The main borders that cross the West Darfur region through the Chad address were closed for several months by military orders until it finally reopened in August 2024. Exercises sovereignty that requires the United Nations to carry out cross-border aid operations. Meanwhile, the Sudanese army fears that the RSF is smuggling weapons under the cover of humanitarian aid. This has created a stockpile of aid just a few kilometres from those who needed it. In fact, all regions of the country under RSF control were cutting humanitarian distribution by Sudanese authorities for this reason.
The history of humanitarian crisis
Sudan is unfamiliar with food insecurities and humanitarian crises. Due to changes in geography and climatic conditions, Sudan is affected by the types of weather-related shocks that regularly fall on the wider horns of the African region, such as seasonal rain, floods, desertification, or locust invasions. It’ll be easier. But it is more often the artificial state that affects Sudan’s ability to feed itself and maintain people’s livelihoods.
Hosts of government bureaucratic obstacles such as war, internal evacuation, road closures and technical work agreements, customs inspections, internal travel documents, and the provision of visas for international humanitarian staff have become the Sudan government and its tools . Sometimes, sometimes, sometimes, sometimes, sometimes, the associated rebel groups and militia punish internal enemies and suppress the international community. In particular, it is estimated that more than 2 million civilians have been killed in two episodes of Sudan’s North-South conflict, primarily from hunger-related causes. In the historic 15-year operational Sudan lifeline, the US and other donors have resorted to aerial suction food aid in the Nuba Mountains region. This is a small and replicated operation today across the region.
Similarly, during the Darfur conflict in the early 2000s, more than two million civilians were evacuated and suffered periodically from aid routes, either due to government deficits or other deliberate blockades. At one important moment in 2008, President Omar Al Bashir said that as part of Bashir’s genocide indictment, he was punished against aid workers who provided an anonymous statement to the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, as part of Bashir’s genocide charges, the International Criminal Court, as a punishment for aid workers. They expelled most of the aid organization from Darfur. Although estimates vary, it is believed that Darfur’s genocide produced more starvation related deaths than conflict deaths during nearly a decade of intense fighting.
The seemingly old, measured against this history, is once again new in Sudan. The same tactics that hampered the bureaucratic structure of paralysis and the Byzantine decision-making process (the bureaucratic structure of paralysis and the Byzantine decision-making process) from Sudan’s security agencies, intelligence reporting agencies, and ministerial positions, once again It was adopted again to steal current efforts, exacerbate the effects of the war, and create record levels. of humanitarian needs. However, this time, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and Ukraine has attracted more attention, and the conflict is a broad public awareness campaign similar to what sparked global attention 20 years ago Sudan’s atrocities. They do so with much less notice, as they do not benefit from it. .
Humanitarian assistance as a negotiation tip
Aid should not be treated as a negotiation tip, but it is usually found in Sudan. RSF is an overall publicity to try to demonstrate that it is a responsible international actor, showing compassion, respecting international norms and governing areas under its control. I used it as part of the campaign. However, the same group is responsible for the most overly and terrible acts of murder, evacuation and destruction of humanitarian resources, including looting, theft of aid vehicles and deliberately destroying medical facilities around the country. Meanwhile, Sudanese officials negotiate with international aid workers and diplomats who seem to be more interested in saving Sudan’s lives than the Sudanese government, using bureaucratic control over borders and internal movements. I keep bent my muscles. Indeed, sovereignty claims are routinely used to justify the denial of aid and the Fraut international humanitarian law.
Under this scenario, the Sudanese government makes political concessions to civilians or to build international pressure to build international pressure, or to provide the crisis response with the international community over access to aid. By turning it into negotiations, you can routinely bias yourself towards ceasefire talks with armed enemies. By retaining the hostages of civilian happiness, government negotiators have been able to avoid harsh conversations about peace deals, ceasefires and political consultations for decades. Once again, US envoys, UN authorities and peace mediators are drawn into a perennial game of horse-drawn carriages on humanitarian access in Sudan. To unblock in one region, you just have to see new restrictions appearing in new locations. This is also the case today.
In July 2024, the US announced an updated ceasefire talks to replace the previously co-hosted MO death talks in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. As part of the announcement, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said, “Consultations in Switzerland have reached a nationwide halt of violence, allowing humanitarian access to all in need, and robust surveillance and We aim to develop a verification mechanism. Any agreement.” However, the Sudanese army refused to send delegations and offered to send “government representatives” instead. This is a tactic aimed at achieving the Sudanese Army (SAF) higher position in consultations compared to the RSF. As a result, meeting organizers would support negotiations that were largely focused on aid access to affected communities, moving the aspect away from ceasefire negotiations that could have forced the pain of political concessions. I was forced to.
