Sudan: looking to a new future

Southern Sudan is voting for its future and is widely expected to usher in full independence from Khartoum, splitting the largest country in Africa and the Arab world in two. The referendum that guides this process is the culmination of years of peace talks and treaties – especially the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of January 2005 brokered chiefly by the UN and IGAD – that sought to end decades of violent and divisive conflict.

Whatever the final outcome of the referendum, expected to be announced between the 07th and 14th of February, the fact that it has happened at all is already a triumph for the Sudanese people. Many observers - including Head Down Eyes Open - feared the worst but thankfully the dominant, dire predictions of a return to war and violence have been largely disproved.

The mostly trouble-free lead up to the referendum did bring with it some unforeseen developments however, including a larger-than-expected movement of Southern Sudanese people from the north to the south which presented a range of logistical, health and humanitarian challenges. Masses of people decided to return for the referendum and will now possibly choose to remain to build the world’s newest country.

Returnees are reported to be still journeying south in a jubilant mood, sensing the historic era of a newly independent state, but with little else to sustain them. The end of voting is of course only the beginning. It is going to be a massive challenge to provide people returning to the South with the health and social assistance that they need, not to mention assisting them to secure ways of earning a living. The existing vulnerabilities of the local population also need to be factored in so a balanced support is provided that avoids triggering tensions between returnee and resident populations.

Strong Civil Society 
Our partners working with the Sudanese Red Crescent (est. 1956) are quiet possibly the only civil society organization that has remained unified and operational throughout the entire territory of Sudan, including in the Red Sea State in the east and the troubled region of Darfur. Continued partnership and support to this national society will be a top priority now and, we would argue, should also be for the international community.

When, as expected, independence is chosen by the electorate, the process of transition will start – a period of some six months. Special attention will be given not only to the process of forming a new state but a brand new national society which is poised to become the latest member to the Red Cross and Red Crescent global network of 186 national societies.

Any future national Red Cross society in an independent Southern Sudan will need to be fully resourced and supported as they will play a grassroots role in building stability, supporting communities as well as being a key contributer to peace-building south and north of any future borders. There will be enormous legal, logistical, resourcing and political challenges but an ‘amicable divorce’ is certainly achievable.

Caution instead of Complacency
Although indications at this stage are that we will not be facing a large-scale humanitarian emergency triggered by the referendum’s result, the situation remains fragile and unpredictable. This is Sudan after all - big country, big problems. Numerous unresolved issues between Sudan’s north and south – from citizenship to oil exploration - may lead to escalated crises or localized conflict, and violent tensions between some fifty tribal communities within Southern Sudan itself can also be easily exacerbated.

The people of Sudan are pointing the way forward. They have taken an incredibly difficult road to get to this juncture. The vital political milestone of the referendum has passed and this needs to be celebrated as a victory for peaceful dialog - of which, importantly, a regional organization (IGAD) played a major role. But it is only the start. We would be wrong to deceive ourselves into thinking that the toughest test is over – any complacency now would be a mistake. Let's hope, after the Jubalation calms down, that the world resolves to stick with Sudan - north and south - for the long haul.


/PC

Aid Workers increasingly targeted

Somewhere right now, fellow Red Cross colleagues, Gauthier Lefèvre and Laurent Maurice, are being held hostage in Darfur and Chad. The exact location is of course not known. Gauthier was kidnapped in western Darfur some 70 days ago on 22 October and Laurent taken in eastern Chad nearly 50 days ago on 09 November. Their abduction followed hot on the heels of the release of two other aid workers who had been taken hostage: Irish aid worker Sharon Commins and her Ugandan colleague Hilda Kawuki were released in mid-October after some four months in captivity. Two civilian workers of the UN peacekeeping mission in Darfur (UNAMID) are also still in the hands of their abductors since last August.

Aid workers now more at risk than UN peacekeepers

The most recent reliable statistics for 2009 cite 19 aid workers being killed in Sudan and dozens more kidnapped. In 2008, according to the Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG), some 260 aid workers were killed, kidnapped or seriously injured in violent attacks. This year's numbers are trending to surpass 2008's record breaking figures. The amount of murderous and hostage taking incidents of aid workers is indisputably surging with the annual average now three times higher than the previous nine years (when systematic documentation of this type of data was first seriously gathered). Interestingly, the figure of aid worker fatalities now exceeds that of UN Peacekeeping troops.

