Weekly Update #101
February 5, 2024

General Figures

Refugees from Ukraine recorded across Europe 

5,974,800

Last updated December 31 2023

Covers those granted refugee status, temporary asylum status, temporary protection, or statuses through similar national protection schemes, as well as those recorded in the country under other forms of stay 

Refugees from Ukraine recorded beyond Europe

470,000

Last updated December 31 2023

Covers those granted refugee status, temporary asylum status, temporary protection, or statuses through similar national protection schemes, as well as those recorded in the country under other forms of stay 

Refugees from Ukraine recorded globally

6,444,800

Last updated December 31 2023

Source: UNHCR collation of statistics made available by the authorities

A community organized relief effort supported by the Ukraine Humanitarian Fund restored gas services to Lidia's house which was damaged by shelling. Photo: CORE/Jaya Vadlamudi

___________________________________________________

Thousands of families near the frontline receive heating materials to protect against harsh winter conditions

Thousands of families living in frontline areas are exposed to freezing temperatures, especially given that vital utilities such as water and electricity have been hard-hit by ongoing hostilities.

The ICRC supported some 28,200 people (10,600 families) with cash, briquettes, firewood, or other essential items like stoves to help them keep warm this winter. The ICRC provided 5,147 tons of solid fuel to frontline and hard-to-reach areas, while quick-fix materials were distributed to help maintain family homes seriously damaged by ongoing hostilities. Earlier in 2023, more than 353,000 people in conflict-affected areas across the country were supported with cash to cover their varying needs.

Ahead of winter, the ICRC stepped up its response to support district heating companies, power plants and electrical infrastructure serving around 1.6 million people in affected areas. The support consisted of providing transformers, generators and undergoing repair work to public utility companies.

"The ICRC is one of few humanitarian actors able to assist communities in hard-to-reach areas, but this is not enough," Mr. Eglin said. "The protections conveyed by international humanitarian law (IHL) to civilians and civilian infrastructure they rely on – including electricity, water and heating infrastructure – must be respected at all times."

Source: ICRC

The High Price of Losing Ukraine: Part 2 — The Military Threat and Beyond

Below is an excerpt from a lengthy analysis of the war undertaken by the Institute of the Study of War and just recently released.  It is highly recommended to read the entire study – Part 1 and Part 2 (the links are provided).  

The brief excerpts are key messages in the study to provide some insights about the full study.

• • Allowing Russia to win its war in Ukraine would be a self-imposed strategic defeat for the United States. The United States would face the risk of a larger and costlier war in Europe.

  • A self-imposed defeat in Ukraine will confront the United States with the real risk of another war in Europe with higher escalation risks and higher costs. Cutting aid to Ukraine will not freeze the frontlines.

  • A Russian victory in Ukraine would present the West with a reconstituted and emboldened Russia that is more determined to undermine the United States. There is no going back to the pre-2022 status quo. The United States is on track to be blindsided by Russia’s transformation — again.

  • Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has permanently changed Russia. It has cemented an ultra-nationalist ideology that believes in expansion by force and that is inherently anti-Western. A Russian victory in Ukraine is a certain path to another Putin or worse.

  • The Kremlin would get closer to a real opportunity to break NATO. Putin sought to use its invasion of Ukraine to break NATO — an objective he failed at but continues to pursue.

  • A Russian victory in Ukraine would increase the likelihood of military action against other Russian neighbors.

CONCLUSION

A Russian victory in Ukraine would create a world fundamentally antithetical to US interests and values with an empowered anti-Western coalition. US deterrence power and geopolitical standing will diminish. The cost of protecting the homeland and operating globally will rise, as will the number of national security issues the United States will have to tackle. More states and groups will challenge America at home and abroad. Latent adversarial intent is more likely to transform into action — which is how we got here in the first place, when Russia perceived the West to be weak.

The asymmetry goes both ways: Ukraine is the lynchpin on which the future of Russia’s power hinges. Russia’s ability to reconstitute; to maintain and increase its control and influence over its neighbors; the power of the Kremlin’s global narratives and ability to manipulate US will and perceptions; and the strength of Russia’s coalitions, including with US adversaries, all depend on whether Russia wins or loses in Ukraine. Helping Ukraine win would not only prevent Russia from erasing an independent nation and save the Ukrainian people from Russian atrocities and murder but would also land an asymmetric blow to the Russian threat and the anti-US coalition.

