Sudan: Press conference with Under-Secretary-General/Emergency Relief Coordinator John Holmes

Dawn Blalock: Thank you all for coming today.

We are pleased to have here today John Holmes, the United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator. This is his first official mission since he assumed office on the first of March. Also with us is Manuel Aranda da Silva, the Deputy SRSG and Humanitarian and Resident Coordinator for Sudan.

Since Mr. Holmes arrived on Wednesday he has traveled to Juba as well as northern Darfur to meet see the humanitarian situation and meet with key actors in the government and the UN. He will be traveling to Chad and the Central African Republic before leaving for New York.

With that, I hand over to you ... Mr. Holmes.

USG John Holmes: Thank you very much. Let me add my thanks to all of you for coming. I recognize that you had to wait some time but that was due to circumstances out of our control. So thank you all very much for being here.

As you all know, this is my first visit to Sudan and my first visit to Darfur. And the reason for coming to Sudan as my first overseas visit after taking over three weeks ago was that this is obviously the largest humanitarian operation currently going on in many respects. I wanted to see for myself how this is going; to see the success and some of the problems and perhaps to talk to the government and to be able to see with my own eyes and to be able to judge what is actually going on.

I am very grateful for the cooperation of the Sudanese government in making my visit possible and helping with the visit - with one exception, of which you might be aware and to which I will return. I thought I would start with a very brief account of what I had been doing and then go on to some of my impressions and of course I am happy to answer your questions.

I started off in Khartoum last Thursday with talks with government ministers - the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Humanitarian Affairs and National Security. We talked about the humanitarian operations to share impressions on how that was going on and to raise some issues with them. And these talks took place in a positive spirit and I think were very useful.

I then went on Friday to southern Sudan to Juba and had discussions with the President and Vice-President to the Government of Southern Sudan and also with people from UNMIS. My visit followed shortly after a visit by the Donor Consortium there and like them, I was impressed by the determination I found to get the area back to its feet after so many years of civil war and starting from such a difficult position. And I expressed the hope then and I express it now again that donors will continue to give their full attention to the problems of the south given all the difficulties there and make sure there is no trade-off between what is happening in Darfur and what is happening in the south of Sudan.

I also discussed while I was down there the need to pursue the talks between Ugandan Government and the Lords Resistance Army which the Government of Southern Sudan are facilitating, and offered my support to try and keep those talks going and bring them to a successful conclusion.

We also talked briefly about the wish of the President of the Government of Southern Sudan to help get the non-signatories of the Darfur Peace Agreement because of the links he sees between peace in Darfur and development of the country as a whole.

I then spent Saturday and Sunday in North Darfur, based in El Fasher, and had talks with the governor initially about the humanitarian effort there and issues down there. Again it was a very positive spirit. In the afternoon I went to Kutum and, as you may be aware, tried to visit Kassab Camp but, unfortunately, we were turned back by a military checkpoint just outside the camp and were not able to visit. I think it is clear that this is a result of poor communication and not of any deliberate decision to exclude me from the camp and the government of Sudan have apologized for what happened and assured me there will be no repetition of that - an explanation and apology which I have accepted. But I think what happened to me on a high-level visit is perhaps symbolic of some of the problems I might come back to in a minute.

On Sunday, we visited Jebel Marra, an area held by the SLA, and heard some of the problems they faced - particularly problems of access - and I said I would do what I could to help for example, perhaps, in the provision of medicines and drugs. In the afternoon we visited AlSalam Camp just outside el-Fasher which is an overflow camp for the Abu-Shouk IDP Camp catering for up to 40,000 IDPs some of whom have been there for up to two years. I found a generally calm and good situation in the camp but, of course, a lot of impatience for a peace settlement and the ability to return home. I was particularly impressed by some new wood-burning stove technology which I saw on the ground using cheap local material. The point being that this economizes the use of firewood, reducing the need for dangerous firewood collection and is a so much more efficient way of burning.

