HUMANITARIAN AID ACCESS WITHIN
DARFUR
“It is strange to see that there is still the notion in the world that nothing is happening and we’re completely blocked from
accessing Darfur. We are reaching some 800,000 people at the moment with some sort of assistance and food.”
Jan Egeland, UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, July 2004 [1]
“Most of the underserved areas remain rebel-held, many of which have
not been accessible to UN agencies because of a series of security
incidents and a delay in obtaining SLA agreement and understanding of
humanitarian rules and principles laid out in agreements.”
United Nations Report, December 2004 [2]
There has been considerable sensationalism with regard to humanitarian
aid access to Darfur. There have been attempts to claim that the
government has been systematically denying humanitarian access to
Darfur and Darfur’s war-affected communities. The reality is that
ensuring humanitarian access to the war-affected communities while a
political solution is sought is the single most important task facing
both the Sudanese government and the international community. At the
same time it is clear that a continuing humanitarian crisis, especially
one in which aid workers cannot gain access to war-affected
communities, is in the best interests of the rebel movements. It is now
equally obvious that the rebel movement have not only been seeking to
deny humanitarian access to governmentcontrolled areas by attacks on
aid workers – attacks which in turn result in aid agencies suspending
activities in parts of Darfur – and by attacks on humanitarian aid
convoys: they have also denying the international community access to
rebel-controlled areas, thereby severely affected the very people they
claim to protect. All of this in an attempt to further ratchet up
international pressure on the Sudanese government.
Any
study of the Darfur crisis must examine the aid issue in some depth.
Humanitarian access to displaced communities in Darfur is essential in
addressing the crisis. The international community must be aware of the
extent to which emergency relief and food aid in such circumstances can
and has been manipulated.
The Government of Sudan would appear to have acted responsibly with
regard to humanitarian access to Darfur. The facts speak for
themselves. In September 2003, the Government of Sudan and the SLA
signed an agreement allowing “free and unimpeded” humanitarian access
within Darfur. [3]
In less than 12 months the Sudanese government had agreed and
facilitated an increase in aid workers present in Darfur, from two
foreigners and a few dozen nationals in September 2003, to just under
6,000 aid workers – over 700 of them expatriates – by August 2004. [4]
By the end of 2004, there were 8,500 aid workers in Darfur. The signing
of the April 2004 ceasefire made it safer and thus much consequently
easier for aid agencies to operate in Darfur. The UN 2004 end of year
humanitarian action report stated that “much credit has to be given to
the [government] Humanitarian Affairs Ministry whose officials worked
tirelessly to enforce the provision of the Joint Communique of 3 July
[guaranteeing access].” [5]
On
6 July 2004, the government issued 15 decrees which included measures
to enhance security in Darfur; the establishment of police stations in
displaced people camps; to facilitate the ceasefire commission and
African Union monitoring force; to streamline the granting of visas for
aid workers in Darfur; the exemption of all humanitarian aid imports
from any restrictions, customs tariffs or personal fees; the repeal of
measures regarding specifications on the humanitarian aid imports into
Darfur; to facilitate freedom of movement for those working in the
humanitarian aid organizations in Darfur; to facilitate the flow of
humanitarian aid to displaced people in Darfur; to exempt humanitarian
aid from the health and medical regulations in Darfur; the exemption of
agricultural inputs, fodders, and seeds in Darfur from any
restrictions, customs tariffs or personal fees; exemption from import
restrictions of humanitarian aid imports into Darfur; to activate the
measures regarding the governments of the Darfur states to guarantee
the flow of humanitarian aid and humanitarian aid imports into Darfur
and to encourage the return of the displaced to their villages; and to
facilitate the work of the fact-finding commission in regard to the
allegations of human rights violations committed by armed groups in
Darfur. As of October 2004, there were 155 locations assisting with internally displaced people in the three Darfur states,
and the World Food Programme is present in 136 of these centres. [6] There are now dozens of international and
national non-governmental organisations working in Darfur. [7] Speaking in June 2004, the outgoing UN Humanitarian
Coordinator for Sudan, Mr Kevin Kennedy, confirmed that visas were generally being granted within 48 hours – as
promised by the Government of Sudan – and that “people are experiencing very few visa difficulties”. [8]
That there have been propagandistic attempts to claim that the
government was deliberately blocking access to Darfur by aid workers is
apparent. The United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian
Affairs, Mr Jan Egeland, speaking in July 2004, commented on some of
these claims. He said: “It is strange to see that there is still the
notion in the world that nothing is happening and we’re completely
blocked from accessing Darfur. We are reaching some 800,000 people at
the moment with some sort of assistance and food.” [9] By September 2004, the World Food
Programme was feeding some 940,000 conflict-affected people in Darfur. [10] The presence of several thousand aid
workers in Darfur provides clear evidence of the Khartoum government’s commitment to the provision of food and
medical relief to Darfur’s war-affected communities.
