MSF RUSSIA: CHECHNYA IS STILL A HUMANITARIAN

C O N F I D E N T I A L MOSCOW 000510

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/20/2016
TAGS: PREL PGOV PHUM EAID PREF RS
SUBJECT: MSF RUSSIA: CHECHNYA IS STILL A HUMANITARIAN
CRISIS

REF: MOSCOW 396

Classified By: Minister Counselor for Political Affairs Kirk Augustine.
Reason 1.4 (b, d)


1. (C) MSF-Russia asked us to meet with heads of mission from
MSF-France (Manuel Lannaud) and -Belgium (Goran Svedin)
January 20 to receive a report on the humanitarian situation
in Chechnya (MSF-Holland HOM was out of Moscow). MSF
declared that there was still a humanitarian crisis in
Chechnya, and MSF opposed UNDP plans to make the transition
from humanitarian assistance to reconstruction assistance.
Lannaud stated that MSF has dissociated itself entirely from
the UNDP plan, which MSF sees as a concession to Russian
claims that the situation in Chechnya has normalized.


2. (C) Lannaud stated that according to MSF and official
data, those IDPs who returned to Chechnya suffer worse health
conditions than they did when living in tents in Ingushetia.
Several years after their return, the former IDPs are still
in "temporary accommodation centers" in Chechnya without
basic utilities and services. The incidence of tuberculosis
is 1.5-2 times higher in Chechnya than the national average.
The psychological health of the population is still poor,
with 80 percent having suffered or witnessed acts of
violence. The main government trauma hospital in Groznyy
still reports an average of two war-related injuries per day
(gunshot wounds, mine explosions, etc.).


3. (C) MSF made the point that it is a humanitarian NGO and
cannot participate in reconstruction efforts, despite the
requests of local governments in the region. Though the
health system in Chechnya is virtually non-existent outside
Groznyy and MSF runs clinics and TB dispensaries of its own,
MSF cannot help build hospitals or support the development of
the Ministry of Health.


4. (C) Asked whether MSF has felt pressure concerning its
registration, of the sort detailed in Reftel, the MSF
officials said no: though they are often mentioned by
Russian officials and commentators alongside such human
rights NGOs as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International
("the troublemakers"),in practice on the ground they are
treated as the purely humanitarian organization they claim to
be. Lannaud said he had met with the Ingush government
official in charge of liaison with NGOs, and said he could
understand the difficulties others were having: the official
viewed the NGOs as resource providers who could be directed
to provide whatever resources the local government needed,
according to plans and divisions of labor decided by the
local government. Lannaud viewed the new Russian NGO law as
a tool for local officials to reinforce this position.
BURNS