glli'~~illlli~~~~~~£s~~ 
44


24832c-4.eps

Over the last two years, Somalia has seen increased refugee rctums (both UNHCR supported and 

spontaneous returns) from the neighboring countries, primarily tram Kenya (Dadaab). As of March 15_ 

57_329 Somali refugees had returned home since December X_ 2014, when UNHCR first started 

supporting voluntary rctum of Somali rcfi.tgccs in Kcnva. UNHCR supported 17,359 in 2017 alonc. 1

' The 

conditions in many parts of Somalia arc not conduci vc to mass refugee returns due to ongoing conflict, 

insecurity, and humanitarian conditions that ha;c now been exacerbated by the \\Orscning drought and 

possible famine. leading to further internal and external displacement of the local communities and 

returnees. 

Kenya 

The Government of Kenya declared the drought a national disaster early in February. The drought has 

caused widespread crop failure and water shortages, increased levels of hunger and malnutrition, 

threatened livelihoods --particularly of pastoralists --and caused rising rates of communicable disease. 

The number of people in need of humanitarian assistance has more than doubled from 1.3 million people 

in August 2016 to 2.7 million in February 2017. Close to 175.000 children are not attending pre-primary 

or primary schooL" There is a critical nutrition situation in Turkana North, North Horr in Marsabit, and 

M<1ndera, indimting m<1lnutrition rates in communities th<1t f<11l within the !PC Phase 5 classification. In 

Marsabit county alone, the Global Acute Malnutrition (GAM) measurement is 31.5 percent and the water 

distance increase is 240 percent. An NGO partner operating in Turkana reported GAM rates of 55%. 

Fthiopia 

In addition to recovering from lingering eftects of the 2015-2016 El Nino-drought, the lowland pastoralist 

areas are 110\\ contending with the impacts of a new drought The go\-emment of Ethiopia continues to 

support 7.9 million Ethiopians through the Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) with the help of 

partners. Despite these efforts, 5.6 million people will require emergency food assistance in 2017. An 

additional2.7 million children and pregnant and lactating mothers will need supplementary feedings_ 9.2 

million people will need help accessing sate drinking water_ 1.9 million will need livestock support, and 

300_000 children will need to be treated for severe acute malnutrition. 

Mercy Corps Response 

Saving Lives Now 

Across the region_ Mercy Corps is working with our local partners to quickly deliver food, water, 

sanitation supplies, hvgienc promotion, health care_ and education in emergencies. 

For example, over the last year in South Sudan in Unity State. we provided 80.000 people with 

emergency water and sanitation (WASH) services. Just a few of our activities between October and 

December of2016 included treating and distributing potable water to 41,500 individuals_ rehabilitating 32 

boreholes_ and helping respond to a cholera outbreak. While we appreciate the strong support of donors 

like the US, we also use private funding from concemed individuals. Through private funds, we are 

distributing crop and vegetable seeds. fishing nets and agriculture tools so that people get an option to 

grow their food and rebuild their lives. Where appropriate. we try to provide cash assistance that allows 

fmnilies to buy the items they need most while supporting and stimubting loc<!lmmkets and businesses. 

Since the declaration of the fan1ine, \Ye have scaled up our response in the counties \Vhich are at 

18 b.ttps·//cata2.unhcr ora/e_QlQocur(j~tJl:illl.<I,..;nioadJ5!JQ§ 19

~m:~~~~9EJ~~'Piillb~!Qmi~Qm~ill~~~~z~~~@~'&~~ 

http:f/rellet\N<Jb lnt!reoort!cthlct>a/horf]-atr~ca-ca:l-oc11on-tebrumv-20" 7 

4 
45


24832c-5.eps

heightened risk of famine in order to not miss this last chance to save lives, yet \\e arc barely scratching 

the surface of the need. 

In Somalia, Mercy Corps is using private ftmds to mpidly bolster ongoing WASH and livelihoods 

programming while also responding to the increasing levels of tood insecurity. Without this 

programming_ families arc !arced to drink unsafe water that leads to high risk of \\aterbome diseases. In 

addition_ with OCHA funding we are providing water and emergency wet -feeding to 21 schools in the 

central regions of the country that have been most severely affected by the drought. This not only saves 

lives_ but ensures access to education for over 4,000 school children and the continued operation of 

schools systems that would have otherwise closed due to the worsening drought conditions. 

In Ethiopia, we are responding to the drought with OFDA and OCHA funding for commercial destocking 

project that prmides income sources to households, protects the livestock assets ofpastoralists, preserves 

deteriorating rangeland, stimulates market linkages between traders and producers, and supports the 

market prices of livestock. So far we have helped nearly 10,000 cattle, are gearing up to destock about 

22.000 more livestock, and are serving over 24,000 families. We are also working to treat malnutrition in 

Somali region. 

In Kenya, to date. there has been little donor funding released for the emergency response to the drought 

or help to bolster the efforts of the Kenyan government, which is doing what it can. What funding exists 

tor the drought response has. in large part, been private funding. We have been able to do little in 

response to the drought, other than some limited water tmcking and water infrastmcture work. If we fail 

to respond now, \Ve risk a much larger and costly emergency response later, \Vith too many Jives lost in 

the meantime. 

Humamtarian Access 

More funding is needed urgently to continue tl1cse responses, but humanitarian access in contlict zones is 

also a concern as aid workers continue to be killed, injured and harassed. Without the safe access to 

deliver food, water and vital supphcs. especially in areas \vhich arc on the brink of starvation, we \vlllnot 

be able to save lives. 

According to the UN, at least 67 aid vvorkcrs have been killed by warring parties in South Sudan since ti1c 

contlict erupted in2013.21 For example_ in Unity State in South Sudan, famine has already been declared 

but humanitarians arc currently tmablc to enter the areas in direst need and serve the vvorst -affected 

communities due to security concerns. In fact. after the famine declaration, about 28 humanitarians were 

evacuated from Mayendit county in Unity state_ which is a famine-affected county. And just over a week 

ago, an NGO's attempt to provide aid was disrupted as the team of 8 vvas abducted for 3 days (tile 

abductors wanted food and other aid supplies). Unless the guns fall silent and contlict stops, the 

humanitarian situation will continue to deteriorate. ·'J sri// wanr to believe God rs rhere, but based on whar 

I have faced my patience and faith is running out," 19-ycar-old Julia told our rapid response team. 

Securing access for the humanitarian response should be a top priority. More than ever, we need safe and 

unintermpted humanitarian access. The international community needs to act now as the world cannot 

miss this chance to prevent catastrophe. Peter, a 30-year-old father of 5 grieved,"/ have lost everyrhing, 

my house 1vas burnt. everything looted and 1 do not knoH' hmv to rebuild my l~fC Cvou are doing VClJ' good 

work a// our blessing are with you).'' We camwt tum a deaf ear to Peter and Julia. 

21 http:i!ec.europa eu/cchoiflles/a'dfccu,..linc;s/factsheets/south-suoan en.pat 
46


24832c-6.eps

The difterence access makes on mitigating famine risks can be seen when comparing the constraints in 

South Sudan and Soma1ia to the proactive responses of the govcmmcnts of Kenya and Ethiopia to the 

drought The levels oftOod insecurity and malnutrition are sobering, but would e\-en worse if they vvere 

not allowing the most vulnerable to be reached and contributing their own resources to the response. 

Money Is needed urgently 

I was in Kenya as the impacts of the 2011 drought unfolded in Somalia and witnessed the consequences 

of ignoring early action. Looking at Kenya now_ I am conccmcd we could repeat the san1c mistakes_ 

While conditions in Kenya arc not as overtly desperate as in other parts of the Horn, now is the time to 

double down on prevention activities that can help mitigate the drought's impacts on vulnerable 

populations. As a Feed the Future Focus country_ the U.S. has helped contribute to those gains_ including 

a 14 percent decline in the prevalence of child stunting in part of the Feed the Future target area in the 

country between 2008 and 2015." The lack of rapid, preventive intervention now is placing at risk the 

gains made. 

Some donors are already committing (or reprioritizing) large tranches of funding to provide this 

immediate llfe saving response. But funding is not being made available across the region, and \Vhat is 

available needs to be scaled up dramatically in the next days and weeks, not months. Not only do we need 

more pledges, \Ve need more funds immediatel~y going directl~y to those \Vith access to the most 

vulnerable. Even if funding arrives in hvo months. the human cost ofthat delayed funding is too high. 

Ruilding Resilience now and in the Future: Prevention at Work 

Considering the level of need, ifs easy to feel overwhelmed_ We at Mere:; Corps though are pushed to 

action. And we continue to find evidence that our efforts to save hves and reduce po\-erty are hm-ing 

positive. sustainable impacts. 

Besides the responsibility of saving lives now through humanitarian aid, I would like to stress to this 

subcommittee the fact that we can prevent and mitigate food security crises. lfs also extremely cost 

effective: a study by the British government in Kenya and Ethiopia estimates that every $1 invested in 

resilience will result in $2.90 in reduced humanitarian spending_ avoided losses and development 

benefits_'' 

To improve food security in the region, Mercy Corps has been implementing a variety ofprogrmns to 

strenb>lhen a community's resilience to drought and other effects of climate change. New evidence from a 

USAID-funded Mercy Corps program in Ethiopia confirms what academic experts and aid groups already 

know: food security resilience programs help communities survive crises and stop the cycle of 

recurrent humanitarian disasters. 

As mentioned earlier, in 2015-2016, one of the strongest El Nino cvcles on record resulted in the worst 

drought Ethiopia has experienced in mer 50 years.'" At its height more than I 0 million people required 

food aid. In the midst of this crisis, Mercy Corps sought to measure the impact of its resilience activities 

under the Pastoralist Areas Resilience Improvement through Market Expansion (PRIME) program. 

22 https //feedthefuiJJrt:.cov/proqress2CJ.§l 23

~£~c~cF~~o-~~~J~8m~c~q@~~9~l~~-'~~:u~~-~~!~~~-Ee·d~~PL~f 

6 
47


24832c-7.eps

PRIME is a ±ivc-ycar USAID Feed the Future project implemented by Mercy Corps25 and designed to 

improve the lives and enhance resilience ofpastoralist communities in Ethiopia·s drought-prone drylands 

in Afar_ Oromiya and Somali regional states. Begun in 2012, the project works to strengthen market 

systems to benefit poor and 'ulnerablc households_ and reduce their risks to the effects of drought and 

other natural disasters_ 

Researchers evaluated PRIME's impact on households' ability to cope and recover from the drought in 

the hard hit regional state of Somali" by collecting data from four woredas (districts) that compared 500 

PRIME beneficiary households with more than LOOO comparable households from similar communities 

not targeted by the program_ 27 

PRIME beneficiary households were better off than their neighbors in multiple ways. 

• More Food Security. Less Food Insecurity: Households in PRIME target communities had a more 

diverse diet, consuming nearly one additional food group per dav. This indicates that the program 

improved income and/or access to markets to enable purchase and consumption of more 

nutritious foods even during an acute crisis. 

• Greater Wealth J,ovver Vulnerability to Poverty: PRIME interventions had a positive impact on 

households' ability to maintain important assets (including livestock) and avoid impoverishment 

in the face ofthe drought The asset values (a proxy for wealth) of households in the program 

were 1.4 times higher than those of the comparison group. Households supported through PRIME 

were also four percentage points less likely to be at risk of being under the poverty line. 

• Heller Am mal Health i-''ewer IJ1vestock f.osses: Compared to the non-targeted households. 

PRIME beneficiaries vwre able to maintain healthier herds despite the severe drought conditions. 

They were less likely to experience animal deaths, and in particular were able to protect their 

breeding females, a critical component of a healthy and resilient herd_ The lower animal mortality 

rate suggests that PRIME's support to veterinary care and animal markets allowed households to 

avoid losing weakened livestock 

This study demonstrates that innovative, long-tem1 resilience programs like PRIME can help mitigate the 

worst c±Tccts of humanitarian emergencies and protect important gains in development goals such as child 

nutrition, maternal health, and economic growth and stability in vulnerable communities_ Over the longtcnn, this type of multi-year. sy·stcmatic approach creates households, commtmitics and ultimately 

countries that arc more self-sufficient and better able to respond and adapt when faced with crises. 

And PRIME continues to be a part of the response to drought in Ethiopia_ While continuing to provide 

veterinary products and helping governments make use of climate information, it is also providing cash 

transfers via mobile phones that will impact 12,500 people. This helps them open bank accounts, 

connecting people to financial institutions and introducing a culture of savings as people arc prmidcd 

financial literacy, in addition to proper nutrition practices. 

25Mercy Corps works on PRIME in partnership with the Aged and Children Pastoralists Association (ACPA), Action for Integrated 

Sustainable Development (AISDA), CARE, Ethiopian Center for Disability and Development (ECDD), Haramaya University, Horn of 

Africa Voluntary Youth Committee (Havoyoco), Kimetrica, and SOS Sahel. 26Approximately 1.4 million people were estimated by the Ethiopian Government to be food insecure in this area, well above the 

five-year average and even greater than the previous drought in 2010-2011. 27The comparison group was matched to PRIME participants such that they were statistically similar- the only difference was 

whether or not they had benefited from PRIME Using data from the African Flood and Drought Man1tor, our research was able to 

control for levels of drought exposure, so that any differences observed between the two groups could be attributed to the program. 

7 
48


24832c-8.eps

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Even as we respond urgently to tl1c crisis in the East 

Africa, we must continue to in\-cst in opportunities to build communities' abilities to cope \vith shocks 

and stresses in the future. By helping these communities deal with risk, we can sm-e lives from future 

famines and reduce the need for costly humanitarian investments over the long-term. 

This innovative resilience approach to toad security \Vas also embraced by Congress last year \Vhcn the 

Global Food Security Act (GFSA) was passed. I have to take a moment to thank Chairman Smith for his 

leadership and being the original sponsor of the House bill and thank the rest of the Committee for their 

help in passing this important bill into law so that we can continue to build and support more programs 

that deliver similar, powerful impacts. 

PRIME is funded by the Development Assistance account. Feed the Future programs funded by this 

important account are exactly the type of programs we imagine the Chair and Congress vvant to see 

develop with the implementation of GFSA. Unfortunately, if the President-s budget request for foreign 

aid is not rejected by Congress, these gains and im10vative programs would not be able to continue. 

Hunger 1s Complex: Solutions Must be Multi-Sectoral 

In addition to Feed the Fuhne, non-emergency Food for Peace Title II programs are absolutely 

critical to building the resilience of families and communities to food insecurity. While Feed the 

Future countries tend to be in more stable countries. Title II non-emergency programs are essential in 

stav-ing off food crisis in some of the more fragile and complex countries. For example. the Karamoja 

region of Northern Uganda has been racked by war, nearly continuous raiding and neglect by the central 

government tor decades. Sitting at a strategically import<mt nexus between Kenya and South Sudm1. cattle 

raiders from both countries continue to steal cattle and threaten the livelihoods ofpastoralists and tanners 

in the regions. Further. ·while matemal mortality rates in Uganda are some of the worst in the world. \vith 

a ranking of 37 of 184, Karmnoja has particularly high maternal mortality rates as vwll as the highest 

child mortality rate (under 5 dcatl1s) of 72 per I. 000 births-more than triple that of Uganda's capital, 

Kmnpala. TI1esc tactors arc a dm1gcrous combination that could not only drag down the economic 

potential of the region, but also risk exacerbating inequality and, iflcft unaddressed, increase instability. 

In partnership with Food for Peace. Mercy Corps is implementing a fhe-year $26 million Food for Peace 

""Non-Emergency" progran1, called Northern Karamojo Growth_ Health and Governance (GHG). The 

program is addressing the complex drivers oftood insecurity in the region_ including through a range of 

economic_ health, governance m1d pcaccbuilding initiati vcs tlmt will build a foundation tor broader sclt~ 

sufficiency_ while targeted food aid for prcgoant and lactating women and children under the age of two. 

Mercy Corps works through a 'market-systems· approach that m1alyzes markets beyond basic supply m1d 

demm1d principles; instead, looking at how thcv arc int1ucnccd by behaviors, government regulations m1d 

rules, relationships. and the environment to understand why markets do not work for the poor. This 

approach then facilitates structural or ·system· changes that increase the the ability of vulnerable 

populations to participate in markets and lift themselves and their fmnilies out of poverty. 

Lessons from this progran1 are helpful for Congress to consider when thinking about breaking the cycle of 

famine and food insecurity. For exmnple. last year, a drought in the Northern Uganda caused 60% of the 

crops to fail. With pov-erty rates of 51% percent--74% in the Nortb East subregion alone--buying food 

was already difficult for v-ulnerable families and their children." \\ll1ile some traders were starting to 

raise prices on cmmnodities- in effect price gouging- Mercy Corps worked with traders to keep the price 

of commodities low. Using smart subsidies for trm1sportation and storage, we partnered with traders not 

28_b.t!.t2:f/pubdocs.>'.<orid bank.om/en/38i 9;')1-<· 7 4255892375/pdf/Uqa nda--Poverty-Assessment-Report -2018.pdf 
49


24832c-9.eps

interested in price gouging and taking advantage of a drought, and were able to further lower their costs, 

keeping the price low of commodities they were selling on the open market Other traders had to follow 

suit as their commodities were overpriced, causing the price of commodities to st.:1.y affordable. Poor 

fan1ilics throughout the region were able to continue to purchase food on the market, despite the drought. 