The traditional 'protection' afforded to humanitarians working in areas of conflict (or post-conflict) has its origins in universally accepted norms of war which have been most recently enshrined in the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (and their related Protocols of 1977). The Conventions outline the obligation of 'beligerents' to provide protection to civilians and non-combatants and specifically points out their obligations towards facilitating security for people and assets (warehousing, telecommunications, vehicles etc.) engaged in humanitarian activities that are aimed at reducing the suffering of people not taking part in the conflict i.e. the non-combatants (which also includes injured or detained fighters and soldiers i.e. people who no longer pose a threat).

Military 'Heroes' and Humanitarian 'Do-gooders'

This legal and de facto protection has become increasingly eroded and is probably best demonstrated during the war in Iraq when humanitarian organizations were directly targeted (including the Red Cross head office in Baghdad) as they were wrongly perceived by the insurgency to be part and parcel of the occupying forces. What's more, the very work of aid agencies in places such as Afghanistan, Somalia or Sudan, which includes providing clean water, sewage treatment, effective medical care, infant nutrition programs and so on - is now often viewed as contrary to the 'war' aims of insurgency groups in whose interests it may be to maintain chaotic and dire conditions (as the contrary - the success of aid work - might indirectly reflect well on the central powers that be, or want to be).

There is another aspect which niggles slightly and that is the deafening silence that generally meets the news of aid workers being killed or taken hostage. There is not only a relative silence from governments, media or the public but even from the humanitarian sector itself. Compare the death in Afghanistan of aid workers to that of soldiers who, by and large, are armed to the teeth and sent to Afghanistan to kill or be killed. I don't dispute military interventions - not my business - but it is quiet incredible that the media is so keen to eulogize the military as 'fallen heroes' and ignore those who risk (and give) their lives desperately trying to make a difference on the human level without resorting to state of the art munitions and military occupation.

Ready for risk but not to be a target

This realization - ever rising fatalities among aid workers in recent years - will inevitably affect how aid organizations operate in increasingly insecure environments. Can you, as an operational manager of an aid agency, send your people into danger zones knowing that the risks are unacceptable; knowing that they are likely targets? As is often said, aid workers are ready to accept the risks that come with the context of conflict but can we really accept to be a target? 


There are many possible reasons for this worrying trend not least of which are the blurring of the lines as occupying military armies (such as the US and its allies) increasingly resort to what they like to call 'hearts and minds' whereby you have the contradictory scenario of soldiers doing aid work (normally conditional on locals cooperating with military objectives rather than based on urgent humanitarian needs). And then you have the massive increase in private military contractors - as many as 100'000 working directly in Iraq alone - basically guys in tee shirts and jeans (just like aid workers) but part of the occupying power and walking around heavily armed (unlike aid workers - but can armed opposition groups or the public tell the difference?).


Neutral, independent, humanitarian action must be maintained if we are to retain a smidgeon of security, international law, human decency, conversation and understanding between the richly diverse and distinct peoples of our confused, imbalanced world. In the jargon of the aid business, the humanitarian space is shrinking fast. We have surely come too far, learned too much from the 'colonial' type mistakes of aid in the past, to resort to a regressive 'aid through the barrel of a gun' - or am I completely naive?

Meanwhile, spare a thought for Laurent and Gauthière and the good people of Sudan and Chad who are helping to secure their release.

/PC

Keeping an eye on South Sudan

Over the last 12 months or so violence in South Sudan has steadily increased. Rumours are rife that militias are being armed in the south to create fear and tensions in the run up to one of the most anticipated referendums in world politics scheduled for 2011 – to determine whether South Sudan secedes from Khartoum and opts for independence as stipulated in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) signed in 2005. One thing is certain - the road to the CPA referendum vote will be bumpy if not potentially lethal.