The international community must be aware of the extent to which humanitarian issues can be manipulated for
political effect. [11]
For rebels a humanitarian crisis is a no-lose situation. A humanitarian
crisis always reflects badly on the government in the country affected.
And a humanitarian crisis is something which can be created and
deepened. One of the goals of most insurgencies is to internationalise
the conflict to which they are a party. One of the easiest means of
doing so is to provoke a humanitarian crisis. This is precisely what
the Darfur rebels succeeded in doing. Merely starting the war in Darfur
initiated a humanitarian crisis in western Sudan. The escalation of the
conflict and the government’s response to it led to a deepening crisis
and considerable displacement of populations – a feature of most wars.
The rebels, however, have deliberately sought to heighten the
humanitarian crisis they created by starting the war by additionally
seeking to escalate food insecurity knowing full well that this would
be the focus of immediate international attention. As early as July
2003, for example, the UN news service reported on rebel attempts to
disrupt food security in the affected areas: “SLA rebels regularly
attacked and looted villages taking food and sometimes killing
people…The attacks present a real threat to people’s food security and
livelihoods, by preventing them from planting and accessing markets to
buy food.” [12]
The
provision of humanitarian relief such as food aid and medical supplies
has historically also been a bonus to rebel movements. Firstly,
international access impinges upon the national sovereignty of the
country concerned, a net propaganda victory for anti-government forces
as it brings with it international attention. Secondly, international
agencies provide food and emergency supplies which help to sustain
communities within rebel-controlled areas and can often be diverted by
rebel forces. It was widely acknowledged, for example, that vast
amounts of food aid were diverted during the war in southern Sudan. In
July 1998, in one instance, the Roman Catholic Bishop of the
starvation-affected diocese of Rumbek, Monsignor Caesar Mazzolari,
stated that the SPLA were stealing 65 percent of the food aid going
into rebel-held areas of southern Sudan. Agence France Presse also
reported that: “Much of the relief food going to more than a million
famine victims in rebel-held areas of southern Sudan is ending up in
the hands of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), relief workers
said.” [13]
It is also clear that rebel forces in Darfur are also directly
misappropriating food aid and equipment stolen from relief agencies.
This is a point made by humanitarian aid expert, Professor Sarah Kenyon
Lischer. Interviewed in January 2005, she noted that: “Recently, the
World Food Program has had over a dozen of its trucks hijacked. And the
aid that was on those trucks has been stolen. The trucks reportedly
have been repainted and used for military purposes by the rebels. And
so that’s just a very obvious way that aid can be used for war.” [14]
This had happened was confirmed by the United Nations: “The United
Nations said it was also concerned about reports that Darfur-based
rebel forces have stolen 13 commercial all terrain trucks leased to WFP
and loaded with food in the last two weeks. These thefts are in
addition to multiple losses of commercial and aid agency vehicles to
armed groups in recent months, [the UN said]. More alarming are reports
that the rebel group that stole them may now be using some of these
trucks for military purposes, it said.” [15]
The UN Sudan Envoy Jan Pronk stated: “Such misuses of humanitarian assets should cease immediately. All trucks
and other equipment taken by armed groups from humanitarian organizations should be returned without delay so
that relief operations are not hindered further.” [16]
The rebels have, from the earliest days of the insurgency, sought to escalate humanitarian access difficulties by
deliberately targeting aid workers. They murdered nine World Food Programme truck drivers, and wounded 14
others, in an attack on a relief convoy in October 2003. [17]
All this followed a set pattern by rebels in other parts of Sudan,
tactics which have previously succeeded in creating a humanitarian
crisis in southern Sudan. The veteran American journalist Robert Kaplan
noted, for example: “On June 1, 1986, twelve Kenyan truck drivers
bringing food into the south from the Ugandan border town of Nimule
were ambushed…The drivers were bound by ropes to their steering wheels,
and then grenades were lobbed at the trucks. This put a virtual halt to
the World Food Program’s overland relief operation. Only 600 of the
90,000 tons had been delivered.” [18]
In
November 2003 the Government accused rebels in Darfur of killing two of
its relief workers and abducting three others in an attack on an aid
convoy. Humanitarian Aid Commissioner Sulaf Eddin Salih said his
government is worried about the “continued” rebel attacks which he said
“threaten the humanitarian operations and result in losing human lives
and worsening the humanitarian situation”. He appealed to the
international community to intervene to halt and denounce the
“repeated” armed operations on the humanitarian assistance convoys. [19]
Put quite simply, insecurity severely curtails humanitarian aid access. In the words of a UN humanitarian relief
spokesman: “You can’t give aid when there are bullets flying.” [20] In January 2004, for example, UN media sources
reported that “about 85 percent of the 900,000 war-affected people in Darfur…are inaccessible to humanitarian
aid…mainly because of insecurity.” [21]
In December 2003, the UN quoted the Government as saying “The problem
is in areas controlled by the SLM. Our experience has made us hesitant
to send relief to areas under the SLM because of kidnapping and attacks
on trucks.” [22] In October 2003, in the wake of the above-mentioned attacks, the United
States government asked the Sudanese government for help with security and access. [23] One month later, rebel
gunmen killed two other relief workers and abducted three others. [24] Rebels have also kidnapped other relief workers.