On my overall impressions, I think the first thing to say is that what has happened here in the last three years in terms of the humanitarian efforts is an extraordinary success given the massive scale of the problem and the massive scale of the operations which has had to be undertaken to deal with that problem, largely by the international humanitarian community. It is almost a $1 billion a year operation with more than 13,000 humanitarian workers on the ground - a large number of agencies and NGOs. And they have succeeded in their efforts in keeping people alive and in physical shape and that is an enormous tribute to their dedication and commitment which I am very happy to salute here today. So that is a positive side which we should certainly not ignore.

But I also was able to see and hear about a number of concerns which relate in one way or another to the sustainability of this humanitarian effort. Firstly; the length of time that all this has been going on. Some people displaced for 2 - 3 years is bound to increase the difficulties of returning when that opportunity happens and that also emphasizes the urgent need for political settlement.

Secondly, the problem itself is still increasing. Although there are already some two million IDPs - which is a huge number - in all the camps around Darfur, in recent months there are still tens of thousands of new IDPs - people who are still being displaced because of violent incidents. So people are still coming in to the camps; some camps are already at bursting point. So there are real problems there too.

Meanwhile access to the camps, in some cases, and particularly to areas outside the camps is decreasing because of the continuing violence and insecurity which I will come back to in a second.

Thirdly; and I think this is a very important point, it is clear that the dangers to the civilian population from violence, and in the case of women from sexual assaults, these dangers are increasing. This is a result of the increasing insecurity in some areas to which I have referred and to the unpredictable nature of these violent incidents. These are not normally large-scale clashes but nevertheless the effects on the civilian population can be very considerable. And I think it is the responsibility of course of the government or whoever is in control of that particular area to protect their own civilians and I hope that they will continue to make every effort to do so. We as the UN System ... as the humanitarian community ... can help in this and we are trying to do so but it remains a major concern and one which is affecting virtually all areas in Darfur in one sense or another.

Fourthly there is the question of the security and safety of the humanitarian workers themselves. There have been some major incidents which you have all been aware of, I imagine, in Gereida and in Nyala but also in many other minor incidents of one sort or another with vehicles being hijacked, usually at gunpoint, with assaults and beatings. And the result is a feeling of lack of safety on the part of the staff on the ground and that is making operating more difficult and resulting to problems of access to which I have already referred. There have been some withdrawal of NGOs in particular from some areas and one or two NGOs have withdrawn altogether and this is a particularly worrying trend.

Finally, there are practical difficulties of operating in some ways in what is sometimes referred to as "bureaucratic impediments" - usually questions of visas, travel permits, customs permits, labor regulations and labor law. While the cooperation in the past has been in many ways very good and I thank the Sudanese government for that - there was a very rapid increase in humanitarian operations in 2004 - 2005 which were by and large dealt with very well, more recently the kind of concerns I have been referring to are multiplying again. So that is one of the things I have been trying to address while I have been here - this process which I did not start it; it started before I arrived and I try to help it along while I have been here. And that is why, for example, my own problem of access to Kassab Camp, although clearly an accident as I said, a mistake, was symptomatic of the problems which ordinary workers on the ground can have because of this can happen to me on a high-level visit which was pretty public and certainly notified authorities in advance, you can imagine the possible effects on ordinary humanitarian workers going around their business. We had some discussion going on about trying to resolve these issues which started before I arrived and have been continuing while I have been here. Again, the discussions have been going on with a positive atmosphere and I think we have made some useful progress but we've also got somewhere to go before we can reach final agreement and I hope that there can be agreement before too long ... it certainly can help the workers on the ground and can help the civilians on the ground because that is our ultimate concern or major concern.