As long as Ukraine remains committed to defending itself against Russia’s aggression, the best course of action for the United States is to commit to the path of helping Ukraine win.

Source: ISW THE HIGH PRICE OF LOSING UKRAINE:

Part 1

Part 2

 ___________________________________________________

Vulnerabilities, Needs and Conflict Incidents in Frontline Settlements

This report prepared by REACH provides detailed analysis of the needs, vulnerabilities and conflict events at Raion level covering Frontline communities in Ukraine. This is based on data compiled from REACH’s Humanitarian Situation Monitoring (HSM) round 13, REACH’s: Joint Market Monitoring Initiative (Round 19) – October 2023, IOM’s Ukraine Conditions of Return Assessment Factsheet — Round 5 (September – October 2023). In addition, conflict event data in Ukraine from ACLED covering the months of September and October was sourced along with local and international press reports and two internal situational analysis reports from REACH.

 Its main aim is to provide a succinct profile of the impact of the conflict and subsequent humanitarian needs at a raion level and to give summaries at oblast level, so that comparisons can be quickly made.  The objective of the profiling of raions was to provide a summary of factors that may support or hamper operations in the individual raions. The raion profiles give an overview of the population composition, main safety and security concerns, level of needs, extent of ability of the settlement population to meet their own daily needs (vulnerable groups) and assess the most viable aid delivery mechanisms.

Profiles of five Oblasts are shown – Dinopoprevska, Kharkivska, Khersonska, Mykolaisvska, Sumska, Zaporizka.  The full report includes profiles of various raions.

Profiles of Sample Oblasts

1.   Dnipropetrovska  

Total Oblast Population 3,224,712 

Internally Displaced 471,781 14.6%

Returnees 249,098 7.7%

Non-displaced 2,503,833 77.6%

Main safety and security concerns: In general, there were not many safety and security concerns identified in the assessed areas. Threat of missile attacks was identified as a key concern in 20 out of 30 assessed settlements, followed by lack of bomb shelters (3) and exposure to armed violence and shelling 

Severity of needs: Of the assessed settlements in Dnipropetrovska Oblast, 11 have been ranked as having moderate needs, 4 as having high needs and 1 with severe needs. Overall, most people in assessed areas are still able to meet their basic needs, but the situation with living conditions requires attention/monitoring. However, the trend has been rather positive as 10 settlements have reported an improving situation. The main needs in the assessed areas are financial support (10), livelihood support/employment (6) and healthcare (7).

Preferred modality of assistance: Most preferred modalities of assistance are multipurpose cash assistance cited across 19 settlements, in-kind support 16 settlements and services (11). While there is no understanding of what the most reliable method for aid delivery in all settlements would be, key informants in 10 settlements listed road as the most reliable method for delivery of humanitarian assistance in the settlements.

2.   Kharkivska Oblast  

Total Oblast Population 1,795,640  

Internally Displaced 415,445 23.1%

Returnees 332,237   18.5%

Non-displaced 1,047,958 58.4%

Main safety and security concerns: The main safety and security concern in Kharkiv Oblast is the threat of missile attacks, which was prevalent in 26 out of 32 assessed settlements. Other highly prevalent concerns that, according to key informants, apply to at least 50% of the assessed settlements are presence of landmines/UXO (19), exposure to armed violence and shelling (20), lack of bomb shelters (18) and damaged or destroyed property (16) (HSM Rnd 13). 

Severity of needs: Of the 32 settlements (11) have moderate needs, 5 settlements have high needs, and 12 settlements have severe (5) or extreme (7) needs. Only 1 settlement has seen some improvement in regard to the level of needs, while 15 have experienced worsening over the past one month prior to the data collection. Thereby, the most prevalent needs are food (16), drinking water (15) and provision of medicines (15).

Preferred modality of assistance: The most preferred modality of assistance for the majority of the households in 25 out of the 32 assessed settlements is in-kind support, followed by multipurpose cash assistance that was cited across 17 assessed settlements. However, at the time of the data collection, key informants reported that 15 settlements may have been inaccessible for international humanitarian actors, while the most reliable method of aid delivery for another 8 settlements was by road.