There are many fractious areas where tensions can be easily stoked. Places like Malakal, Abyei, Kordofan and the Nuba Mountains. In Malakal, a beautiful town by the banks of the Upper Nile that lies along the north-south divide, more than 100 people were reported killed in clashes last month. This brings a total of more than 2000 people killed in Southern Sudan already this year. Arguably as explosive as the still unresolved Darfur conflict.

Nubian Wrestling

The Nuba Mountains, a former frontline region in Sudan’s north-south civil war is set to remain tense, years after the 2005 north-south peace agreement, local leaders and analysts say. It is an area famed for its rhythms, art, wrestling and, it has to be said, incredibly beautiful looking people.

Comprising some 48,000sqkm of green uplands and farmland, the area is part of northern Sudan’s Southern Kordofan State, but remains politically dominated by the southern-led Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM).

Tensions and mistrust have remained high between Sudan’s north and south - major political, ideological and religious differences are unresolved – not least in the Nuba region.

"Security is a big problem, with violations and hostility between two parties - the SPLM and the NCP [National Congress Party], and a lot of conflict between tribes," said Kamal al-Nur, commissioner of SPLM-controlled Heiban County in Southern Kordofan.

"We are concerned that violence will escalate as we come closer to the elections - and in the period after the elections - to the referendum," al-Nur added. General elections in Sudan are slated for April 2010, before a southern independence referendum in 2011.

During the war, the Nuba population suffered aerial bombardment, isolation, shortages, land expropriation and forced population movements, according to international human rights groups.

The area is characterized by a mix of ethnic groups and coexistence between Muslim, Christian and traditional believers.

"We fought for long years… for equality, for the right to live as we want and not under the [Islamic] Sharia law of the north," said Younan Albaround, the SPLM chairman in Kauda, the party’s former headquarters for Nuba during the war.

“Popular consultation” 

Unlike Southern Sudan and the oil-rich region of Abyei which are due to vote on independence and self-determination in 2011, the 2005 peace deal only set out arrangements for interim power sharing and ”popular consultation” in Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile states.

Abyei, Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile are sometimes referred to as Sudan’s “three areas” – transitional and contested-zones straddling the north-south political, military and cultural fault lines. 

"Whilst the South and Abyei have clearly defined rights to an independence referendum - guaranteed by the presence of the SPLA and thus with the option of unilateral secession should the peace deal fail to be fully implemented - the two `contested areas’ are only given the ill-defined concept of `popular consultation’ on their future status," said Peter Moszynski, a Sudan analyst who began working in the Nuba region in 1981.

The SPLA’s ranks in the Nuba Mountains were largely filled by local people, but those forces have officially pulled out of the region under terms set down by the peace agreement, with only special joint north-south units remaining.

Tensions have also risen following recent comments by senior Southern Sudanese officials in favour of separation, including a speech by the Southern president, Salva Kiir, that voting for unity would make southerners "second class" citizens.

"The Nuba people fear the breakaway of the south because they will be left as an isolated minority in the north - and will also be on the frontline of any future north-south conflict," Moszynski said.

"There are huge concerns that the Nuba Mountains could return to fighting," said Sudan analyst, John Ashworth. "They have no referendums - but many ordinary people are not aware of that yet and will be angry when it finally dawns on them. The `popular consultation’ is vague and probably meaningless."

Sentiments flagged already in October 2008 by International Crisis Group (ICG) in a report on Southern Kordofan entitled The Next Darfur? "If the NCP, SPLM and international community fail to pay the required attention to the divided region," the ICG warned, "their inaction could come back to haunt them in a way that threatens the stability of the already divided country." 

HDEO has a long and personal relationship with Sudan. "Big Country with Big Problems" as my Sudanese mentor (a Nubian Arab as it happens) told me in 2005 as the CPA was signed and Darfur was in flames. I could tell him after a few years experience that "Sudan also has a Big Heart." How else can Africa's largest nation continually overcome so much adversity? HDEO aims to post frequently as this amazing country approaches the momentous referendum in 2011.

/PC

This post is based on an IRIN report.

Aid workers now sixty days as hostages in Darfur

It is now some sixty days since Dubliner Sharon Commins and her Ugandan colleague Hilda Kuwuki were seized by gunmen from their base in the town of Kutum, North Darfur, Sudan. Kidnapping of aid workers is an upward trend in Darfur and the case of Sharon and Hilda is the longest saga to date. HDEO hopes for the best.