So there is a cumulative concern from these individual concerns that I mentioned that if we are not all careful, if we do not nurture the partnership which exists between members of the humanitarian community and the government, and if we don't deal with these problems and if the problems get worse or if there is a major incident the kind which we have seen already, this humanitarian effort could begin to unravel with possible catastrophic consequences for the population. We are determined to avoid that happening and I am certainly impressed by the commitments of all the people I have met to stopping that happening and to continuing their effort to maintain that humanitarian effort despite the difficulties they face. The morale of the humanitarian community is not good at the moment so we need to work on these points to re-ensure that we can avoid the kind of unraveling I have referred to.

Finally, I will expect, when I get back to New York next week, to be reporting back to the Security Council on these points and, finally if I may, I should just confirm as Dawn said, that I am going on to Chad and the Central African Republic partly because the problems there are often linked to the problems here particularly in Darfur but also because there are some very serious humanitarian problems there which I would like to look at on the ground as well.

So thank you very much. I am very happy to answer your questions. I warn you in advance my brief is humanitarian so if you ask me lots of questions about sanctions, you may not be satisfied entirely by my answers.

Q: You talked about a possible collapse of the humanitarian effort. Have you received any assurances from the Sudanese government that they will cooperate more, ease bureaucratic obstacles and try to improve your security? What of the details of the assurances which they gave you?

USG Holmes: What I can say is that the assurances we have received, the words I have received from all the members of the Sudanese government I have met have been positive in saying that they welcome the humanitarian presence; they welcome the presence both of the agencies and the NGOs and they want that to continue. They recognize that there are issues to be addressed and they have addressed that with me in a positive spirit. So what we are trying to do is, I would say, get back to or if possible improve the relation which existed two years ago which was started originally by the agreement between the then Secretary-General Kofi Annan and the Sudanese government I think in July 2004 when the Secretary-General came here.

So we are engaged in very detailed discussions and, as I said, they have been conducted in positively; we made some good progress; we have got some way to go but they are designed to clarify the operations procedures but also to reduce them to an absolute minimum. As you know there has been in the past a moratorium on renewals of visas and things of that kind and that is the kind of thing that we want to make sure we get back to in a detailed and specific way. And of course what we want to absolutely be sure about is that if there is an agreement and if there are undertakings made, then these undertakings are actually implemented on the ground in a consistent manner and a manner over time so that we have a lasting improvement which will have a real impact on what humanitarian workers are doing on the ground and what the beneficiaries to the assistance are receiving. That is the most important thing.

Q: You said that there is a positive side with the government. Some months ago, the government said that there is a moratorium extended to 2008 and that, according to some government elements, the situation on the ground is stable and that restrictions on humanitarian workers have been lifted. You have seen the situation by yourself and have felt the difficulties. Do you think that the words that the government is saying about improvements of the situation on the ground, the extension of the moratorium and no restrictions on humanitarian workers are really being implemented well?

USG Holmes: I think as far as security on the ground is concerned, it is variable from place to place. It is hard to have a consistent picture. All I am saying to you is that the reports I received before I arrived and that the reports first hand and in other ways since I have been here indicate that certainly in some areas in Darfur there is an increasing feeling of insecurity. Even if, for example, the IDPs are well-looked after in the physical sense, they do not feel safe and they do not seem to be safe. And that is also reflected in the problems of security that the humanitarian workers on the ground have also encountered - these are general incidents that have been reported.

On the moratorium, in principal the moratorium was already extended until January 2008. From the accounts we receive from the agencies, from the NGOs and indeed from our own experiences as the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), there are these bureaucratic problems to which I have already referred. These problems are soluble; they have been solved before and I think they can be solved again and that is why we have been talking to the government now and I am reasonably optimistic that we can reach agreement but, as I said, the important thing is to ensure that is implemented and implemented over time.

Q: Given the fact that you have said that you will press to try and get assurances of access, if there isn't any sanction - I mean humanitarian sanction or the UN Security Council sanction is to be able to withdraw the humanitarian effort in Darfur - is there any other pressure to be exerted on the government here to make sure that their promises that there won't be any restrictions is actually met?

