Assad government awarded millions in UN aid contracts

The Syrian government, including members of President Bashar al-Assad’s family, was awarded tens of millions of dollars in UN contracts, according to an investigation by the Guardian.

The contracts are part of an aid programme that critics fear could endanger the UN’s mission in the war-torn country.

In the Guardian’s report, companies and persons under US and EU sanctions, including Assad’s wife, Asma, were awarded these contracts.

Among the contracts is a $13m sum to the government aimed at boosting agriculture, even though the EU has prohibited trade with the agriculture department.

Another contract from the World Health Organisation shows a $5m donation to the country’s blood bank, which is operated by Syria’s defence department.

A couple of UN departments gave a $5.8m contract to the Syria Trust charity, which is run by Asma, who is sanctioned by both the US and EU.

The Guardian’s investigation is based on documents leaked to the news outlet through an unnamed humanitarian organisation.

In response, the UN said that their mission operates in an “extremely challenging” area and their choices reside in a “highly insecure context”.

“Of paramount importance is reaching as many vulnerable civilians as possible,” a UN spokesman said. “Our choices in Syria are limited by a highly insecure context where finding companies and partners who operate in besieged and hard to reach areas is extremely challenging.”

Among the other contracts awarded to the Syrian government, some include $4m to the state-run fuel supplier and several hundred thousand dollars to companies owned by Assad’s cousin, Rami Makhoulf, who the US has called “the poster boy of corruption”.

Despite some unease among UN officials, some of them told the Guardian that the body is not required to follow US and EU sanctions.

However, a UN official told the Guardian on condition on anonymity that Assad demanded the UN to work with government institutions.

“The UN country team knew from the early days of the conflict that neither the government nor its authorised list of local associations for partnership with the UN could be considered as befitting the humanitarian principles of independence, neutrality and impartiality.

“This important consideration was stepped aside by the UN to satisfy the government’s leadership demand for the humanitarian response. This set the tone for UN entanglement with entities closely associated with the government.”

For its part, rights groups complimented the UN’s commitment to mentioning names and companies in their reports.

“But at least the UN publishes the names of their suppliers. Many of the international NGOs won’t even do that. Very limited transparency is a problem that affects the whole aid effort in Syria," a person who works with the humanitarian group that leaked the documents told the Guardian.

"Given that the aid industry has been talking [about] the need for more transparency for decades, it’s high time we had proper independent scrutiny of where this money is going and how it is being spent.”