In a further example of interference with humanitarian work, JEM gunmen admitted abducting five aid workers
working for the Swiss humanitarian group Medair. [25]
On
11 February 2004, JEM declared its intention to close down every road
within Darfur. It would have been aware of the devastating consequences
this would have on the ability of the government and aid agencies
(national and international) to provide emergency assistance to those
communities suffering in Darfur. This was at precisely the same time,
in February 2004, as the United Nations high commissioner for refugees
warned of a humanitarian catastrophe in Darfur. Médecins Sans
Frontières had also warned that there was not enough food or water in
the desert region. [26]
In
February 2004, the state minister at the Ministry for Humanitarian
Affairs, Mohammed Youssef Moussa, commented on an attack on Save the
Children: “It is true that (the rebels) have started causing damage and
today, in particular, they planted a land mine near the town of Ambro
that went off, wounding a lorry driver and his assistant. The lorry was
carrying medical supplies and belonged to Save the Children Fund-UK. So
if this is what they are talking about, then they are...abandoning all
humanitarian principles.”
[27]
In
early January 2004 the Sudanese government said its troops were trying
to secure deliveries of humanitarian aid to people caught up in the
Darfur conflict. The ministry of humanitarian affairs said a government
delegation had completed a nine-day tour of West and South Darfur
states during which it had examined the obstacles hindering the
delivery of assistance to parts of the region. The ministry stated that
the obstacles included insecurity and instability. The delegation said
the government armed forces “are working to tighten their grip on the
situation” which would ease the delivery of relief supplies to some
areas. The delegation instructed the offices of the Humanitarian Aid
Commission (HAC) in Darfur to speed up distribution of relief supplies.
[28]
On
10 February 2004, the United Nations said that aid access had improved
within Darfur. The UN spokesman for the humanitarian coordinator for
Sudan, Ben Parker, stated: “There are signs and indications that we
will be able to reach more places in the coming weeks and the
government is assuring us that the access situation will improve”. The
government had told aid agencies that it had opened 10 new corridors in
Darfur for relief convoys to move through. [29] The UN Emergency Relief Coordinator, Jan Egeland, described the agreement with the Sudanese
government to provide improved aid access to Darfur as a breakthrough. [30]
As part of the UN-government agreement, on 18 February 2004, the UN
announced that a 13-person UN logistical team arrived in Darfur to
assess humanitarian needs in the area. The team would assess aid
requirements in the cities of Nyala, al-Geneina and al- Fasher as UN
agencies work to deliver and pre-position food, water and medical
supplies for around 250,000 displaced people. [31]
Rebel
attacks on relief convoys continued. A senior UN official in Sudan
stated in February 2004 that rebels have made it too dangerous to take
aid into parts of Darfur. Aid convoys were still being attacked by
armed groups. The spokesman also cited the danger of landmines.” [32]
In March 2004, the Sudanese government held rebels responsible for
blocking deliveries of humanitarian aid in Darfur. Deputy Foreign
Minister al-Tigani Salih Fidhail said: “The armed groups constitute the
main obstacle to the delivery of relief in Darfur.” He called on the
international community to hold the rebels “fully responsible”. [33]
A high-level UN humanitarian assessment mission, under the leadership
of World Food Programme Executive Director James Morris, visited Darfur
in late April 2004. Rebel attacks on aid workers continued. At the same
time the SLA attacked a humanitarian convoy, killing a traditional
leader of the Zaghawa, Abdel Rahman Mohammain, who was leading it. [34] The
International Crisis Group noted continuing rebel obstruction in May
2004: “The SLA issued several statements in the first half of May to
the effect that it will refuse to allow into areas it controls any
humanitarian relief that originates in government-controlled areas -
where most UN and international NGOs are based.” [35]
In
early June 2004, Associated Press reported the abduction by rebels of
16 aid workers. Those kidnapped worked for the International Rescue
Committee, Save the Children UK, the UN Office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), United Nation’s World Food Program,