These type of interventions arc smart, cost-c±lectivc and have far reaching effects. Food for Peace has 

been an essential partner in fostering these types of interventions. Title II non-emergency programs have 

proven time and again tbat multi -year. flexible funding enables progmms to address hunger within 

complex, interrelated systems effectively. 

Fightin;; Violence and Coryflict 

Conflict directly and indirectly impacts hunger across East Africa Not only do we need to address 

conflict where it is happening, but we also need to mitigate potential spillover effects that could further 

stress resource strapped neighboring countries and furtl1er exacerbate food insecurity. This is why Mercy 

Corps enhances the capacity of people and institutions to prevent and manage conflict. For example, 

Mercy Corps· progmms in East Africa are working cross-border to mitigate cattle raiding, a major cause 

of conflict and resource loss for families. Through our USA TO-funded program PEACE TIT, where we 

partner \Vith PACT and local organizations, \Ve are working with 'refom1ed \Vaniors- to better integrate 

them into society and ensure they don't pick up anns again. As one example, Peter Acia, a \Varrior since 

he was 19, was a tlerce tighter known by names like "Tetiamoi.'' or "one who kills all enemies." Working 

with PEACE TIT, he is now a "Peace Ambassador'' and part of a support group of refom1ed warriors. 

Through the program Peter has benefitted from trauma healing sessions, trainings on peace building, 

entrepreneurship m1d lite skills. Once a teared fighter. he now owns a small shop in Kaabong, Northern 

Uganda. 

Policy Recommendations 

We can m1d should do better as a global commtmity in responding now to address the urgent needs. 

Congress has an integral role to play in helping prevent the spread of famine and create conditions that 

mitigate food crises trom happening in the tlrst place. 

hmding 

Specifically. Congress must: 

• Prioritize funding in tbc FY 2017 omnibus or CR to aggressively respond to these crises and 

prevent the next crises from happening. Cuts or recessions to tbe FY 20 I 7 CR levels for 

humanitarian m1d development cuts would be de; astating to the response m1d should be fought at 

all costs. 

• In FY 2018, Congress should fully fund the International Affairs !50 Account at no less tban $60 

billion and ensure the 302b allocations for the State Department and Foreign Operations and 

Agriculture Appropriations bills arc robust enough to respond to these growing crises and 

continue investments that mitigate against future crises. 

• Witbin tbe appropriations bills in FY 2018. Congress must provide adequate funding for 

humanitarian and development accounts, including: 

$3.4 billion for lntematioml Disaster Assistance: 

$1.8 billion for Food for Peace, including no less than $350 million for non-emergency 

programs; 

$3.6 billion for the Migration and Refugee Assistance: and 

$3.3 billion for Development Assistm1ce and $4.32 billion for Economic Support Fund 

Accounts which provide funding for Feed the Future m1d other critical programs. 
50


24832c-10.eps

These funding levels \Vill ensure the U.S. can continue to lead the response and \vorks with other donors 

to make sure they are also adequately contributing. Funding will: 

• Provide immediate resources to respond to humanitarian needs and avert mass starvation and 

death 

• Support development programs to build resilience, improve food security and mitigate the impact 

of disasters, both within the emergency response and by continuing to support community-led 

development wherever possible 

Resilience and Peace building in the midst of'emergency response 

The US government should continue to invest in programs that address the root causes of conflict and 

violence at all levels. The US gmernment should also utilize a resilience approach to development when 

possible by enabling interventions to respond and stay relevant to rapidly changing conditions and needs, 

provide multi-year funding (like the 5 year Title II non-emergency programs), and allow for flexible, 

iterative program design. 

Diplomacy 

Both bottom up and top down diplomatic efforts are urgentlv needed to stop the man-made crisis in 

South-Sudan. In addition to local conflict prevention and management etTorts, diplomacy and negotiation 

are desperately needed. The US and key allies should provide high level support to: 

• Ensure quick and peacen1l resolution to the conflict; 

• Guarantee humanitarian access and ensure the safety and security of aid \vorkers: and, 

• Address govemance, inequality· and development issues that drive conflict and violence and 

support longer-term peace building 

Conclusion 

Congress has considerable po\vcr and responsibility to help address these extremely critical problems. 

Twill close by referring yOU to the addendum Tam including with my testimony. This piece, published in 

the Guardian in December 20 16, is written by Dcepmala Mal1la. our country director in South Sudan. She 

illustrates the consequences of not changing how we respond in South Sudan. She reminds us that we can 

m1d should do better. in South Sudan, and in all our responses to crisis. Twenty years from now, when we 

reflect upon our collective response to this emergency. we want to be able to conclude that we did 

everything to save lives, m1d even more, we did everything vvc could to tum this story of malnourishment 

m1d starvation into one of recovery and development. 

Thank you for your time and attention and I look forward to answering your questions. 

Addendum I 

Aid in South Sudan: We're mopping up while the tap is still running 

Even the most experienced humanitarians arc being ground down by the violence and short-tcnnism in 

South Sudan 

10 
51


24832c-11.eps

Written by: Dccpmala Mabla. South Sudan country director. Mercy Corps 

Date Published: Wednesday 7 Dcccmber2016 07.12 EST 

Date Last modified: Wednesday 14 December 2016 05.56 EST 

In September. South Sudan joined a club where the fees arc exorbitant and no one really wants to be a 

member. Along with Syria, Afghanistan and Somalia, it became one of the countries that has produced 

more than a million refugees. 

We all know the story. The birth of South Sudan in 20 II brought with it such hope and promise. But now, 

engulfed in a deadlv and bitter contlict fi1clled by a power struggle leading to ethnic-related violence. 

hope is dying and the future looks bleak. 

At Mercy Corps the way we vievv the world is to find opportunity in crisis. But, for the first time in my 

career. I an1 finding this tough. The people of South Sudan are resilient but with the number of people 

needing support to feed themselves and their families having doubled over the last year (now at 4.8 

million) and most indicators of development on a downward spiral, it is difficult to identify the positives. 

And the truth is that although the war is at the heart of this crisis, short-term donor strategies and funding. 

crippling bureaucracy and a peace deal that the intemational community is holding on to, but which many 

South Sudanese have lost faith in, are all playing their part in making the situation worse. 

No one is denying that conditions in South Sudan are gnte11ing. We work in a tense situation of ongoing 

conflict and v-iolence trying to deliver aid to the most Hdnerable. And while the fact that my team's lives 

are on the line day in day out, is concerning to me as their country director. it is not \Vhat is keeping me 

awake at night Our protcssion comes with certain risks, which we knowingly accept As aid workers we 

are trained to manage and implement programmes in times of conflict. We do this responsibly and 

sustainably. so that despite the fragility of the environment. we can move people along the road from 

relief to recovery. 

But in South Sudan, we arc not able to do this and it is this that grieves me. Just to begin with, we arc 

suffering from diminished humanitarian capacity in the country_ atlcrthc surge in violence in July_ many 

humanitarian and institutional statTletl and are yet to return. Moreo;er. while the NGO community 

perseveres in continuing to share best practice and recommendations for programmatic responses- both 

for urgent relief and mcdi1m1 tcrn1 recovery- we arc consulted only occasionally by donors on their 

strategies despite our rich on-the-ground experience and knowledge ohd1at conm1unitics want and need. 

For example, NGOs implement more than 70% of all programmes in South Sudan, but yet the main 

support from state actors is provided through pooled fimding. What this means is that money is firstly put 

into a conm1on pot, and tram there it is donated to NGOs. This is not only an expensive way to operate, 

but it slows down implementation. Donating direct to NGOs would be more efficient, especially as there 

is no shadow of a doubt that the needs of South Sudanese people are exigent and cannot wait 

However. the most pressing concern affecting recovery is that the vast majority of our fimding is received 

in short !ranches: a couple ofmontl1s, a couple of months and then anotl1er couple of months. What this 

means is that we are unable to plan long-term and nothing is guaranteed. We establish our progranune. 

hire staff. implement for perhaps five months, and then wind down the programme again. We may (or 

may not) receive more funding for that programme, and so \Ve start the cycle a11 over again. This is the 

reality in which we are working. We can do better. 

In July. Mercy Corps with support from the British gov-ernment began implementing a programme to 

stimulate economic recovery in some of the most inaccessible areas in Unity state. This is a four-year 

programme, virtually unheard of in the recent times in South Sudan. We are providing cash transfers to 

II 
52


24832c-12.eps

households and traders to kick-start market recovery, as well as provide business training and livelihoods 

support for fishing and fam1ing. It is precisely this type of programming that allows us to vvork 

sustainably in a manner that builds capacity and ultimately. enables the project to be taken over by the 

community. It is also more cost effective as we can plan efficiently, procure smarter, recmit better. and 

engage communities more meaningfully. 

We cannot say that our programmes will not be interrupted by violence and conflict. but should this mean 

that we surrender all hope to help the South Sudanese people move forward beyond urgent relief and 

handouts? No. It means we adapt, we change our way oftl1inking and working. It means that donors 

become more ±1cxible in their approach and understand tl1at when there is an uptick in violence we will 

need to pivot from our recovery programmes to urgent relief, and then when we can, back again. Around 

the world, Mercy Corps has implemented progranlllles with such nimbleness to shift between relief and 

recovery to fit the context. it requires trust. partnership, and commitment. 

Witl10ut this change in approach, I will not be surprised if more intemational organisations leave South 

Sudan. or scale back their operations in the next six months. While we must have a peace deal that is firm. 

assuring and definite. that ensures the protection of civilians as well as aid workers. we also desperately 

need donors to reinvest and recommit to the future of South Sudan. 

12 
53

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Bowers, thank you so very much for your leadership as well and the recommendations you’ve made. They will—

they will go from you to a whole lot of people from this hearing. 

So I do thank you for that. 

Mr. Maphosa. 

STATEMENT OF MR. THABANI MAPHOSA, VICE-PRESIDENT 

FOR FOOD ASSISTANCE, WORLD VISION INTERNATIONAL 

Mr. MAPHOSA. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify 

before you today on the east Africa hunger crisis. Your continued 

leadership and focus on these humanitarian issues is critical and 

it matters. 

I testify today on behalf of World Vision but also as a person 

born and raised in Africa who has experienced hunger on several 

occasions in my native country of Zimbabwe. 

In 1983, a civil war or a near civil war in the southern part of 

the country disrupted funding activities and many were left without food, including my family. 

In 1992, a major drought across the country meant there was not 

enough food for a greater part of the year. It was then that I first 

experienced first-hand the generosity of the American people when 

my family received the yellow corn, famously called Kenya in my 

country because it was coming through Mombasa. 

While the focus on my testimony today is to put light to the unfolding situation in east Africa, I also want to take this opportunity, Chairman, to say thank you to you and the members and 

the American people for the help that you provided to me during 

the hardest time 25 years ago. 

Those who testified before me today have captured the real and 

the grim situation in South Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia and Kenya. 

The crisis is affecting over 20 million people who require urgent 

and lifesaving assistance. There are other pressing humanitarian 

needs across the globe, as you mentioned earlier on when we 

touched on Yemen, Nigeria and the like. 

But what is unique about east Africa is that a formal famine declaration has been issued in parts of South Sudan. As an African, 

I would like to tell you that it is very uncommon for African governments to lift their hands and declare these famines and when 

they often do it is a little too late. 

Without an elevated and immediate response, we are gravely 

concerned that the situation could worsen in regions of South 

Sudan, Somalia, and other countries as well. 

We have spoke today about the refugee situation. World Vision 

is working in Kenya, Uganda. In Uganda, we are receiving refugees. We are currently have 200,000 refugees that we are dealing 

with and that number has not stopped. They are coming, as Mr. 

Isaacs said, 2,000 a day crossing into the country. 

So the burden of South Sudan is actually spilling over to other 

countries and that needs to be noted. 

World Vision’s mission requires us to work tirelessly to address 

the needs of children and their families. As a child-focused organization, we are particularly concerned about the more than 3.5 milVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:12 May 03, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 Z:\WORK\_AGH\032817\24832 SHIRL
54

lion children under 5 who are acutely malnourished and the nearly 

850,000 children who are severely malnourished. 

Interventions made today will not only save their lives but also 

reduce the possibility of long-term chronic malnutrition and stunting that can occur in the critical first 1,000 days of a child’s life. 

World Vision has been a partner in these response efforts and 

specifically in east Africa where we have been operational for the 

last 2 to 3 decades. 

We have experienced achievements and challenges and we have 

refined our programming and we have used every lesson that we 

have learned. 

While this crisis remains complex, I would like to present three 

key recommendations or points for this subcommittee’s consideration. 

The United States Government must maintain its position as a 

global leader through continued and robust support of humanitarian development programs. 

For example, I would like to highlight the flexibility that we have 

seen shown by Food for Peace in places where programs were already existing and they made sure that they extended those programs to respond and to pivot to the needs that were emerging. 

We have also seen great coordination between the Offices of Foreign Disaster Assistance and Food for Peace where they have tried 

to coordinate to make sure that their resources are stretched and 

go much further. 

But furthermore, it is essential to note that the U.S. Government 

cannot be alone in these things. As such, other governments, international donors, and humanitarian actors should all join and act 

swiftly to prevent the crisis from worsening. 

Just like my colleagues have said, I would like to urge this subcommittee to advocate for funding and programs that will respond 

to this crisis. 

This includes strong support to the international affairs budget 

as Congress finalizes 2017 spending bills and begins discussions 

around 2018 appropriations. 

The U.S. Government and its partners need to adopt multi-year 

multi-sector funding to achieve lasting impact in fragile contexts. 

We can thus empower communities to pull themselves out of poverty and create a more enabling environment that mitigates 

against future shocks. 

We have experienced this in our work with USAID and the 

World Food Programme in South Sudan, in Ethiopia, in Kenya, 

and I would say a little story from South Sudan when I visited 

some time last year. We saw this community that we have been 

giving food for a while. But over a certain period when we invested 

in resilience projects—and this was a fish pond, fish ponds in water 

view—in just a year we didn’t need to actually be helping that family. 

And sometimes I think it is important to help those in need but 

come out of that space of needing to help them again. 

During these crises, one of the things that I’ve noted is that resources are disproportionately skewed toward the short term. No 

wonder we find ourselves in the same situation too often. 

55

Our investment needs to be balanced and we need to have staying power. Last but not least, while we do our best as humanitarians, we call upon recipient governments, donor governments, 

and the African Union to seek political solutions to the conflicts 

that continue to undermine food security in some of these countries. 

I think it has been pointed out well today that it is not only undermining it for the long term but also in the short term. I want 

to reiterate that your leadership counts. One story that hasn’t been 

told here today is that we have made tremendous progress in our 

fight against hunger. 

The number of hungry people has dropped by 200 million since 

1992 and I am one of those that in 1992 needed yellow maize from 

this country. We know the decisions are hard but we are also 

aware how close we are to achieving a hunger-free world. 

Thank you for taking an important step today by holding this 

critical hearing. We thank you. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Maphosa follows:]

56


24832d-1.eps

World Vision 

East Africa's Quiet Famine 

Testimony before the 

House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human 

Rights, and International Organizations 

Mr. Thabani Maphosa 

Vice-President for Food Assistance and 

Senior Director for Food Security & Livelihoods 

World Vision 

March 28, 20 17 
57


24832d-2.eps

Introduction 

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass, and members of the Committee, thank you for the 

opportunity to testify before you today on the East Africa hunger crisis. Your continued 

leadership and focus on these critical humanitarian issues is more important than ever. 

I testify before you today as both the Vice-President for Food Assistance and as the Senior 

Director for Food Security & Livelihoods with World Vision. 

World Vision is a Christian relief, development, and advocacy organization serving millions of 

children and families in nearly I 00 countries. Our 42,000 employees are dedicated to tackling 

the root causes of poverty and injustice. This work includes emergency relief and preparedness 

for people impacted by natural disasters and armed conflict; long-term economic and 

agricultural development; programs to support the health of mothers and children, including 

water, sanitation and hygiene and training of community health volunteers; preventing and 

responding to abuse, neglect, exploitation, and violence against children; mobilizing children, 

youth and local communities to hold their governments accountable; and advocating for 

effective systems, laws, and policies that protect vulnerable populations where the social fabric 

is especially weak. 

World Vision US has more than one million private donors in every state and Congressional 

district, partners with over 16,000 churches in the United States, and works with corporations 

and foundations. We are motivated by our Christian faith to serve every child in need that we 

possibly can, whether they are of any faith or none. We partner with faith leaders throughout 

the world, equipping them to be champions for the needs of their communities. We are part of 

the global federation of World Vision International, which last year implemented more than 

$2.7 billion in programming to help children and communities through international relief, 

development, and advocacy assistance. Although private donors support much of our work, 

the US Government is an invaluable partner. We leverage this partnership to reach many more 

vulnerable children and ensure that the precious resources of the American taxpayer are 

prudently used to promote and protect the well-being of children and communities abroad. 

World Vision maintains a significant and long-time presence in East Africa, working in Ethiopia 

since the early 1970s, Kenya since 1974, in South Sudan since 1989, and Somalia since 1992. In 

addition, we have an East Africa regional office that provides technical and programmatic 

support to the entire region. 

