|
|
|
|
The Disgraceful Approach of the International Community to the Humanitarian Crisis in Sudan
Amgad Fareid Eltayeb
Since the outbreak of the war between the Sudanese army and the Rapid Support Forces in the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, on April 15, 2023, the inability of humanitarian organizations to initiate an effective humanitarian relief operation has been the most prominent mark in relation to the international community's efforts to address the situation in Sudan. Last week, on August 19, which coincided with World Humanitarian Day, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, tweeted paying tribute to humanitarian aid workers, saluting “their unwavering dedication to serve all people in need: No matter who, no matter where; no matter what.”
The eloquent tribute of the UN Secretary General António Guterres ironically contradicted the scene of the UN organizations' Great Exodus from war-torn Khartoum, less than two weeks after its outbreak, before their complete departure from Sudan. On April 24, 2023, a long convoy of white United Nations vehicles lined the road from Khartoum to Port Sudan, under the protection of the warring parties who had coordinated to safeguard the departing caravan. The warring factions took turns guarding the procession during the journey. The channels that ensured the success of this coordination for the UN exit march were not utilized to ensure the performance of humanitarian agencies that the war-affected desperately needed and still need. In fact, no attempt was made to exploit these channels for this purpose. Later, the presence of most of these organizations in Sudan was terminated without any announcement of plans for their return or compensation for their absence. That scene starkly contradicted Guterres' elegant affirmations in his celebratory tweet.
Naturally, it is the duty of the United Nations to protect the lives and safety of its employees in hazardous locations and attempt to provide them with the utmost security in order to carry out their important and necessary duties. However, fulfilling these duties cannot be achieved by withdrawing them in this manner, especially considering the urgent and growing need for these duties. This entire scene does not align with the celebrating the dedication and bravery in covering essential humanitarian needs.
Dag Hammarskjöld, the historic leader and second Secretary-General of the United Nations, is remembered for his famous phrase defining the positive role required of peacemakers. "It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity. It is when we all play safe that fatality will lead us to our doom. It is in the "dark shade of courage" alone that the spell can be broken."
However, it is becoming painfully clear that under Guterres' leadership, the United Nations is no longer Hammarskjöld's United Nations!
The Sudanese Warring Parties were not without fault in impeding international relief operations. The Sudanese government, currently controlled by the army, designated Volker Peretz, the UN Secretary-General's Special Representative in Sudan, a Persona non grata in Sudan on June 9, 2023, after the Secretary-General declined the demand of the army's commander to replace him. The attacks and looting of diplomatic missions and UN warehouses by the Rapid Support Forces militia remain ongoing. However, what is the guilt of Sudanese citizens being left alone to confront the cruelty of war and the craziness of the generals in this battle between two awful parties? Isn't the primary purpose why these humanitarian organizations exist is to relieve or at least ease the burden of all such circumstances on civilians?
The disgrace of international organizations in Sudan was not only limited to the absence of presence after the war. Some international organizations also took advantage of it as an opportunity to save or redirect some of the funds. For example, in June 2023, two months after the outbreak of the war, The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, which was announced by the former Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, in June 2001, informed the Sudanese Ministry of Health of its intention to terminate the grant provided to the Program Management Unit in the ministry, which is supposed to cover the cost of Malaria control activities amid its seasonal outbreak period. The Global Fund expressed its intention to explore alternative measures to manage the grant and implement malaria control activities. Afterwards, the administration of the Global Fund ignored the Ministry of Health's pursuit for several weeks to conduct a technical discussion about the practical implementation plans of these measures. Global Fund even disregarded responding to the Ministry of Health's inquiries regarding the justifications for this decision. After several weeks, it notified the ministry of the termination of the grant by July 31, 2023, and the transfer the remaining amount to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), which is one of the organizations that lacks practical presence in Sudan after the exodus of April.
It is worth noting that administrative expenses in other health projects executed by the UN Development Program in Sudan with Global Fund support equal to 27% of the grant value.
The Global Fund's only justification for this decision was the risk that the Sudanese war might result in sanctions being imposed on the Sudanese government, which may conflict with the Fund's accounting procedures. Despite Sudan previously being subject to international sanctions and a US embargo during the Bashir government, and after the December revolution that ousted the Islamist regime, financing for humanitarian, Malaria control, and other health projects was unhindered. Despite all of these historical and humanitarian considerations, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria decided to suspend the Malaria control grant and transfer the fund to the UNDP, effectively rendering its activities impossible to implement. All this was based on political possibility that is far from reality and was not supported, at least publicly, by any directions or signals from the United Nations or its political mission in Sudan.
