Skip to main content

Internal displacement

We read and hear about refugees, by the millions, in camps dotted around the world or literally "on the move" seeking either a safe haven or a new home. All too often the quest for a new "home" ends in some sort of tragedy - witness refugees dying in trucks moving from country to country or people drowning as they try and cross the seas from Africa to Europe.

But there is another group of people seemingly totally overlooked - those who are displaced internally in a country. Relief Web reports:

"In 2007, the estimated number of people internally displaced as a result of armed confl icts and violence passed the 26 million mark. This is the highest fi gure since the early 1990s, and marks a six per cent increase from the 2006 fi gure of 24.5 million. The increase resulted from a combination of continued high level of new displacements (3.7 million) and a lower level of return movements (2.7 million) in 2007.

Three countries had signifi cantly larger internally displaced populations than any others: Colombia, Iraq and Sudan. Together they accounted for nearly 50 per cent of the world’s internally displaced people (IDPs).

At the end of 2007, Africa hosted almost half of the global IDP population (12.7 million) and generated nearly half of the world’s newly displaced (1.6 million). Somalia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo were the African countries worst affected by new internal displacement in 2007.

The region with the largest relative increase in the IDP population during 2007 was the Middle East, where a rise of nearly 30 per cent was mainly caused by a continuing deterioration of security conditions in Iraq."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...