UN Security Council offers tepid response to Sudan crisis
UN Security Council offers tepid response to Sudan crisis
Secretary-General nixes calls for civilian protection force in Sudan
In a somber meeting in New York on Monday, the United Nations Security Council discussed the devastating war in Sudan, which has now lasted for 18 months. While the council members reached consensus on a handful of limited measures and strategies to address the country’s spiraling crisis, the meeting also exposed the UN’s powerlessness and reluctance to take more decisive action.
Ambassador Amar Bendjama, Algeria’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, was outspoken about the UN’s “inability to provide the Sudanese people with the right response on the ground.” He said,
“It is difficult to find the accurate words to describe the appalling situation in Sudan and to express our sentiment of inability to provide the Sudanese people with the right response on the ground while civilians continue to bear shocking patterns of the carnage in Sudan. We therefore strongly condemn the continued violence committed against civilians.”
Bendjama highlighted the appalling suffering of women, girls, and children, saying, “We wish to pay tribute to all the Sudanese women who are showing unprecedented levels of resilience and courage. This must spur us to redouble our efforts to urgently relieve them from the abhorrent suffering they continue to endure.”
The Algerian diplomat emphasized that Security Council Resolution S/RES/2736 (2024), passed in June, was blatantly ignored. The resolution had demanded an end of the siege of El Fasher, de-escalation, and a local ceasefire in that city. Instead, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) attacked the city repeatedly and continued besieging it, despite a declaration of famine by the IPC, an international famine watchdog.
The ambassador said, “Several products were adopted by this same council, and several initiatives have been initiated outside this council to push for a peaceful solution. Unfortunately, they did not have the desired effect on the ground. The renewed clashes in Khartoum and in El Fasher, particularly the attack launched by the RSF against this city, are a blatant example of the disregard demonstrated not only toward this council but also towards the international community.”
“More than 18 months after the conflict began we are yet to see a modicum of willingness from the parties to commit to a ceasefire and engage in a meaningful political process.”
Similarly, Ambassador Samuel Žbogar Representative of the Republic of Slovenia, said, “The ongoing siege of El Fasher by the RSF must cease. Indiscriminate artillery shelling by the RSF must stop. Indiscriminate aerial bombing by the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) must stop. Attacks on civilian critical infrastructure, including shelters for internally displaced persons must end immediately.”
Likewise, France’s Deputy Permanent Representative, Jay Dharmadhikari, said, “As requested by Resolution 2736 adopted in June, it’s imperative to lift the siege of El Fasher and for the fighting to cease in this area.”
Fighting in El Fasher has continued in recent days, though the RSF was forced to withdraw some forces from the city to respond to attacks by SAF-allied forces other parts of Darfur. Some trucks carrying food and medicines recently reached famine-struck parts of North Darfur, though famine or near-famine conditions persist in some areas, including in El Fasher, which remains besieged by the RSF.
Diplomats representing the various council members expressed dismay at the failure of all peace initiatives so far, while calling for redoubling of these efforts and greater coordination among different mediators. Žbogar said, “The warring parties must accept the undeniable truth that there is no military solution for this conflict. We call on both sides to cease all hostilities, return to negotiations, and to do so in good faith.”
“At present the conditions do not exist for the successful deployment of a United Nations force to protect civilians in Sudan.” — António Guterres
UN Secretary-General António Guterres has appointed a special envoy, Ramtane Lamamra, the former foreign minister of Algeria, who has supported ceasefire mediation efforts and humanitarian talks in Geneva led by the United States and Saudi Arabia, as well as a political dialogue process in Addis Ababa led by the African Union.
In remarks to the council, Guterres nixed the idea of a UN protection force, akin to the one that served in Sudan for nearly 15 years after mass killings in Darfur in the early 2000s. War broke out in Sudan two years after the UNAMID peacekeepers withdrew.
Guterres said, “Diverse Sudanese voices, human rights organizations, and others, have called for stepped-up measures—including some form of impartial force to protect civilians in Sudan. These calls are a reflection of the gravity and urgency of the situation facing civilians in the country. At present the conditions do not exist for the successful deployment of a United Nations force to protect civilians in Sudan.”
