Examination of witnesses (Questions 144
- 159)
THURSDAY 16 JULY 1998
HE MR OMER
BIREEDO and DR
ALI AL
HAJ
Chairman
144. Your Excellency, I welcome you to the Committee.
Thank you for making time to come and talk to us about the
current situation in Sudan. Thank you also for your memorandum
which we have received. I am not certain that we have fully
digested it; we received it only yesterday, but it has been
very useful to us. We have prepared some questions, many of
which you have anticipated. There is much to talk about.
I understand that you would like to make an opening statement
which may also anticipate many of our questions. Is Dr Ali
Al Haj in the embassy with you?
(Mr Bireedo) No; he is a visitor. Dr Ali Al Haj
is a Member of Parliament in Sudan and is Deputy Secretary
General of the Sudan National Congress. He is a medical doctor
by profession and trained as a gynaecologist, obtaining his
postgraduate qualification in Belfast, Northern Ireland.
He is a former Minister of Federal Relations and Minister
of Investment, Economic Planning and Trade. He has been associated with
the peace process during the past eight years either as leader
of the delegation or a member of the Sudan delegation throughout
all the negotiations that have taken place with the rebels.
145. He is a man of great endurance and patience.
(Mr Bireedo) Yes. He is here on a private visit.
I have asked him to join us. He accepted that with great pleasure.
I should like to extend to you and your colleagues on the
Committee our profound thanks and appreciation for this opportunity
to exchange views and ideas in respect of the critical situation
and famine in the southern part of Sudan. It is a very critical situation
which in our view needs urgent and long-term solutions.
In the memorandum distributed yesterday I have tried to outline
the context in which this crisis is taking place, taking
into account that Sudan is the biggest country in Africa.
It is one million square miles in extent, has 10 neighbours
and has multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-religious
diversities. Since independence over 40 years ago it has
witnessed three multi-party elected governments and three
military governments. It was very important for the present Government
who took power nine years ago to stop the cycle of elected
governments and military coups. There was a need to restructure
the political system to ensure continuity, stability and
the sharing of power and resources. Because of that the Government introduced
a federal system in the country. Twenty-six states have been
established, of which 10 are in the southern part of Sudan.
Each state has an elected governor and assembly. Another
step in that direction is the adoption of a new liberal constitution
which provides for a multi-party presidential system, an independent
judiciary and the observance of all fundamental human rights.
As to the economic situation, the Government sought to adopt
self-reliance and open market policies. With those policies
the Government achieved a number of successes, in particular
a sustained rate of economic growth, from a negative growth
of 0.2 per cent in 1989 to an average of 6 per cent according
to the IMF annual report. The IMF projection for 1998 is
6.5 per cent. The Government succeeded in doubling the capacity
of the infrastructure of roads, telecommunications, airport facilities
and education, with an increase from five to 26 universities.
For the first time last year gold to the value of $65 million
was exported. Oil was produced last year. By June of next
year we will be self-sufficient and in a position to export
by way of a pipeline of 1,600 km. You will be pleased to
know that British companies have won sub-contracts for the building
of that pipeline.
The present famine in Sudan has been associated for a long
time with the United Nations Lifeline Operation (OLS). We
have a track record of nine years' co-operation with this
organisation. It is a unique experiment whereby the Government
agree that relief supplies should be distributed to rebel
areas. During that period it witnessed the excellent co-operation between
the Government of Sudan and the OLS. The General Assembly
of the United Nations has commended that co-operation on
a regular basis. There were 20 sites of distribution in 1989
when the operation started. Up to now there are 180 locations according
to the World Food Programme. This excellent co-operation
with OLS in delivering relief assistance was obstructed last
January due to an attack launched by one of the rebel factions
against government forces at Wau in addition to the drought that
took place in the same part of Sudan. Because of that military
attack the Government felt bound to impose a limited restriction
on the flights to that area for a number of reasons, primarily
for the safety of the flights. In the past during military
operations the SPLA shot at a civilian aircraft and attempted
to attack a number of flights carrying relief supplies. It
was also important that the process should be temporarily halted.
I stress that it was a limited restriction; it was not the
banning of flights at that time. The flights continued to
other parts of southern Sudan. Even in those areas the Government
issued permission for 34 flights for the World Food Programme
and UNICEF programme during February of this year. The World Food
Programme and UNICEF succeeded to fly only five out of 34
flights. Obviously, the reason was not lack of access but
rather an element of financial resources or possibly the
NGOs themselves felt that it was risky to go to those places.
As soon as the military operations stabilised by the end
of March the Government gave permission for all the flights
for which the United Nations had asked. We received letters
of appreciation from the Secretary-General of the United
Nations, the European Union and a number of NGOs. They commended
that position and we continued to co-operate with the United
Nations and OLS. They are prepared to provide for any flight
that the United Nations and OLS may wish to ask for.