USG Holmes: I am not sure I accept the way you put that. We are not in any sense threatening withdrawal of humanitarian effort, and we should not in any sense regard it as a kind of sanction and by the Security Council. I hope I have made it clear we hope to maintain our humanitarian effort irrespective of what is happening politically. Of course there is a link in some respect as it always is between what is happening politically. The humanitarian effort is there because it is necessary because of the need and we are entirely impartial in our interpretation of our humanitarian responsibilities. So it is not a sanction and the pressure we can exert is in talking to the Sudanese Government and pointing out that we are all trying to achieve, I hope, the same objective which is keeping the people in Darfur alive as well as possible and in as good a condition as possible so that when peace comes they will be able to return to their homes and resume their normal livelihoods. This is what we are trying to achieve. So as I say you shouldn't see it in any way as a kind of sanction.

Q: As we may have seen in New York and London and in Australia a very high profile debate to save Darfur coalition. This is something the Sudanese government has expressed concern about; did you express any concern about the rhetoric around the Darfur crisis to play a role in the attitude towards the humanitarian [inaudible]?

USG Holmes: No, they did not refer to that particular campaign or indeed campaigns in general. They, of course, have concerns that they want to see the truth about the situation as they see it reported. But they did not express concern about overseas campaigns and nor did they make any link obviously between that and the difficulties which I have talked about.

Q: There have been reports about decreasing access to the IDPs. In that regard, what is the percentage of those you have been unable to access to?

USG Holmes: I am not sure I can answer that question exactly. I think I will ask my colleagues if they can give a better impression of that. We do not have access to all of the IDPs. That is part of the problem. And still there are those who are not IDPs but are also affected by the conflict and in need. Of course it is possible where there is no access, and where access is difficult what we are able to give just tends to decline. And one of the concerns I did not mention in my initial presentation is that although, as I said earlier, the indicators in general about malnutrition and mortality and medical care have been reasonably favorable, they have begun to turn in the wrong direction recently and that is the major concern. And that in part explains our concern about the possible and round the operation but let me ask Manuel Da Silva if he has, indeed he has, on the percentages of IDPs we are reaching in Darfur.

Da Silva: In general the access varies every month and so what we have in access today does not mean anything tomorrow. But in general with partial assistance we have been able to access, in average, over 70% of the people in need. Now you can ask the question why people are not dying, what happened to the 30 percent we are not accessing? I know every month changes so some people whom we are not accessing this month the next month we may be able to access. And what we are doing is that we are relying more on ways of distribution that are not that are different from the traditional. For example, when we have access to people that we did not have it for a couple of months then we provide two to three months' rations in a go. Because we do not know if next month we have access to them. And these are meant to slow down the deterioration of the situation of the people. We can give you precise figures of access to all kinds of services. It changes every month, as you know.

Q: With regards protection of aid workers, the government says that the UN agencies refuse protection offered by local security personnel. Don't you think that the UN itself is responsible in part for what is happening to its personnel as a result of their rejection of protection from the government?

USG Holmes: No, I don't accept that. The reason humanitarian workers in general refuse protection of this kind is because they need to maintain their absolute independence, impartiality and neutrality and their need to operate purely on the basis of needs - the needs and rights of those concerned. So there is always a danger of if they accept armed protection from the local authorities that "humanitarian space", in the jargon if you like, is compromised. So I think that you will find that this is not something unique to Darfur but a practice all over the world that humanitarian workers prefer to operate, where they possibly can, without any protection from local police or armed forces.

As for notifying their movements, there are procedures for this. But again, our basic position in principle is that UN staff should be able to move around freely in an area where it has been agreed that they should operate for humanitarian reasons - and the same goes for the NGO workers. So if you impose this system of notifying anytime you are moving anywhere, in fact you will make operating successfully and practically extremely difficult.