This is the case in Sudan, where malaria cases account for 56% of the Eastern Mediterranean region's caseload even before the war. Sudan has the largest malaria burden in the region, and it is one of the top five causes of mortality in the country. It occurs during a war that has resulted in the displacement of significant numbers of residents from low malaria endemic areas, hence the populations' immunity to the disease is low in high malaria endemic areas. Because of this inadequate immunity alone, they are at greater risk of developing malignant malaria. It also happens during the rainy season, which is the natural time for the spreading of the malaria epidemic. With the deterioration of the health system, the absence of strict protocols for case management, as well as a lack of medicines, IV fluids, and other challenges confronting the health system, it is expected that a large number of cases of cerebral malaria, renal failure, and other severe malaria complications will develop very quickly. This, in turn, will put additional strain on the already strained health-care system, which has seen further deterioration as a result of the war's conditions. The host communities will also face an increased risk of infection from the increased cases of the low-immunity displaced patients, increasing the disease's incidence on a geometric progression rate. Malaria alone will put at least 20 million Sudanese at risk of suffering and death, not to mention other risks of war, while the international system employs bureaucratic justifications and political considerations that far from reality in order to discontinue its support for malaria control efforts. This is nothing short of a major unethical politicization of health and humanitarian assistance. More than forty million Sudanese within the country are being punished by the international system or used to put pressure on two parties to a bad war who are fighting over the spoils of power that they jointly stole through a coup, after which the international community continued to coddle them until they started fighting over the heads of Sudanese.
Looking at the statistics of the humanitarian situation in the Sudan since the commencement of the war, shame grows larger. Nearly 4 million people have been displaced from their homes, of whom about 1 million have become refugees to neighboring countries while about 3.3 million have been displaced within the country. The destruction of the capital, Khartoum, resulted to the displacement of nearly 71% of its inhabitants and it is rapidly becoming a ghost town. War economics have become increasingly cruel, resulting to a doubling of consumer prices in different states in the midst of a severe shortage as a result of a halt in routine import flows. The level of medication availability has reached around 30% of the country's average need. This has been exacerbated by the occupation by the militia of the Rapid Support Forces of the main warehouses of the National Medical Supply Fund, which has disrupted the supply of medicine to the public health sector throughout the country and contributed to the intensification of the scarcity caused by the war. On 11 August last, the World Food Fund celebrated its first successful delivery of a food shipment to areas in West Darfur State in the Sudan, but this celebration ignored the fact that, it took place four months after the outbreak of the war, and this partial success was carried out in villages and areas that had already been subjected to ethnic cleansing massacres! The Humanitarian assistance during the times of war is an integrated package, and you cannot celebrate bringing food to villages devoid of their population, whether by death or displacement.
Since the commencement of the war, 24.7 million civilians have been in dire need of humanitarian assistance. 19.9 million of them are in need of food provisions and only 2.1 million have been reached with 10.6% coverage. Of the 11 million civilians in need of health aid, just 820 thousand were supported, with 7.4 per cent coverage. 8.6 million kids require support in the elementary education sector, but only 58.8 thousand students; less than one percent received any support. In the sector of shelter, which is required by 5.7 million Sudanese, just 110.8 thousand were supplied something at proportion of 1.9 per cent. And on these numbers, you can imagine the covering of the rest of the sectors.
It should be noted that most of this coverage was not carried out by international organizations, but that the first and largest respondents to the humanitarian situation were the emergency rooms set up by the resistance committees in the Sudan. The youth groups who organized during the revolution and after the coup d'état to engage in political resistance in order to realize the slogans of freedom, peace and justice, whose banners rose during the December revolution, announced immediately after the outbreak of the war the formation of Emergency Rooms. They contributed actively to the evacuation of those trapped in the war zones - including many diplomats and international staff of relief organizations - to safe areas in the city. These youth, armed with unparalleled valor, risked their lives, and engaged in the delivery of food supplies, water, evacuation of the wounded and other necessary tasks in such situations. They applied practically the noble saying of Hammarskjöld, about the shadows of courage that break the spell of doom. The saying which seems to have been forgotten or simply ignored by those who sit on Hammarskjöld’s seat today.
