Why traditional approaches to protecting civilians in Sudan aren't working

Establishing military peacekeeping missions has always been a fraught process, triggering discussions on sovereignty. But the Sudanese people need our help now before it's too late.

Sudanese refugees who fled violence in the Darfur region arrived on the backs of their donkeys in search of a place for temporary settlement, near the border between Sudan and Chad.
AFP
Sudanese refugees who fled violence in the Darfur region arrived on the backs of their donkeys in search of a place for temporary settlement, near the border between Sudan and Chad.

Why traditional approaches to protecting civilians in Sudan aren't working

The visit of two senior directors from the World Health Organisation (WHO) to Sudan on 8 September has highlighted what seasoned observers have known for months: the situation is dire. Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and Regional Director for the Eastern Mediterranean, Dr Hanan Balkhi, were appraised of the issues in a country where ten million people have been displaced and a man-made famine has begun.

Until just recently, the conversation on Sudan had been dominated by the political complexities, but fighting has now intensified after US-led ceasefire negotiations in Geneva in August were aborted when one of the two warring parties failed to attend.

The threat of disease

The WHO visit comes at a particularly crucial time, after flooding hit various parts of Sudan, exacerbating the situation for civilians with the spread of several epidemic diseases across most of Africa’s third-largest state. Not least among these diseases is cholera. The Sudanese Ministry of Health has now reported 8,350 confirmed cases. The WHO announced an outbreak back in May, with over 11,300 cases and at least 300 deaths.

Little is known about the situation in areas of active conflict, especially in the capital, Khartoum, Al Jazeera, and the states of the Darfur region. The crisis is not limited to cholera—there have also been widespread outbreaks of malaria, measles, and dengue fever—but with a healthcare sector that has been hit hard by the war, civilians often cannot get treatment.

Getty
Ishag Abdullah Khatir, 30, from Geneina in West Sudan, whose leg was amputated after RSF soldiers shot him, poses for a portrait on April 20, 2024, in Adre, Chad.

From the very beginning, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) militia has deliberately targeted the country's healthcare infrastructure, including the destruction of warehouses containing medicines and vaccines. Even maternity, women's, and children's hospitals have been repeatedly bombed by the RSF, along with other healthcare facilities. Around three-quarters of these establishments have now ceased to function.

Compounding the problem

Just as the Sudanese people felt it could not get any worse, the flooding brought extra misery and devastation. The heroic resilience of Sudanese doctors and healthcare workers stands as a beacon of hope, representing the endurance of the Sudanese people to confront disasters with courage, bravery, and dedication. Caught on video, Dr Mudathir Ahmed Yahya, the medical director of Tokar Hospital, even swam through floodwaters that had cut off access to the hospital in order to reach his patients and resume his work.

The WHO visit earlier this month coincided with the release of a report by the UN Independent Fact-Finding Mission on Sudan, established by the United Nations Human Rights Council. It documented widespread violations and horrific crimes committed by both the RSF and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF). RSF crimes included the targeting of civilians and aid workers, rape and sexual violence, arbitrary arrests, torture, mistreatment, ethnic targeting, and numerous acts that amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity, including mass killings, enslavement, and forced displacement.

The report concluded that civilians in Sudan face acute, unprecedented, and continuous threats and recommended the creation of an independent force to protect civilians and ensure safe access to humanitarian aid.

This reflects a traditional method the international community uses to protect civilians during wartime: deploying peacekeeping or peacemaking missions with military forces on the ground. Such missions are typically established on the back of a UN Security Council (UNSC) decision.

UNSC Resolution 2736 (from June 2024) sought practical recommendations for protecting civilians in Sudan. These recommendations are still pending.

Problematic missions

The UNSC's five permanent members include Russia. Since 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine (which three of the other four permanent members support), the Council has been in a state of polarisation and paralysis, with both 'sides' using their veto to block the resolutions of the other.

Establishing military peacekeeping missions has always been a fraught process, triggering complex discussions on sovereignty, the need for consent from the de facto authorities, and cultural sensitivities. Discussions can be lengthy, causing delays which cost lives. They can also detract from the main objective of finding a practical model for civilian protection in Sudan.

At present, there is a lack of trust between the Sudanese government and the United Nations, especially after the former forced the termination of the UN mission following protracted negotiations over status agreements and force arrangements. Many question the practical effectiveness and success of such missions aimed at protecting civilians in complex conflicts with deep-rooted social divisions. Clashes between mission forces and armed parties can lead to accusations of political bias.

This would further complicate the political landscape in Sudan, where protecting civilians is an urgent priority that requires immediate and actionable measures. In time, this may gradually evolve into a more comprehensive civilian protection model.

UNSC Resolution 2736 (from June 2024) directed the UN Secretary-General to consult Sudanese authorities and regional actors to provide practical recommendations for protecting civilians in Sudan. These recommendations are still pending.

There is an urgent need to redefine 'civilian protection' beyond mere physical and military protection. This redefinition needs to include the provision of essential services such as healthcare, water, education, and communications. Integrating essential services into civilian protection would help alleviate the effects of war and make such missions more politically acceptable. It can also create a more sustainable model that prioritises the lives, dignity, and safety of people.

Establishing military peacekeeping missions has always been a fraught process, triggering discussions on sovereignty and the need for consent

The international community should see Sudan as an opportunity to develop new approaches for addressing the limitations faced by traditional peacekeeping forces and to establish safe "green zones" as havens for civilians. These should be identified not through negotiations between the warring parties but using criteria such as the capacity to shelter civilians, the infrastructure to provide social services, and the ability to support economic and agricultural activities. Ideally, these zones should be in strategic areas that facilitate the flow of aid, such as a 5km radius around El-Obeid Airport that includes the market and key residential areas.

Building civilian havens

Establishing these zones requires planning and coordination involving local communities, humanitarian organisations, and international partners. Likewise, protecting them requires a joint monitoring mechanism involving both warring parties, plus a third regional or international entity, with satellite technology used as an early warning system (EWS) to detect threats.

Satellite surveillance covers large areas, operates continuously, and provides objective data that can be used to verify compliance with agreements or uncover violations, while an EWS could involve ground-based observers from local communities. Technical assistance would be needed within the green zones, so any mission should include experts in fields such as healthcare, education, water, sanitation, energy, and infrastructure, along with a policing component for law enforcement.

The risks civilians face in Sudan are acute and cannot be ignored, so the paralysis of the UN's highest body presents a significant obstacle to comprehensive solutions and decisive interventions. However, this should not lead to inaction. If a solution cannot be fully achieved, the pursuit of it should not be entirely abandoned. The provision of imperfect relief to civilian populations is an initial step that can gradually evolve into more comprehensive systems and interventions.

Civilian protection is not optional—it is a moral and legal priority. International humanitarian law mandates the protection of civilians in conflict zones. If the world fails to act on this responsibility, it is in neglect of that duty.

font change

Related Articles