Q: You mentioned in your opening remarks that there is an increase in the number of IDPs and that there are camps that are facing a dangerous situation and are overflowing beyond capacity. What are the reasons for the overflow; specifically which camps were you referring to; are they in the safe or unsafe regions and what future remedies do you have for this - will the camps be increased or will there be plans to resettle these IDPs?

USG Holmes: I think the reason why the number of IDPs is increasing is that the violent incidents continue. There are villages being attacked; violent clashes of one sort or other are going on and when that happens the local population flees and they become IDPs and need to be looked after in one way or another. And this is a variable picture and it is very hard to give you a consistent picture. It is not happening just in the south or just in the north or just in the west, it is happening all over in different places. And some of the camps, as I said, are becoming full. Why they are becoming full is not a new phenomenon: camps have become full in the past. There is a need, if necessary obviously, to construct another camp; to find another site for a camp nearby where they can be accommodated. And I am sure the process, if necessary, will be gone through again obviously in cooperation with the local authorities. That is why, for example in AlSalam Camp which we visited yesterday near el-Fasher that is an overflow camp which was created to take the IDPs that could not be accommodated in the Abu-Shouk Camp. That is a process which could continue elsewhere and there are already, I think, some hundreds of camps in Darfur. We never want to see that number expand but, if necessary, we would have to expand it.

Q: Many people in these Sudanese villages and camps notice that there have been a lot of promises from the Sudanese government and nothing's changed. After your talks with top officials here, what could you offer them?

USG Holmes: I think I have tried to answer that question by saying that the Sudanese government have said they are will to work with us to improve, in particular, the practical problems I have talked about - the visas, travel permits and all those things - to make these things faster and easier so that UN agencies and NGOs don't spend so much time dealing with them which is one of the real problems they have. There was also the problem of people having to operate without permits sometimes not knowing whether the situation is going to be regularized or not. I think those are the issues we are trying to address in particular. I think where people have frustrations - and some of the ones we heard as we went around is that there are huge frustrations that there is no peace settlement and people are not therefore able to go home and that is what they want to do; so they are demanding a peace settlement and that is not something I am engaged in negotiating. But clearly the need for that settlement as fast as possible is absolutely fundamental. There is also frustration in some places for example in the area of Direibat in the Jebel Marra where we visited that they had visits before and nothing seems to have happened. We will try to address these problems as best as we can but if there is a problem of access because of conflict in the area and roadblocks, there is nothing that we can do about that. We can have access by air but access by road is much preferable and much easier for moving stuff around and that is why we have difficulties in addressing some of these problems. But, as I said, I think the fundamental demand I heard loud and clear from people was, "Please can you help produce a political settlement and peace for us because we want to go home."

Q: During your visit here, you have seen for yourself that Sudan is no longer a poor country. Why are you in the UN agencies and the NGOs feeding so many Sudanese people? Do you not consider the fact that these agencies are feeding about 6 million Sudanese people is, in some ways, a violation of Sudanese sovereignty to some extent?

USG Holmes: I don't know if it is a violation of Sudanese sovereignty because we are doing it at the invitation and the consent of the Sudanese government. As I said, they have said clearly while I have been here that the [humanitarian] effort is welcome. It is true that the overwhelming bulk of the humanitarian effort is being undertaken by the international community but we are doing that because we see there is a need; we need to meet that need and that is what international humanitarian organizations of various kinds are for.

But there is also a national effort in terms of financing - though it is relatively small. And let us not forget that most of the relief efforts on the ground are actually carried out by national workers. I talked about 13,000 aid workers on the ground but only 1,000 of those come from abroad. The rest are from Sudan. There are also of course, beside the international NGOs, national NGOs working very successfully in many cases and one of the things which we want to do which is a general ambition of NGOs and agencies is to build on local NGO capacities so that they can deal with the problems more easily themselves without having recourse to the international community.

Dawn Blalock: Thank you very much everybody.