3.   Khersonska Oblast

Total Oblast Population 298,369  

Internally Displaced 16,538 5.5%

Returnees 45,479 15.2%

Non-displaced 236,352 79.2%

Main safety and security concerns: Security issues remain prominent in the oblast with the city of Kherson coming under regular attacks. The oblast is also contaminated by land mines, leading to security threats for both the civilians and the humanitarian actors. Exposure to armed violence and shelling, threat of missile attacks, lack of bomb shelters and damaged or destroyed property were the main concerns cited by various settlements in the area. In the areas assessed in Khersonska Oblast the most prevalent safety and security concerns among the people are threat of missile attacks (11), exposure to armed violence and shelling (10) and presence of landmines/UXO (8) (HSM Rnd 13). 

Severity of needs: Overall the level of needs in the areas assessed in Khersonska Oblast are moderate with 12 settlements where most people are still able to meet their basic needs, but the situation with living conditions requires attention/monitoring. In 4 settlements the key informants assessed not having any needs or only limited needs. The level of needs has not changed much in the past one month, except in 2 settlements where the situation has worsened. Thereby the most common needs are repair of accommodation (12) and fuel for heating (9).

Preferred modality of assistance: The most preferred modality of assistance for the majority of households in assessed settlements is multipurpose cash assistance (16). Thereby, when asked which what the most reliable method for delivery of humanitarian assistance is, key informants from 5 settlements listed by road.

4.   Mykolaivska Oblast

Total Oblast Population 642,063 

Internally Displaced 92,063 15%

Returnees 93,526 15%

Non-displaced 457,399 71%

Main security and access concerns: The main safety and security concern in Mykolaivska is the threat of missile attacks that is further aggravated by the lack of bomb shelters. Generally, exposure to armed violence and shelling is a prevalent concern too with about 19% (119,347) of its population being within a 30 km of the frontline. Furthermore, some areas in Mykolaivska are contaminated by landmines. 

Severity of needs: While 8 assessed settlements have moderate needs, key informants from 2 settlements reported high needs. The remaining 9 settlements have limited or no need. The situation of needs has remained unchanged in most of the settlements (16), as 2 settlements have seen an improvement over the last one month prior to the survey. The situation has worsened only in 1 settlement. Some of the most commonly listed needs by the interviewed key informants are repair of inadequate/damaged housing (6), fuel for heating (6), food (4) and NFIs (4).

Preferred modality of assistance: The most preferred modality for assistance across 17 out of 19 assessed settlements in Mykolaivskyi is multipurpose cash assistance, followed by and in-kind assistance (12) and services (3). There is not much insight into the most reliable methods of aid delivery, except from 9 settlements where the most reliable method to deliver aid is by road.

5.   Sumska Oblast

Total Oblast Population 857,827 

Internally Displaced 76,252 8.9%

Returnees 99,128 11.7%

Non-displaced 682,447 79.6%

Main safety and security concerns: Attacks in Sumska Oblast restrict civilian and humanitarian movement and add protection threats. Despite a dozen attacks reported these past couple of months, the number of civilian casualties has remained low. No major problem of access was reported in this oblast. Overall, in the assessed areas 22 settlements reported the threat of missile attacks as the main safety and security concern for the people, followed by the exposure to armed violence and shelling (10) (HSM Rnd 13). 

Severity of needs: Majority of the settlements in the assessed areas have no or only limited needs, while about 1 settlement has a moderate level of needs which have mostly not changed over the past one month prior to the data collection in late September. Thereby the most prevalent needs are livelihood or employment support (10), food (7), fuel for heating (5), repair of damaged housing (6) and provision of medicine (5).

Preferred modality of assistance: Most preferred modality of assistance that is preferred by the majority of households in all assessed settlements is multipurpose cash assistance (36), followed by in-kind support across 17 settlements. Most areas are accessible by road, with the exception of 3 settlements where key informants listed that the most reliable method of aid delivery is by train.

6.   Zaporizka Oblast

Total Oblast Population 1,064,680

Internally Displaced 230,498 21.6%

Returnees 114,827 10.8%

Non-displaced 719,355 67.6%

Main safety and security concerns: Main safety and security concerns in the last 14 days prior to the survey in the 12 out of 20 assessed settlements was threat of missile attacks, followed by lack of bomb shelter (6), exposure to armed violence and shelling (5) and social tensions in the community (4) (HSM Rnd 13).