Famine and Food Crisis in East Africa 

In East Africa, a new arc of fragility has quietly emerged and given rise to a complex hunger 

crisis driven by drought, conflict and poor governance. This crisis is currently affecting over 22 

million people, who require urgent, life-saving assistance. More than 3.5 million children under 

five are acutely malnourished, and 844,900 children are severely malnourished, with an 

estimated 14.4 million people in need of health assistance. In Kenya, South Sudan, and Somalia, 

certain areas have already reached or are approaching famine levels. At the same time, the 

number of people escaping conflict and hunger is dramatically increasing across the region with 

more than 3.3 million people now living as refugees. Somalia and South Sudan remain two of 

the largest sources of refugees globally. Host countries, such as Uganda which is home to more 

than 800,000 South Sudanese refugees, are reaching capacity limits. 
58


24832d-3.eps

The immediate needs in this crisis are clear- food assistance and nutritional support must 

reach the region quickly and efforts by donor governments and the international community 

must be scaled up. At the same time, the international community cannot ignore the long-term 

impact of malnutrition, particularly in children and pregnant mothers. Should we fail to address 

this crisis soon, not only will we witness more deaths from hunger, but we will see an increase 

in stunting in children that will have long-lasting impact. 

The interventions required in these crisis situations go beyond immediate life-saving food 

assistance and nutritional support. Famines and food insecurity cause a ripple effect across 

communities and families, impacting health, child protection and economic security. As clean 

water for drinking and household sanitation, like handwashing, becomes scarce, we see 

malnutrition exacerbated by diarrhea, cholera and other diseases. As families are displaced or 

leave their homes to find water and food for themselves or for livestock, there is a need to 

ensure access to latrines, education and basic health services. A lack of access to consistent 

health care services means that mothers do not get needed prenatal care, which may cause 

complications during pregnancy and childbirth, and children do not receive vaccinations for 

preventable diseases. As communities migrate, millions of children are forced to leave school, 

putting their education, careers and dreams on hold. As families' exhaust coping mechanisms, 

children become more vulnerable to hazardous child labor, child marriage, trafficking, and 

recruitment in armed forces and other groups. 

Additionally, much of the humanitarian need today is driven by civil wars, instability, and 

unresolved political disputes. The famine in South Sudan is largely a man-made catastrophe and 

in Somalia, the humanitarian crisis is a result of the combined effects of the drought and 

ongoing conflict. Standing on a 30-year history of working in many of the world's fragile states, 

World Vision remains committed to scaling up interventions that prove effective in supporting 

countries as they transition out of fragility towards greater stability and lasting peace. 

In recognition of these evolving complexities, World Vision has worked to improve integrated 

programming models for addressing poverty and vulnerability, including famine and food 

insecurity. We are looking at and testing models that allow us to commit to longer-term 

projects in specific geographical locations focusing on the holistic needs of children, their 

households and communities, through multi-sector and integrated programming with a focus on 

rebuilding livelihoods, water resources, health, and education systems. At the center of this 

work is community relationship building and collaboration with government ministries, local 

leaders, women's group, children and youth to create sustainable impact. 

Recognizing household vulnerability to drought, conflict and other disasters, we are also 

working to prioritize community-led disaster preparedness and management plans linked to 

early warning systems. When shocks are forecasted, World Vision aims to quickly modify 

project plans by accessing additional emergency public or private funding and link communities 

to other available safety net programming. 

Country Overview and World Vision's Response: 
59


24832d-4.eps

World Vision's East Africa regional office is leading the coordination of our famine response 

and programming efforts with our national offices in Kenya, Ethiopia, Somalia, and South Sudan. 

Given the recurring nature of food insecurity in East Africa, our life-saving interventions have 

and will continue to address the vulnerabilities and shocks that brought about this crisis with 

the further objective of building resilience among communities in our areas of operation. 

However, additional international aid and response is urgently needed to avert this looming 

catastrophe. 

South Sudan 

World Vision partners with the World Food Program (WFP), UNICEF, Food and Agriculture 

Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and other partners to bring life-saving interventions 

to the most vulnerable around the world. This is no more apparent than in South Sudan, the 

world's youngest country. South Sudan plunged into civil war in 20 13 and the protracted, 

precarious, and intensely violent nature of the conflict has resulted in untold suffering 

experienced by millions of South Sudanese men, women, and especially children. 

The conflict and the immense internal and external human migration it has caused is wreaking 

havoc on the country's food security. Coupled with the effects of climate change, the conflict, 

general insecurity, human migration, land degradation, economic collapse, and years of 

underdevelopment, the humanitarian community declared the presence offamine in two 

counties in the former Unity State of South Sudan where roughly I 00,000 people are on the 

verge of starvation. This is among the over 5 million individuals estimated to be experiencing 

severe food insecurity across the country - the highest ever recorded year on year. 

If the situation remains, the level hunger and malnutrition experienced across the country will 

continue to deepen where it already exists, while also continuing to spread. This is particularly 

true for urban populations who are experiencing collapsed markets and inflation rates over 

835%. For example, based on the most recent analysis, over 230,000 individuals, or 71 per cent 

of the population in Juba alone is considered food insecure. 

In response to the complex crisis, in FY 2016 alone World Vision reached over I million 

beneficiaries with multi-sectorial interventions through its emergency response activities across 

the country. It has also scaled up its food assistance programing using a variety of modalities to 

provide life-saving food and nutrition support to vulnerable households through activities such 

as general food distribution, conditional cash and voucher assistance, and others to reach an 

expected 950,000 beneficiaries in both rural and urban areas across the country. 

Somalia 

The humanitarian situation in Somalia is rapidly deteriorating, and hundreds of thousands of 

children and their families need immediate life-saving assistance including access to food, water, 

medicine, and other basic services essential for their survival. Currently, 5 million people, 

almost 40 percent of Somalia's population is food insecure with 322,350 children under five 

acutely malnourished, and 57,140 children severely malnourished. Last week, the International 

Committee of the Red Cross warned that there is a small window of only three to four months 

to save millions of lives before the worst-case scenario in Somalia and Yemen is realized. 
60


24832d-5.eps

In Somalia, World Vision has been responding through resilience and nutrition programming 

working with the World Food Program (WFP) as well as USAID's Office of Food for Peace 

(FFP) and Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA). The coordination between FFP and 

OFDA on resilience underscores our recommendations for working beyond relief-only 

solutions. Through partnership with WFP, World Vision is supporting more than 53,000 

people to create productive assets in their communities which either prevent the effects of 

disasters or support land reclamation and development for agriculture to promote long-term 

resilience. A further additional 68,000 people are being supported with food assistance and 

targeted trainings to improve rates of food security in some of the areas hardest hit by drought 

including Somaliland, Puntland and South Central Somalia. Lastly, in cooperation with the 

Office of Food for Peace, World Vision is implementing a $2.5 million voucher program to 

provide life-saving assistance to 2,61 I households in Somaliland and South Central Somalia who 

have been adversely affected by drought; this enables families to meet the monthly food needs 

of their families. 

World Vision supports USAID's ongoing efforts to distribute food rations to the most acutely 

food-insecure people, as well as provide food and cash transfers in exchange for participation in 

vocational training or productive asset building activities. Specifically, we also support efforts by 

USAID to modify existing awards and provide flexibility to partners to meet growing 

emergency needs in a timelier manner, and thereby helping to curtail future food crises. 

Ethiopia 

In Ethiopia, 5.6 million people are now in need of direct food assistance to stem the effects of 

multiple seasons of failed rains and drought in more than 360 districts throughout the country. 

Cross-border movements by families in search offodder and food continue in the southern 

areas of the country where food insecurity has reached crises levels. Malnutrition in children 

under the age of five has increased severely and access to water in affected areas is decreasing 

daily. 

World Vision Ethiopia currently implements a multiyear integrated food security development 

program called "Strengthen PSNP 4 Institutions and Resilience" in some of the areas hardest hit 

by the drought in Ethiopia. The PSNP is the government's Productive Safety Net Program 

which is currently in its fourth iteration. In collaboration with the Government of Ethiopia and 

other partners, the program supports the country's Productive Safety Net Program which 

enhances the ability of communities to adapt to, recover from and mitigate against disaster 

through immediate food assistance and creation or rehabilitation of productive community 

assets. This program is expected to reach nearly 530,000 people over the next five years and it 

will support the development and maintenance of a more efficient, responsive and effective 

safety net program across the country. 

Under the leadership of Catholic Relief Services with the support of the USAID Office of Food 

for Peace, World Vision is also implementing a Joint Emergency Operations Program 

responding to critical food needs of nearly 160,000 of the most vulnerable households across 

Ethiopia, many which are in areas that have been hardest hit by the drought. 

Kenya 
61


24832d-6.eps

In Kenya, more than 2.7 million people are food insecure and an estimated 357,000 children 

under five are acutely malnourished. Staple food prices in the country have risen by close to 30 

percent in the past three months. In certain areas of northern Kenya, severe acute 

malnutrition levels have reached double the emergency level with nearly 30 percent of children 

on the brink of starvation. 

World Vision Kenya is responding in 15 out of the 23 most drought affected counties: Turkana, 

Baringo, Marsabit, lsiolo, Makueni, Garissa, West Pokot, Kilifi, Samburu, Taita Taveta, Wajir, 

Narok, Kajiado, Kitui and Lamu. In partnership with national and county government, WFP and 

other development partners, World Vision's immediate responses are prioritizing cash transfers 

for food, rehabilitation of water sources and water trucking for domestic and livestock use, 

school meal feeding programs to mitigate school drop-out, and support for the Ministry of 

Health to conduct nutrition surveillance and manage acute malnutrition. 

Other medium and long-term interventions include the creation of community assets that 

increase people's resilience to future food security shocks such as farm ponds, promotion of 

relevant climate smart agriculture technologies to increase crop and livestock productivity, the 

construction of water facilities for increased access to safe water, and support to strengthen 

county governments to coordinate drought response activities. 

Recommendations 

In these highly violent and volatile circumstances, the humanitarian system is struggling to 

deliver enough emergency relief today, enhanced livelihoods for tomorrow and sustainable 

security for the future. Despite these challenges, World Vision believes international and 

national actors are capable of re-building a resilient, peaceful and prosperous future in East 

Africa for children and their families. To do this, all actors-governments, UN and multilateral 

agencies, donors, faith communities, and more-must protect rights and uphold the rule of law, 

provide emergency water, help build economic resilience, and look at the many other 

vulnerabilities, including violence, that particularly impact children. 

Robust Funding & Program Support for Emergency Food Assistance Interventions: 

Scale-up emergency hunger and malnutrition interventions, with a focus on the first I ,000 days 

of life and other vulnerable populations, such as lactating and pregnant women, the elderly, 

disabled, persons Jiving with HIV and AIDS or TB, and robustly fund the USAID Offices of Food 

for Peace and Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) that support these programs. 

Leverage the full range of food assistance modalities, including U.S., locally, and regionally 

purchased food commodities, ready-to-use therapeutic and supplementary food, vouchers and 

cash transfers, as contextually and culturally feasible and with the aim of reaching as many 

food insecure persons as possible. 

Advance more ffexible emergency response through existing programming, ensuring quick 

response as food deficits are identified. During the massive drought induced by El Nino last 

year in Zimbabwe, World Vision was the recipient of a $I 9 million cost modification to our Title 

II- Food for Peace funded ENSURE program. This ffexibility from the U.S. Government enabled 

us to quickly respond to the needs of the hardest hit households with more than I 8,000 metric 
62


24832d-7.eps

tons of US commodities. Also, through the cost modification, supplemental feeding rations were 

also provided to more than 3 I 3,000 people, helping to protea earlier gains made in building 

community assets and long-term resilience. 

Access: 

Seek solutions that secure safe, sustained and unhindered access for humanitarian workers to 

all the locations where needs have been identified, including occupied territories. 

Collaborate closely with implementing agencies to provide more ~exibility in funding and 

transportation modalities when access is not allowed due to a variety of issues. 

Work to resolve bureaucratic impediments that would otherwise result in a more efficient and 

effeaive response in the countries where we are seeking to operate. 

Coordinated Multi-Sectoral Response 

Support grant mechanisms that allow for cross-sectorial, ~exible, and holistic responses to 

famine and food insecurity that utilize technological innovations to provide more targeted and 

coordinated programming. 

Ensure cooperation and collaboration between USAID bureaus and offices to ensure a holistic 

response to community needs using funding tools that allow for integration of seaors and 

innovation in emergency response. 

Long-Term Investments and Resilience-Building 

Adopt multi-year, ~exible funding, with an aim to improve long-term investments in fragile states 

to build resiliency, provide greater sustainable impaa and increase community ownership. By 

intervening in fragile states before they become failed ones, future famines and food insecurity 

crises can be averted. 

Promote development food security programs that support communities in coping with shocks 

and risks associated with climate change and severe weather patterns. To mitigate current and 

future emergency food assistance needs, long-term investments in development food assistance 

programs that empower vulnerable communities to "grow their own way out" of poverty 

through the promotion of agricultural produaion practices that include natural resource and 

drought cycle management, as well as land and water conservation techniques. 

Conclusion 

The number of hungry people globally has declined from about one billion 25 years ago to 

about 795 million today, and agricultural production has, on average, doubled as well. Ending 

hunger and malnutrition in our lifetimes can be achieved. But, as evidenced in East Africa, we 

do face growing challenges in achieving this goal, and in other regions and countries prone to 

fragility and severe impacts from climate change and other extreme and increasingly 

unpredictable weather. 
63


24832d-8.eps

Despite these obstacles, we have also never been as well prepared to overcome them. World 

Vision, along with our partners, will remain focused in responding to the immediate needs of 

affected communities in South Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia and Kenya. But, we are seeing the 

window of opportunity to avert a larger catastrophe rapidly closing. Historically, the United 

States has led the international community as the largest single donor for humanitarian 

assistance, and we believe that if other governments, international donors and humanitarian 

actors all join together, and act swiftly to meet the current global need, we can prevent this 

crisis from worsening. If we don't act now, we will have failed in living out our American 

values, and for many of us, a Christian call, to care for the least of these and we will have stood 

by while millions suffer and die. We will also have to address the consequences of migration 

and displacement that will lead to increased conflict, not only through competition over land, 

water and other resources, but also a potential for those in need to look for other sources of 

food and income, like armed or terrorist elements. 

We hope that Congress and this Subcommittee will continue to provide strong leadership and 

advocate for the funding and programs that are needed to respond to this crisis. This includes 

strong support for the International Affairs Budget as Congress finalizes fiscal year 2017 

spending bills and begins discussions around 20 18 appropriations, and for much-needed 

humanitarian funding alongside any defense emergency supplemental appropriations in 2017. 

Thank you for this opportunity to testify today. 

Appendixes 

World Vision East Africa Hunger Response Situation Report- March 13, 2017 

World Vision Somalia Appeal 

World Vision South Sudan Hunger Crisis Appeal 
64

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Maphosa, thank you very much for your leadership and for being a person who, having been helped, has been 

helping others ever since, and so thank you. 

That is a tremendous witness to all of us of someone who just 

gives back and gives back and gives back some more. So thank you. 

I would like to now recognize Ms. Wabwire. The floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF MS. FAUSTINE WABWIRE, SENIOR FOREIGN 

ASSISTANCE POLICY ADVISOR, BREAD FOR THE WORLD INSTITUTE 

Ms. WABWIRE. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass and esteemed members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to 

testify before the subcommittee today on this critically important 

issue of drought and famine in the east Africa region. 

I am here in my capacity as the senior foreign assistance policy 

advisor for Bread for the World Institute. Bread for the World advocates for policies and programs to end hunger. 

Our 2017 hunger report focusses on the urgency of addressing 

crises in some of the world’s most fragile environments, including 

those we are here to talk about today. 

I would like to mention that I have a copy of the most recent report, which outlines some of the strategies that governments could 

do, that multi-lateral agencies could do, and what governments 

themselves are doing to address such crises. 

Given the scale and the severity of the crisis, Mr. Chairman, 

Bread for the World urges Congress to reject the administration’s 

proposed skinny budget cuts to foreign assistance in the face of 

such serious crises. 

The proposed cuts include slashing or eliminating altogether the 

very accounts that finance the U.S. Government’s support for emergency response, and I would just like to highlight three specific accounts that will be severely impacted if the cuts in fact come to effect. 

One, is the Food for Peace account, which funds food aid. The 

second is the International Disaster Assistance, which funds 

nonfood items including water and medical services. 

We know what conditions look like in refugee camps. They are 

breeding grounds for all kinds of diseases. So this account is critically important. 

The third account I would like to highlight is the Migration and 

Refugee Assistance account which provides U.S. support to refugees in affected countries, neighboring countries—for example, refugees right now residing in Kenya and Ethiopia. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to focus my remarks on three points 

today. The fact that has been rightly mentioned by my colleague 

on the panel this crisis comes at a time when we have made tremendous progress against hunger and poverty around the world. 

And it can be overwhelming because a lot of people think we keep 

doing this but where is the evidence that we are actually making 

a dent. 

I am here to testify that in 1990 approximately one in four people lived with hunger on a daily basis. By 2015, the hunger was 

cut nearly in half and stood at one in nine. 

65

Over the same period, Mr. Chairman, extreme poverty was cut 

in half by even more—one in three people in the world to one in 

10. That is progress. 

Countries across the continent have invested in efforts to address 

hunger and poverty including reducing stunting which, as you 

mentioned in your opening remarks, Mr. Chairman, is a serious—

in fact, it’s a hidden hunger issue. 

