OCHA HomeTable of ContentsContact Us
HomeOverviewExecutive ManagementEmergency Response CoordinationPolicy Development

Advocacy and Information ManagementCoordination Activities in the FieldOCHA at WorkAnnexesMaps



Integrated Regional Information Networks (IRIN)
Middle East
Russian Federation  
Americas and the Caribbean


Russian Federation

In 2005, Chechnya experienced slight improvements its security environment and living conditions. This improvement has prompted the Security Management Team (SMT) to consider a reduction from Phase V to Phase IV. However, general instability continues and has increased in other republics of the North Caucasus. In Chechnya, bombings, ambushes, sweep operations and targeted killings have continued. In Dagestan the situation has become particularly worrisome, as assassinations of police officers, bombings of strategic targets and other acts of violence have taken place with increasing frequency. Ingushetia has suffered a series of bombing attacks, including several assassination attempts against prominent members of the government. Kabardino-Balkaria has also, though to a lesser extent, been the site of incidents of violence. North Ossetia has remained the quietest, although it too has seen occasional explosions as well as civil protests of a larger size than in Ingushetia.

The UN and a range of NGOs have been implementing a comprehensive humanitarian assistance and protection operation in the North Caucasus, in an extremely challenging working environment, since 1999. This operation has been strongly supported by the diplomatic and donor community, and is well coordinated with federal and local authorities. As the humanitarian situation in Chechnya and the neighboring republics remains serious, agencies, government and donors expect OCHA to remain fully engaged in field coordination.

The OCHA office is heavily engaged in managing recovery-oriented transition planning, laying the groundwork for an eventual phasing out, in several years, of the humanitarian operation. At the request of the government, there will be no CAP for 2006. However, a CAP Review in spring 2005, led jointly by the HC and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, concluded that the level of humanitarian need was unlikely to be reduced and that the local capacity to meet the need had not significantly increased. Therefore, the humanitarian community is challenged to meet the most pressing humanitarian assistance and protection needs of the population without a CAP in 2006. Meanwhile, UNDP, the World Bank, the EC, and other traditional development partners have become more active in the North Caucasus and started defining an appropriate role for themselves in this G8 country. The Russian Government has also taken significant steps to develop its global humanitarian profile. It established a budget for annual contributions to UNHCR and WFP, and it provided approximately US$ 22 million in tsunami relief (some US$ 10 million channeled as UN contributions, including US$ 3 million for OCHA).

The aim of the UN and its partners in the North Caucasus is to conduct a range of assistance projects in relief and development simultaneously for several years, meeting urgent humanitarian risk and addressing its root causes to ensure the smooth transition of international assistance in the North Caucasus. All consultations within the UNCT and with partners have concluded that the existing humanitarian-coordination mechanisms must remain firmly in place. An NGO Consortium was formed in 2005, and the HC invited this Consortium along with the ICRC to join UN Heads of Agency in forming an IASC field team.

OCHA has strongly advocated for and contributed to inter-agency plans for an increased UN presence in the Republic of Chechnya. Greater access in Chechnya and Dagestan is expected, with OCHA basing staff in Chechnya for the first time. With positive signals coming from UNDSS in New York about the down- phasing of security in Chechnya or parts thereof OCHA together with other UN humanitarian agencies is ready to establish a permanent, initially low-profile presence in Grozny. Humanitarian coordination will be more complex, given the above considerations. A Protection Strategy will be developed among humanitarian agencies and local authorities and special efforts will be needed to mobilize funding in the absence of a 2006 Consolidated Appeal.

In 2006, OCHA’s objectives are to: coordinate humanitarian assistance and protection in Chechnya and the North Caucasus in an evolving environment; promote recovery-oriented assistance in the North Caucasus; strengthen information management and analysis; and help the government better define and realize its global humanitarian goals.


  • Lead the overall humanitarian needs analysis and help target assistance and protection.
  • Adapt coordination mechanisms to be more effective, concentrating on reform of the sector working groups.
  • Support the completion and implementation of a Protection Strategy.
  • Establish an OCHA presence in Chechnya.
  • Involve the Development Coordination Group (DCG) in joint planning with the Humanitarian Coordination Group.
  • Track and raise funding for the humanitarian operation (CAP Section, Donor Relations, embassies, agencies).
  • Define benchmarks for OCHA RF exit from the North Caucasus/Russian Federation, with a preliminary, estimated timetable (Desk, humanitarian agencies).
  • Fully mobilize the OCHA Information Management Team to modify existing practices of data collection, analysis, information-sharing, and advocacy.
  • Organize a workshop on program planning and monitoring.
  • Analyze Russian humanitarian funding and bilateral assistance patterns, and advocate to government suggested next steps (FTS, MFA, EMERCOM).
  • Support UNDAC-support training course in Russia (FCSS, EMERCOM).


  • OCHA and other agencies’ staff presence in Chechnya and Dagestan (number of staff and number of days).
  • Geographical coverage of relief and protection projects in the Transitional Workplan.
  • Number of hits and satisfaction among partners with the OCHA website.
  • Transitional program well funded in 2005.
  • 2007 humanitarian program reduced, barring a deterioration of the humanitarian situation.
  • Amount of funding mobilized.
  • Wider geographical spread of Russian humanitarian action.
Planned Staffing Extra-budgetary
Local (GS)
UN Volunteers
Staff costs (US$)
Non-staff costs (US$)
Total costs (US$)