Capital: Najaf Districts: Kufa, Al Manathera, Najaf, Al- Hadariya Total Post-Feb

Home , Kufa, Najaf, Najaf District, Najaf Governorate

NAJAF POST-FEBRUARY 22 EMERGENCY IDP MONITORING AND ASSESSMENTS NOVEMBER 10, 2006

Capital: Najaf Districts: Kufa, Al Manathera, Najaf, Al- Hadariya Total post-Feb. 22 IDPs as of reporting date: 1,910 families Total IDP and IDP returnee pre-Feb. 22: 3,993 families

POST-FEBRUARY 22 EMERGENCY IDP MONITORI NG AND NEEDS ASSESSMENTS: BACKGROUND

An alarming increase in displacement due to heightened tensions after the bombing of the Askariya shrine in Samarra on February 22, 2006 brought to light the need for comprehensive, thorough monitoring and assessments of the recently-displaced populations. IOM has been assessing IDPs displaced since February 22 in the central and lower 15 governorates in Iraq.

The monitors use IDP Rapid Assessment Templates for both IDP groups and individual IDP families. The IDP Rapid Assessment Template addresses a number of issues and needs, including food, health care, water and sanitation, documentation, and property; in addition, the templates outline the IDPs’ future intentions. Monitors visit IDP tribal and community leaders, local NGOs, local government bodies, and individual IDP families to gather information and complete the templates. Once the information is gathered, it is then entered into a database for analyzing.

After the information from the templates is collected and analyzed, IOM returns to the governorates to gather additional information from the field. This additional information provides a more in-depth look at the situation and issues surrounding displacement in each governorate.

With this information, IOM is developing Governorate Needs Assessments for the 15 central and lower southern governorates in Iraq. These Governorate Needs Assessments will assist IOM and other agencies to prioritize areas of operation, plan emergency responses, and design long-term, durable solutions programs.

POST-FEBRUARY 22 IDP OVERVIEW

Background

Najaf city, the capital of Najaf governorate, is one of the two holiest cities in Iraq (the second being Kerbala), located at about 160 km south of Baghdad in the upper south of Iraq, home to the revered shrines to Shias’ spiritual founding father Ali bin Abi Taleb and grandson Hussein. The city is a destination for Shia pilgrims, with Mecca and Medina being the only other locations that receive more Muslim pilgrims. Najaf city is also the center of Shia political power in Iraq.

During Saddam’s reign, he restricted Shia religious activities, and a Shia revolt in 1991was met with crushing violence by the Iraqi army. After the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Najaf experienced a high level of conflict and was the scene of heaving fighting in 2003 and, to a lesser extent, in 2004.

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MIGRATION

The following information provides an overview of the current situation, highlights needs, and suggested areas of intervention relating to recently-displaced IDPs in Najaf. Information was gathered from a variety of sources: IDP representatives, the IDP host community, local authorities, the Ministry of Displacement and Migration (MoDM) Branch Offices, religious leaders, partner NGOs and other NGOs working in these areas.

Despite increasing insecurity and instability throughout Iraq, IOM strives to stay abreast with updated and accurate information. Displacement is ongoing, however, and displacement information changes on a daily basis.

Total displaced:

As of the reporting date (November 10), 1,910 families were identified and assessed. The district with the highest number of IDPs is Najaf district, with 1,150 IDP families (60% of those displaced). Kufa has 586 IDPs (31% of the displaced) and Al-Manathera has 174 (9% of the displaced).

Ethnicity:

All IDPs assessed in Najaf are Arabs. However, 8 families (0.42%) chose not to respond, possibly for security concerns. All stated that they are Shia Muslims, although 3 families (0.16%) chose not to respond, again possibly out of fear. Throughout Iraq, Shia Muslims who are displaced tend to move from mixed communities, especially in central Iraq, to places with a high concentration of people with similar religious background, usually in the south. The ethnic and religious makeup of IDPs who fled to Najaf supports this trend.