UNICEF, the Norwegian Refugee Council, ECHO, the Humanitarian Aid
Office of the European Commission, and Sudan’s Humanitarian Aid
Commission. They were stopped while were conducting assessments to
prepare the way for delivery of relief assistance for displaced people
in the vicinity of Al Hilief in North Darfur despite driving vehicles
clearly bearing the UN insignia. [36]
They were eventually released by the rebels. The UN Emergency Relief
Coordinator, Jan Egeland, condemned the detention and delayed release
of the 16 aid workers as “totally unacceptable” and “contradicts solemn
promises” made by the SLA. Egeland said that “Too much time has already
been lost in this race against the clock to save more than a million
lives threatened by indiscriminate violence, starvation and disease.”
The UN stated that “[t]he incident not only threatened the safety and
security of humanitarian workers, but has interrupted and delayed aid
to desperately needy civilians in Darfur.” [37]
On
8 June 2004, Agence France Presse reported that rebels had seized nine
trucks loaded with relief items, medicines and tents on the road
between Nyala and al-Fasher. The rebels abducted four of the drivers
and beat a fifth one. [38]
Later that month, rebels attacked a humanitarian relief convoy in
Darfur, stealing 57 tons of UN food aid. Ibrahim Hamid, the minister of
humanitarian affairs, said: “These types of rebel action are the most
serious threat to the humanitarian and security situation.” [39]
In
the first week of July 2004, the SLA attacked 26 aid workers, working
for Save the Children UK, delivering emergency assistance in northern
Darfur. They also stole six vehicles and a large amount of cash. On 13
July, the British government publicly urged Sudanese rebels to return
the stolen vehicles. [40]
There were a number of systematic rebel attacks on aid workers in
August 2004. The African Union confirmed that, on 22 August, SLA forces
had abducted humanitarian affairs workers on their way to a meeting in
the Abgaragil area, and that on 23 August rebels had abducted medical
aid workers engaged in an inoculation campaign in Kutum. [41]
At the end of August 2004, Darfur rebels abducted six aid workers in
north Darfur. Three were from the World Food Programme and three from
the Sudanese Red Crescent. WFP condemned the targeting of humanitarian
workers. WFP Senior Deputy Executive Director Jean-Jacques Graisse said
that WFP was “delighted that our people, as well as those working for
the Sudanese Red Crescent, have been freed unharmed. This is not,
however, the first time that humanitarian workers have been targeted in
Darfur. At a time when all agencies are battling the rainy season, poor
infrastructure and an unpredictable security environment to deliver
desperately needed humanitarian assistance, this kind of incident can
only further worsen the plight of the needy in Darfur. We call upon all
armed groups in the region to stop targeting those involved in
humanitarian work and allow them to do their duty without fear of
intimidation. Any continuation or escalation of incidents such as the
one just resolved is likely to have far-reaching consequences for the
relief operation.” [42] On 31 August 2004, JEM gunmen detained 22 Sudanese health workers near Nyala in south Darfur. [43]
In late August, the United Nations humanitarian coordinator for Sudan,
Manuel Aranda da Silva, stated that he was encouraged by Sudan’s
actions to improve the humanitarian situation in Darfur. [44]
In October 2004, the Sudanese government’s chief negotiator at Abuja, Dr Magzoub al-Khalifa, warned that the
rebels were seeking to worsen affairs in Darfur: “They need to stimulate all these governments and all these
organizations on their side by making the situation worse on the ground.” [45] October also saw rebel threats to kill aid
workers. [46] A SLA landmine killed two Save the Children Fund workers in Darfur. Two other Save the Children
workers, one British and one Sudanese, were killed in October by a landmine laid by SLA rebels. [47] The United
Nations special envoy to Sudan Jan Pronk unambiguously confirmed rebel involvement in these deaths: “It was the
rebels who are responsible for attacking relief workers and convoys, they are responsible for…landmines which
killed two relief workers.” [48]
That
same month, the United Nations reported that “UN spokesman Fred Eckhard
said in New York that the operations of humanitarian agencies in North
Darfur State have become limited because some roads remain closed to
them. Other areas have become dangerous for transporting aid supplies.
