|
Two years after the crisis in Darfur erupted, the international community is still failing to protect the people of Darfur from crimes committed against them, primarily by the Government of the Sudan and its allied militias. In our view, the crimes committed are no less serious and heinous than genocide. The violence and suffering continue. More than two million people have been forced to flee from their homes, many left with absolutely nothing. Nearly two and a half million people are currently in need of humanitarian assistance, a figure that looks likely to rise to four million over the course of 2005. The World Health Organization's widely-quoted mortality estimate of 70,000 is a gross under-estimate. Jan Egeland, the UN Emergency Relief Coordinator, has stated that the real figure is likely to be several times that estimate. That is, we suggest, somewhere around 300,000.
We visited Darfur in early February. Images that will stay with us from our visit include: the burnt and destroyed villages which we saw from the air; the tears of women recounting the death of family members at the hands of the "Janjaweed"; the fear on the faces of women who, dreading rape, were too terrified to stray beyond the relative safety of their camps; and the aircraft at Nyala airport — at one end of the runway those for bombing and killing, at the other end those for monitoring the so-called ceasefire and delivering humanitarian assistance. We also remember the words of denial uttered by many of the Sudanese government officials we met, dismissing the deaths of tens or hundreds of thousands as the inevitable casualties of the government's counter-insurgency campaign.
The Government of the Sudan bears the primary responsibility for the suffering of the people of Darfur. But when a government commits atrocities against its own citizens, then the international community has a responsibility to protect those people. In this report we assess the international community's response to the crisis in Darfur — both the humanitarian response and the political response — and make recommendations as to how the response needs to be improved to better protect the people of Darfur.
The humanitarian response: Meeting humanitarian needs?
- Early warnings were ignored, the response from donors was initially slow, and governments, including the UK Government, should have done more to raise the alarm.
- The UK was, however, one of the first bilateral donors to respond and is, after the USA, the second most generous country in terms of humanitarian assistance. The EC/ECHO has responded well, but substantially more help is needed from individual EU Member States.
- Access for humanitarian relief has been poor, as a result of the Government of the Sudan's bureaucratic obstructions, logistical challenges, and continuing insecurity.
- The humanitarian agencies were slow to respond to Darfur, responsibilities for helping displaced people and managing the camps in which they live have been unclear, and the UN suffered from an avoidable leadership vacuum in Sudan at a critical time.
The political response: Providing protection and security by exerting political pressure?
- Stronger political pressure is needed on all sides in the conflict to protect civilians, to enhance security, and to encourage progress towards a political solution. More concerted political pressure on the Government of the Sudan would enable a more effective humanitarian response.
- The international community prioritised progress on the North-South peace process over the crisis in Darfur. This was misguided and unnecessary, and had predictable, deadly, consequences for Darfur. A more holistic approach to the problems of Sudan was possible, preferable, and would have provided a more secure basis for building a sustainable country-wide peace.
- The efforts of the African Union (AU) to end the crisis in Darfur are extremely welcome. But the AU Mission needs a stronger mandate and more troops. There must be a clear strategy to ensure its success, backed up by generous international support. The AU must not become an excuse for inaction by others.
- The UN Security Council has failed to fulfil its responsibility to protect the people of Darfur, and to maintain international peace and security. Driven by national interests, the Security Council has been divided, weak and ineffective. There should be a referral of Darfur to the International Criminal Court, targeted sanctions and an extension of the arms embargo to cover the Government of the Sudan.
Towards sustainable peace and development? Responsibilities and accountability
The crisis in Darfur will only be resolved when the parties choose a future of sustainable peace and development rather than one of conflict and poverty. For this to happen, the new National Government of the Sudan, and its international partners, must jointly deliver on their shared responsibilities, not just to protect, but also for development. The UK Government and others must work hard to ensure that the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between the North and the South of Sudan ushers in a new Sudan, characterised by good governance, justice and human rights, and with the principles of the CPA extended to Darfur. There must be local solutions to conflicts over land and resources in Darfur. And oil revenues and aid must be invested in peace and development, to rebuild livelihoods and communities shattered by conflict. Donors must support the North-South peace process, but must not take the pressure off as regards Darfur. That mistake must not be made again. Aid and debt relief which will primarily benefit the Khartoum regime must be strictly and clearly conditional on resolving the crisis in Darfur.
Shared responsibilities to protect, and for development, will be poorly met unless those responsible — governments, humanitarian agencies, and international organisations, including the UN — are accountable for their actions and inactions. If the international humanitarian system had been more accountable, and had learnt more from past responses, then it would surely have responded more effectively to the crisis in Darfur. If the Government of the Sudan had been more accountable for its actions, to its citizens, or, failing that, to the international community, then the crisis in Darfur would have been resolved more peacefully. And if the "international community", and in particular the UN Security Council, were more clearly accountable to those governments and people who take seriously their responsibilities to protect, then it would surely have acted more decisively on Darfur.
If the international community is to fulfil its shared responsibility to protect, then we must all fulfil our responsibilities, and hold others to account for fulfilling theirs. The international community must now fulfil its responsibility to protect the people of Darfur. Attacked by the government which is meant to protect them, the people of Darfur, who we have collectively and demonstrably failed, deserve no less. We demand that there is action now.
|
