Interview with UN’s Jan Egeland on the situation in Darfur
KHARTOUM, July 05, 2004 (IRIN) — Jan Egeland, the United Nations
Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, was in Khartoum last
week, travelling with UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan on a three-day visit
to western Sudan’s Darfur region and eastern Chad. In an interview on
Saturday, he told IRIN that the UN’s efforts to provide humanitarian aid
to the region were hampered as much by a lack of donor support as by a
lack of access. He asked governments to issue fewer condemnations of the
situation in Darfur and instead to start providing tangible support for
the victims of the conflict – including helicopters, vehicles and hard
cash.
Below are excerpts from the interview held in the Sudanese capital,
Khartoum:
QUESTION: In the last couple of days we have heard repeated commitments
from Sudanese authorities that they will rein in and disarm the Janjawid
militias. They had also committed to doing this in the cessation of
hostilities agreement of 8 April, but failed to do so. Is there anything
to suggest they will fulfil their commitments this time round?
ANSWER: I hope and believe that they will now start to disarm these
militias. There are many armed groups and many armed criminal gangs in
Darfur. Over the last 48 hours we have had reports of more relief trucks
being looted, of civilians being attacked in all of the three Darfur
provinces, and even reports of aerial bombardment. I believe that all
sides are involved – the so-called Janjawid militias, organised criminals,
too many unemployed men with too many guns, government forces and
definitely also rebel forces.
I believe they will start to demobilise, and we will very clearly speak
out if we do not see such disarmament. We now have an implementation
mechanism for the first time at the highest levels led by the foreign
minister for Sudan and the Special Representative of the
Secretary-General, Jan Pronk, who will meet on a regular basis, at least a
couple of times a month, to review progress.
Q: In an area the size of Darfur, how do you disarm these groups –
especially in cases where the government has given them arms in the first
place? What incentives are there for them to give up their guns and power?
A: The Janjawid is a kind of paramilitary group which, little by little,
became a monster that nobody seems to be able to control. So it was very
wrong of the government to not avoid this monster being created and start
to act against them earlier.
We need to have a massive disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration
progress in all three Darfur provinces. That will presumably be a big part
of the task for our future mission here. But certainly, also the
government says it has big plans to disarm and demobilise and put those
young men with the guns to other work.
Q: Do you believe the government has the means to do that?
A: They say they will now deploy 6,000 policemen and they will also use
their own army. There is no country on earth which is actually offering to
send forces to do that, so what we have to do is to pressure the
government to be a real government and to disarm and demobilise.
Q: There are reports of the Janjawid being integrated into the army, the
[paramilitary] Popular Defence Forces and the police. To what extent is
that going on?
A: We have heard these reports, and we have brought it up with the
authorities. We have said it is totally unacceptable that former abusers
of human rights can be put to protect human rights in the same area and
vis-a-vis the same people.
Q: What is happening to the areas of land in Darfur that have been cleared
of people?
A: The refugees believe that there is indeed ethnic cleansing and [that]
their land is being taken over. I think we have more reports actually of a
kind of scorched earth [policy] – and that nobody has taken over. The
places have been burned, the wells have been destroyed, the irrigation has
been destroyed, the cattle have been killed and the donkeys have been
thrown in the wells to poison them, which means that nobody has taken
over.
Q: In cases where people have taken over, who are they?
A: It’s complex, because some have said that it doesn’t fit the legal
definition of ethnic cleansing. The same tribes are represented both among
those who are cleansed and those who are cleansing.
Q: Reporters in Al-Fashir, Northern Darfur, were told that the
humanitarian situation is getting better. Is this true?
A: It is definitely getting better. 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.
Our appeal is to donors to really come with their contributions, to
physically give us helicopters so that we do not have to purchase or to
rent these very expensive tools. There are many Western and Eastern
European countries who could give them to us tomorrow, and I am surprised
that many countries produce many more resolutions and declarations than
actual hardware for our operation.
So we are as much restrained at the moment for lack of resources and
logistical hardware as from government lack of access.
Q: Is there a reluctance on the part of donors to contribute to Darfur
and, if so, why?
A: Some have woken up and some have not. I see some countries coming with
one big declaration after another that it is unacceptable what is
happening. And then they have given 2 percent of or 1 percent of the
pledges so far and no logistical hardware. I am surprised at the
discrepancy between the rhetoric and what they are actually giving.
Q: Are donors reluctant to finance a crisis that has been created by a
government and its allied militias?
A: I don’t think so. Maybe, but this is not so different from many other
places in the world. There is always donor fatigue: there are some who are
just slow in waking up to new situations and also slow in providing
assistance.
We have only three substantial donors here – the US, UK and some parts of
the EU family, and that is it. Some of the bigger donors are surprisingly
small, and the Arab wealthy oil-rich nations are nonexistent as donors in
Darfur.
We have now launched a 90-day plan of action. If we succeed in
implementing that, we will feed a million people by the end of this month
and two million in October. But there are three conditions: one, the
government gives us increased access, including all the NGOS who work with
us and on our behalf; secondly, that the security situation improves for
us humanitarian workers and our trucks that are now being looted; and
thirdly that we get more resources.
Q: It seems the demography of Darfur has significantly changed. How long
will it take before the internally displaced persons [IDPs] can return to
their homes?
A: It has. [The return of IDPs may take] anything from a few months to
many years. In the worst case we’re looking at years of camps, and that
would be a tragedy.
Q: Has there been any indication from the government how it will deal with
the issue of land grabbing, compensation and giving people back their
land?
A: This is what we hope will come out of this process. I think the
secretary-General’s visit represents a watershed in the sense that we’re
now for the first time looking beyond the immediate saving of lives in
camps. We’re looking now towards how to create conditions for voluntary
returns, insecurity, reconstruction and also a just political settlement
to the conflict.
Q: Has there been any progress vis-a-vis political negotiations?
A: Yes. The UN will work with the AU [Africa Union] to offer facilitation
of direct talks between the parties.
Q: Have you had any indication from the rebels that they will participate?
A: My impression is that the two sides will welcome that.
Q: Are the AU monitors having any problems in Darfur?
A: They do not seem to have any serious access restrictions from the
government side, but they are sitting now in a Spartan hotel in Al-Fashir
without the logistical means to move out – again, [due to] a lack of
vehicles, of trucks, of helicopters, of airplanes. If they are going to
monitor an area bigger than France, they need all of that. I have become
increasingly frustrated in all of this by seeing too many words and too
little Sudanese and international action. So [we need] less declarations
from fewer ministers, and more helicopters.