[Peace] Fwd: US stops Food Distribution

[Joan Nelshoppen]

This came to me through the Quaker listserve. Thought it was appropriate 
here as well.  Joan



Delivered-To: jnlshppn at prairienet.org
X-Sender: m-gilpin at staff.uiuc.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 07:38:05 -0600
To: quakers:;
From: Mariellen Gilpin <m-gilpin at uiuc.edu>
Subject: Fwd: US stops Food Distribution

 >X-Originating-IP: [192.220.130.190]
 >From: "Rosalie V. Grafe" <r_v_grafe at hotmail.com>
 >
 >Dear Friends,
 >
 >This comes from Sojourners Online Editor Jim Wallis.
 >
 >
 >Take care,
 >
 >Rosalie
 >
 >----------------------------------------------------------------------
 >
 >H e a r t s & M i n d s
 >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 >U.S. military policy hinders food distribution
 >
 >by Jim Wallis
 >
 >Today I spoke with Ken Bacon, president of Refugees
 >International. He told me there is now enough food in
 >place to feed hungry people in Afghanistan, but banditry
 >and the lack of security on the ground is preventing its
 >distribution. The U.N. and relief agencies report that
 >routes are either blocked or sporadically interrupted
 >due to the violence and chaos of post-Taliban Afghanistan.
 >
 >In northern Afghanistan, where the largest number of
 >hungry people are - particularly around the city of
 >Mazar-i-Sharif - the U.N. Office for Humanitarian Affairs
 >reports a situation that "remains very unstable" with
 >reports of continued fighting and looting. For the period
 >of November 15 to December 15, the U.N. says, less than
 >20% of identified food needs have been met. Two million
 >people are estimated to be vulnerable.
 >
 >Last week, a number of allied governments, including
 >Britain, France, Canada, Turkey, and Jordan were preparing
 >to send peacekeeping forces to help stabilize the situation
 >and permit the safe passage of food before winter
 >arrives completely. The Northern Alliance, now nominally
 >in control of northern Afghanistan, agreed to allow these
 >forces in. It was the obvious solution - a multinational
 >force to ensure safe passage of food.
 >
 >But that peacekeeping force has been blocked. The U.S.
 >Central Command's General Tommy Franks, in charge of
 >the war, ruled that these forces might hamper U.S. military
 >operations and vetoed the deployment. Why? According to
 >a "diplomat representing a U.S. ally" quoted in The
 >Washington Post, "General Franks is very much in charge
 >of everything, and he doesn't want to have to worry
 >about a multinational force. The U.S. has one goal:
 >attack al Qaeda and get the job done. They're not too
 >worried about the rest of it right now."
 >
 >If the U.S. doesn't want an international force, are
 >we offering to provide protection for relief distribution
 >ourselves? No, the U.S. government is focusing on the war.
 >
 >This is morally outrageous. The U.S. doesn't want any
 >other force in the country, won't help with food
 >distribution itself, and is now standing in the way of
 >feeding starving people.
 >
 >I ask each of you to write to President Bush, urging him
 >to support the necessary multinational peacekeeping force
 >to stabilize the situation in Afghanistan so that hungry
 >people can be fed. There are millions still at high risk,
 >winter snows have arrived in many locations, and every
 >day lost could cost lives. Tell the president to act now.
 >
 >