Places of Origin:

A large majority of IDPs in Najaf fled from Baghdad, with other families moving from other governorates in the center of Iraq. The percentages from each of the governorates are as follows: Baghdad: 88% Anbar: 3% Diyala: 4% Salah al-Din: 2% Ninewa: 2% Babylon: 1% Tameem: less than 1%

IDPs' Place of origin (Najaf)

Anbar 3%

Tameem 1% Baghdad Salah al-Din 87% 2%

Ninewa 2%

Babylon 1%

Dyiala 4%

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MIGRATION

Reasons for Displacement:

When IDPs shared their reason for displacement, the impetus tended to be fear for the safety and well-being of themselves and their families. Almost all said they left due to direct threats to their life. These threats generally take the form of threat letters, anonymous calls, graffiti on their homes or in their neighborhoods, or other forms of warnings against the individual’s or family’s lives.

Those interviewed were allowed to provide multiple answers for their reasons for fleeing their homes. 1,902 families (99.6%) said they left after receiving direct threats to their lives, 465 (24%) said they were forcibly displaced, 152 (8%) left out of fear, 108 (6%) left due to generalized violence, and 56 (3%) said they left due to armed conflict.

If the IDPs thought their family or someone in their group was targeted personally, almost 100% responded that it was because they belonged to a certain religion or sect (in this case, being Shia Muslim).

99% of IDPs interviewed have only been displaced once since February 22, and the remaining 1% have been displaced twice. None has been displaced three or more times. IDPs tend to leave their homes and flee directly to the south where they have tribal/family links or friends, and Najaf is a relatively stable governorate, so IDPs usually were not forced to leave more than once.

The majority of IDPs left their place of origin in April and May. The breakdown is as follows:

February: 4% March: 16% April: 29% May: 34% June: 14% July: 3% August: less than 1%

Overview of IDP camps:

In Najaf, the local authorities (provincial council) established a camp for IDPs and vulnerable groups near Al-Kefel sub-district, located 30 kilometers north of Najaf city. The camp was built at the end of February 2006. However, due to its isolation and a lack of services (electricity, water, schools and health services) IDPs and others have been uninterested in settling there. Thus, this camp has not received any families since its establishment.

The Ministry of Displacement and Migration local office in Najaf has not found a need to build another camp in Najaf.

Outline of Already-Existing IDP Population (pre-February 22, 2006)

Before February 22, the total number of IDP families IOM monitored in Najaf was 3,993. Around 160 post-2003 conflict IDPs and 3,833 pre-2003 conflict IDP families resided in Najaf before the newly-displaced arrived. Most of these IDPs were from Basrah, Thi-Qar and Missan. The majority lived in Najaf city and the remainder lived on farms in the surrounding countryside. Some of them occupied buildings or lands belonging to the government.

The majority of the displaced in Najaf came to Najaf prior to the 2003 conflict. The primary reasons for their displacement were the Iraq/Iran war, human rights violations, the draining of the marshes and drought.

Most of the pre-February 22 displaced people are women and orphans suffering from poverty. Some have up to seven or eight children, many under ten years of age. Most of those who were displaced before the 2003 conflict report that they are unwilling to return to their place of origin. 3

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MIGRATION

There is a noticeable pocket of economic migrants heavily infused with the IDPs in search of better economic opportunities.

IDP Population’s Relationship with the Host Community

Najaf has not experienced the violence and tension that many governorates have since February 22. In some governorates, IDPs are being blamed for the increase in crime or for deteriorating living conditions, but the IDPs fleeing to Najaf are not experiencing such hostility. All families but one said they were well received by the host community.

It is important to note that positive relationships with the host community are often maintained when the host community is also targeted in assistance. There are often people in the host communities that experience the same hardship as IDPs: lack of services, food, water, etc. They suffer equally as the IDPs. Assistance, such as infrastructure rehabilitation, training programs, and emergency distributions that benefit the vulnerable in the host community as well as the IDPs, prevents feelings of animosity and competition.

Intentions of post-February 22 IDPs:

Essential in order to plan interventions and long-term IDP assistance and durable solutions for recently-displaced is to understand the IDPs’ intentions.

The IDPs assessed in Najaf were very unique in their intentions. The majority of the southern governorates, IDPs who flee there plan to stay (for example, in Basrah, 87% plan on staying). However, in Najaf, 89% plan to return to their place of origin. This is especially surprising since the majority of IDPs come from highly unstable, intermixed communities in the center, such as in Baghdad. Only 11% plan on staying in their current location. One family had not decided and was waiting on several factors before deciding, and no families plan on settling in a third location.