Severity of needs: Overall, 5 out of the 20 assessed settlements have high needs, and 4 settlements moderate needs, while the remaining have limited or no needs, according to interviewed key informants from these settlements. Almost half (9) of all the assessed settlements have seen some improvements in the level of needs, while key informants from 5 settlement reported worsening of the situation compared to one month prior to the survey. Thereby the main needs are financial resources (cited across 8 settlements) and provision of medicine (in 4 settlements).

Preferred modality of assistance: The main preferred modality of assistance for the majority of households in 16 settlements is in-kind assistance. Key informants from 13 also reported multipurpose cash assistance. There was no insight from interviewed key informants regarding most reliable ways of aid delivery.

Sources: DFSIMP,  ACT Initiatives

 ___________________________________________________

EU readies more Russia sanctions ahead of Ukraine war anniversary

This article was released prior to the EU decision to provide 50 billion aid to Ukraine.

The EU is readying more sanctions against Russia and financial support for Kyiv ahead of the second anniversary of the war, in a bid to revitalise waning levels of western assistance to Ukraine. The package includes a 13th set of restrictions on businesses and individuals connected to the 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, as well as a long-delayed agreement on €50bn for Kyiv over the next four years, some of which could be paid out as soon as a deal is struck, according to people familiar with the preparations. Another €5bn in military assistance per year and a decision to set aside profits arising from Russia’s frozen assets are also part of the overall set of support measures.

The war-torn country urgently needs help to stay afloat, and with US support being thrown into doubt, the EU is its principal lifeline. The commission wants to ensure that Kyiv can balance its budget without resorting to printing cash, which would drive up inflation. The rest of the money will be disbursed in tranches over four years as Ukraine ticks off reforms linked to its bid to join the bloc.

Negotiations are also continuing on overhauling the so-called European Peace Facility, a fund that has financed weapons supplies for Ukraine, people involved in the talks said. The negotiations are focused particularly on “gradually phasing out” reimbursements to capitals for the armaments they sent to Ukraine, and replace them with payments for joint production of weapons instead. Countries with large arms industries, such as Germany, want that phaseout to happen faster than those without.

Source: Financial Times

___________________________________________________

UN top court can rule on Ukraine case against Russia

The UN's top court has said it has jurisdiction to hear a case brought against Russia by Ukraine.

Kyiv brought the case at The Hague-based International Court of Justice (ICJ), days after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Kyiv accuses Moscow of falsely using genocide law to justify its brutal invasion which continues.

Russia says it intervened in Ukraine to prevent a genocidal attack on ethnic Russians in the eastern Donbas region.

While the case centres on the 1948 Genocide Convention, Kyiv does not accuse Moscow of committing genocide in Ukraine.  Instead, it says Russia violated the genocide treaty by resorting to it to justifying the invasion.

Ukraine maintains there was no risk of genocide in the east of the country, where it had been fighting Russian-backed forces since 2014. It adds that the genocide treaty does not, in any case, permit an invasion to stop an alleged genocide.

Moscow argues Ukraine is using the case as a roundabout way to get a ruling on the overall legality of Russia's military action and has asked for it to be thrown out.

A record 32 states have filed submissions on the issue.

More than two dozen European states, as well as Australia and Canada, have backed Kyiv by giving formal statements to the ICJ.

On Friday, judges said the ICJ had jurisdiction to rule on Ukraine's request for the court to declare that Kyiv has not committed genocide.

However, judges will not rule on whether Russia's invasion or recognition of the independence of areas in eastern Ukraine amount to a violation of the Genocide Convention as those claims fall under different international laws.

The ruling is an important procedural step, which means the case continues.

The 1948 UN Genocide Convention defined genocide as crimes committed "with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such".

ICJ rulings are legally binding but cannot be enforced by the court itself.

Source: BBC

ICMC mobilized mental health care professionals in Ukraine in unprecedented ways to address the emotional wounds caused by the horrific experiences of those fleeing the areas of active fighting and bombings. Subsidized and free psychological counseling which has been provided to anyone in need has proven to be of critical importance to keep the nation from falling into despair of loss and suffering. (Courtesy of ICMC)