Sudan: Oversimplified humanitarian crisis needs our response on all fronts
by Dr. Sandra Allaire and Mr. Charlie Musoka
Dr. Allaire and Mr. Musoka recently travelled to the Darfur region of Sudan to carry out an assessment for the Canadian Red Cross.
No one would ever doubt that the situation in the Darfur region of Sudan is one of the worst humanitarian disasters in the world today, with up to one million people displaced from their homes and thousands killed. Often the sides of the conflict are depicted in very narrowly defined terms—as simply good or bad. They are synthesized as just Arab tribes against African ones. But it must be recognized that there are victims on both sides of the conflict. The violence cannot be simplified as just one side against another. Although the polarization between government and rebels remains the most important factor in the eruption of violence, there are several other elements involved—be it the traditional struggle for scarce resources, desertification, people jockeying for attention because the peace process in the south has garnered all the attention, cattle raiding that has gone on for centuries or the influence of neighbouring countries and Sudan’s influence upon them.
The fact remains that in this most recent conflict, the rampant violations of international humanitarian law have caused untold harm to members of different tribes. No one is left unscathed, as the violence is inflicted on all sides. It is truly difficult to imagine what the real magnitude of the humanitarian crisis is when you multiply what we saw by thousands.
The human suffering takes on many forms. In Al Fashir, a three year-old chronically malnourished girl who looks as though she is an infant, suffers from cerebral malaria—a deadly condition for children. Yet when brought in to a clinic, she responds rapidly when basic drugs are administered to her. Malaria is the leading cause of medical consultation and hospitalization in the region. It is also one of the leading causes of death.
While it is remarkable to see life continuing on in some places—with makeshift schools appearing and young people playing soccer in the barren fields—other places are living an eerie, standstill existence. A group from the village of Mandura has returned back to Sudan from Chad where the residents had temporarily lived as refugees. They remain closely linked as a village unit, but have only straw matting and brush to create basic shelter. While this offered at least shade, they had no plastic sheeting to protect themselves from the rain—and it was the rainy season. It is startling to see that their impromptu community has not a single stitch of garbage—because they have absolutely no possessions to turn into rubbish.
Rampant insecurity is almost everywhere you travel in the Darfur. In Seleia, a two day trip was reduced to one because of the violence. During our short visit, three civilians suffering gun shot wounds were brought in by donkey cart. Four more were awaited. Their fate was unknown.
Political action is needed immediately if the vicious cycle of violence and displacement is to end. It is truly the responsibility of many groups—including the Sudanese authorities, the armed rebels, the United Nations, regional governments, international organizations and governments around the world—to act now and improve the situation. It is their duty to ensure that the most basic rules of war are upheld—and that civilians are not targeted. The humanitarian operations of aid organizations like the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) cannot be a substitute when it comes to protecting the civilian population caught in the crossfire.
The ICRC has access to all sides of the conflict and can cross the front lines because of its neutrality, impartiality and independence. In order to operate in the field, without creating parallel foreign aid structures, the ICRC relies on local strengths and the work of the Sudanese Red Crescent—the equivalent of a national Red Cross in the country. It maintains its credibility and level of trust by aligning its operations to a local organization that is present in almost every camp for Internally Displaced People (IDPs). If the ICRC leaves, the Sudanese Red Crescent remains operational, even when the expatriates have long gone. They have the grassroots, organizational structure and provide a long-term investment in the country.
One key point that must be raised is that while much of the focus of assistance has been on the IDPs, the needs are still significant among the hundreds of thousands of people who remained in their villages following the outbreak of violence. The International Red Cross Red Crescent Movement is now striving to increase its coverage of the harder to reach areas that have been left out of the equation. It is estimated that 45 per cent of the population who remained in their homes have yet to receive assistance. They are among the most vulnerable who urgently need our immediate help. Their medical needs are the same, as well as their requirements for basic food and non-food relief items.
Not to be forgotten is that often these are the individuals who take displaced people into their homes—further stretching their already scarce resources. In some communities, 60 per cent or more of the population is actually composed of IDPs, not residents. The locals tend to become needier and may begin to feel resentment towards the IDPs who are receiving aid and appear to be better off than the residents. This type of inequality was seen in the eastern Congo after the Rwandan Genocide—where in some cases refugees who had simply crossed a border 500 metres from the camps where they lived began receiving a complete humanitarian assistance package—including food, clean water, shelter and comprehensive medical assistance. This created resentment among local people who were in dire straits. Over time, this can also lead to additional security problems.
The challenges ahead are enormous as the Red Cross and other aid agencies have only had access to the Darfur region since last March—but simply by providing basic medical care to the most vulnerable, many of the most harshly impacted will survive. Although other forms of aid are important, the situation is essentially one of life or death. Large parts of the population have yet to be reached. It may take several hours to travel 50 km, and the insecurity presents an additional challenge. In addition to providing essential humanitarian assistance, the increasing presence of international aid agencies may also act as a deterrent for future violence.
In such a difficult environment signs of hope do appear. In a small IDP camp near Al Geneina, West Darfur, a young woman who looks much older than her age and carrying an emaciated baby breaks into a weak smile. Although she doesn’t know the whereabouts of her husband and several other family members, she now has access to clean water. The well in her village was contaminated by a dead animal. Now there is a new, functioning well. This type of resilience and optimism is puzzling at times—but she really has no choice but to look forward to the future. The Red Cross and other humanitarian agencies should continue to provide and expand their aid in the Darfur—so that this woman and others truly have a sustainable future.
