Executive summary

This report, produced by 5 international agencies with long experience of working with war-affected communities in Sudan, calls upon all concerned governments, agencies and warring parties to work in concert to bring about a just and sustainable peace in Sudan. The war has exacted a terrible human cost and it must end. Now. The report exposes the human costs of Sudan’s conflict and makes the case that ending the conflict will require coherent and coordinated efforts by the international community working in concert with Sudanese peace interests. Most Sudanese people are tired of the war and disappointed by the lack of progress in the current peace process. Ending the war and achieving a durable peace is the only way to break the cycle of humanitarian crises and human rights abuses and allow the people of Sudan to move toward sustainable development and the realization of their country's potential.

Meanwhile, a new commitment to peace is emerging as both sides in the conflict begin to implement the confidence-building measures proposed by the US government’s peace envoy Senator John Danforth. Other governments are joining with humanitarian agencies and with communities across Sudan to show renewed interest in a just and sustained peace: the UK has appointed a peace envoy; Norway has contributed monitors for the cease-fire in the Nuba Mountains that Switzerland helped to broker; and Kenya has appointed a special envoy to support regional peace efforts. Sudanese people are also finding new ways to build bridges between communities and have engaged in local reconciliation efforts that are bringing real dividends.

However, despite this progress, the humanitarian crisis affecting Sudan remains intolerable. The protracted civil war between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) is tearing apart families and destroying the social fabric and economic life of Sudanese communities. Over the last 18 years, conflict has increased people’s vulnerability to famine, eroded their already fragile coping strategies and destroyed vital assets and livelihoods. Fighting has now claimed more than two million lives, has caused the largest displacement of people in Africa and is responsible for the erosion of health, education and other vital services. People’s lives have been shattered by violence and the levels of destruction are difficult to comprehend, even when seen first hand.

All sides to the conflict are guilty of widespread human rights abuses including assault, rape, abduction and forcible displacement. Warring parties have targeted civilians and uncontrolled militia groups wreak destruction on property and livelihoods, exacting a terrible human toll. The activities of unaccountable paramilitaries appear to continue unabated. Militias attack, rape and abduct civilians creating fear, distress and increased displacement. Large areas of southern Sudan, especially Bar al-Ghazal, have been devastated by militia activity.

As the conflict continues men and boys become soldiers or join militias (sometimes voluntarily, sometimes forcibly); and economic opportunities diminish, especially for poor populations. The consequences are stark, particularly in southern Sudan. There, school enrolment is intolerably low – a generation of children has already been deprived of education – and there are almost no career opportunities outside the military. Throughout Sudan, health facilities are inadequate for the needs of the poor; and while reliable figures are unavailable, under-five and infant mortality rates are unacceptably high: most children succumb to preventable disease.

The extraction of oil is fuelling war and allowing increased military expenditure to occur. Conflict in the oil fields is escalating as warring parties reposition and shift allegiances. The recent attack in the remote town of Bieh, which killed at least 24 people, was a tragic reminder that civilians are paying the cost of oil extraction.

The four million internally displaced persons as well as refugees in neighbouring countries have fled the war, famine and, more recently, conflict in the oilfields. The displaced people are largely poor and landless. They often lack access to basic services, including clean water, health and education.

Sudan is a country with a variety of natural resources and vast economic potential. However, partly because the benefits of those resources are inequitably shared, major economic opportunities are being lost and the conflict becomes ever more intractable. The revenues resulting from resource exploitation are diverted from vital services and infrastructure and reportedly redirected towards military spending.

The peace process for Sudan has also failed ordinary and poor Sudanese. The process, under the auspices of the Inter-Governmental Authority for Development (IGAD), has been characterised by eight years of ineffectual negotiations that neither side appears to have taken seriously. The Declaration of Principles (DOP) provides a legitimate framework for negotiations and addresses key issues as the right to self-determination and the separation of religion and state. The premise of the DOP is unity, with the right to a referendum if agreement is not reached.