“The Secretariat stands ready to engage the council to engage with the council and others on a range of operational modalities that can meaningfully contribute to a reduction of violence and the protection of civilians. This may require new approaches that are adapted to the challenging circumstances of the conflict.”
Guterres instead recommended other measures to contain the conflict and mitigate its effects. In a written report submitted to the Council prior to the meeting, he made the following recommendations
Renewed Diplomatic Push: “I call on the Security Council, regional actors and the broader international community to intensify collective efforts… to decisively advance the shared goal of silencing the guns.”
Compliance Mechanism: “I strongly recommend the warring parties to establish a robust and transparent compliance mechanism, with the support of key partners, as a critical step to ensuring that the Jeddah Declaration commitments are realized on the ground… The United Nations stands ready to engage with key Member States and regional partners on ways to provide support to such a mechanism, as feasible and agreed to by both warring parties.”
Monitoring Violations:
Support for UN and regional mechanisms: Strengthen mechanisms for monitoring and reporting violations of international humanitarian law and human rights abuses, including the UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan, which was established pursuant to a resolution of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, and a comparable AU team.
Support for civil society and journalists: “The international community should provide enhanced and flexible financial and technical support to Sudanese civil society organizations and networks, including those led by women and youth, to bolster their protection efforts on the ground. Training and capacity building on international human rights and humanitarian law should be supported. Sudanese civil society organizations and networks identify protection needs, document violations and develop localized protection responses. They do so despite facing immense challenges, operating under precarious conditions amidst intolerable targeted violence and security risks. Similar support should be provided to national and local journalists, operating both online and offline, whose efforts, inter alia, guarantee access for civilians to life-saving information.”
Try to secure local ceasefires: “Until a nationwide ceasefire is secured, I call on the warring parties and relevant stakeholders to engage in efforts to ensure scalable, locally negotiated ceasefires and other de-escalation or violence-reduction measures to protect civilians and prevent the further spread of conflict. Such arrangements can help build confidence between the parties laying the groundwork for a broader ceasefire agreement. Such arrangements had met some success earlier in the conflict but have come under enormous strain with local responders and peacebuilders now subject to intimidation, and local systems depleted and overwhelmed. The United Nations remains available to facilitate and support these initiatives, building on existing mediation and good offices mechanisms, and drawing on its institutional experience.”
Enhanced humanitarian response:
Support local humanitarian initiatives: “Similarly, the international community should provide technical and financial support for safe, flexible and rapid forms of support for community-based initiatives, such as Emergency Response Rooms, Resistance Committees and religious institutions which are providing lifesaving aid.”
Fund the UN humanitarian response plan: “The humanitarian appeals for humanitarian operations inside the Sudan and in support of refugees and host communities in neighbouring countries remain significantly underfunded. Urgent assistance is needed to avert massive loss of life in this unprecedented protection and food security crisis in the Sudan.”
Improve humanitarian access: “Procedures for the crossline and cross-border passage of humanitarian relief must be simplified and expedited… The freedom of movement of humanitarian personnel and the re-establishment of humanitarian presence in key field locations must be ensured.”
Influential members of the Security Council broadly agreed with the Secretary-General’s recommendations, including China, whose Deputy Permanent Representative Geng Shuang called for greater efforts to establish a ceasefire and a more robust humanitarian response, highlighting Chinese humanitarian efforts.
Russia’s envoy Vasily Nebenzya was the only member of the Council to express reservations about the approach proposed by the Secretary-General. He said,
“We’ve read very carefully the secretary’s report on the protection of civilians in Sudan. We cannot say that we share all of the assessments and recommendations that it contains. Yet the main issue is not actually what they look like on paper but rather how all of the above will be implemented on the ground especially in the absence of a lasting ceasefire. As the report rightly points out, a ceasefire is the decisive factor which can ensure reliable protection of civilians. Steps that preempt this absolutely necessary precondition can result on the opposite of the desired outcome. It’s also not entirely clear what is meant by local ceasefires, how they’re going to be reached and most importantly how they are going to be monitored.”
Although he called for peaceful resolution of the conflict, Nebenzya also repeatedly referred to the Sudanese military government as “sovereign” and legitimate, indicating Russia’s current alignment with the military against the RSF.