We know that when children are affected by hunger, especially 

in the critical window between birth and 2 years old, their cognitive development is severely affected. 

It means that even when they grow up they are not as productive 

individuals of society, cannot contribute to the economic growth 

that we all hope to see in their own respective countries. 

These trends reinforce my belief in the feasibility of ending hunger and poverty. I must acknowledge that at the same time conflict 

and severe droughts related to a rapidly changing climate are making it much harder for countries to keep up with the progress that 

I just mentioned. 

I recently visited Kenya in December 2015 and January 2017. 

One of the things that really struck me was the effect of the 

drought, especially on communities that have managed to feed 

themselves all of these decades but are now in severe need of assistance. 

The early warning system, as was mentioned earlier, is a great 

tool that today helps us assess the extent of the crisis and find 

ways to mitigate its effect. 

FEWS NET mentions that today 6.2 million people in Somalia 

are in dire need of food assistance and especially if the own oncoming rains expected in the April season will not be to the level 

that it’s supposed to be. 

It’s noteworthy also to mention that although we have this kind 

of cycle of issues going on in Somalia, we are at a much different 

place, and I would like to echo what Mr. Nims mentioned earlier, 

that there is relatively more access to communities in Somalia compared to when we had the famine in 2011. 

In 2011, I also remember that we did not have any form of government in place. The entire country was pretty much under the 

control of the militant group al-Shabaab. Some progress has been 

made on that front. As we speak right now there is a government 

in place in Somalia. 

In fact, the government has declared the drought a national disaster and is willing to work with partners to address this. So that’s 

an opportunity right there that we can jump onto. 

I would like to mention that at a time of intense debate over the 

U.S. budget and proposed cuts to foreign aid let us remember that 

investing in food security helps to promote economic growth. It also 

promotes global stability, which we all wish for. 

My final point is about the fact that we are not a hopeless people. We have the tools that we need to address this crisis. The 

United States has demonstrated leadership through a range of 

tools including long-term development assistance and humanitarian assistance, as some of my fellow panelists have already mentioned. 

66

I just want to focus on one of the long-term development programs that I am very familiar with and which I would like all of 

you to support and continue to exercise your leadership on because 

it has made such progress in the countries where it works. 

Feed the Future is a U.S. Government’s global food security initiative. It complements funding from countries themselves, works 

with American businesses and universities to promote long-term 

agricultural development. 

It takes a comprehensive and sustainable approach such that 

countries own their own plains and eventually are able to fund 

their own initiatives. 

In addition to all the bilateral assistance I mentioned I would 

also like to add that U.S. leadership in the multilateral world is 

critically important. 

An example that I would like to highlight and which has helped 

to see the gains that we are seeing in Somalia today is the United 

Nations Peace Fund. This Fund promotes co-existence and peaceful 

resolution of conflict. 

It supports the government’s priorities for stabilization and peace 

and also focuses on creating jobs. Another important multilateral 

program that the U.S. Government participates in is the World 

Bank’s International Development Association. It also focuses on 

supporting countries efforts to build local institutions, strengthen 

governance issues which are so critical to addressing some of the 

issues we are talking about, and to prevent future calamities from 

happening. 

At this point, I would just like to offer three broad points upon 

which I believe that a U.S. Government response strategy should 

look like. 

The administration and Congress should quickly adopt a response that does three things—combines food assistance and cash 

vouchers, allowing people to purchase food in local markets. It 

should also specialize on nutrition for most at-risk populations such 

as children, pregnant women, and the elderly. 

And finally, provide financial and logistical support to countries 

that host refugees to prevent the spillover effects like have been 

mentioned before. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to answering any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Wabwire follows:]

67


24832e-1.eps

Statement of Faustine Wabwire 

Senior Foreign Assistance Policy Advisor, Bread for the World Institute 

U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations 

Hearing on: 

Eust Africu's Quiet Fumine. 

March 28, 2017 

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass: 

Thank you for inviting me to testify before the Subcommittee today on the critically important 

issue of drought and famine in the East Atfica region. I am here in my capacity as the Senior 

Foreign Assistance Policy Advisor for Bread for the World Institute. Bread for the World 

advocates for policies and programs to end hunger. Our 2017 Hunger Report focuses on the 

urgency of addressing hunger crises in some of the world's most fragile environments. 

Bread for the World urges Congress to reject the administration's proposed "skinny budget" cuts 

to foreign assistance in the face of severe droughts and famine. The proposed cuts include 

slashing or eliminating the very accounts that finance the U.S. government emergency response: 

Food for Peace, which funds food aid 

International Disaster Assistance-which funds non-food assistance such as water 

and medical services 

The Migration and Refugee Assistance account, which provides U.S. support to 

Somali refugees in camps in Kenya and Ethiopia. 

I will focus my remarks on three points: 
68


24832e-2.eps

• First, the crises in East Africa come at an unprecedented time of progress against hunger 

and extreme poverty in human history. It is in fact feasible to end chronic hunger by 

2030. But we must work much harder to support the etl'orts of people caught in these 

very challenging and fragile environments. 

Second, the US government has all the tools needed to help address the crisis in East 

Atrica. 

• Third, this is not the time to be cutting development and humanitarian assistance. 

The famine comes at a time when we've made dramatic progress in reducing hunger and 

poverty around the world. Tn 1990, approximately one in four people lived with hunger on a 

daily basis. By 2015, the hunger rate was cut nearly in half and stood at about one in nine. Over 

the same period, extreme poverty was cut in half by even more, from one in three people in the 

world to one in ten 1 Finally, many countries have shown remarkable progress in reducing 

stunting, a serious form of child malnutrition that hampers those who survive for the rest of their 

lives. In Ghana, for example, stunting rates have almost halved- from 36 to 19 percent- in just 

11 years. Malawi has made impressive progress on reducing anemia and promoting 

breastfeeding, which saves lives in poor countries. 2 

These trends reinforce my belief in the feasibility of ending hunger and poverty. At the same 

time, contlict and severe droughts related to a rapidly changing climate are creating near-famine 

conditions in some countries and threatening to reverse the world's gains of the past decades. 

When T visited Kenya in December 2016 and January 2017, T saw the devastating effects of 

drought on communities across the country. Pastoralists in the north have been most affected, 

since there is little water for the livestock they rely on. More than 2.7 million Kenyans are now 

food insecure, a number that's likely to reach 4 million by April. The Government of Kenya, in 

collaboration with the United Nations, will soon launch an appeal for $200 million to provide 

timely life-saving assistance and protection. 

The Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NETi analysis of Somalia finds that the 

number of people in need of humanitarian assistance is expected to increase from 5 million in 

September 2016 to 6.2 million between February and June 2017, at the height of the pre-harvest 

hunger season. That is more than half the population of Somalia. Somalia has one of the highest 

rates of malnutrition in the world. Even brief periods of hunger or malnutrition can cause death 

or lifelong damage to a child's growth and development. When these occur during the 1,000 

days betv,reen pregnancy and his or her second birthday, the damage for those who survive is 

largely irreversible and can mean lifelong health problems, diminished physical and cognitive 

development, and a more difficult time earning a living4 This is why measures to address the 

current crisis must reach that population quickly. 

by US AID after devastating famines and West Africa. FEWS NET provides 

objective, evidence-based analysis to help goven1ment decision-makers and relief agencies plan for and respond to 

humanitarian crises. 4 One Thou.snnd Davs: Fact Sheet 
69


24832e-3.eps

According to FEWS NET, an estimated $825 million is required from January to June 2017 to 

implement the Somalia Operational Plan for Pre-Famine Scale Up of Humanitarian Assistance. 

As of March 13,2017, a total of$183.8 million had been received--that's less than 23 percent of 

what is absolutely essentia1. 5 

Complicating response efforts is the fact that large parts of southern and central Somalia remain 

under the control or influence of Al-Shabaab, a militant group. This has restricted access to 

markets, basic commodities, and services. People's livelihoods are severely disrupted. Blockades 

of crucial facilities such as markets, and the extortion of ''taxes" trom already desperate 

communities, prevent farmers from transporting their grains to markets, disrupting supply of 

food and other essential goods and services. 

It's noteworthy, however, that in spite of the serious challenges in Somalia, there is much reason 

to believe we can avert the crisis if we respond thoughtfully and quickly. In 2011, when famine 

was declared in much of Somalia, the country was in much worse political turmoil and without a 

functioning government. Unfortunately, by the time the famine was declared and a robust 

response launched, it was far too late for many. About 260,000 people, half of them children 

under the age of 5, died in that famine. 

The situation is much different today. Despite immense challenges, including an ongoing civil 

war, Somalia conducted peaceful elections in early 2017. The government recently declared 

drought a national disaster and has appealed for help trom international partners. Lessons trom 

the 2011 famine have helped strengthen data systems so that officials can assess the crisis more 

accurately. Humanitarian partners now have a better system in place to get people help in forms 

they can immediately use. 

At a time of intense debate over the U.S. budget and proposed cuts to foreign aid, it is important 

to remember that investing in global food security and supporting developing countries' own 

etiorts to feed their people literally saves lives, promotes economic growth, and promotes global 

stability. We also save money in the long run. We know from experience that natural disasters 

such as drought can destroy crops and disrupt food production, but this does not have to lead to a 

crisis on the scale we are witnessing today if governments and aid agencies intervene in time. 

The experience of East Africa, particularly, shows that effective safety net programs can pay off 

very dramatically. A good example is Ethiopia's Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) 6 In 

spite of numerous challenges, this innovative program has played a significant role in reducing 

hunger and food insecurity in Ethiopia. Between 2005 and 2008, the PSNP in Ethiopia led to the 

construction of many community assets: 

2.1 million kilometers of stone embankments to prevent soil erosion and improve water 

conservation; 

About 1 billion trees planted to restore degraded watersheds and improve soil and water 

conservation; 

7,000 kilometers of small-scale irrigation canals and 191,600 ponds constructed to 

provide water for agriculture. 
70


24832e-4.eps

As a result, during the 2010-2011 famine in the region, nearly 500,000 fewer people in Ethiopia 

needed external assistance than in past hunger emergencies. 

We have all the tools to address the current crisis as well as to prevent similar ones in the 

future. 

The United States has demonstrated leadership through a range of tools: long-tenn development 

assistance, as well as humanitarian assistance such as food aid, and non-food assistance. 

Humanitarian and diplomatic assistance 

The nature of the current crisis is largely man-made. We have the ability to stop the famine, and 

prevent millions of deaths. But the window of opportunity is very limited. We must act 

decisively-now-not later. The region's most immediate needs include interventions to 

improve food access and address health and nutrition challenges-particularly for children and 

pregnant women. The appropriate response strategy has to be rapid and comprehensive, and 

should prioritize three things: deliver a combination of food assistance, digital cash cards, and 

cash vouchers that allow people to buy food in local markets; provide specialized nutrition 

support for mothers and children; and increase financial and logistical support for peace building 

initiatives to countries and communities that are hosting refugees. This should be done through 

bilateral and multilateral programs, including agencies such as the through the World Food 

Program. 

The flexibility to provide assistance in ways that people can immediately use -for example, food 

or cash vouchers-helps people get food more quickly, helps avoid disrupting local markets, and 

helps save money so that more people can be reached with the same funding. Working with 

refugee-hosting countries and communities is important because failure to address their needs 

causes disruption in local economies, increasing instability and the likelihood that conflict will 

spread across entire regions. 

loOJJg-term development assistaJlce 

The United States should continue to lead by example, providing encouragement and motivation 

for global actions that prevent the need for repeated humanitarian interventions. The challenge 

presented in East Africa-frequent, severe droughts related to climate change and weak 

governance institutions-requires sustained investments. While emergency aid is vital right now, 

we must think beyond the current crisis. We know that it is much more cost-effective to invest in 

building agricultural and economic systems that are sustainable in the long run. Over the past 15 

years, U.S. foreign assistance has paid greater attention to long-term investments in women and 

children and in country-led initiatives that lay foundations for sustainable agriculture and 

livelihood strategies. This will pay otfin the longer term. 

A good example is Feed the Future, the U.S. government's global food security initiative. The 

program complements funding from partner countries themselves, and works with American 

businesses across sectors to improve livelihoods through agriculture value chains. Feed the 

Future takes a comprehensive, sustainable approach to agricultural development. Investments 

focus on country-owned plans and emphasize the importance of gender, nutrition, response to 

climate change, and natural resource management. In Kenya, through support from USAID, the 
71


24832e-5.eps

U.S. Department of State, and USDA, Feed the Future prioritizes resilience-building efforts in 

the face of erratic rainfall and frequent drought. Because food security and climate conditions are 

interrelated, Feed the Future targets areas of recurrent crisis that historically have had high 

humanitarian needs7 Drawing on resources and expertise from 10 federal agencies, Feed the 

Future is helping countries, including 19 focus countries, transform their agricultural sectors and 

sustainably grow enough food to feed their people. 

US. multilateral leadership-in collaboration with partners-is as essential as bilateral US 

assistance in achieving positive results and preventing calamities in future. In our increasingly 

interconnected world, investments in programs such as the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund. 

In Somalia, The Fund promotes coexistence and peaceful resolution of conflict in, and aims to 

support the government's priorities for stabilization and peace, including investment in jobs. 

Another important mechanism is the World Bank's International Development Association 

(IDA). IDA, the World Bank's fund for the poorest countries, is particularly critical in the face of 

climate change, fragility, conflict, and the worst refugee crisis since World War II. Strong US. 

support for IDA18 replenishment is critical, with particular attention to fragile and conflictafiected statesg This is the time to redouble our efiorts and accelerate progress to end hunger 

once and for all. 

The administration and Congress should work together to review program time frames and 

establish a mechanism outlining appropriate oversight to ensure that U.S. assistance in fragile 

and conflict-affected situations takes into account the need for effective coordination and patient 

capital. The current crisis is largely political. To achieve lasting peace, political solutions-in 

addition to humanitarian assistance--are key. The United States could step up its power to 

leverage mediation efforts through its diplomatic ties and presence in affected countries. 

Mediators should work with local communities, regional leaders, and the international 

community to encourage dialogue at the community, national, and regional levels to find lasting 

peace. 

It's time to sustain progress, not cut foreign aid 

US leadership on global hunger and food security has been instrumental in leveraging 

substantial additional resources and reversing decades of decline in funding for agricultural 

development. The United States has significantly helped to raise awareness of the urgency of 

improving nutrition in the critical window between pregnancy and age 2. ln July 2009, when G-8 

leaders gathered in L' Aquila, Italy, to respond to the 2007-2008 global food price crisis, the US 

proposal to invest significantly more effort and resources in agriculture leveraged support from 

other donor countries, who committed to providing $22 billion in financing for agriculture and 

food security. U.S. assistance plays a catalytic role to leverage other partners, including the 

private sector. Initiatives such as Power Africa are mobilizing more than $40 billion from private 

sector partners, delivering power to 6 million people to date9 

I would like to leave the Committee with a few recommendations: 
72


24832e-6.eps

l Launch a robust U.S. Government response: A massive, strategic response is 

urgently needed to prevent death, total loss oflivelihood, and further instability. 

The administration and Congress should work together to review program time 

frames and establish a mechanism outlining appropriate oversight to ensure that 

U.S. assistance in fragile and conflict-affected situations takes into account the 

need for effective coordination and patient capital. 

.b Support Multilateral Assistance: The U.S. should work with the international 

community to increase official development assistance to conflict-affected 

countries such as Somalia, including through multilateral mechanisms such as the 

World Bank's International Development Association, the World Food Program, 

and the United Nations Peace Fund . 

.,L Strengthen the humanitarian-development nexus by expanding social protection 

programs: Social protection programs have been critical to progress on reducing 

hunger crises in the region. Providing regular and predictable cash transfers to 

poor households often plays a critical role in terms of filling immediate food gaps, 

but can also help improve the livelihoods of poor families by alleviating 

constraints on their productive capacity. 

:l Take the long view and work with local actors to address climate change: Work 

with afl'ected communities, national governments, donors, and the private sector 

to improve access to new technologies, knowledge, and skills for climate change 

mitigation, as well as facilitate networks to share infonnation and develop new 

adaptation strategies. Agricultural research and extension programs, for example, 

should pay attention to the affected communities' significant hardships as climate 

change causes their communities to sufl'er growing resource scarcities. Etl'orts 

must focus on increasing their adaptive capacity to deal with the shocks, while 

also providing the necessary support-such as social protection and financial and 

technical assistance--to cushion their communities against additional stressors. 

I sincerely thank the Subcommittee for its attention to this important issue, and for extending me 

the honor of testifying today. 
73

Mr. SMITH. Thank you for your testimony and your leadership as 

well. Let me begin. If I could ask you a question. Others might 

want to join in on an answer as well, and thank you for underscoring the devastating impact of stunting. 

The outward appearance is mirrored by an inner tragedy that occurs when a mind is artificially held back because of lack of nutrition and stunting is a direct result, as we all know, of insufficient 

nutrients and food during the critical period, as you pointed out, 

from conception to the second birthday. 

And this subcommittee and this chairman has made the first 

1,000 days one of my highest priorities because if you get the first 

1,000 days right you get the rest of the life most likely to be far 

better. 