The lack of progress with IGAD has led to other proposals being put forward. The most recent from Libya and Egypt, proposes the formation of a transitional government charged with adopting constitutional reforms and organising genuine elections. The proposal makes no reference to the referendum on self-determination that forms part of IGAD’s negotiating platform, and this makes it unacceptable to the SPLM/A.

The longevity of the war, as well as the multiple interests of regional and international governments have implications for peace in Sudan. States have provided support for warring parties at various times and have shown insufficient commitment to working towards a just and comprehensive solution. Among donors and international leaders there has been confusion, contrary policies and lack of continuity.

The benefits of peace

A peaceful Sudan could attract considerable revenue through foreign direct investment and trade, peace could allow the redirecting of spending to poverty eradication and to the vital sectors of health and education which could in turn bring benefits to communities and to the environment. The reestablishment of international development relationships could bring relief to poor rural communities and bring Sudan back into the international community. The exploitation of oil generates huge revenue, yet if it could be extracted under more peaceful circumstances, oil companies would have lower overheads and the government could negotiate a higher share of the profits. Whilst the potential benefits of oil are often over-stated, it is clear that wealth-sharing arrangements could play a part in increasing trust, improving services and contributing to the well being of poor Sudanese.

If a just and durable peace were firmly established, then resettlement could be a real opportunity for displaced people and refugees. Markets and trade routes could be re-established and if markets were functioning effectively then food security could also be improved. There would be "peace savings" too. The annual cost of food aid for displaced people in South Darfur in 1998 and 1999 averaged nearly $1.5 million. Since 1983, $2 billion have been spent on relief and rehabilitation through Operation Life Line (OLS) Sudan alone. Sudan will still need investment and sustained development assistance, but in the context of peace, advances could be more durable and be used to strengthen trust and confidence among and between communities.

Although the human costs of conflict are the central concern of the humanitarian agencies who have authored this report, the need to advocate for a permanent end to Sudan’s suffering is a commitment which is shared with equal conviction. Ending the conflict will require coherent and coordinated efforts by the international community working in concert with Sudanese peace interests. Durable peace can only emerge from the collaborative efforts of Sudanese people and the international community. Yet, this will in the first instance, require a genuine commitment among the international community to establish convergent approaches to peace in Sudan. It is this convergence of efforts and strategies that is currently lacking.

The following recommendations which emerge from research as well as the long experience of the contributing agencies, attempt to demonstrate how the various opportunities for peace and development that exist at community, national and international level, can be exploited. In short, this report attempts to show how the human and economic potential of Sudan could be unlocked if peace were to become a reality.

Recommendations

1. Support for peace

The warring parties, having shown good faith in agreeing to the confidence-building measures proposed by Senator Danforth under the auspices of the US government, should now work towards the full implementation of all the Danforth proposals. Furthermore, both sides should renew their commitment to the Declaration of Principles and agree to and publicise a timetable of continuous dialogue in support of a just and peaceful settlement to the conflict.

Concerned governments, international leaders and agencies need to ensure that the confidence-building measures proposed by Senator Danforth are both fully implemented and reinforced with sustained political action at the highest levels using a combination of pressures and incentives.

Interim steps which reduce the potential for violence and which address humanitarian concerns are vital, but they cannot be a substitute for political resolution.

Peace envoys, concerned governments and agencies need to demonstrate their commitment to more convergent and coherent policies Sustained co-ordinated efforts are needed to bring about a just and long-lasting peace.

To this end joint missions, such as those undertaken by the UK and France to Nigeria and DRC are encouraged as are common statements following diplomatic or thematic missions (human rights, IDP etc). Unified positions and strategies should be articulated.

Decision-makers need to continuously and in good faith, consult with civil society and support community reconciliation efforts.