When asked when they plan on implementing the aforementioned intentions, the majority (97%) responded that they would do so when the security situation improves, especially in their places of origin, so that they can return.

The breakdown for intentions is as follows:

IDPs' Intentions (Najaf)

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

Return to their place of 70.0% origin 89.2% 60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0% Locally integrate in the Waiting on one or current location several factors to make 20.0% 10.7% a decision 0.1% 10.0%

0.0% IDPs' Intentions

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MIGRATION

EMERGENCY ASSESSMENT AND NEEDS

Security:

In 2003 and 2004, Najaf experienced more instability than it has recently. However, despite abatement in attacks and violence, Najaf is still considered one of the less stable southern governorates. However, everyone interviewed reported that they feel relatively safe in their current location. No one requires authorization to move from their current location and no one is required to pass through checkpoints for daily movement near their home. There were no other reported restrictions on freedom of movement.

In addition, no one reported that someone has been detained. However, a surprisingly high number of families, 591 or 31%, have members who were killed by another citizen. This most likely occurred in their place of origin and probably contributed to their displacement. Three families reported “other deaths” and 8 “other injuries” of family members. No one reported family members killed by militants or victims of mine accidents.

Shelter:

Shelter was overwhelming listed as the number one priority in Najaf. IDPs arriving in Najaf who do not have families or friends with whom they can live are competing with each other and the local community for a place to reside, which increases the costs of rent and property.

67% of IDP families interviewed in Najaf are renting homes. However, many of the rented homes are not adequate. Homes that IDPs rent tend to lack basic services, such as sanitation, water, and electricity. In addition, without employment, it is difficult to pay rent. Unless someone in the family is employed or has some form of income-generation, renting is not sustainable.

Only 7% of families live in the house of a host family or relative. However, families living with relatives or friends often find that the situation is not ideal. It can put a strain on the hosts by overcrowding and competition for resources.

Less than 1% lives in public buildings. However, these families face potential eviction if the buildings are reclaimed. 35% live in collective towns, which generally describe settlements either created by local authorities for IDPs or spontaneously populated by IDPs. These collective towns generally lack infrastructure and services. None lives in a tent in a camp, a tent near the house of a host family or relative, or in a former military camp.

No IDP families reported pressure to leave, whether that would be from their relatives, neighbors, or militants. However, 18 families (1.5%) face the threat of a court-ordered eviction to leave their premises.

Property Issues in Place of Origin:

When IDPs flee, they often leave behind property, such as a home, office, land, etc. Accessing information about the status of their property is difficult for IDPs. Communication or receiving information about their property is often hindered by security, lack of electricity, or the inability to communicate with friends and family in their place of origin. 95% of IDPs interviewed in Najaf do not know the status of their property. 3% said their property was destroyed, 3% said it was occupied by private citizens (someone had illegally moved into their home, office, etc.), and 4 families said their property was occupied by the governorate.

Many families interviewed have property in their place of origin. Of those 122 individual families interviewed (this question was not present in the Group Rapid Assessment Template), 118 had a house in their place of origin, 1 family had land for agriculture, 1 family had an apartment, 1 had a shop/small business. No family reported having land for a home.

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MIGRATION Some of the IDPs were able to bring assets and were able to take some items with them when they fled their homes. Compared with other governorates, IDPs who fled to Najaf took very little with them, except for tools.

The following are the percentages of families who brought the listed items with them when they left their homes:

Tools: 92% Winter clothing: 12% Livestock: 3% Food: 2% Car/transportation: 1%

Vulnerabilities:

Many people are in need of assistance in Iraq, but those with vulnerabilities face acute needs that must be addressed most urgently. Vulnerabilities such as single parenthood, serious health issues, and mental and physical disabilities are exacerbated in an environment of displacement. IDPs, who must often leave behind many of their possessions, their source of income, and their social safety net, are already in weakened situations. In addition, a lack of food or water has a greater impact on the already vulnerable, such as a pregnant woman or an elderly person. Mental disabilities can be exacerbated by the unfamiliar environment experienced in displacement. Illnesses are also worsened by displacement. Therefore, humanitarian agencies should focus on these IDP populations.