In addition to access, the Government felt it important to
achieve a ceasefire to help the delivery of humanitarian
relief assistance and at the same time create an environment
conducive to the peace process. We maintained that position
last year and continued to exert pressure to obtain that,
but obviously for a number of reasons the SPLA rejected the
appeal for a ceasefire. That was also called for by the leaders
of the IGAD at their meeting in Djibouti last March and by
the Security Council and the European Union. All of them
appealed for a ceasefire which had not been accepted for
the past few years. We are pleased that eventually_yesterday_the
SPLA announced its acceptance of the ceasefire due to the
pressure imposed on them by various forces and elements.
However, while we welcome the acceptance of the ceasefire,
I must note that there was considerable distortion in the BBC
reports yesterday and this morning that the Government of
Sudan had accepted the ceasefire for one month. President
Moi of Kenya contacted our Government three days ago and
requested a ceasefire for four months. For that reason our
Government responded positively to his request. But our basic position
is that we have called for a permanent, comprehensive ceasefire
to cover all of the regions so that the relief supplies can
reach each part of the country, not just selective areas,
in the hope that that ceasefire will create confidence-building
measures to help us conclude a comprehensive peace settlement covering
all the difficulties that have existed in Sudan for a long
time.
We have provided additional measures that can help the international
community to intensify delivery of relief supplies, including
the use of El Obeid and Malakal Airport in the western part
of Sudan. Both of those towns are less than one hour's flight
from the affected areas. For a long time we have invited
the OLS to use the airport facilities in those towns to deliver
food to the affected area because food is available and at
less cost compared with food that comes from various parts
of the world. From Lochichokio to Bahr El Ghazal is close
to three hours whereas it is less than one hour to go from
Malakal to Wau. We are pleased that lately the OLS has started to
use the facilities at El Obeid Airport. We hope that that
will be further intensified. In addition we have stressed
the need to use river, rail and road transportation. This
is part and parcel of the OLS agreement but for quite some
time it has not been utilised fully. We hope that this is
another opportunity to intensify the use of such facilities.
The lack of resources has been stressed by many non-governmental
organisations and the United Nations. I am sure you are aware
that the United Nations in 1997/98 asked for $120 million.
Less than 40 per cent was received. In 1998/99 the UN made
an appeal for $109 million. The amount received so far is less
than 40 per cent. There is a need to increase the resources
and make them available to the OLS. Since the Committee is
interested primarily in development issues, the Sudanese
Government appreciate the humanitarian relief assistance
which the United Kingdom has generously given to Sudan over
the past seven to nine years. But we are quite aware that durable
solutions cannot rely on relief assistance. There is an urgent
need to consider the question of rehabilitation and development
particularly in the areas of education, health and water
resources. These are very important areas. It will help to
encourage people to remain where they are and have a stable
life and permanent peace. Development is a basic, fundamental human
right. It should not be conditional on other rights. For
that reason it is high time to reconsider the whole question
of rehabilitation and development. In conclusion, we are
in agreement with the Minister, Ms Clare Short, that the
war must come to an end. The famine is a symptom of the conflict.
For that reason we call for the ceasefire to be continued,
maintained and strengthened and to cover all areas.
We are of the view that the policy we have adopted in respect
of a federal system, liberal institutions and the Khartoum
peace agreement, which provides for a transitional period
and an internationally supervised referendum for our people
in the south after four years to decide whether to remain
as one country or to have a separate country are necessary
conditions to removing the root causes of this conflict which
has continued since 1955. With that in mind, we state our thanks
to you and express our confidence that you will continue
to support our efforts to achieve a fair peace and deliver
the relief assistance to our people. I and my colleague are
quite prepared to respond to any questions that you may wish
to put.
146. Thank you, Ambassador, for that comprehensive
review of the situation. You bring us very welcome news that
a ceasefire at least for a short duration has been agreed.
Without it we cannot truly help the people in your country
who are starving or begin to help you redevelop the country
and provide a long-term future. At least this is a beginning
which we hope you will be able to extend to a permanent cessation
of the war and the beginning of a new period of construction
in your country. As we understand it, one of the principal
causes of the war is the ambition of the Sudan Government
to apply Sharia Law throughout Sudan. Is it true that the
Government of Sudan are prepared to suspend or change that
view to produce peace?
(Mr Bireedo) The question of religion has never been
part of this conflict which started in 1955. The conflict
started before independence. The SPLA started its movement
in May 1983 which was before the application of the Sharia
Law. The root causes go deeper than the question of the application
of Sharia Law. The present Government are of the view that
the Sharia Law should not be applied to the southern part of
the country, the majority of whose people are not Muslims.
The position that has been adopted_the Khartoum peace agreement
is part of that_is that religion is a source of the laws
of the land together with the customs, traditions and other
religions. Citizenship is the basis of rights and duties.
Religion does not play a central role in determining status
or the rights of every citizen.
Ms King
147. We are not really here to discuss the application
of Sharia Law. I do not want a comprehensive answer from
you. I wonder whether you can take a message back to your
Government on behalf of the Committee. When I met your Minister
of Justice in Khartoum about six weeks ago he said that it would
be possible to look at the question of exempting women from
the floggings that they currently receive under that law.
Has progress been made in that area?
(Mr Bireedo) I shall convey your message, but
the question of the flogging of women is not part of our discussion
today. It is a technical question. Sharia Law is quite flexible
and liberal. In Sudan women assume 7an important position
in government, parliament, universities and in public life.