But also, not all relief organizations ventured out with the United Nations on April Exodus. Organizations such as Doctors without Borders, the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Norwegian Refugee Council continued working tirelessly throughout Sudan. It was the voice of William Carter, the head of the Norwegian Refugee Council office in Sudan, that rose in frank criticism of the humanitarian efforts in the Sudan, accusing the international system of racism explicitly in comparing the situation of what is happening - or, indeed, what is not happening - in the Sudan with that of Ukraine.
According to estimates from United Nations agencies, the present budgetary requirement for humanitarian assistance in Sudan stands at roughly $2.6 billion. However, the available funding thus far amounts to only $658 million, resulting in a significant gap of approximately 75%. The deficit of funding allocated to crucial sectors such as nutrition amounts to (80.9%), health amounts to (88.6%), refugee protection amounts to (61.4%), food security amounts to (82.3%), shelter amounts (82.1%), and clean water and sanitation amounts to (82.1%) is catastrophic. Nevertheless, when it comes to the coordination and public services sector, encompassing aspects such as international worker salaries and outsource contracts, the deficit amounts only to 36.1%. Hence, there arises a curiosity regarding the nature and efficacy of these coordination and public services in light of the abovementioned distressing statistics.
While it is important to acknowledge that comparing the suffering caused by different humanitarian crises may not be appropriate, it is crucial to ensure that all such tragedies are afforded equal attention and support. Disregarding and failing to take action in response to the current humanitarian crisis in Sudan is incongruous with the expectations of the contemporary era. Humanitarian aid and international cooperation efforts, as well as the activities of the United Nations, are not stemming from the altruistic motives and the benevolence of donor countries and the international organization. It is not charity. Instead, it is an international responsibility and a means of restitution for a historical debt that accumulated over a period of over 300 years due to the colonialism and exploitation of nations in the global South by those in the global North. Over the course of three centuries, the progression of societies and political systems in Southern countries has been impeded, resulting in a state of reliance on developed nations. This reliance stems from the exploitation of wealth, resources, and cheap labor during the colonial era, which contributed to the development of the developed countries of the global North at the expense of societies of the global South. The aforementioned circumstances have given rise to a state of pronounced disparity and inequality, if left unaddressed, make the preservation of global security and stability is unattainable.
However, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the international system has faced significant challenges. The utilization of this system to advance the interests of a single dominant pole has resulted in catastrophic outcomes, as exemplified by the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. Subsequently, the incomplete or poorly planned interventions in Libya and Syria have further exacerbated the situation. Thus, the global system has collapsed to itself, and experienced a decline and deviated from its original moral and political principles, which were intended to inspire and pursue noble objectives, envisioned by Hammarskjöld and his contemporaries in the aftermath of World War II. This has ultimately led to a comprehensive failure and a genuine paralysis of the international system in terms of safeguarding security, promoting peace, and upholding the inherent dignity of all humans.
It was also Hammarskjöld who said that the United Nations "was not created to take mankind to heaven, but to save humanity from hell." But today we see a United Nations that seems to prefer to do nothing at all as it sees its role, its influence and its existence gradually waning into thin air.
|
|
|
|
Amgad Fareid El-Tayeb
CEO of Fikra for Studies and Development
previously served as the Assistant Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister of Sudan; Dr. Abdalla Hamdok during the transitional period following the toppling of the Islamic dictatorship in Sudan. He has also served as a political advisor to the United Nations Special Political Mission in Sudan (UNITAMS) and a visiting fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. He made a prominent political and social contribution to the liberation movement to overthrow Bashir Islamic regime before and during the December 2018 revolution acted as the head of the foreign relation committee of the Sudanese Professional Association and Spokesperson of it during the revolution. Founder of the Nafeer Initiative in 2013 and contributed significantly to the establishment of the Girifna and Sudan Change Now movements. He has also written extensively on cases of violations of migrants' rights, democratization, and issues of military and civil institutional reforms in Sudan. He can be contacted by email at: amjed...@gmail.com , Am...@fikrasd.com
Twitter: @amjedfarid
|
|
|
|
|
|