The immune system is bolstered and, of course, cognitive abilities 

once lost are very hard to reclaim later on. So it’s an early intervention effort that we have been promoting very aggressively as a 

subcommittee for some time now. 

And we have actually convened the African Diplomatic Corps recently and heard from three Ambassadors tell of what they are 

doing in their respective countries on this effort of global food security, particularly focused on mother and child so that mothers are 

healthier and babies both unborn and newly born into that second 

birthday are healthier as well. 

So if any of you would like to expand upon that because it seems 

to be the progress that is being made is at risk of being severely 

reversed and lives crippled by that lack of food security. 

Second, Mr. Isaacs, you mentioned the issue that many of the 

governments do not have control of these militias and as you go 

down the line the men with guns increasingly report to a warlord 

or somebody else—my question is how hard are the governments 

themselves trying to rein in on that practice? 

Are they taking a laissez-faire attitude or are they really trying 

to say, we need a cohesive military unit with a command and control structure that truly if we say do this, this happens? 

Because when Greg Simpkins and I spoke to Salva Kiir, we had 

every indication that they were in control and that we wonder if 

that’s at all true when, again, people with guns, even people who 

had the insignia of his corps were the ones who were committing 

atrocities in Terrain, if you could speak to that. 

Let me also ask are we doing enough? I asked this of Mr. Nims 

earlier. Are we doing enough right now? Are we mobilized sufficiently with enough money to make a difference? 

Again, as I said earlier, the President and every President since 

I’ve been in Congress has made recommendations, some of which 

were draconian in their cuts. 

There was a 20 percent cut envisioned by President Obama on 

issues like neglected tropical diseases as well as tuberculosis, an 

issue that I know members on both sides of the aisle care about 

very, very deeply and there are suggestions for some severe cuts, 

which I don’t believe in an instant are going to happen. 

But there is still reason for concern because they are on the table 

as something that might happen so we have to make sure that they 

don’t, especially in light of the crises that we are facing. 

74

So is there enough money in the kitty right now? Are we doing 

enough to really make a difference here? And I have other questions but let me ask you to respond to those and then I’ll yield to 

my——

Mr. ISAACS. I’ll start with speaking about the security sector reform in South Sudan. So the South Sudanese—the Sudan People’s 

Liberation Army were formulated over a lot of different visions that 

came together, and Dr. John Garang built that into a national vision that ended up being the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, the 

Government of National Unity. 

And in the end, the South decided to vote and they went for independence during the referendum. 

But when you look at the different military units they were 

never cohesive around the vision. They were cohesive around the 

individual leaders. 

So the building of the SPLA—there was a core contingent of it 

that, let’s say, was in the vision and then the rest of it was I made 

a deal with this person and they would come in and swear allegiance. So then all the guys that came with that person would put 

on the uniform. 

But the allegiance or the command and control capability doesn’t 

necessarily extend down, and as you saw starting from December 

2013 when the civil war began, when there is a rupture between 

relationships at the top it goes all the way down. 

But then there can be another rupture down below that and another rupture down below that. So reform in the security sector for 

South Sudan is something that is desperately needed. The other 

thing I would like to answer quickly is, ‘‘Are there enough resources?’’

I am not familiar with the details of everybody’s budgets but 

here is what I do know. About 6 months ago, the World Food Programme pretty much across the board reduced everybody’s daily rations by 30 percent and that wasn’t just in South Sudan. 

That was about 6 months or 8 months ago. Do you remember 

this? Okay. So I am not the only one that has experienced this. 

We haven’t talked here and they are shaking yes, they remember, too. But this went not only in South Sudan. It was in Uganda. 

It was in Iraq. It was in Syria, Turkey, and Greece. 

Everywhere straight across the board there was a 30 percent cut 

and I think that’s reflective that there are so many displaced people, there are so many refugee people in the world today and now 

with this drought and other food needs, insecurity on top of that, 

I don’t think there are enough resources. And this is going to breed 

greater instability, ultimately. 

Mr. SMITH. Your point about the 30 percent cut, I chaired a hearing 2 years ago on why the massive exodus out of the refugee 

camps run by the UNHCR, and the UNHCR representative said it 

was the 30 percent cut. 

Mr. ISAACS. Yes. 

Mr. SMITH. And then people had said, they are not going to take 

care of us—we are voting with our feet, so to speak, and were going 

to just—were just going to leave. 

Mr. ISAACS. Yes. 

Mr. SMITH. So in essence it is an ongoing problem. 

75

Mr. ISAACS. And I am—I am not kicking World Food Programme 

there. I am just saying I don’t think that they are being adequately 

funded and I also don’t think that it’s solely the role of the United 

States. 

I think that by the United States exerting leadership in the humanitarian sector that means other countries have to come forth. 

And if I may make one last comment—Mr. Nims said it earlier 

but I just want to reemphasize it. Humanitarian aid will never resolve political conflict and I think that political decision makers in 

the world today when they can’t get a political resolution have a 

tendency to put more pressure on the humanitarian players to get 

a conflict resolved and that’s never going to work. 

Political division, political strife requires political resolution. Yes, 

sir. Thank you. 

Mr. BOWERS. Just a few comments, Mr. Chairman. 

We have talked about men with guns. Often, they are boys with 

guns. But I also want to portray a more positive story of what can 

be lost as well due to budget cuts and some of our nonemergency 

food programs funded by USAID, which is integrating these men 

and boys back into society when they do put their guns down. 

So a program that we work in northern Uganda is doing just 

that. And in many ways Uganda, though still going through a lot 

of challenges, has succeeded in looking at how do you deal with a 

restive part of your society that has taken up guns for different 

reasons. 

So there are positive ways actually you can work on this issue 

with men with guns. Now, South Sudan is not at that place yet. 

But, clearly, when you look at where cuts will be made, and 

peacekeeping/peace-building programs with impacts on communities’ resiliency, helping young men, helping boys, reintegrate into 

society and put those guns down is part of that food security challenge that we want to get to. Because part of the reasons driving 

them and a lot of recruitment of Boko Haram, frankly, was over 

economics, not just ideology of an extremist group. 

A report we put out last year proved that point. A lot of them 

were in debt and they were looking for other financial means just 

to make their life successful by recruitment in. 

So some of these programs have to be done in conjunction with 

other activities both humanitarian as well as development assistance that works on security and safety. 

And then finally on the issue, I guess, is if there is enough in 

the kitty. No. Because the world has never been in a place we are 

at today. 

Sixty million people are refugees or IDPs; globally the largest 

ever since World War II. And now we have basically a food and 

famine crisis brewing. 

Now, we have been focused inherently over the last few years on 

what breaks the humanitarian system. Is it simultaneous wars in 

Yemen and Syria? Is it a large natural disaster that hits Nepal, et 

cetera? 

Well, this is another data point in that kind of terrible story that 

we are getting to—that without enough resources and certainly 

without FY 2017 rescinded money people will be without food. 

76

So the WFP account was reduced because essentially WP lends 

to itself in emergencies. It has its own emergency reserve. So it 

pulled internally its funding to meet Nigeria needs, staff up, et 

cetera. They exceeded that amount and then WFP basically had to 

start dialing back. 

Ms. WABWIRE. I’d like to briefly respond to the question on nutrition and how some of the existing programs are responding to this. 

In September 2015 I visited a village in northern Kenya and I 

was sitting with this grandma who is 82 years old. After a couple 

of times, a ton of children came to her and three of those were her 

grandchildren. 

We had been talking about the challenges in the area and she 

explained how the frequency and severity of droughts have been increasing over the years, over the course of her lifetime. 

One thing that she told me that really stuck with me was the 

fact that she feels so helpless to know that she cannot provide nutrition support to her grandchildren. 

She was able to raise her children but today, because of the effects of climate change, rapidly changing and erratic weather patterns, she’s simply not able to. 

So hunger is also an issue that affects people’s dignity and I 

think as we talk about addressing some of the world’s challenges 

it really speaks to the issue of our moral obligation and the values 

that we hold as a human society. 

Leah came to me and greeted me and the first thing she said to 

me—this was an 8-year-old girl—she said, I feel really dizzy. By 

looking at her, I could tell she hadn’t eaten for a while. I didn’t 

have to ask her. 

Because I have seen so many of these every time I visited countries where a number of U.S. programs are working I get to see 

communities like this. 

One of the programs that I really want to expound on a little 

more is Feed the Future and how it’s working to change that 

around. As we may remember, the food price crisis of 2008, riots 

across 40 countries all over the world. 

The Arab Spring was largely as a result of the food price crisis 

where a lot of people could not afford to buy food. The following 

year in 2009 at the G8 Summit in L’Aquila, Italy, the U.S. Government stepped forward and called upon partners to reverse the decades of neglect in agriculture development. Feed the Future was 

born out of that initiative. 

Today, Feed the Future is very serious and keen on turning 

around the crisis of malnutrition and the way that Feed the Future 

works is that it works with governments. It focuses on areas that 

bring returns on investments. Addressing nutrition is one of those. 

Like I mentioned earlier, lack of proper nutrition in the critical 

1,000 days window destroys people’s lives. 

After that, I visited Senegal, a country that’s doing very well on 

Feed the Future, and the Government of Senegal has actually 

adopted a lot of the tools and is carrying on much of the work on 

its own. 

So Feed the Future, a program run by USAID, speaks to the effectiveness of U.S. assistance when it is targeted. But I also want 

to speak to the fact that we need stronger institutions. We need a 

77

USAID that’s able to carry out these functions like it’s currently 

doing. 

Over the last course of about 10 years we have seen major reforms across the Agency and I think it’s very unfortunate that a 

lot of the stories we hear about this Agency being ineffective and 

wasteful is totally not correct. 

One of the issues I wanted to highlight is the monitoring and the 

evaluations that are happening currently at USAID. Since 2011, 

USAID has conducted more than 1,000 evaluations by independent 

third parties. 

Ninety-eight percent of these have been used to shape the Agency’s policies and programs. Feed the Future is one of those programs. 

I also wanted to highlight the foreign assistance dashboard. Out 

of continued effort from the NGO community, most of whom are 

represented in this room, have continued to advocate for U.S. foreign assistance to be more effective, return on investment, but also 

deliver for the people that it serves. 

And we are seeing a lot of progress on that front. We are seeing 

more country-led initiatives, governments that are willing to work 

in partnership with the U.S. Government to address their own 

problems. 

So I thought I would use the nutrition piece to just highlight the 

effectiveness of the Agency, USAID that would be severely impacted and would reverse the decades we have made if these cuts 

come into effect. 

Mr. MAPHOSA. Thank you, Chairman. On the topic of nutrition 

I did mention the 1,000 days in my opening remarks and, you 

know, I would like to bring this to life with bringing a situation 

that I came across in the field. 

When we talk about 1,000 days we talk about a pregnant mother. That’s where we begin, and we talk about a child who is under 

2 who is receiving lactation. 

I met this mother who is pregnant. She has got a child who is 

under 2 years of age and she has a child who is 5 years old. 

And she’s going through a program where we have said we are 

focusing on the first 1,000 days because our resources are fewer. 

And she asks me the question, what would you have me prioritize? 

The child who is in my tummy that I don’t see or this child that 

I am lactating or this child that is crying loud that is here? 

These are choices that women face every day when programs are 

not able to meet their needs but also when, really, they are not 

able to provide for themselves. 

So the first 1,000 days is critical but it is also a very difficult one 

for a parent who will be having children of that age group sitting 

with them. 

Are we doing enough right now? I will say that the stress migration that we are seeing or we are beginning to see in Somalia gives 

me a sense that we are not doing enough because otherwise people 

wouldn’t move if we are doing enough. 

It is important for them to be kept or to stay where they would 

rather be productive than to move into a camp. That’s the last 

place people want to be. But when you see them moving into that 

space it’s because they are actually stressed out. 

78

Mr. SMITH. Thank you. Before yielding to my distinguished colleague, just remind everyone—I think the record should clearly 

show it—that there has been a strong bipartisan effort on food security. 

President Bush, beginning in 2002, had the initial foresight to 

elevate the important role of food security in the U.S. foreign policy, especially in Africa, via the Initiative to End Hunger in Africa, 

or the IEHA, which was funded through development assistance 

and implemented through USAID. 

At the same time, the Millennium Challenge Corporation began 

making substantial investments in agriculture-led economic growth 

programs, particularly in Africa. And as you pointed out, I would 

say to my friend that it was built upon at the G8 Summit meeting 

in Italy in 2009. 

I would like to yield to Ms. Bass. 

Ms. BASS. Thank you. Just adding to that, Feed the Future had 

definitely been a program that has been—has had bipartisan support and we actually moved it from just being a program to putting 

it into statute. 

So I’ve seen it myself personally work in the hills of Kenya and 

to me I think it’s an example of really how a lot of our foreign aid 

should be transformed so that it’s not just about us providing direct 

services but it’s about helping to build the capacity on the ground. 

So, major support here. 

And I think along with that, I mean, I think Electrify Africa follows in the same vein. You know, Mr. Isaacs, you started by talking about your aid workers and I was just—I don’t remember if you 

said what happened—if they were returned or if they were released. 

Mr. ISAACS. They were safely released. So the SPLA——

Ms. BASS. Were they South Sudanese? 

Mr. ISAACS. Yes, they were all South Sudanese. They were 

roughed up a little bit but none of them were killed. None of them 

were hurt. And after we did the debriefing we have a six-page report—the blow by blow detail is fascinating. 

So they are kidnapped in a village by a local garrison whose wife 

of one of the guys they kidnapped went down and chewed out the 

garrison and said, ‘‘What are you doing with my husband? You got 

to let him go,’’ and he said, ‘‘Well, I can’t let you and your kids go 

now because we want to fight those other guys tomorrow. So now 

you’ve got to stay with us.’’ It’s sort of comical but it could have 

been tragic——

Ms. BASS. Right. 

Mr. ISAACS [continuing]. And it could have been horrific. They 

were all released safely and we have gone back. We have talked 

with the commissioner in the area and we have even confronted 

the guy and talked to him, and we are trying to build an environment where there is some kind of stability that we can come back 

and help people. I mean, it’s in the middle of a swamp. 

Ms. BASS. Yes. 

Mr. ISAACS. Why would anybody want to come in the swamp and 

fight? 

79

Ms. BASS. Well, and I think you raise a real important issue 

about where South Sudan is these days—that it’s not really a situation of two factions but many. 

Mr. ISAACS. It’s multiple factions. 

Ms. BASS. And so it’s fine to say there needs to be a political solution but I am not exactly sure what that is or how that comes 

about. 

I mean, to me without—that’s why I always go back to the AU 

even though I know the AU has its challenges. But I love what 

happened in the Gambia as a perfect example and I wish, obviously, that wasn’t a situation that had ridden to the level of war 

but the fact that the countries came together to resolve a situation 

is what I certainly hoped for. But I don’t see how it’s just political 

and not militarily as well. 

You also mentioned within Uganda that there was a problem and 

you mentioned that a percentage of the people were from South 

Sudan. 

I was wondering in terms of hunger, famine—I mean, I don’t 

think that there is famine that is beginning Uganda unless you 

were saying that, and then what percentage of that is because of 

the refugees versus is Uganda having a problem. 

Mr. ISAACS. Right. So Uganda is in a level right now that’s probably considered stressed because the agricultural production and 

the markets are considered stressed due to lack of rainfall. 

But with now 800,000 people from South Sudan that have flooded into the area and the Ugandan Government, as Mr. Bowers said 

earlier, they have a pretty good handle on how to organize that. 

Ms. BASS. Right. 

Mr. ISAACS. But that’s drawing resources out of society somewhere. It’s drawing resources out of the WFP pipeline and that’s 

more resources that need to be replenished or it’s going to create 

more insecurity somewhere, and there are thousands of people 

coming every day, fleeing Sudan. 

Ms. BASS. So I am thinking of the cuts that have been made and 

also we are doing a resolution tomorrow in full committee about 

the famine. 

But none of it was going to Uganda. You know, that’s not what 

we are recommending and I am just wondering if we shouldn’t include Uganda. 

Mr. ISAACS. So I would say that—I don’t know how your budgetary process works but if you’re considering funds to Food for 

Peace and some of their requests are to help South Sudan refugees, 

a substantial portion of them are in Uganda now. 

So however that funding stream runs. But I think that there 

needs to be consideration made for those refugees to feed them. 

Ms. BASS. Okay. And Mr. Bowers, you mentioned PRIME in 

Ethiopia. Is—and it sounds—I mean, I have read about it in your 

testimony. Is PRIME—does PRIME exist outside of Ethiopia or is 

it just in Ethiopia? 

Mr. BOWERS. Well, that particular project was designed for arid 

parts of Ethiopia. But I think the construct is what my colleague 

was saying because it is a Feed the Future program as well. It’s 

a 5-year program; over 50 million U.S. dollars were invested. 

Ms. BASS. Where are we in the 5 years? 

80

Mr. BOWERS. We are at the last year. But the proof is there. We 

know the evidence is there to demonstrate, again, that sort of metric that Matt Nims mentioned today. A dollar spent can actually 

reduce humanitarian needs by over $2.90. 

So that’s a pretty impressive metric, and in an area of the world 

where we know there will be cycles of drought again. So the whole 

point of resiliency, the whole point of sort of a systems approach, 

is looking at the diverse drivers that make people more resilient so 

that they are not dependent on us handing out food again. 

