Nick Guttmann: Wanted: 32 Galahads a day

Coverage of the looming humanitarian crisis in Iraq has been dominated over the past few days by two images. The first is of battle-trained British troops struggling, almost panicking, over the task of distributing food and water to populations that are unwilling to form an orderly queue. The second is of the supply ship Sir Galahad, after many delays, finally docking at the port Umm Qasr with its eagerly awaited aid cargo. Both give an equally distorted picture of what is needed now by the people of Iraq.

Throwing boxes of food off the backs of lorries into a sea of eager arms is simply not how you do these things. It is potentially dangerous for all involved and, more importantly, it virtually guarantees that the wrong people will get whatever is on offer. The most successful arms in this kind of situation belong to the strongest, fittest young men. While the old, the weak and the women with children – those who need the aid most – have either to stand by and watch or run the risk of being trampled underfoot.

Yes, there will be further sharing of these supplies within communities. And yes, some of the aid will trickle down to those in need. But random, disorganised distributions, like those we have seen on our televisions, offer no way of guaranteeing this and no way of monitoring what effect the distribution will have had. It is not unknown, for instance, for such aid to end up in the hands of traders who sell it on at inflated prices.

No one is questioning the sincerity of the troops who are trying to fulfil this role. But it is not their job and, demonstrably, they don't know how to do it. Furthermore it is impossible for a force fighting on one side of a war either to be impartial over who gets the aid, or to be seen to be impartial. Yet this very impartiality lies at the heart of the "humanitarian imperative" which governs the actions of all humanitarian agencies and non-governmental organisations. It is enshrined in the Red Cross/Red Crescent Code of Conduct to which Christian Aid is a signatory. Quite simply, this states that aid must be delivered at the point of greatest need, without fear or favour or with any political purpose.

To do this requires a lot of planning and organisation. First to establish who are those in greatest need by careful, prior assessment. Then to make sure, through existing local community leaders, that people understand and accept that this is what is going on. Communication is essential.

It can, and does, work well all over the world. Not following these rules, as we have seen, can lead to a riot. Much has been made of the expertise of the Humanitarian Operations Centre (HOC), part of the US central command in Kuwait, which has been placed in charge of the initial relief operation. There is even a representative there from Britain's Department for International Development (DfID). This expertise must be put to better use before any more damage is done.

That, though, is only the short-term option, while the security enabling those qualified to do the job is missing. The whole humanitarian effort must be taken out of military hands and handed to the United Nations, with which aid agencies can co-operate.

For as well as the question of method, there is also the question of scale. The figures are stark. Before the war, virtually the entire Iraqi population was in receipt of food aid through the UN's Oil For Food programme (OFF). Some 60 per cent of this population, about 16 million people, were dependent on the programme, which covered medical supplies and other essentials as well as food. This means that 16,000 tonnes of aid will need to be shipped into the country every day, once the stocks that are thought to exist in the country run out in around three weeks' time.

But in the northern Kurdish area, where Christian Aid funds most of its Iraqi programmes, we are told that food could start to run out in as little as two weeks. Already there are shortages of kerosene, meaning that some of the large bakeries which operate on the fuel, have suspended production. The Sir Galahad brought in 500 tonnes of aid on Friday. But it would take an average of 32 such shipments every day just to reactivate the pre-war programme. No one is pretending that the situation in the country will not be a lot worse when the war is finally over. Water and sanitation will be the first priority. There are likely to be more Basras in the coming weeks, or months.

The opening of Umm Qasr has been presented as an opportunity for the coalition forces to ship humanitarian supplies. That it will also be a vital conduit for the supply of growing ground forces is unquestionable. So what will be the priority in the minds of generals faced with the need to deploy a new armoured division or land dozens of aid shipments? We've all answered harder ones than that.

Again, the aid is welcome in these terrible circumstances. But for the US or UK governments to paint this as anything other than a sticking plaster on the needs of the Iraqi people is to risk being accused of the worst kind of public relations stunt.

The new UN Security Council resolution to establish a successor to OFF, passed on Friday, is something that aid agencies have been calling for since the original programme was suspended on the eve of hostilities. It is a start. But it presupposes that there will be safe access for aid workers and a stable political situation in which the UN can operate. That is unlikely for some time – and that means that it will be quite some while before the 300 relief workers who monitor the distribution of supplies return. In the meantime donor governments must match this with contributions to the $1.3bn (£800m) appeal which the UN has now launched.

Last week, the British government, through DfID, announced a further £30m for humanitarian work. Two days later, the Treasury announced new money for military expenditure – bringing the running total to £3bn. This does not sound like Tony Blair's pre-war promise to give equal importance to the humanitarian effort as to the military. This screaming discrepancy must be addressed – now.

Nick Guttmann is head of emergencies for Christian Aid. To make a donation to Christian Aid's work in Iraq, go to the website: www.christian-aid.org.uk