Collaborative efforts, which bring together Sudanese peace interests and the international community are urgently needed. Support to inter-tribal conferences and meetings, which identify alternatives to violence and help re-establish inter-communal trust, are vital. The international community can help sustain progress by providing resources to support the implementation of recommendations emerging from such meetings.

2. Humanitarian access, rights and protection

All warring parties need to respect the needs and priorities of displaced, refugee and other conflict-affected groups.

The warring parties, international governments, NGOs and the UN need to ensure that there is unrestricted access to vulnerable and war-affected communities, regardless of their location in accordance with the provisions of International Humanitarian Law.

The ceasefire in the Nuba Mountains needs to be monitored and the free movement of civilians and access to humanitarian assistance guaranteed. The warring parties in cooperation with the international community must work towards maintaining and extending the ceasefire in the context of an overall peace process.

The human rights abuses being perpetrated in the oil fields needs to end now. The minimum conditions to achieve positive change are the cessation of civilian attacks and the termination of inequitable and non-transparent use of oil revenues.

Concerned government as well as other international and regional actors should insist that an independent monitoring presence is established and that parties to the conflict agree to a more equitable sharing of wealth and resources.

Oil companies must undertake to cooperate with independent assessments, ensure that security forces protecting oil installation adhere to the voluntary principles of security and human rights, and consider carefully the direct and indirect effects of their operations on the safety and rights of local people and to consider all possible options to ensure that their operations cause no further harm to local communities.

Protection of civilians must be guaranteed. The recent agreement to Senator Danforth’s fourth point needs to be operationalised as soon as possible and monitors need to be in place as soon as modalities are agreed.

All concerned parties, local and international, should consistently and unequivocally condemn attacks against innocent civilians and humanitarian facilities. The international community must be unified about speaking out against abuses committed by all sides in the conflict, and be ready to speak out and act immediately if abuses occur.

Co-ordinated efforts by agencies and NGOs are needed to ensure that the rights and protection of IDPs are guaranteed.

In particular to ensure a co-ordinated multi-agency contribution to a national policy workshop planned for 2002. IDPs right to integration, resettlement or return should be respected and to this end, donors and NGOs are encouraged to work with the government in exploring land tenure, provision of health and education.

It is necessary to develop long term solutions for women and children whose families have been fragmented by conflict and who have as a consequence lost vital assets. Family reunification programmes will be necessary both for IDPs who have become dislocated from their communities and for abductees in particular.

INGOs, donor agencies and the UN need to ensure full access to IDP camps and settlements in order to provide humanitarian assistance and to monitor the human rights and humanitarian situation on the ground. Regular meetings with the government could provide a forum for sharing information and for developing rights-focused approaches.

Concerned governments, agencies and NGOs should support the implementation of the findings and recommendations of the Commission on Abductions.

The Commission is urged to apply pressure on the Government and SPLM to agree locations and modalities of return for abductees. Both parties- working in cooperation with others- are encouraged to explore the possibilities of linking the return of abductees to the ‘periods of tranquility’. Using days of tranquility for return of abductees is a concrete way of demonstrating impact and for building trust and confidence between communities.

3. Long-term development and investment in people

Building peace requires long-term investment now, in people, to enable them to challenge the status quo.

The provision of health and education, support of representative governance structures, and the creation of equitable economic systems and an independent judicial framework are essential elements.

Many donors have hitherto been reluctant to provide longer-term assistance to communities throughout Sudan and they are now urged to reverse policies that deny sustained assistance. Long-term support must not undermine local structures or self-reliance where this exists: the Nuba Mountains being a case in point. Support to health provision and education are priorities.

Furthermore, donors are encouraged to ensure more "joined-up" cross-government approaches to relief, rehabilitation and development based on a comprehensive analysis of the central issues facing Sudan.

Better understanding of the local political context could allow donors and NGOs to develop more appropriate tools and strategies for addressing local humanitarian need, establishing more sustained programmes and simultaneously expanding the space for confidence building and conflict transformation.