North Darfur is a place I know well. A beautiful landscape, washed by the Sahara's sands and laced with the dry riverbeds of its numerous wadis. Its capital is called Al Fashir, my favourite town in Darfur, and it is home to wonderful settlements like Kabkibiye and Kutum.

During my time in Sudan one of the relief actions we carried out from Kutum - which lies smack in the middle of a major north-south migration route - was the mildly ambitious program to vaccinate (and provide assorted veterinary services) to about one million camels belonging to the region's nomadic Arabs - a group which has been largely neglected by the myriad aid groups corralled in the urban areas of Darfur.

Darfur is an immense region with forbidding terrain and no real road network. It is about the size of Spain and north Darfur itself is about the size of Italy. And this is where, in Kutum almost sixty days ago, Irish aid worker Sharon Commins (pictured above) and her Ugandan colleague Hilda Kuwuki, were seized and taken hostage without warning. Both are working with Goal, a well-respected Irish humanitarian organization.

Hostage taking in Darfur is a more or less recent development. During my time (from 2004 to 2006) it started with the odd attack on aid convoys (interestingly, they were normally the ones who had chosen to use armed escorts - go figure), progressed onto the car jacking of the ubiquitous land cruisers, and from time to time involved planned or opportunistic robbery of aid workers driving off-road or resting at home.

Today, while the intensity of violence has somewhat dissipated (though bubbling upward in the oil rich central province of Kordufan and re-appearing in the politically complex South Sudan) disenchanted factions appear to have elevated their activities to the more lucrative business of hostage taking.

There were already two such events in recent months involving foreign aid workers (both resolved quiet quickly with money reportedly changing hands) and only yesterday two staff from the UN and African Union peacekeeping mission in Darfur (UNAMID) were abducted in the early hours of the morning as they slept in their compound in Zalengei town.

While we are being told by the Sudanese authorities that money is the soul motivation for the rise in hostage taking we can assume there are also political agendas or related disgruntlements attached. The UNAMID kidnappings for instance are seemingly related to a statement delivered by the force commander at his farewell ceremony where he all but declared the war over and Darfur at peace. For rebels with a cause this is not very clever and what better way to prove the commander wrong than by kidnapping some of his staff.

The abduction of Sharon and Hilda also indicates a 'progression' of sorts in that theirs is the longest period that hostages have been kept, more or less incommunicado, in Darfur. This in itself is worrying. Under normal circumstances sixty days is a long time to spend in Kutum but it is a lifetime to spend in captivity there, where we can assume conditions of detention are basic at best.

It is reported in Sudanese media that tribal leaders are now actively involved to negotiate the girls' release - this is a welcome signal and lets hope that their safe return is imminent in the holy month of Ramadan.

However, if the Sudanese officials are genuinely using this case to demonstrate their unwillingness to pay ransoms then it could drag out for a long time with all the risk and unpredictability that such a scenario brings. It may also harden the resolve of Sharon and Hilda's captors who will be keen to demonstrate that Khartoum holds no sway in North Darfur.

In the meantime, wherever Sharon and Hilda are in Darfur tonight, we hope they have the strength and courage to see this ordeal through to the end. We also hope that the renowned Sudanese hospitality is being extended to them. And, knowing a bit the wonderful people of Sudan, I am sure they will concur with these sentiments.

/PC


Some more photos from Sudan here.

A Challenge to Aidocrats

War Child turned Peace builder: Is Emmanuel Jal the type of Leader that the 21st century needs to look to if it is to genuinely have an impact on the multiple conflicts and disasters that, despite all the great minds and millions, continue to multiply in frequency and intensity? HDEO thinks there is a good case to bring Emmanuel (and his fellow-travellers) to the table.

Jal's hypnotic voice rises from hellish origins as a beacon of hope for those caught in seemingly endless cycles of war and despair. Jal and his ilk are arguably the real spokespeople and potential architects for development and conflict solutions.