Three out of 10 members of the Supreme Court are women. The country
is very conscious about the status of women. They play a
key role in the development of our country, political and
social.
Ann Clwyd
148. I should like to go through some aspects of what
you have said which contradict what the Secretary of State
said when she gave evidence to the Committee. She said that,
ªThe current crisis in Sudan was made even worse because
the Government of Sudan would not allow humanitarian flights
to the region from the UN base in northern Kenya for fully two
months. The problem was one of access, not resources. . .¾
What you have said directly contradicts that.
(Mr Bireedo) Yes. That is not true. We are not
in agreement with that statement. As I stated earlier, even during
February and March when there were restrictions on the flights
the Government gave permission for 34 flights by UNICEF and
the World Food Programme. Since the end of March and up to now
they have given approval to any flight that has been asked
for.
149. Perhaps we can go into what happened during the
two months when the ban was imposed. Was it a total or partial
ban?
(Mr Bireedo) It was a partial ban, not a total
one. Thirty-four flights were permitted. In my memorandum
I included a letter which our Minister of State for Social
Planning had written to the regional co-ordinator for the
emergency operations asking why they had not used the permissions
given during February.
150. In your memorandum you refer to 34 flights. Does
that relate to the two months in which there was a partial
ban?
(Mr Bireedo) Yes.
151. So, you gave authorisation for 34 flights and you
say that the UN agencies flew only five flights during that
period?
(Mr Bireedo) That is correct.
152. What is the reason for that?
(Mr Bireedo) I think that the OLS should reply
to that question. We are trying to give an interpretation. It
was due either to lack of resources or possibly the OLS and
NGOs felt that it was not safe for them to go to an area
in which military operations might be taking place.
153. Did you ever ask them why they did not take advantage
of those permissions?
(Mr Bireedo) We wrote to them but did not receive
a reply.
154. Do you think that even a partial ban was a mistake
at that time when obviously the humanitarian needs were very
great? With hindsight, are you sorry that you imposed even
a partial ban given the escalating humanitarian problems?
(Mr Bireedo) It was for the security and safety
of OLS personnel that that limited restriction was put in place.
If there had been the resources and they had used the 34
flights and could not get additional ones then the answer
to that question would be quite relevant. But in the event
they failed to use the flights available to them. I do not
think that that is sufficient reason to suggest that someone
should regret the decision. Even with that limitation the
OLS failed to deliver the relief of humanitarian assistance.
155. Limited access was granted on 23 February and
the flight ban was fully lifted on 1 April. Do you know how
many flights were permitted between 23 February and 1 April?
(Dr Al Haj) I should like to add my voice to what His
Excellency has said. We thank the Committee for this opportunity.
Both we and the Committee are happy to hear about the ceasefire
declaration. The Sudanese Government have longed for this opportunity
not only for humanitarian reasons, to which I shall turn
in a moment, but also for other issues to put an end to the
war. Our only comment is: Why three months? It could be said
that the three months were enough.
156. We are trying to get at some of the facts relating
to the flights.
(Dr Al Haj) I can answer you now. On 29 January there
was an incident in Wau in Bahr El Ghazal involving Kerubino.
There was heavy fighting in that area which went on during
February, March and April. It was the decision of the Government
at that time to stop the flights. It was an area of fighting
and we did not want the people bringing the food to the area
to be harmed in any way. We are not in hindsight apologetic about
it. You said that of the 34 flights permitted only five or
six took place. I cannot explain it. I do not blame the donors,
but 80 or 90 per cent of the money goes into the air transport.
That message must be got across to you and the donors. That
is why we are thinking of alternatives like river transport
and the railway.
157. How many flights were permitted between 23 February
and 1 April?
(Dr Al Haj) I do not know the details, but they
can be supplied. I guess that of 34 only five or six took place.
The OLS administration may be in a better position to explain
the situation.
158. The numbers that we were talking about originally
related to February.
(Dr Al Haj) We can provide that information.
159. I would also like to know whether during that period
all the permitted flights were taken up by Operation Lifeline
Sudan. An official from the department who gave evidence
said that each additional flight demanded agreement and that
was the problem. Why does not the Government of Sudan give blanket
approval for all flights that OLS wants to arrange instead
of having to ask for approval for each additional flight?
(Mr Bireedo) The reason is simple. That is part
of the OLS agreement. That agreement has a number of provisions
in respect of sovereignty of the country and transparency.
I think that that is in compliance with the agreement freely
accepted between the United Nations and the Sudan Government.
There is also a need to know the exact locations, times and
places. We are operating in a war zone and we have certain responsibilities.
The Government want to be fully aware when and where each
operation is taking place. The OLS programme is negotiated
and agreed upon a month in advance. For instance, we are
now in negotiation with OLS for the August programme. By the
beginning of August all the plans will be ready and everybody
will be informed. There is no difficulty about the number
of flights. As I said earlier, we have given blanket approval
for any flight but there is a need for co-ordination not
only on 0our part but on behalf of the other parties. They
have to get approval and consent. It is a matter of co-ordination.
|