Ms. BASS. So what happens? Does it need to go on beyond 5 

years or is 5 years——

Mr. BOWERS. Well, I think we are always looking for opportunities to continue to build a momentum where the need and the government are both in alignment. And Ethiopia has shown itself to 

be quite progressive in championing these types of systems approaches in the region. 

Kenya is getting there as well. I think it’s more difficult to do 

in areas in Somalia but not impossible. And then, finally, Uganda 

is another area where we are championing a lot of these multi-year 

programs that are building resiliency in the midst of coping with, 

as Ken mentioned, 800,000 refugees. 

So, you know, these are the signature programs that the USG 

should really be championing in addition to our humanitarian accounts because those are critical for saving lives. 

Ms. BASS. I do think it’s something that we need to lift up in 

terms of the role African countries have been taking in taking in 

refugees. We often think of the migration out but do not acknowledge often that so many refugees are absorbed by other countries 

and they do it in principle, which I think is something that——

Mr. BOWERS. I would just quickly add on the fluidity of that region, obviously, as many people on the subcommittee know, borders 

there don’t really exist in reality and many of these societies have 

cross border trade, cross border realities that go beyond. 

Ms. BASS. Yes, but not for 800,000 people. 

Mr. BOWERS. So the markets are all cross border there—religions, ethnic groups. So the fact——

Ms. BASS. That’s because the borders were never real. 

Mr. BOWERS. So whatever legislation language you come up with, 

I think acknowledging that cross border dynamic is very important. 

Thank you. 

Ms. BASS. So I wanted to ask you, Mr. Maphosa, you mentioned 

that the leaders don’t want to call it a crisis and I am not sure if 

you were making reference to say, for example, there is a problem 

in Kenya and it’s not really clear whether the Kenyan Government 

is saying that there is a crisis, and I am thinking also specifically 

of Nigeria. So how do we help Nigeria if the issue is Boko Haram? 

Mr. MAPHOSA. So that was in specific reference to South Sudan. 

Ms. BASS. Oh, okay. I see. 

Mr. MAPHOSA. I was noting that when you see them accepting 

that there is a famine, they are not crying wolf anymore. In 

fact——

Ms. BASS. Oh. 

81

Mr. MAPHOSA [continuing]. They may be behind the curve because traditionally for them they would not want to be the first 

ones out. You need to push them a little bit more. 

Ms. BASS. I got it. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. 

Chair. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you. 

Mr. Garrett, gentleman from Virginia. 

Mr. GARRETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to credit the ranking member for stealing my favorite 

question. But I do appreciate the follow-up, Mr. Isaacs, on your aid 

workers, that at least it dovetails with another question. 

Four extraordinarily effective good organizations represented on 

the panel. How many members of your organization have you had 

abducted? How many are still being held and what can be done to 

help them? 

I know it’s beyond the purview of the meeting but I think appropriate in light of the testimony. 

Mr. ISAACS. So I can say that we have had people kidnapped over 

the years. I don’t know the exact number. We have been blessed 

not to have too many and we have none that are held now. 

Mr. GARRETT. None currently? 

Mr. ISAACS. Yes. 

Mr. GARRETT. Thank you. 

Mr. MAPHOSA. I would say for us we have been fortunate not to 

have those situations. But the near misses type of situations is 

where we have had to evacuate staff when we sensed that there 

was danger. 

Mr. GARRETT. Sure. 

Mr. BOWERS. I would just add, usually we don’t comment on 

these things publicly because some of these cases may be active. 

Mr. GARRETT. To the extent that you’re not comfortable commenting on it I would ask that you reach out to any members of 

the subcommittee with whom you are familiar and comfortable. Let 

us know so that we might be able to help. 

Mr. BOWERS. Sure. And we are happy to provide additional sort 

of international data on that. I mean, most of the abductions currently are in Syria. 

Mr. GARRETT. All right. Well, any number of places and sometimes the government actions might not be classified as abductions. 

But yes, let somebody know and there are members of this subcommittee, Mr. Smith in particular, who have had some wonderful 

success in sort of humanitarian efforts to help folks out of bad situations, for lack of a more appropriate term. 

How about Bread for the World? Are you all in the same circumstance where——

Ms. WABWIRE. No, actually because we are not a direct service 

agency. Fortunately, we don’t have that problem. 

Mr. GARRETT. I appreciate that. That’s better news than I 

thought I might here. So that’s very good. 

Ma’am, you also spoke to the conditions in the refugee camps and 

how, obviously, they are breeding grounds for disease, infection, et 

cetera. 

Can you also speak to the circumstances as it relates to exposure 

to extremism, people who are hopeless and how their circumstances 

82

in some of these camps might lead them to make decisions they 

might not otherwise make. 

Ms. WABWIRE. Absolutely. As I began my remarks, I highlighted 

this report which I will just mention again. And the reason I do 

that is because, as we were preparing—putting together this report, we traveled and interviewed lots of people—including young 

men in Somalia, a country that, obviously, is severely affected. 

One of the people that presents a story here is a young man 

called Mohamed. He works with the Global Youth Innovation Network. This is a group of young Somali men who, in spite of all the 

challenges around them, have committed to try and prevent recruitment from happening in their own villages. 

So what Mohamed and his team do is they bring together young 

men whom they know are prone or susceptible to influential recruitment by al-Shabaab and plan for a lot of livelihood strategies. 

They’ve opened businesses with support from external partners, to 

a very large scale, though, have helped to build roads and canals—

just very impressive initiatives. 

And this is really to alleviate opportunities where grounds for 

breeding of such extremists happen. 

Mr. GARRETT. So at the risk of sounding like my colleague, Mr. 

Castro, earlier and ending my question with what do you think 

about that, I would sort of soliloquy, Mr. Chairman, that you very 

rarely see young people make decisions that relate to transition to 

extremism where there is an opportunity where there is hope. 

And so the work that we are doing here and I think the bipartisan commitment to ensure that we continue to do it will save 

lives that we will never be able to quantify because we will see 

fewer people pushed toward extremism, I think. 

And I think that it’s hard to—it’s hard to do that in numbers but 

what you all do, God bless you and thank you. 

Mr. Chairman, I don’t know if this would be an appropriate time. 

I had spoken to you prior to the meeting about some information 

that I have received from the Ambassador to the Republic of Sudan 

that he wished to have read into the record. 

So I will hand that to you now and ask that it be included in 

the record. 

Mr. SMITH. Without objection it will be made part of the record. 

Mr. GARRETT. If I might articulate very briefly, Mr. Chairman, 

I have had some conversations with leadership from the Republic 

of the Sudan on semi-related issues. 

Obviously, the Ambassador is not able to testify at this hearing. 

But they are trying to make it abundantly clear that they hope to 

become better partners, particularly as it relates to transportation 

of assets and resources in the South Sudan by virtue of being landlocked and also that they hope to integrate themselves better into 

the region and the world, moving forward. 

And I will tell you, Mr. Chairman, for the record that I have 

found them to be engaging and well intentioned, and past activities 

notwithstanding I think worthy of sitting down and maybe having 

some greater discourse moving forward and I thank you for your 

indulgence. 

83

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Garrett, thank you very much and this submission from the Ambassador will be made a part of the record. So 

thank you very much for that. 

Ms. Wabwire, you have referenced that summary of recommendations. To the extent possible, particularly things like the 

executive summary and some of the recommendations, we would 

like to make that a part of the record. 

So afterwards we would like to go through it and pull out some 

of the most important and salient points to make it part of the 

record. 

Ms. WABWIRE. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Suozzi, gentleman from New York. 

Mr. SUOZZI. I don’t have any questions, Mr. Chairman. I just 

want to thank each of you for your testimony today and for your 

great service that you provide to people. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. I would like to yield to Mr. Donovan, the gentleman 

from New York. 

Mr. DONOVAN. Thank you, Chairman. 

I don’t know how I am going to get liked more than Tom Suozzi 

right now. That’s wonderful. 

I also got a chance to ask some questions earlier and I know they 

are going to call the votes in 5 minutes. So is there something else 

that any of you want to tell us, whether it’s to understand the issue 

better, to understand the problems, understand the solutions? I 

offer that up to you until the bell rings. 

Mr. ISAACS. If I may bring up one other thing. 

All of the localities and the populations that we have talked 

about today we have not mentioned two people groups. In the 

southern part of the Republic of Sudan—that’s the people in Nuba 

Mountains and Southern Blue Nile—and they have been totally cut 

off with no humanitarian access since June 2011 and they continue 

to be cut off today. And this is a population of a total of about 1.5 

million people. 

So while the words from the Embassy of Sudan are gracious and 

I have no doubt that they maybe have made some progress in some 

areas, there has been no humanitarian access allowed to that and 

that is something that I am very familiar with and I would ask 

that you look into that and pressure them to allow access into 

those areas. 

Mr. SMITH. I would add that in the past we have actually had 

hearings that focused on the Nuba Mountains almost exclusively 

because of that lack of humanitarian access. 

So I think your point is extremely well taken and I thank you 

for it. Would anyone else like to add before we close? Any comments? Yes. 

Ms. WABWIRE. I think I will just close with where I started—that 

in order for us to make an effective response to one of the world’s 

largest humanitarian crises we have got to protect funding. 

We have got to oppose the proposed cuts and I am really encouraged, Mr. Chairman, by your confidence that these are going nowhere. That makes me feel a lot more encouraged and motivated 

and especially because this is for some of the most vulnerable people around the world. 

84

This is not for our organizations. This is for mothers and fathers 

who watch very helplessly their children die of things that are so 

solvable like hunger. 

And so just very quickly, a robust U.S. Government response is 

needed urgently. We have got to act fast because millions of lives 

are on the brink of starvation. 

Secondly, please support multilateral assistance including World 

Food Programme and the U.N. Peace Fund, which helps build institutions for peace building over a long period of time. 

But at the same time also help to bridge the gap between the humanitarian and the long-term development assistance because I 

think that’s where we are not making fast enough progress. 

And finally, as we respond to the current crisis, let’s take that 

long-term view so that hopefully in a few years we are talking 

about a whole different story and how we have made a difference. 

And I thank you all very much for the opportunity to testify. 

Mr. SMITH. As we close, one of the reasons why we have called 

this hearing was to hear from the experts who have just absolutely 

compelling information that needs to be heard by this subcommittee, the Congress, the appropriators, and that’s why it was 

scheduled for today. 

And also we wait for a new USAID Administrator and other key 

personnel because personnel is policy. As you know, Mr. Isaacs, 

having served—others too as well—the key is having the right person, the right people in those gatekeeper positions and a lot of that 

has not happened yet. So we are not flying blind but we don’t have 

the visibility that we should have. 

So this hearing and, again, your testimonies become very, very, 

I think, informative and motivating going forward. So I want to 

thank you very, very strongly for that leadership because we will 

take your statements. 

The full record won’t be ready, it is never done overnight, the 

Q&A part, but your written testimonies especially it’ll get very 

wide distribution. And so I thank you so deeply. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:36 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

(85)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

86

f


24832n.eps

SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING NOTICE 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6128 

Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations 

Christopher H. Smith (R-NJ), Chairman 

March 28, 2017 

TO: MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

You arc respectfully requested to attend an OPEN hearing of the C01mnittec on Foreign Affairs. to be held 

by the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health. Global Human Rights. and International Organi7ations in Room 

2200 of the Raybum House Office Building (and available live on the Connnittee website at 

hU.p:/1\, '"" .. ForeignA[[alrs.house.£>0\ ): 

DATE: 

TIME: 

SUBJECT: 

WITNESSES: 

Tuesday, March28. 2017 

2:30p.m. 

East Africa's Quiet Famine 

Panel! 

Mr. Matthew Nims 

Acting Director 

Office of Food for Peace 

Bureau for Democracy. Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance 

U.S. Agency for International Development 

Mr. Ken Isaacs 

Vice President 

Programs and Govermnent Relations 

Samaritan's Purse 

Mr. Michael Bowers 

V icc President 

Humanitnrian Leadership and Response 

Mercy Corps 

Mr. Thabani Maphosa 

Vice-President for Food Assistance 

World Vision International 

Ms. Faustine Wabwire 

Senior Foreign Assistance Policy Advisor 

Bread for the World Institute 

By Direction of the Chairman 
87

f


24832m.eps

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

iviiNUTES OF SUBCO.NilvHITEE ON .!!~im, Gtubulllei,ltll, GlubJ1! IIsmum Rlglll;.,, aJUl Ilttematiouat Orgrmhatious HEARING 

Day _ ____cT:.:l:.::le::sc::d.::;aJ,_'_~D•te, _ ___:M=a:..:rc::_h::..:2:.:8'-',-=2:.::0.::_1_:_7 __ Ruum 2200 Raybum HOB 

Starling Time 2:31v.m. Ending Time 5:11p.m. 

Recesses [~1 ~ -] (3:15 to 3:51) L_!o _ 

Presiding Membe•·(s) 

Rep. Cltl'is Smith 

Ciled< ttl! oftlrefollow/ug that apply: 

Open Session IZl 

Executive ~sed) Session D Televised LL.J 

TITLE OF HEARING: 

East Aji'ica's Quiet Famine 

SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBEUS PRESENT: 

)( _to_ _) L_to_) (_to_) L_to __ ) 

Electronically Recordcl.(r•ped) IZl 

Stenographic Record LL.J 

Rep. Karen Bass, Rep. Ami Bem, Rep. Joaquin Castro, Rep. Tom Garrett, Rep. Dan Donovan, Rep. Tom 

Suozzi 

NON-SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: (Mark with an* if they are not members of full committee.) 

Rep. Eliot Engel 

HEAlUNG WITNESSES: Same as meeting notice attached? Yes EJ NoD 

(If "no", please /;st below and include title, agency, deparfmtm!, or ur<gcmizufion.) 

STATEMENTS 110R THE RECORD: (List any statements submitted jar t/Je record) 

2017 Bread for the World Hunger Report, submitted by Rep. Chris Smith 

Statement ofSean Callalum 'ifCatlwlic Relief Service,,, submitted by Rep. Chl'is Smith 

Statement of the Embassy of the Republic ofSud<m, submitted by Rep. Tom Garrell 

World Vision Ra~t Africa llmrger Cl'i,is Overview, .mbmitted by Mr. Thabani Jlfaplwsa 

World Vision Somalia Emergency Appeal, submitted by A-fr. Tim bani 1lfophosa 

World Vi;·ion South Sudan Situation Repm·t, submitted by Mr. Thabani Maplw.\'0 

TIME SCHEDULED TO llECONV!!:NE ___ _ 

or 

TIME ADJOURNED 5:11p.m. 
88

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, 

A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, AND CHAIRMAN, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS


24832f-1.eps
89


24832f-2.eps

Summary 

The world has made dramatic progtcss against hunger and extreme puvetty in 

recent decades. In 1990, approximately one in four people in the world lived with 

hunger on a daily basis. By 2015, the hunger rate was cut nearly in half and stood 

at about one in nine. Over the same period, extreme pmrcrty was cut by even 

more, from one in three people in the world to one in tcn.1 

At no other time in human hi,lm'y has ptogress against hunger and poverty 

"ccun·cd so rapidly. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) provided 

a framework lo mobilize global action against hunger and poverty and other 

development objectives. The MDGs were not the only reason for this dramatic 

progre., but they made a difference. Buoyed by this progress, in September 

2015, heads of state and g"vcrnmenl from around the world adopted a new and 

much more ambitious set of global goals known as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs ). The 17 interrelated goals include goals to end hunger and 

poverty by 2030. See Figure ES.l. 

fxocutivo Summary 
90


24832f-3.eps

Ending Hunger in Fragile Times and Franile PlaGes Recent trends give optimists gDod reason to believe that ending hunger aud povel"ty is within 

reach. At the same time, the world faces daunting challenges. Tragedies on an unimaginable 

scale are occurring In different parts of the world. The wars in Syria and South Sudan and the 

nea1· famine conditions in places whe1e war and dimale change collide are enough lo challenge 

anyone's optimism about ending hunger und poverty. 

Syria and South Sudan arc among a group of nations the international development community nft~n refer to as fragile states, \Vhile thrre i~ no 'mivet~al ddinition of fragility, thrsf': 

are nations where hig·h rates of hunger and poverty are compounded by civil conflictl poor goveruance, and vulnerabiWy lo dimale change. Frat,rile places pn:senl the greatest challenge in 

ending hunger and poverty. 

Conllictls one of the grealesllhreats to ending huJJgel'. Mono: people die from hunger cutd c.Hse,tse 

in confHct zone-S than from violence. 2 Paul Collier, author of Tl1e Bottom BiDlon, describes the effects 

Post-r.onflict socir.tlas 

are more likely to 

relajJSe into conllict 

il hunger remains a 

major tJroblem. 

on nations as "development in reverse/' Within two years of the 

:;;tart of the Syrian civil war, thf! country had lost35 years of development gains, induding 3,000 schools damaged or destroyed, 

another 2,000 conve-rted lo shelters for di~placed people, nearly 

a third of all public health centers destroyed, half the population 

living in poverty, and half the workforce unemployed. 3 

The potential for climate change to destabilize countries in 

some of the most volatile regions of the world is why the U.S. 

milita1-y -considers it to be a threat to national Sf!c.mity.4 Thf: 

internation<Jl connmmity c<Jnnot afford to ignore the dwllenges in fragile states. Conflicts ~pill 

over national bru·ders and threaten regional securHy, \-dlh ram..ificati.om. for th-e security of nation~ 

around the worldl as we've seen repeatedly since the 9/11 attacks in the United States. Fragile 

states are a breeding ground for terrorism. Violence in Syria and Central America drive refugees 

and undocumented immigrants into Europe and the United States. 