In keeping with yesterday's post, HDEO reckons it is such knowledgeable voices - so undeniably anchored in personal experience and hard fisted reality - that can provide the real key to overcoming the monumental challenges posed by today's conflicts and disasters. The very same solutions that have eluded well-heeled, well-paid global (so-called) experts. Experts (so-called) who, more often than not, will always lean towards real politik rather than humanitarian reality.

It is time to listen to the people who have the answers. And these people are not necessarily in London, Luxemburg or Langersville. They are often in Juba, Jericho and Jalalabad. Are we ready to listen? Can we hear? Do the yearly billions spend on aid even have the right mechanisms in place which allows us to listen, learn and act? And consider such voices as worthy counterparts? And....?

For five years, young Emmanuel Jal fought as a child soldier in the Sudan. Rescued by an aid worker, he's become an international hip-hop star and an activist for kids in war zones. In words and lyrics, he tells the story of his amazing life.

Hip-hop star Emmanuel Jal first exploded into dance halls with Gua in 2005. His music has energized music lovers of all ethnicities and nations. But Jal's life story is far darker. Swept up into the Sudanese rebel army at age seven, he finally escaped with 400 fellow soldiers, 16 of whom survived, the rest succumbing to starvation, ambush and animal attacks. Rather than resort to cannibalism, Jal ate snails and vultures until he arrived at a refugee camp, where he was adopted by aid worker Emma McCune and later sent to England. Jal found an outlet for his turbulent life story in music. His lyrics tell moving and disturbing stories, but wrap them into hope and love. He is active in charity work across Africa, fighting against poverty and child warfare. War Child, his biography, was released in early 2009 along with a documentary film.

For those interested, some other articles of interest in Rolling Stone and the Guardian or, an account of an unusual day in South Sudan that I had the privilge of spending back in May 2005.

/PC

Minority Plights

Countries on the front line in the "war on terror" are using the battle against extremists as a smokescreen to crack down on minority groups, according to an international human rights group. While this may come as little surprise to some seasoned observers it is rare enough to find a report that methodically documents the evidence and puts a convincing case forward.

For the fourth straight year, Somalia, Iraq, Sudan and Afghanistan topped an annual index compiled by Minority Rights Group International (MRG) of countries where minorities are most at risk of genocide, mass killings or violent repression.

"You see governments who have faced a genuine threat, but the point is the actions they have taken against the wider civilian population, including minority civilians, has been justified as part of the 'war on terror,'" according to MRG director Mark Lattimer.

"It has included disappearances, torture and extrajudicial executions." A two-year insurgency in Somalia led by al Shabaab militants, who have links to al Qaeda and include foreign Islamists among their ranks, has killed some 18,000 civilians.

The insurgency has put historically oppressed minority groups such as the Bantu, Gabooye and Yibir at particular risk, the chairman of Somali Minority Rights and Aid Forum, Mohamed Hassan Daryeel, said.

"If the Yibir go with the government, they will be attacked by the radical Islamists. At the same time, if they go with the Islamists, they will be considered terrorists, and if they are neutral they'll be targeted by all sides."

Daryeel said recent amputations carried out by al Shabaab fighters were performed on child soldiers forcibly recruited from minority groups. "They are at the bottom of society, the most disadvantaged," he said.

Despite a decline in violence in Iraq, the report said civilian deaths from violence were still estimated at 300-800 a month over the past year. It said minorities continued to bear the brunt of the violence, especially in the Nineveh area, home to the Shabak people.

"The Shabak community has suffered a lot at the hands of the terrorist groups and at the hands of the Kurdish 'Assayish' (secret police)," says head of Iraq's Minorities Council, Hunain Al-Qaddo. He said around 10,000 Shabak families had fled parts of Mosul to their homeland in the Nineveh plains for fear of being killed because of their ethnicity.

The rest of the top 10 list was comprised of Myanmar in fifth place, followed by Pakistan, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Nigeria and Israel/Palestinian territories.

Pakistan rose on the list due to an escalating conflict against different Islamist groups, combined with growing violence in national politics and suppression of dissidents.

Ethiopia, Eritrea and Yemen were assessed as under greater danger than a year ago with their governments' involvement in regional conflicts compounding the risk of repression at home.

African states make up half the report's top 20 list.

Source: Alertnet

Go here to access the full report: Peoples Under Threat 2009

/PC