Last Saturday, forces from the rebel Sudan Liberation Army (SLA)
hijacked seven commercial trucks on a road about 120 kilometres east of
the state capital El Fasher.” [49] A spokeswoman for the
UN Advance Mission in Sudan (UNAMIS) stated that “[t]he repeated
ceasefire violations of the past month have had a very serious impact
on the UN’s ability to deliver humanitarian assistance to affected
populations.” [50]
In
mid-November 2004, the United Nations said that nearly 200,000 needy
people, especially in the mountainous Jebel Marra area in central
Darfur and the northern part of North Darfur, had been cut off from
relief aid because of escalating violence. The German press agency
reported: “The U.N. said tension in the region had risen as rebel
groups, in particular the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA), had increased
their operations in an apparent attempt to claim more territory.” The
Humanitarian Coordinator for Sudan, Manuel Aranda da Silva, said an
estimated 150,000 people have been driven from their homes due to the
escalating violence during the past month. The UN also reported several
attacks on buses and aid convoys around Darfur. Travellers had been
abducted and even killed and vehicles looted by the attackers. [51] By the end of November 2004, The New York Times was reporting that the
rebels had been “sharply ratcheting up attacks” which in turn was preventing relief work. [52]
In November 2004 the rebels were accused of attacking a joint WHO/Ministry of Health medical team. One doctor
was killed and four other health workers were injured. The team was also robbed. [53]
In the same month both the Dublin-based GOAL aid agency and the Spanish
branch of Médecins Sans Frontières were forced to withdraw their staff
from the Jebel Marra area in central Darfur after “repeated” rebel acts
of aggression targeting the humanitarian personnel and the relief
supplies intended for people in need. [54] Both MSF and GOAL complained that rebels had
attacked their vehicles. [55]
On 27 November 2004, The New York Times revealed the degree of rebel
obstruction of aid delivery and aid workers: “On the ground, many aid
workers, too fearful of giving their names for fear of jeopardizing
their work, say that rebel officials have made unreasonable demands on
aid groups operating in their territory, at one point insisting on a
certain number of expatriates to accompany Sudanese staff, whom rebels
distrust as potential government spies. Aid workers have also been
detained in rebel territory in recent months.” [56]
Amnesty International noted a similar pattern of rebel activity: “over the past two months, a number of World Food
Program commercial trucks have been attacked in South Darfur.” [57]
It also noted that: “After Sudan Liberation Army forces reportedly
hijacked seven commercial trucks east of al-Fasher on 23 October, the
road between al-Fasher and Um Kedada in North Darfur was closed and has
only just been re-opened. Because of heavy fighting in the area, the
road between al-Fasher and Kutum remains a no-go zone.”
In
early December, The Christian Science Monitor confirmed the results of
rebel action: “[R]ecently they’ve stepped up attacks and have even
looted international aid convoys. The violence adds to the instability
– and to aid groups’ growing inability to help the displaced millions.”
[58]
Two Save the Children aid workers, members of a mobile medical clinic,
were murdered by rebels on 12 December 2004. They were deliberately
shot dead in an attack on an aid convoy. The director of Save the
Children’s international operations said: “We deplore this brutal
killing of humanitarian workers in Darfur.” The charity said its
vehicles were clearly marked as belonging to Save the Children. [59] The African Union and
United Nations confirmed the SLA’s responsibility for the deaths of the
aid workers. In addition to the murdered aid workers, one other worker
was injured and three are missing. African Union officer Nigerian
Major-General Festus Okonkwo stated: “SLA was involved in the attack as
two Land Rovers belonging to Save the Children (UK) were recovered from
[the] SLA camp in Jurof.” [60] Rebel involvement in the
murders was established by the UN. [61] In mid-December the United Nations suspended aid operations in South
Darfur in December in the wake of these murders. [62] The Guardian reported that an aid worker was shot on the same
road in the summer but survived.
The UN Envoy to Sudan, Jan Pronk, said of the rebel attacks and interference with aid deliveries: “They have to stop.