Russia and its Wagner proxy force formerly had ties with the RSF, but those ties mostly predate the current war. More recently, Russia has reestablished itself as both a diplomatic partner of Sudan’s military government and a supplier of ammunition and weapons. Nebenzya said, “We believe that the supreme sovereign council [the Transitional Sovereignty Council] is the highest ranking legitimate state authority in Sudan. We are in favor of the unity, territorial integrity and the sovereignty of Sudan.”
On the other hand, Japan’s Permanent Representative Yamazaki Kazuyuk expressed unequivocal support for the secretary-general’s approach and for his special envoy, Ramtane Lamamra, as well as the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission and UN Panel of Experts, which monitors compliance with the arms embargo on Darfur:
“Japan stresses the importance of monitoring, reporting, and collecting evidence, and documenting violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. The violators must be held accountable. In this regard, Japan supports the important work of the independent international fact-finding mission for the Sudan established by the human rights council as well as the works of the Panel of Experts of the Sudan Sanctions Committee, national, regional, and international journalists, NGOs, CSOs, and others.”
To conclude, Yamazaki, added, “I’d like to reiterate that the United Nations and its member states will never forget Sudan or leave its people behind.”
Sudan’s Permanent Representative, Ambassador Al-Harith Idriss, who is aligned with the military regime based in Port Sudan, responded critically to the UN Secretary-General’s report, saying that humanitarian access points, including the Adré border crossing, could be used by the Rapid Support Forces to import weapons and supplies.
During talks in Geneva in August, the military government led by Lt-Gen Abdel Fattah al-Burhan agreed to a three-month opening of the Adré border crossing between but it has not agreed to extend that window. Before August, the military had blocked access via that crossing.
Al-Harith expressed suspicions about the ongoing flow of aid across the Sudan-Chad border. “Humanitarian organizations want to go out and in without any supervision,” he claimed. “Some humanitarian staff have been involved in irregularities.”
In a related comment, Japan’s envoy, Yamazaki, warned that restrictions on humanitarian aid and “the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare may constitute a war crime. The parties must allow and facilitate… unhindered and sustained humanitarian assistance to those in need across Sudan.”
“Japan demands the parties to uphold their obligations under international law and calls particularly on the Sudanese armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces to fully honor their commitments declared in Jeddah and after the proximity talks in Geneva.”
“In this vein, Japan welcomes the passage of hundreds of trucks through the Adré border crossing since August… and calls on the government to continue to allow the use of this crucial crossing point.”
Similarly, Ambassador Hyunwoo Cho, Deputy Permanent Representative of the Republic of Korea, said, “We are deeply concerned by reports of a systemic obstruction of aid operations imposition of unnecessary administrative restrictions. We call on all parties to open all possible cross-border, cross-line routes, including the lifting of all arbitrary constraints and time limits at the Adré border crossing.”
“In addition, the Sudanese authorities must fully recognize the dire humanitarian conditions on the ground including the presence of a famine in some areas and ensure that they cooperate fully with humanitarian actors on the ground.”
Additionally, both the Japanese and South Korean envoys warned that violators of the Darfur arms embargo could be designated for targeted sanctions. A panel of experts appointed by the UN Secretary-General has concluded that there is credible evidence that the United Arab Emirates violated this arms embargo.
About this publication
Sudan War Monitor is a collaborative of journalists and open source researchers tracking the events of Sudan’s war and the search for solutions. We are not affiliated with either side in the current conflict. We publish news, maps, analysis, and verified videos. Our work is intended to be a resource for humanitarians, civil society, ordinary Sudanese, diplomats, and news media. Sudan War Monitor is a reader-supported publication. We invite you to subscribe, share, or donate to help us reach more readers and produce more analysis of the conflict.
Related coverage
Can Civilians Stay Alive in Sudan’s War Without a Protection Force? (external link)
UN panel says end impunity, hand over Bashir, September 6, 2024
Joint Donor statement on aid access in Sudan, October 21, 2024
Paris conference boosts Sudan aid funding to 50%, April 16, 2024
Mbeki: ‘African response to Sudan disaster woefully inadequate’, Nov. 22, 2024