Countries that are govel'lled well h<we a 30-4.5 p('rccnt low('r l'isk of conf1ict.5 VVhilc a nation's 

leaders arc the face of governance, state institutions are what make it possible for govemments 

to function and serve the public Acce.ss to health care, education, and other services, especially 

among gwups who have histodcally been excluded, are important steps towards achieving 

duraLle ~ace. The record shows lhat pusl-cuuflid s:odelies are mole likely Lo rehp~e inlo conllid 

if hunger remains a majorproblem.5 

Any country can have fragile regions or communities. Some U.S. communities have poverty 

rates of .10 percent or more-. As a community hecomes poore1; there are more and more barriers 
91


24832f-4.eps

Figure ES.t The Sustainable Development Goals 

to people lifting themselves out of poverty. The difficulties reinfo1·ce and amplify each other. 

A survey of the literature on concentrated poverty shows that the mo.s.t negative correlates of 

poverty (e.g., high levels of food insecurity, failing schools, large numbers of youth dwppfng out, 

chronic joblcssnciis, and violent crime) generally do not appear before neighborhood poverty 

rates reach 20 percent, and then become endemic as poverty rates rise to 40 percent or morc-:1 

A Call to Action: Investing in Resilience at Home and Abroad 

Ending hunger is a moral imperative. It is especialiy so in fragile situations where the odds arc 

stackfd against vulnerable penple aml. thr haniers that they fare are the highe.st. If we continue 

on the current path, it is estimated that by 2030, hvo-th.irds of the people \vho experience hunger 

wiillive in fragile slales.8 

The guiding principles of the SDGs arc to "leave no one behind)' and to urcuch the furthest 

behind first."9 The average poverty rate in the countries the '·Vorld Bank classifies as. fragile 

Executive Summary 
92


24832f-5.eps

USAID pre·posftlmwl 

e-mergency relil'!f supplies. 

IIIP.ort-au·Prlnce, Ha!tl,lo 

e-nsure rap'd deployment 

to affected communities 

lnadvilnceofHmrfc;me 

Matthew fn Octobt!l' 2016. 

is 51 percent.lO The "'-rorld Bank's 

2011 World Development Report, 

Conflict1 ScCU1'ifJ1 and Devcloprncnt, 

noted that no fragile state was on 

track to achieve any of the MDGs.11 

liy ~015, several of these nations 

had met al Ieast one of the targets, 

but ovemll, (he recmd leaves lillie 

room for doubt: fragile counlries 

are fmthest behind.l2 

Addre.~~ing the root causes of 

fragility now will prevent future 

conflicts; save lives, build resilience 

and put the world on a path toward 

ending hunget. In other words, 

investments today will reduce the 

need for humanitarian response and 

military intervention in the future. 

At the beginning of 20Hi, thf!re. 

\'l.'ere 33 adive c..:oullicls around ihe 

globe,l3 and the number of peuple 

forcibly displaced by conflict had 

reached 65 mi!Iion, the highe-st 

number since World War 11.14 

Diplomacy and rlefense are ohvious.ly crucial to ending conflict and 

.<.ecuring peace, but much more must be done to prevent crises anrl 

to ensure thai a short-term crisis today does no~ ~urn into a long-term 

crisis through the intergenerational effects of malnulrition aud lhe 

disruption of health care and education, especially among vulnerable 

children. A child in a developing country that is affected by conflict is 

twice as likely to be hungq and nearly three times <~.s likely to be out 

of school i'lS a child in a deve-lop:lng country at peace.Lr, 

The Uniled States government is C"Urrently involved in fragil€' statfs. The U.S. military is 

presenl or ass.isling in many of lhese countries, and lhe United Stales. is the largest contriln1tor 

to the international humanitarian system. Between· 2004- and 2015, humanitarian funding fmm 

all donor.'l increased six-fold, from $3A billion to $21.8 billion, and fragile and conflict-affected 

countrie;:; have heen the large-Et rf'dpients of this assistance.1

fl But in spite of this dramatic 

incrc:Me in resources, donors meet lcs:S than two-thiJ·d:S of the annunl humanitarian needs. 17 In 

20141 and then again in 20Ei, the ·world Food Program had to temporarily suspC'nd food aid to 

millions of refugees because of funding shortfalk18 

We need new tools :and a ne\V approach that focuses on building resilience through lucal inslitutions, so that communities and <.:Ounlrie~ <.:an avoid, cope wilh, and bounce back from crises. 

To addrc.ss the long-term challenges posed by fragi1ity, the United St;:t~es should lake a more 

comprehensive and balanced approach) with greater investments in diplomacy and humuni 

tarian and development aso;.istance. U.S. glohal rlevelopment programs that build resilience in 
93


24832f-6.eps

Box ES.1 Executive Summary 
94


24832f-7.eps

Two·thifds of peopll'l 

in tha world who are 

hungryliveinrural 

mcas<!nd e-arn a living 

as farmers or landless 

a.gricultwalwarkers. 

c.ountrie:s that are vulnerable to fragility are underfumled, e.<~pecially 

relative lo defense spending, anrt 

limited in scope. The legislation 

that governs U.S. fon:-ib'll assislan-ce 

was \\-Titten in a different era for 

different challenges. Programming lacks flexibility, making it 

diffir:nlt to work across sectors and 

to addre,'l.s diverse needs on the 

gwund. Il is in our interest to take 

a pragmatic} fon-vard-lhinking and 

sustainable approach to frugilily. 

Thi::; includes our· engagement 

with international im;timtions. The 

SDGs and the Paris climate agree" 

me·nt in Decemhf:r 201.1, which 

p1·oduced a global frame\,.·ork to 

fight climate clumge, are the most 

impressive displays of colledive 

artion to date. The annual conference on eli mat('; change provides a 

fOrum for all countries in the world 

to come together to add1·ess perhaps 

lhe biggest iong-ternl development 

chRllenge facing humanity. U.S. 

lf':<tdership at the global leveL can help bring people together and can 

leverage rcs01.1t'CC'S fro-m other partners. 

To end hunger in the United St{ltes by 20.10, public policies and 

resources must be mme fot:used on reducing concentt·ated poverty. Jn 

20H, 55 percent of all people in poverty Hv-ed in a community where 

at least 20 p-ercenl oi the populatlon was poor-up from 4.3.5 percent. in 

2000.19 Some small-scale demonstrat.iuu pwjeCLs have shown promisel 

but they cnmf': and go without being brought to scale. VVc need a long-term commitment to 

resolve the many interconnected problems in high-poverty communities. There is no one-si:r..e--

fits-all m- a single all-encompassing policy solution. To aggressively reduce the rate of concentrated poverty, policymakers will need lo use alllools at their disposal. 

Bread for the Wodd welcomes the ambitious agenda of lhe SDGs. We believe ending hung~r 

and poverty by 2030 b within Je<t<:h in all countries. VIe recogniz-e thal fra;gile envh-onments 

present m<ljor challenges. VVc also know that v,'ith political will focused on the challenges we 

ran succeed. 
95

f


24832f-8.eps

Executive Surnrnwy 

The complete version ofthis doc~1ment can be accessed at: https://go.usa.gov/x58WC 
96

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, 

A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, AND CHAIRMAN, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS


24832g-1.eps
97


24832g-2.eps

markets, making food difficult to purchase when it is available. Famine was declared on February 20th in 

two counties in Unity State (Leer and Mayendit), with an elevated likelihood that famine will occur in two 

additional counties. Affecting approximately 100,000 people, the famine has forced many to scrounge 

for any form of sustenance, like water lilies. It is estimated that over one million children under age five 

are acutely malnourished and last month 12,558 children were treated for severe acute malnutrition. In 

fact, seven out of the country's ten states have reached the emergency threshold of 15 percent global 

acute malnutrition. While food assistance is important, livelihood and development support is critical to 

prevent further household asset depletion and reduce negative coping mechanisms. Overall, an 

estimated 4.9 million people (42% of the population) are severely food insecure, and this number is 

expected to increase to 5.5 million by July. 

In addition to food insecurity and malnutrition, the spread of disease is also of concern as people are 

unable to access basic health services and live in makeshift conditions as they flee violence. Health actors 

are reporting increased cases of cholera and measles. As of March 3rd, there were a total of 5,300 

suspected cholera cases, including 122 deaths, since the initial case was identified last summer. 

Additionally, more than 1.3 million malaria cases have been reported across South Sudan since the 

beginning of 2016, an increase of 350,000 reported cases during the same period in 2015. Malaria 

continues to be the main cause of morbidity and mortality of children under five in South Sudan. 

Catholic Relief Services implements two United States Agency for International Development (USAID) 

funded programs; the Resilience Food Security Program, funded through the Office of Food for Peace 

(FFP), and the Livelihoods Recovery and Resilience Program, funded jointly by FFP and the Office of 

Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA). Together, these programs reach 800,000 beneficiaries in parts of Lake 

State and throughout Jonglei State- the largest and most populous State in South Sudan. They provide 

an integrated programming approach that includes food security, water and sanitation, livelihoods, and 

nutrition programming, that together help communities be more resilient to the shocks their country is 

experiencing. A key component of the Jonglei Food Security Program is the distribution of U.S. food aid 

to needy families in exchange for work on community projects like road habilitation and irrigation 

channels. Overall, this assistance is helping to protect people from the worst effects of the crises. Catholic 

Relief Services has also partnered with the World Food Program (WFP) to deliver emergency food supplies 

to 143,000 people in remote parts of Jonglei State, at times using WFP's airlift capacity to parachute food 

supplies into otherwise inaccessible areas. Catholic Relief Services is also using our own private funding 

to implement an anti-cholera program in Lake State, reaching 16,000 individuals with hygiene promotion, 

borehole rehabilitation, and latrine construction. We are also using funding from Caritas Austria to 

provide emergency food assistance to 10,000 people in Upper Nile State. 

In 2011, Somalia experienced famine that claimed the lives of 260,000 people. Recent years have not 

been kind. The 2016 Deyr rainy season (October-December) was late and did not benefit most of the 

country, resulting in significant water availability deficits across the country. While the poor rains in 2016 

were largely attributable to the effects of La Nina, many parts of Somalia have experienced drought 

conditions for two or more years. Prolonged drought conditions have adversely impacted pasture, water 

supply, livestock, and crops, leading to a large depletion of vegetation cover across the country. 

Approximately half the population of Somalia, 6.2 million people, need urgent humanitarian assistance. 

As many as 363,000 children under the age of five are acutely malnourished and 71,000 are at risk of 

dying. Nutrition support is urgently needed to keep them alive. The Somali government declared a 
98


24832g-3.eps

national disaster due to drought on February 28th, and without assistance, there is a strong likelihood of 

famine in some of the worst drought-affected areas of the country. 

It is estimated that approximately 1.1 million people are internally displaced, with the majority being 

women and children living in camps in urban centers. High rates of malnutrition are being reported in 

children at these camps. Our assessments in Bay, Bakool, and Gedo States in the Southwest of Somalia 

indicate loss of livelihoods, limited access to food and drinking water, and limited access to basic services 

such as health, education, and sanitation, all of which is driving more people from their rural homes into 

IDP camps in city centers. The situation is worsened by some 250,000 Somali refugees returning from 

Yemen as they flee the violence and hunger in that country. The United Nations has appealed to the 

international community for $864 million, but thus far only 31 percent of this funding has been secured. 

Catholic Relief Services' current programming in Somalia is concentrated in the regions South and West 

of Somalia's capital Mogadishu, which has traditionally been the breadbasket of the country. Catholic 

Relief Services implements three USAID funded projects, and is permitted to operate in Somalia under the 

USAID's humanitarian license granted by the Office of Foreign Asset Control. The first project, Program 

for Enhanced Resilience in Somalia (PROGRESS), jointly funded by USAID/FFP, OFDA and the U.S. Mission 

in Somalia, is designed to increase household resilience to recurrent shocks. The project works to improve 

smallholder farmers' production and marketing skills like introducing new farming techniques that are 

more water conscious, provides vouchers to needy families to buy necessary food items in local markets, 

organizes saving and internal lending groups, builds water access points, and works with communities to 

develop participatory disaster risk assessments and corresponding plans to mitigate those risks. The OFDA 

funded Humanitarian Assistance for Conflict and Drought-Affected IDPs and Host Populations provides 

support to IDPs and host communities to provide basic nutrition, health and protection services, 

ultimately making it easier for host communities to care for IDPs. The third project is a small pilot project 

which is testing electronic cash transfer modalities. Catholics Relief Services Somalia programs in FY16 

reached 289,000 direct beneficiaries and 646,000 indirect beneficiaries. These ongoing programs provide 

Catholic Relief Services the capacity to quickly scale up emergency response, and Catholic Relief Services 

recently dedicated use of $300,000 in private funds in this way to provide additional assistance to 2100 

households. 

For the last seven years Boko Haram has staged attacks in northeast Nigeria killing more than 13,000 

people. Boko Haram has planted bombs in public places, abducted women and girls, forcefully conscripted 

young men and boys, destroyed villages and farmland, seized livestock, and forced markets and farms to 

shut down amid the violence. In some areas, people have been unable to plant or harvest for three years. 

As a result, an estimated 7.1 million people are experiencing severe hunger and more than 515,000 

children suffer from severe acute malnutrition. 

At least 1. 76 million people are internally-displaced in Nigeria by the violence, with the vast majority living 

with host families, and the remainder in camps, makeshift shelters and unfinished buildings. Because the 

crises in northeast Nigeria has spread to neighboring countries in the Lake Chad basin, including Chad, 

Niger1 and Cameroon1 there are also approximately 6301000 IDPs across these countries. Families who 

have fled lack essential supplies like soap, cooking sets and clothes, while sanitation and hygiene 

conditions are dire. The situation is compounded by overcrowding and limited access to health facilities. 

Recent reports indicate increased sexual and gender-based violence, particularly among young girls and 

women. The violence has also forced over 200,000 Nigerians to flee to neighboring Cameroon, Chad, and 
99


24832g-4.eps

Niger. On March 2, the governments of Cameroon and Nigeria signed a tripartite agreement with United 

Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) requesting the voluntary repatriation of Nigerian 

refugees living in Cameroon. 

Catholic Relief Services is implementing a USAID/FFP program in Barno and Yobe Provinces that provides 

over 101000 households with monthly e-vouchers to purchase food and non-food items1 and another 

OFDA program in Barno province provides shelter, water infrastructure rehabilitation and hygiene 

promotion activities for over 14,000 households. Under an existing USAID food security project, Catholic 

Relief Services is expanding agriculture and livelihood programming to southern Barno and Adamawa 

states. In addition to USAID resources, Catholic Relief Services has also received funding from Latter Day 

Saints Charities and Caritas Germany for water and sanitation work. 

Other Challenges of Note 

While the focus oft his hearing is rightfully on the ongoing food emergencies in South Sudan, Somalia, and 

Nigeria, we must bear in mind other current and likely situations that require a U.S. and international 

response. For instance, close to 2.7 million refugees have fled to countries neighboring these conflict 

zones. As noted earlier, Uganda alone is hosting 813,000 South Sudanese refugees, with 2,000 new 

arrivals daily. Uganda has recently surpassed Ethiopia as the country hosting the most refugees in Africa 

(note, Ethiopia is hosting around 811,000 refugees, with about 350,000 from South Sudan and 250,000 

from Somalia). Governments like that of Uganda are providing what services they can, but they do not 

have the resources themselves to provide needed food1 water and other supplies to maintain these 

refugee populations. They rely on United Nations bodies like the United Nations High Commissioner for 

Refugees, and aid implementers like Catholic Relief Services to meet the basic needs of the refugee 

populations. 

The challenge to serve refugee populations is also great for countries like Kenya, which is suffering from 

the same drought affecting Somalia. There, approximately 3 million people need emergency food 

assistance. While the Government of Kenya has pledged $99 million of its own resources to respond, this 

is less than half of the projected $208 million required and has led the Kenyan government to issue an 

appeal to the international community to cover the balance. These domestic challenges come on the 

heels of last year's announced closure of the Dadaab refugee camp that has accommodated around 

300,000 Somali refugees for several years. Recent reports indicate Somali refugees are beginning to move 

into Kenya again, underscoring the need to support Kenya in both its drought response and the assistance 

being provided Somali refugees in the country. 

Another concern we must keep in mind is the possibility of another El Nino event. Last year, El Nino 

caused what was described as the worst drought in a generation in Ethiopia and across many Southern 

African in countries like Madagascar, Malawi, and Zimbabwe. In Ethiopia alone, over 10 million people 

required emergency food assistance, and Catholic Relief Services played a significant role in drought 

response there and in other impacted countries thanks to foresight of USAID programs (see below for 

additional discussion of this). Some forecast models indicate an increasing chance of another El Nino 

developing by the end of the year. Food and monetary reserves in many of these El Nino impacted 

countries have been exhausted1 and if another El Nino occurs later this year the strain on resources would 

likely be unprecedented. 