The week of “clock negotiations” between representatives of the international community and RSF housed in luxury Swiss resorts and various governments and military representatives in the current de facto capital, Port Sudan, has been a modest humanitarian interest. It only brought about. Before consultations begin, a call between Secretary Blinken and Safleader General Abdel Fatta al-Burhan was to open important border intersections at Chad’s address for humanitarian operations across borders. It helped to achieve the initial agreement. Blunts criticism for not attending ceasefire negotiations. Subsequent consultations with the RSF would generate an agreement on the safe passage of humanitarian convoys from Chad across RSF controlled territory, and to reach these communities with the most hopeless needs in central and eastern Darfur We’ve reached these communities. The opening of a parallel aid route from Port Sudan was also announced, along with a commitment by the RSF to respect the code of conduct to refrain from further attacks on civilians. Recently, SAF officials negotiated directly with the wallet leaders of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement North, Abderaziz Alhil and the American Humanitarian Agency, opened the wallets of Samaritan, opened the humanitarian air bridge, and South Kordofan’s It brings relief supplies directly to the capital city of Kaduguri. The promise of additional air access coming.
Almost four months after it was agreed to open an aid route from Chad, more than 300 aid trucks have crossed the border. However, the most intensely hit Darfur camp near Elfasher’s besieged city in North Darfur, Zamzam needs at least 100 trucks of dedicated assistance per month to meet the needs of more than 450,000 civilians . This opening is a prominent start, but it is hardly enough to create dents for the nearly 26 million people who are currently in need of assistance. This also assumes that these and future convoys will continue to be able to reach their intended destinations. However, the doctor without borders had already announced in late August. RSF has announced that it has held several trucks in West Darfur, which has recently crossed the border. Similarly, the UN reported in September that heavy rains throughout the region severely damaged roads and bridges, limiting humanitarian movements within and within Darfur. These obstacles probably end up at the tip of the iceberg, as neither side shows a true desire to support a civilian in need, fearing that they are acknowledging victory over the other side. It may not be too much. Both sides may continue to use threats and blockages on humanitarian access, both as punishment and use to the international community.
In this connection, it was not long ago that South Sudan’s historic cross-border feeding campaign during the North-South Civil War led to a peace agreement, which ultimately resulted in a peace agreement split into two inches of the country. Remember that it wasn’t. 2011. The agreement denied the government’s reputation as being Africa’s largest country. Not to mention this cuts it off from the majority of coin revenues from former southern oil fields. Similarly, in the Darfur region, the government was ruled by rebels during the Darfur Genocide, when the United Nations and other international humanitarian organisations were given special theocracy to carry out government objections. He fought on a daily basis to reassert his control over the “liberated area.” These experiences remain fresh in the minds of today’s Sudanese officials, unlike the majority of Washington and Brussels, and are in the same or similar position as they were more than 20 years before previous negotiations. .
The ultimate aspect of the human ledger, which is less publicly discussed, is that the United Nations and the international community will be willing to push back the restrictions imposed by Sudan to maintain and expand access to aid. That’s not the case. As the humanitarian situation in Sudan continues to spiral, taking a “no” for answers must have fewer options. Leaving from consultations with Switzerland, the United Nations and international officials speaks of the transition from a “permission-based” aid delivery system to something “notification-based.” If there is an active combat operation. This is not a standard approach for UN officials and their lawyers. They traditionally take a much more conservative and sustainable approach to dealing with their government. Non-irrelevant organizations argue that this is necessary to respond to humanitarian orders. This does not acquiesce any politically motivated decision to request that assistance be provided in accordance with humanitarian principles on the basis of necessity. The opposing party fights. However, maintaining such a system requires consistent pressure not only on the Sudan government, but also on the UN agencies that are under pressure from member states to not step over their duties and respect national sovereignty. . This will be subject to sustained pressure from the national states of Port Sudan and member states of authorities and NGOs to maintain open access to future aid routes.
A humanitarian emperor to manage the crisis
A recent UN assessment states that “Sudan is facing the worst level of food insecurity in its history.” It is a surprising claim given the long and tortured history of hunger in Sudan, and should cause a pause for those familiar with its history. Given what appears to be a lack of progress or profit from political parties to conflict, the greatest effort the international community can now, let alone a move to private control, can certainly continue to strive for Sudan The humanitarian appeal of the company is fully funded, and all measures have been taken to ensure the needs of humanitarianism are met and the provision of life-saving aid is provided.