IDPs in Najaf experience all of the aforementioned vulnerabilities. 69 individuals are a female head-of-household, 207 individuals are considered elderly, 8 women are pregnant, 1 family reported a member with a mental disability, 31 families have a family member with a serious illness, and no other families report “other vulnerabilities”.

Elderly members represent the highest vulnerability, and the second most frequent vulnerability is female head-of-household. Compared to other governorates, IDPs in Najaf do not have as many members who are acutely vulnerable. However, for those IDPs with these vulnerabilities, displacement only makes their situation more challenging. Winter will also place an added strain on these individuals and their families. The vulnerable should be targeted first when providing assistance.

Women and Children:

In addition, women and children must be offered special consideration. These two groups are oftentimes the most negatively affected in times of conflict.

Those IDPs who are pregnant or heads-of-household (77 women) will need to be targeted as a priority. Pregnant women have special nutritional needs, and poverty and lack access to health care make conditions especially difficult for expecting mothers and their unborn babies. In many locations in Iraq, female head-of-households often do not have the economic opportunities as men, despite the fact that the family relies on them for income.

Women sometimes must work outside of the home in addition to caring for large families and managing daily domestic activities, adding to their already challenging situation. The cultural conservatism of some families also affects their basic human rights. Women are sometimes restricted in their movement, forced to marry when young, and sometimes are subjected to domestic abuse. They are also sometimes prevented from studying, either due to cultural conservatism or economic hardship.

The biggest threat to IDP children is that they are not receiving adequate health care or their nutritional needs are not being met. In cities, sometimes children must beg to help their families, and throughout Iraq IDP children are also being forced to work, especially in families where the father has been killed or where there is no income generator. Advocacy against child labour is therefore an essential component of assistance in Najaf. IDPs and monitors also recommended

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MIGRATION psycho-social assistance for children to help them deal with the trauma some experience from violence and displacement.

Food:

IDPs in Najaf gave food as their third highest priority (following shelter and employment). Many Iraqis rely on the Public Distribution System (PDS) rations to supplement their food intake. IDPs, many of whom are unemployed and do not have the funds to pay for adequate food, rely heavily on PDS rations. However, access to PDS rations is constantly a problem for all Iraqis. Many times the PDS rations do not contain all of the established foods.

In Najaf, a very high percentage of IDPs (75%) have no access to their PDS rations. Very few governorates experience such a high percentage of IDPs who do not have any access to the rations. Only 24% have access “sometimes”, and none has access all of the time.

The majority of IDPs who have not received PDS rations blame it on food transportation routes being insecure. Some thought that it was due to a delay in transferring their PDS registration to a new location. 3% of families were not sure why they weren't receiving rations. None blamed the lack of rations to lack on transportation or lack of documentation. Of those few that received PDS rations recently, 20% said it was missing food items.

Luckily, it seems that some IDPs are receiving food assistance from other sources. The majority of those interviewed, or 68%, received it from humanitarian organizations. 25% received food assistance from national authorities and 7% from religious charities. None reported receiving assistance from regional authorities. Almost all food assistance that was provided was dried food. A few families received intermediate food and none received fresh food.

IDPs in Najaf see basic food assistance as essential, and their lack of access to the PDS system and few other sources of food reinforce this need. See Conclusions section below for suggestions for food assistance.

Water/Sanitation:

All IDPs have reported regular access to water. Almost all report access to municipal water from underground pipes. (1%) has access water through water tanks or trucks, and 1% receives water through open or broken pipes. None needs to access water through rivers, streams, lakes or public wells.

Water accessibility is within 500 meters of where they are staying for 97% of the IDPs, and the remaining 2% have to travel further than 500 meters to access water.

All IDPs who responded (2 families did not) have access to toilets.

Fuel and Electricity:

Throughout Iraq, intermittent access to electricity is the norm. 5% of IDPs in Najaf said that they have no electricity. However, 81% have access to four or more hours per day, and 14% have access to 1-3 hours per day. Assistance to the 92 families who do not have access to any electricity should be a priority.

