NEW HUMANITARIAN FUND FOR BURMA?

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 RANGOON 001422

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

STATE FOR EAP/MLS; PACOM FOR FPA; TREASURY FOR OASIA:AJEWELL

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM EAID SOCI KHIV BM NGO
SUBJECT: NEW HUMANITARIAN FUND FOR BURMA?

REF: RANGOON 1202


1. (SBU) A consultant to the Rangoon UN Resident
Coordinator's office presented a draft proposal for a new
Humanitarian Fund at a December 12 meeting of members of the
international community. The new program would partially
address the funding gap caused by the Global Fund's
termination by creating a single "communicable disease
program" based on Burma's National Strategies to combat
malaria, TB and HIV/AIDS. The Fund, with initial backing from
DFID (UK's development arm),AusAID, the EC, Netherlands,
Sweden and Norway, and possibly Japan, would be a mechanism
to deliver humanitarian aid in an environment "constrained by
politics," according to the presenter. It appears that this
fund will actually try to work more closely with the
government rather than through NGOs as has been the goal of
previous health assistance programs. End summary.


2. (SBU) Representatives from embassies, NGOs, UN offices and
aid organizations attended a December 12 presentation by Paul
Thornton, a consultant to the UN Resident Coordinator's
Office, who described a draft proposal for a new Humanitarian
Fund for Communicable Diseases, designed to fill some of the
gap left by the Global Fund's termination of its program to
fight malaria, TB and HIV/AIDS in Burma (reftel). Thornton
described the new Fund as a humanitarian response to the
three epidemics in a constrained public health environment,
to be funded by a donor consortium, and chaired by the
Ministry of Health. The program would be based on Burma's
National Strategies for each of the three diseases. With
their participation, the donors would support the overall
Strategies, not individual programs.


3. (SBU) The proposed design has two sides. On one side, the
Ministry of Health would chair a Program for Communicable
Diseases Coordination Group, which would be supported by a
strategic and technical group for each disease. These would
be composed of government, NGO and civil society entities.
The Communicable Diseases Coordination Group would maintain a
dialogue, facilitated by the UN Resident Coordinator, with
the donor-supported Humanitarian Fund. The Fund Manager
would decide which aspects of Burma's National Strategies to
support with funding for programs, and will supervise
contracted agents, who would perform all aspects of grant
management.


4. (SBU) Thornton said the Fund has the initial support of
DFID (Britain's aid organization),AusAID, the EC, Norway,
the Netherlands and Sweden. Japan had expressed interest in
future participation. A DFID representative said the donor
consortium planned to refine the program content, agree on
required resources, and identify sources of funding before
presenting it to donors' headquarters in January.


5. (SBU) Opening the meeting, UN Resident Coordinator Charles
Petrie said there is no crisis in Burma now, but there are
pockets of suffering, especially in the health sector, in the
population's inability to cope with economic stresses, and
with the decline in education. If these trends continue, he
warned, there could be a humanitarian crisis in the future.
He said the environment is difficult, but there is more space
to conduct humanitarian work now than three years ago.
Problems Petrie enumerated include travel, access to
officials and vulnerable populations, politicization of NGO
activities and the move to Pynimana. However, he concluded
that these are no worse than problems faced in other
countries.


6. (SBU) Many questions still must be addressed before the
proposal is in a form acceptable to donors. Basic concerns
include the independence of the Fund Manager to choose
projects, the feasibility of the Fund Manager deciding which
aspects of the National Strategies to fund, monitoring and
accountability of funds and projects, maintenance of the EU
Common Position regarding assistance, vulnerability to
international critics, and the lack of donor control over
final use of funds. Since the Fund will directly support the
GOB, USG assistance is not envisioned.


7. (SBU) Comment: In meetings later in the week,
participants expressed satisfaction that the donor
representatives had given initial approval to continue with
the Fund development. Headquarters offices may prove more
demanding, especially since a recent auditor report of
projects conducted under the existing government/donor
mechanism, the Fund for HIV/AIDS in Myanmar (FHAM) showed
problems with inappropriate procurement practices, use of
varying exchange rates and insufficient documentation.
Although the GOB's reneging on access was the primary reason
for the Global Fund's demise, questions had also been raised
about its monitoring mechanisms. The Fund design would have
to address those shortcomings.


8. (SBU) Comment continued: We also find the plan to work
more closely with the government odd in the current
environment. A number of presentations made during the day
noted that, in some cases, fewer than 25% of the victims of
disease are treated by the public health sector. The
remainder go to private physicians, practitioners and
naturopathic healers. We believe that donors have ample
space to address health problems without relying on the
government. End comment.
VILLAROSA