4 
100


24832g-5.eps

Humanitarian Response Must Cover Multiple Needs 

While it is the picture of starving children that draws media attention to the unfolding emergencies, as 

aid implementers we know hunger is only one of the challenges facing people in these crises. Our 

assistance must provide more than just food to the people we are aiding. For instance, people who have 

fled their homes in search of food, or security, left most of the of their limited possessions behind. In their 

desperation, they have made long treks across inhospitable land, usually by foot. When they arrive to 

displacement camps, or urban centers, they have little more than the clothes on their backs. For these 

people, meeting basic needs in addition to food and water includes shelter, clothing, basic hygiene 

products, cooking and kitchen wares, water storage canisters, and host of other supplies. 

Most often the lack of food is accompanied by a lack of clean drinking water. Driven by extreme thirst, 

people will drink water they know is contaminated. This leads to a host of water-borne diseases, including 

cholera, diarrhea, and parasites, all of which require immediate responses. Additionally, efforts 

supporting and improving sanitation practices -latrine construction and handwashing- are essential to 

preventing the spread of infectious diseases. 

Refugees and I DPs are also easy targets for violence and exploitation. Rape and other gender-based 

violence are common in displacement camps. Women and children are particularly vulnerable to sexual 

exploitation- put in the horrific position of trading sex for food and water, or being targeted for human 

trafficking. Providing protection for vulnerable people and safe spaces for children are necessary to deter 

exploitation of this kind. 

In many of these cases as well, we know that people will not be able to return to their homes for a long 

time. For these conflict-affected families, we must look at more mid-term solutions with alternative 

livelihoods and a means to provide for themselves. 

U.S. Humanitarian Resources Must be Robust and Reliable 

The United States leads the international community in responding to crises, likes the ones threatening 

famine in Africa, as it has historically been the single largest donor of humanitarian assistance. This moral 

leadership motivates and guides other countries to contribute their fair share. United States funds 

humanitarian assistance primarily through three main accounts -1) International Disaster Assistance, 2) 

P.L. 480, Food for Peace, and 3) Migration and Refugee Assistance. 

The International Disaster Assistance account funds USAID/OFDA, which provides funding for non-food 

items and services to people in emergency need, including IDPs and refugees. These non-food items 

include things like shelter, water, hygiene kits, protection, livelihood opportunities, livestock support, and 

the like. OFDA also supports agricultural recovery by funding emergency seed distributions, which is 

commonly provided to small farmers who would normally save their own seed for replanting, but lose 

everything when rains and their harvests fail. 

Using a combination of resources from International Disaster Assistance and P.L. 480, emergency food 

assistance is managed by USAID/FFP. Under the auspices of the Emergency Food Security Program, 

recently authorized in the Global Food Security Act, FFP utilizes International Disaster Assistance funding 

to finance cooperative agreements for cash and voucher based emergency food assistance, while also 

drawing on P.L. 480 to finance cooperative agreements to purchase, ship, and distribute U.S. commodities 

in emergency programs. Implementing partners like Catholic Relief Services work with FFP to determine 
101


24832g-6.eps

the optimal form of food assistance in a given situation, and FFP then uses resources from the 

corresponding account. In some cases, like in South Sudan, the import of U.S. commodities is the right 

choice because there is very little food available due to violence induced interruptions in production. In 

countries like Somalia and Nigeria, voucher and cash based food assistance is a better option because 

food is still available in functioning markets. 

The Migration and Refugee Assistance account funds the Department of State's Bureau of Population, 

Refugees and Migration, which provides emergency aid to refugees and lOPs to return home, re-integrate 

into their communities, or resettle in third countries. Significant amounts from this account are being 

channeled through international bodies like UNHCR and UNICEF, to provide assistance to the 1.8 million 

displaced from Nigeria, 1.7 million from South Sudan, and 1.2 million from Somalia. 

We appreciate that Congress has been responsive to the great needs being met by these accounts. Many 

millions of people are alive today because of this generosity. In the FY2017 Continuing Resolution, overall 

funding for the International Disaster Assistance and Migration and Refugee Assistance accounts saw 

increases that put funding at $3.41 billion and $3.35 billion, respectively. Note, while these accounts are 

important contributors to the famine response in Africa, they are also heavily relied on to assist Syrian 

war refugees. Also, in the FY2016 Omnibus the P.L 480 account was funded at $1.716 billion, which 

included a one-time $250 million increase to respond to emergency conditions seen at the time. Given 

the critical roles that the International Disaster Assistance, P.L. 480, and Migration and Refugee Assistance 

accounts play, we urge Congress to oppose any reductions in funding to these accounts in FY17 or FY18. 

In fact, we believe the magnitude of these emergencies require funding way beyond these levels. As such, 

we ask Congress to consider providing immediate and significant supplemental funding in FY17 to address 

these famines and famine-like conditions. We know what works and what will save lives, and we know 

we must act now if we want to advert the worst that these food security crises can bring. 

Mechanisms to Quickly Scale Up Response 

To its credit, USAID has explored various ways to build capacity to scale up response during food security 

emergencies. In our own experience, the clearest example of this is the Joint Emergency Operation 

Program (JEOP) in Ethiopia. The JEOP is a multiyear emergency food aid program funded through P.L. 

480. In a typical year, Catholic Relief Services and its partners provide emergency food rations to about 

700,000 people. In addition, the program is designed specifically to quickly scale up because it has an 

established pipeline of food coming into the country, partnerships have been created port authorities that 

help move food quickly into the country, warehouses to store food are reserved, and a network of onthe-ground relationships with local leaders that facilitate food disbursement activities was created. In 

2016, this capacity to scale up was tapped when Ethiopia was struck by a major drought caused by El Nino, 

resulting in over 10 million people in need of food assistance. Catholic Relief Services' food distributions 

were quickly ramped up to cover more than 2.9 million people, helping to avert famine even in the depth 

of Ethiopia's food security crises. 

We have also seen USAID use the footprint of Development Food Aid Programs (DFAPs) to provide 

emergency response, which have had invaluable results. DFAPS are five-year multisectoral development 

programs funded by P.L. 480, which target highly vulnerable communities. In South Sudan, Catholic Relief 

Services operated the Jonglei Food Security Program as a DFAP before violence broke out there. When 

the conflict spread to Jonglei State, we were given flexibility to shift to emergency response as conditions 

in target communities no longer allowed for development activities. Today, the program is now called 

the Resilience Food Security Program and is a hybrid of emergency and development programming. In 
102


24832g-7.eps

both capacities, the program injects much needed food into the region and has been a factor in keeping 

conditions in Jonglei from deteriorating. More recently USAID has begun integrating 11 crises modifiers11 

into DFAP awards that anticipate emergencies and allow implementers to shift development resources if 

the need arises. Utilizing this model, Catholic Relief Services moved resources from its DFAPs in 

Madagascar and Malawi to scale up food-for-asset programming and unconditional food transfers, when 

they too saw El Nino droughts last year. Congress should continue to encourage USAID to experiment 

and develop other innovative ways of scaling up emergency response, while maintaining investments in 

long-term economic development. 

Peacebuilding, Diplomatic Response, and Development 

Recurring conflict has been the main driver of the food insecurity we are witnessing in South Sudan and 

Nigeria. The international community has a responsibility to meet the humanitarian needs of the victims 

of violence in these conflicts, but it must also work to address the underlying reasons for conflict, and thus 

must respond with efforts to promote a lasting, just, and durable peace between conflicted parties. 

Building such a peace requires long-term political and diplomatic engagement, as well as commitments 

from the affected parties at grassroots levels. 

South Sudan serves to illustrate the enormous challenge of peace building. In that war-torn country, 

Catholic Relief Services partners with the South Sudan Council of Churches (SSCC), to implement a $6 

million grant from USAID designed to launch a National Action Plan for Peace predicated on three pillars: 

advocacy, neutral forums and reconciliation. In its advocacy work, SSCC aims to change the narrative of 

South Sudan's culture of violence by sending Bishops to meet with leaders in Ethiopia, Uganda and Kenya 

seeking advice, buy-in and support for concrete steps towards peace. They also have reached out to the 

influential South Sudanese Diaspora. Under its neutral forums pillar, the SSCC creates for militia leaders, 

women, chiefs/elders and youth to share their experiences, grievances, regrets, and hopes with one 

another without fear of retribution. And finally, under the reconciliation pillar, the SSCC is guided by the 

Committee for National Reconciliation, Peace and Healing to training peace mobilizers to work at the 

grassroots level to help war-torn communities to reconcile. 

Similarly, in norther Nigeria, Catholic Relief Services strengthens social cohesion in deeply divided 

communities using a methodology we call "the 3Bs- Binding, Bonding, and Bridging." Binding activities 

provide space for internal reflection and personal transformation, including trauma healing. Bonding 

activities strengthen relations within respective identity groups through dialogue and collaboration with 

other members of the group. Bridging activities bring together oppositional and adversarial groups to 

interact purposefully in a safe space to promote mutual understanding and trust so that they can 

overcome their differences, engage in mutually beneficial activities, and jointly construct a shared vision 

of a peaceful future for their communities and society. 

We strongly recommend that the United States continue to invest in efforts like these to make and build 

peace. The path to peace is fraught with setbacks and challenges, but it is the only path that will bring an 

end to the humanitarian catastrophes we are witnessing. Further, to support these community-driven 

efforts, the United States must have a robust diplomatic engagement with leaders in these countries, with 

their neighbors and with the international community to convince them to support peaceful resolutions 

to these conflicts. To ensure the United States is diplomatically engaged in this way, we urge the 

Administration to nominate qualified individuals for key diplomatic posts in these countries and in the 

region. 
103

f


24832g-8.eps

Once peace is established, good governance and development investments will be need to avoid these 

kinds of life-threatening insecurities. The United States must work with other actors in the international 

community to help build effective systems of governance characterized by inclusive politics, effective 

delivery of services, uncorrupt judicial systems, and accountability to all populations. Disputes over fair 

treatment, resource allocation, and unmet grievances all have played roles in the conflicts we are focusing 

on. Building good, responsive governments, and providing these governments the support they need to 

rebuild and provide for the needs of their people, which development programming can support, is the 

path to a more stable situation for each of these countries. 

Conclusion 

Pope Francis, in response to the ongoing food insecurity crises in South Sudan, Somalia, Nigeria, and 

Yemen1 recently said, "Now more than ever there should be a commitment by everyone to not just talk 

but contribute food aid and allow it to reach suffering populations." He voiced his concerns that millions 

of people were being "condemned to death by hunger." 

Catholic Relief Services and the US Conference of Catholic Bishops greatly appreciate Congress' past 

support and global leadership in providing resources for disaster assistance, food aid, migration and 

refugee assistance, and peacebuilding. As an implementer of U.S. humanitarian and development 

assistance, we know these programs have saved countless lives and are essential to the continued survival 

of the people of these war-torn countries. We also note that U.S. funding has helped us leverage the 

private resources made available to us to respond to these challenges, which has allowed us to extend 

lifesaving aid to even more. 

We urge Congress to continue its moral leadership by robustly supporting those accounts that deliver this 

aid to the millions of people in South Sudan, Somalia, Nigeria, Yemen, and in the surrounding countries. 

If these people are to survive, not only must we continue to provide the food, shelter, water, and basic 

supplies made available through these accounts, a rapid and immediate scale up of this assistance is 

necessary. In the face of the unprecedented number of people suffering violence and hunger, anything 

short would surely lead to famine. We commend USAID's efforts to find innovative ways of rapid scale up, 

and hope to see further examples in the future. Furthermore, a refocusing on peacebuilding and 

governance is necessary to attack root causes of famine and insecurity in the region. Until we double our 

efforts to alleviate conflict and promote peace, the current 'quiet' crises we face will only repeat 

themselves and grow louder. 

8 
104

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE THOMAS A. GARRETT, 

JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA


24832h-1.eps
105


24832h-2.eps

1. Sudan has granted 2,500 metric tons of sorghum in addition 

to tents and food supplies to people of South Sudan. 

2. His Excellency President Omar Hassan Ahmed Albashir has 

granted 10,000 metric tons of sorghum as an immediate 

response to the threat of famine in South Sudan. 

3. The government of the Sudan has implemented the 

directives issued by his Excellency President Omar Hassan 

Ahmed Albashir to open new corridors on the borders to 

distribute the humanitarian aid in the affected areas by famine 

in South Sudan. 

4. Sudan's Government has extended the tripartite 

Humanitarian Aid Agreement signed with the UN and 

Government of South Sudan to allow the delivery of 65,000 

metric tons of humanitarian aid by the {WFP) across its 

territory to the needy people in affected areas by famine in 

South Sudan. 

5. The Humanitarian Aid Commission in Sudan as 

Governmental Department is in full coordination with the 

Sudanese Council of Voluntary Agencies (SCOVA) to mobilize 

their partners inside Sudan to facilitate Relief and food supplies 

distribution in South Sudan. 

6. To accelerate the humanitarian aid process and reach out to 

the needy people, the Government of Sudan has agreed with 

(WFP) to buy food supplies from Sudanese markets. 

7. The Government of Sudan issued directives to form a 

national committee under the chairmanship of Sudan's former 
106


24832h-3.eps

President field Marshal Abd Elrahman Swar Aldhab to assist 

those who are affected by famine and to create another 

committee to enumerate South Sudanese Refugees in Sudan so 

that they can be provided with basic necessities. 

I~ recognition of what Sudan has offered, as part of its efforts, to help 

adi~ressing the famine crises in South Sudan/ the The United Nations 

Rei5ident and Humanitarian Coordinator in Sudan, Ms. Marta Ruedas, 

issi;Jed statement on 03/26/2017 in which she welcomed the decision 

by~he Government of Sudan to open a new humanitarian corridor for 

foc'd aid to be delivered by the (WFP) from El Obeid in central Sudan to 

serve 100,000 people in Unity State1 South Sudan who are enduring 

fan~ine (a copy of the statement is attached). 

(3ased on the cooperation in various areas between the two 

coCntrieS1 Sudan is looking forward to work closely with the United 

States of America to maximize the benefits of mutual interests and help 

las~ing peace and stability in the region. 

Match 28, 2017 l 
107

f


24832h-4.eps

United Nations-;;~\ ~':1.1 OFFE<.F OF TliT R[.~IDFr>:r ANI~ HUMANTT:I.RIA.N (..'IJ\HtPf:"l,\TQR 

SUDAN 

Statement attributable to the tTN R('sidcnt and Humanitarian Coordinator in Sudan, 

Ms. 1\f arta Ruedas, on Sudan opening a new humanitarian corridor for t'uod aid into 

famine-si:ruciJ:: South Sudan 

Khartoum, 26 l\·larch 201 7 .. The United Nations Resident and Humamlarian Coordinator in 

Sndan, Ms. Marta Ruetla.s, today welcotneJ the decision by the Government of Sudan to open 

a new humanitarian C(tr6dor for food aid to be dc.livered by the UN World Food Programme 

(\VFP) from El Obeid in central Sudan to I3entiu. a tovm in {Jnity State.! South Sudan, where 

' 100,000 people are enduring famine amid a d~Xpt::ning humanitarian crisis across the country. 

"'H y opening this cro~s-border oorrktor, the Government of Sudan is showing its conUllitmerlt 

to tbe people of South Sudan and further strengthening couperaiiun with the internariom1l 

community t0 pull South Sudan baJ.:k from a vvidenlng famine that -could affect another 1 

million people,~· said M8. Rueda~. "This dedsion also comes at a nitival time j LL"t before 

South Sudan •s rainy season, which slarts in May and usuully renders these roads impassable.'~ 

This \Vt:~k, WFP will be mo\·ing an initial rlclivery of I 1,000 metric tons of sorghum-

' including 1 ,000 metric tons donatt!U by the Uovemment of Sudan ~ in scvcfl' convoys of .30 to 

;~ 40 uucks, which i.-; t:nough to teed 300,000 people for three months. The convoys will take up ;·to four days to complete the 500kmjourney. The humanitarian corridor will nut only allow for 

; the timely delivery of the tOod aid. but will aLso help rech.JC!;:': reliance on air operations, which 

cost six to seven timt:.s a~ much as movmg food by river and mad. 

; Ai least 7.5 miHion people across South Sudan- almost iwo lhirds of the popnhttion -~need 

~ humanitari:m assistance. Sudan is also t.:urn:ntly hosting nvcr 350.000 Sonth Sudanese 

:refugees, who hav~ arrived since the conflict erupted in December 2013. 

;For funbc:r intorrnation, ple~,se contact SaiU<lllth:t N~wpwt, Chief, Conl!nt.lllk>.Jlion & Information Section, 

~UN Offic:e for the Cootdination of Humanitarian A tfflirs in Sudan (newpmt~·ZVut1.Q!g / +249 912 ! 74 45,1). 

-1249187122222 Fax: +W;q&J-77'!12& 
108

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY MR. THABANI MAPHOSA, VICE-PRESIDENT

FOR FOOD ASSISTANCE, WORLD VISION INTERNATIONAL

f


24832i.eps
109

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY MR. THABANI MAPHOSA, VICE-PRESIDENT

FOR FOOD ASSISTANCE, WORLD VISION INTERNATIONAL

f


24832j.eps
110

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY MR. THABANI MAPHOSA, VICE-PRESIDENT

FOR FOOD ASSISTANCE, WORLD VISION INTERNATIONAL

Æ


24832k.eps