An alarming number of IDPs (93%) have no access to fuel. 6% has access to propane, 5% has access to benzene, 3% has access to diesel, and less than 1% has access to kerosene. Kerosene, which is used for cooking and heating in Iraq, is essential to all people in Iraq, but it is scarce. The high overall number of IDPs who do not have access to fuel types suggest that humanitarian organizations that have the capacity to assist IDPs in this sector should make this a priority, especially as winter season sets in.

Health Care:

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MIGRATION In Najaf, as with the rest of Iraq, the health care system has suffered greatly since the beginning of the conflict in 2003. In addition to many health care professionals fleeing the country, many facilities lack the equipment needed to provide adequate care, and some centers and hospitals have been attacked during escalating violence.

Although health care facilities cannot operate to full capacity and lack essential services, 97% of IDPs in Najaf do have access to some form of health care services. Those few who do not have access report it is because they are too distant to access and one family said services were simply not available. No IDPs reported a lack of access due to financial constraints or because they were refused services, it was too dangerous, or because there was no female staff.

53% of IDPs have been visited by a health care worker within the last 30 days. However, the majority of IDPs only received vaccinations. 3% received medical examinations and drug distributions, but none received medical examinations or other services. All but 4 families have access to the medications that they require.

43% of IDPs have not been involved in any type of vaccination campaign. However, 44% of families had members involved 1-3 months ago, 12% within the last month, and 1% within the last week. Less than 1% of IDPs were involved from 4-6 months ago. Only 2% of IDPs reported that they suffered from any infections diseases/epidemics in the last 45 days.

Education:

Due to an order on behalf of the Ministry of Education to facilitate the registration of IDP children in the schools where they have been displaced, 80% of the students were able to enrol in school in their places of displacement in Najaf. The remaining 20% did not enrol either due to economic reasons or because they have just recently been displaced and have not begun the process and are not sure how long they will stay in Najaf.

Some families who have fled include members who were formally teachers at schools or professors at universities. The governorate counsel of Najaf has shown its support to those families by providing them with assistance such as job opportunities in the same educational areas and allocating to them the same salaries they received in their place of origin.

Documentation:

Many Najaf IDPs have some form of documentation with them. 99.7% (1,905 families have nationality certifications, 98% (1,870 families) have identification cards, 27% (522 families) carry marriage documents, less than 1% (3 families) have passports, 18% (346 families) have birth certificates, and 19% (357) have death certifications.

HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE RECEIVED

Assistance to IDPs in Najaf varies throughout the governorate. As mentioned above, some IDPs receive food assistance, and 95% report receiving other forms of humanitarian assistance. Of the assistance received, the majority have received assistance from NGOs (60%) or the Ministry of Displacement and Migration (48%). 37% received assistance from Iraqi Red Crescent Society, 15% from religious groups, and 3% from the host communities. Food and non-food items were the most frequent items received 56 families (3%) received health assistance and 116 (6%) “other” assistance. None received assistance in the sanitation sector.

AREAS IN NEED OF SPECIAL ASSISTANCE

During the assessments, 35 families were assessed living in Radhawiya near Najaf city in a collective settlement with other urban poor and vulnerable groups. They are living without basic services, and their priority needs include water due to shortage of water provided to the area.

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MIGRATION Near Al Makrama neighbourhood within Najaf city there is a collective settlement of IDPs. Fourteen of these families are especially vulnerable and live isolated from other communities in reed houses without any services. They listed their priority needs as small electric generators, water tanks, water buckets and jerry cans.

CONCLUSION

Information gathered from the emergency monitoring and needs assessments can provide an excellent base on which to develop assistance responses, establish locations of intervention, identify the most vulnerable populations, and provide responses that meet the IDPs’ identified needs.

IDPs in Najaf listed their priority needs as 1) shelter, 2) access to work, and 3) food.

Shelter: Many displaced persons throughout Iraq live in inadequate shelter, cannot meet their monthly rental expenses, or are facing pressure and tension due to overcrowded conditions with family or friends.

