Sudan: Operational Restrictions on Humanitarian Actors

Question

Asked by

To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of increasing registration requirements and operational restrictions on humanitarian actors by parties to the conflict in Sudan.

My Lords, we are deeply alarmed by both the RSF’s and the SAF’s attempts to restrict life-saving aid from reaching Sudanese civilians. We are lobbying the RSF to rescind the directives imposed by its humanitarian agency, NAHA, requiring humanitarian organisations to register their presence or face expulsion. We are continuing to call on the SAF to show restraint and remove all impediments preventing essential supplies and personnel accessing areas of greatest need, such as El Obeid. As the rainy season approaches and needs increase across Sudan, all parties must facilitate safe, unimpeded humanitarian access in line with their obligations under international humanitarian law.

I am grateful to the Minister for that Answer. As we are all painfully aware, the conflict in Sudan has created a catastrophic humanitarian crisis. Atrocities loom in El Obeid as they did in El Fasher and external actors continue to fuel this war. It is appalling that parties to the conflict are imposing increasing restrictions and threatening that vital emergency assistance. Will the Government please redouble their efforts to ensure that aid reaches those in need and maximise efforts to end this war—not least holding to account the external actors enabling this conflict?

Yes, and I thank my noble friend for putting it quite so strongly. She is right to do so, and she is a long-standing advocate for this cause. It is outrageous that humanitarian agencies are required to register as they are. We are redoubling the amount that we are spending on local agencies—which are able to work in a different way and be more flexible—some of which are not registered as humanitarian bodies and are able to work around this. But it is wrong and should not be happening, and nobody should impede access that is needed to provide humanitarian support and to protect civilians.

My Lords, we are hearing deeply concerning reports of continued assaults in El Obeid, and I welcome the recent statement from the UK and like-minded partners on that. Given these reports and the strategic importance of El Obeid as a humanitarian hub and as a gateway to Kordofan and Darfur, what assessment have the Government made of the humanitarian situation in El Obeid and what further steps can they take to make sure aid safely reaches civilians there?

It is incredibly precarious. We see increasing gathering of troops around El Obeid, and we see more civilians moving into the city because they are being displaced from surrounding villages and are seeking refuge. This is an incredibly dangerous situation. We are monitoring it very closely, bearing in mind the limitations on our ability to be present on the ground there. I can assure the noble Baroness, because I know she cares deeply about this, that we are talking to our counterparts at Head of State level, and we are all speaking to our counterparts wherever we can, because I think we all understand the way that this stops is for the backers of both the armed groups we are talking about to insist that it stops. They need to stop funding, stop arming, and enable peace to be secured and negotiated.

My Lords, I declare an interest as an adviser to DAI. I welcome what the Minister has said about UK government action, but, as she will know, at an event I hosted recently in this House, we heard how local actors were delivering humanitarian aid on the ground where international agencies could not get. I am glad the Government are supporting those, but will they do more to support the emergency response rooms in Sudan? In some cases, they are the only agencies delivering to the people, and it is worth taking the risk of giving them a bit more money.

I agree with the noble Lord. I have met them, and I think they are fantastic. They are not required to meet the registration requirements of the RSF, so they are able to operate more flexibly. We have increased our funding to them for that reason.

My Lords, those of us who have loved and visited Sudan are devastated. I really welcome this Question from my noble friend Lady Brown. What actions are the Government taking through the United Nations and other international platforms to improve accountability for attacks on humanitarian workers in Sudan, and what is being done to ensure that women are not continually raped as a weapon of war?

We increased our funding to victims of sexual violence, which we announced some months ago. That was the right thing to do, and we may need to do more. As for what we are doing multilaterally, we are the penholder at the UN. We have used our role at the Security Council, and noble Lords will know the difficulties with that at the moment. We have been more successful at the Human Rights Council and secured unanimous support for statements there. We have also had to create our own multilateral entities such as the coalition for atrocity prevention and justice to really keep a focus on this and to be more agile and outspoken where perhaps UN processes have proved difficult. We will continue to do this. One thing that may help us avoid seeing a repeat of what happened in El Fasher is a relentless focus on what is happening in Sudan and really holding those responsible—for committing those atrocities but also for supporting them—to account.

My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Brown of Silvertown, for bringing this up, and I could not agree more with everything she has said. The essential thing is to get the aid flowing—to remove the impediments to the flow of aid to these people. We must have an end to the conflict in the first place. The noble Baroness mentioned the United Nations; there are other groups such as the African Union and the League of Arab States. What influence can His Majesty’s Government use with those groups to try to sort out this problem and to enable aid to reach those who actually need it?

I was at the African Union meetings earlier this year and we have frequent conversations with it. We are actively supporting the US-led quad process. We will continue to do those things. The noble Earl is right that there are issues we face today with humanitarian support, but, in the long run, this will be resolved by a cessation of the conflict. We must use all the mechanisms—there are several available to us—to bring that about.

My Lords, in the skies above El Obeid as we speak are reconnaissance drones identifying women civilians as potential targets. There is the technology to ensure that there are no-drone zones to prevent humanitarian atrocities. This is authorised under a United Nations Security Council resolution. The UK, as the penholder for Sudan, is operating under that resolution. Why is there not prevention of drones targeting civilians in these areas?

The last time I answered a Question on this, I indicated that I would ask for advice on our duty to protect. I have had that advice and have asked for further advice specifically on that responsibility. I understand completely what the noble Lord is saying. I receive regular updates on the number of drones and attacks and the amassing of troops. All I can say for now is please be assured that there is a very strong desire from me, the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister to make sure that the United Kingdom does everything it can to protect people in Sudan.