Otherwise they are blocking access to the very people they say they are protecting.” [63]
In December 2004, Sudan’s Minister for Humanitarian Affairs, Mohamed
Yusif Abdallah, made the obvious point that “[w]here the rebels create
insecurity, it is not the government denying access.” [64]
The United Nations Darfur Humanitarian Profile released in December
2004 has stated, for example, that: “Despite prevailing insecurity in
the three Darfur States, 79% of Darfur conflict affected population is
currently accessible to UN humanitarian workers. Most of the
underserved areas remain rebel-held, many of which have not been
accessible to UN agencies because of a series of security incidents and
a delay in obtaining SLA agreement and understanding of humanitarian
rules and principles laid out in agreements.” [65] [emphasis added] The rebels are endangering the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians already
malnourished and badly affected by the conflict in Darfur.
On 22 December 2004, The New York Times has also reported that: “The
chaotic situation in Darfur has hampered the work of agencies trying to
reach the estimated 2.3 million people who rely on aid to survive. Aid
organizations in the region say rebels have been attacking convoys
carrying aid and goods along the road between Nyala and El Fasher,
where two Save the Children UK workers were killed recently.” [66]
Ongoing rebel attacks, particularly that on the market town of Ghubaysh
on 27 December, had disastrous effects on the delivery of food aid to
affected communities. The United Nations noted: “This has a particular
impact on WFP’s provision of life-saving food aid, as it must rely
heavily on road deliveries to support its Darfur humanitarian
operation.” [67]
A World Food Programme spokeswoman said: “The attacks followed a week
of insecurity in Darfur and this has caused difficulties, in terms of
providing assistance. It will delay urgently required food for 260,000
people in South Darfur and the eastern parts of West Darfur.” [68] UNAMIS noted that the rebel attack on Ghubaysh was “the second carried out by the rebels since 19
December, when the Sudanese government agreed to an immediate cessation of hostilities”.
The rebels’ murder of aid workers has had the desired effect – the
intensification of the humanitarian crisis in Darfur with the ultimate
aim of forcing some sort of military intervention. It has gone
hand-in-hand with the SLA’s deliberate breaking of ceasefire agreements
with attacks in northern Darfur. This precipitated the current
humanitarian crisis in Darfur. Associated Press reported that: “The
United Nations has condemned a rebel attack in Darfur province, saying
it violates a cease-fire agreement and jeopardises the lives of tens of
thousands of people who will not receive aid because of the fighting.” [69] The international community has roundly condemned these rebel
actions. [70]
These systematic rebel attacks have placed hundreds of thousands of
war-affected communities in danger of starvation. The Director of Save
the Children UK, Mike Aaronson, stated that: “We are devastated that we
are unable to continue to offer health care, nutritional support, child
protection and education to the approximately 250,000 children and
family members served by our current programs. However, we just cannot
continue to expose our staff to the unacceptable risks they face as
they go about their humanitarian duties in Darfur.” [71]
Erwin
Van Der Borght, deputy director of Amnesty International’s Africa
programme, has also noted the effect of rebel attacks: “Attacks
knowingly and intentionally directed against personnel involved in
humanitarian assistance in armed conflict may constitute war crimes.
Insecurity within Darfur hinders movement to whole districts, so that
food, medicine and other non-food items can not be brought in. This
increases enormously the sufferings of an already vulnerable
population.” Amnesty International noted that “After such attacks, the
district or road is likely to be declared a no-go area for
international humanitarian staff for several days” and pointed out that
it stopped aid reaching “thousands” of displaced people. [72] On 31 December 2004, The Daily Telegraph reported on SLA attacks
in December had “forced the United Nations to suspend supply convoys into Darfur”: “The SLA attacks seemed to
be designed to isolate Darfur. The rebels struck police stations in the town of Ghibaish and al-Majrour in the
neighbouring province of West Kordofan, killing 99 people. The ensuing battle closed Darfur’s main communication
artery.” [73]
In
his January 2005 report on Darfur, the United Nations Secretary-General
reported on what he termed a “new trend” in the pattern of attacks on,
and harassment of, international aid workers: “While previous incidents
have only been aimed at looting supplies and goods, December has seen
acts of murder and vicious assaults on staff, forcing some agencies to
leave Darfur.” [74] Aid access continues to be vital. Rebel intransigence continues to put the very
people for whom they claim to be fighting at grave risk. The international community must act and act decisively.
Footnotes
|
 |
|