A large number of IDPs in Najaf live in collective towns, and these areas tend to lack basic services. Bringing services such as water, electricity, and proper sanitation facilities to these IDPs will improve their overall standard of living.

Since the majority of families live in rented homes, providing grants so that they can pay for their rent or finding more permanent or less expensive shelter would assist this population.

Those IDPs living in public buildings (24 families) suggested rehabilitating the buildings, especially the crucial services (water, electricity, sanitation, etc.) to make them more suitable for living. While this is a good suggestion on behalf of the IDPs, it is essential to ensure that the Iraqi government will allow the IDPs to stay in the buildings for the long-term, before permanent facilities are added.

For the 7% who are living with relatives and plan on staying long-term, an option for intervention is to expand host communities’ homes, since this is a more cost-effective measure than building completely new homes, and this method will support both IDPs and host families.

IDPs also recommended building settlements of low-cost housing. This would need to be closely coordinated with the relevant Iraqi Ministries in regards to land tenure and legal implications so that no future problems would arise from the use of land and construction of homes.

Access to Work: IDPs throughout Iraq lack employment and income-generating activities, a problem experienced by all Iraqis. Displacement especially affects IDPs, as they must leave behind employment, and finding work in their areas of displacement and sector of expedience is challenging.

Several options exist to improve IDPs’ access to employment. One is training IDPs in new areas of service or skills. This could include carpentry, masonry, metalwork, tailoring and the auto mechanic trade. Feasibility and economic opportunity assessments would need to be conducted to find out what type of skills are in most demand in Najaf. In addition, vocational training, which can take time, is most appropriate for IDPs who wish to stay in Najaf. Another option is on-the- job training, where employees are paid to train the IDP for a certain amount of time and then agree to hire him or her after the training is complete.

Projects in construction create work while simultaneously providing much-needed infrastructure development. Micro-credit loans for small business start-up or purchasing land for agriculture are additional options.

Food: Since a very high percentage of IDPs in Najaf do not have access to the PDS rations upon which many families rely, access to food is a priority and should be addressed.

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MIGRATION Food can be provided as food baskets through emergency distributions. Food should target the IDPs’ needs, especially the nutritional needs of children and women.

Long-term food assistance could focus on providing agricultural production inputs, such as seeds, tools and fertilizers. This would need to be coordinated with the local authorities and the Ministry of Agriculture and should be provided to those IDPs who meet several requirements, such as access to suitable land and long-term intentions of residence.

Assisting the IDPs with transferring their PDS ration cards to their area of displacement could help them access the distributions, where they are available. Lobbying the various ministries in charge of transferring PDS ration cards and distributing the rations, such as MoDM and the Ministry of Trade, could also help these IDPs access the PDS.

Intentions: In addition to addressing IDPs’ priority needs, the IDPs’ intentions also need to be taken into consideration when providing humanitarian assistance. Most IDPs in Najaf (89%) plan to return to their place of origin. More immediate assistance should focus on those IDPs who plan on returning as soon as the security situation allows, and for the 11% who plan to locally integrate, long-term projects can focus on this population.

Further Analysis: This report is by no means conclusive, and a more in-depth analysis can be undertaken by obtaining a deeper understanding of what IDPs know, do and think, using tools such as matrix ranking, seasonal calendars and gender analysis.

This assessment tool has been developed to aid programming and to undertake integrated measures that aim to reduce the time between assessments and response to emergencies. It should however be noted overall that some aspects of the above assessments still require more technical descriptions at a higher level, and it is hoped that the agencies that will need such further technical information will be able to take this up at their own convenience. In addition, SPHERE minimum standards in disaster response should always be incorporated whenever providing humanitarian assistance.

For updates on IOM’s humanitarian assistance response to recent displacement, please see the IOM Recent Displacement and Assessments updates.

As the situation unfolds, the characteristics and dynamics of the displacement will change. With collaboration and quick responses, the negative impact of displacement can be minimized with hope for a brighter future for the displaced.

For further information on IDP displacement in Iraq, please contact Martin Ocaga, IOM Iraq IDP Program Manager at [email protected] (+962 79 64 00581) or Dana Graber, IDP Monitoring and Reintegration Officer, at [email protected] (+962 79 611 1759).

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MIGRATION