Interview with UN's Jan Egeland on the situation in Darfur

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.