South of Darfur: Peace and Hunger in Southern Sudan

On January 9, peace was signed to end the 21 year old civil war between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM), the main southern rebel movement. This is an achievement of historic proportions, and a source of renewed hope for the millions who have suffered from the war. It does not, however, usher in a peaceful era in the whole country, still marred by the conflict in Darfur, and the heavy toll it takes on the population of western Sudan, estimated at 70,000 deaths in the last year. Further, and perhaps counter-intuitively, in a country that has lost an estimated 570,000 people to 3 famines since 1984 - overwhelmingly in the geographical south, peace is not going to translate into freedom from hunger in a very long time.

As the largest country in Africa, Sudan hosts about 33 million people in over a hundred ethnic groups, in some of the harshest and least hospitable lands on earth, including the mostly desert North and the largest swamp in the world, in the south.

As important, and perhaps less obvious, is the fact that any settlement to thenorth-south conflict will not translate easily or rapidly into substantive progress in the quality of life for the Sudanese in the south who have been affected by the conflict. The Action Against Hunger International network has monitored the nutritional situation in southern Sudan for the last three years. The monitoring has focused on acute malnutrition, the most severe form of malnutrition, and a deadly condition, especially for children under 5 years old. In the two most vulnerable regions of southern Sudan, Bahr-el-Ghazal and Upper Nile, ACF - USA estimates that acute malnutrition averaged 19% in 2004, down from 20.8% in 2003 and 26% in 2002.

A measure of these rates is that, allowing for uncertainties about population figures in the area, they mean that an estimated 125,000 to 165,000 children under 5 are acutely malnourished, and at serious risk of death. As an element of comparison, in the United States, similar rates would translate into a staggering figure of about 5,800,000 malnourished children under 5.

The good news is that the rates of malnutrition have steadily decreased over the last two years, in line with a general improvement in security in the south, following the repeated cease fire agreements that have accompanied the peace process to its successful conclusion. In that sense, the peace agreement can be expected to further lead to a steady decline in malnutrition. The bad news is that the figures remain well above emergency levels - usually defined by malnutrition rates above 15%: about 90% of areas surveyed stand above or at emergency levels. In addition, it is going to take a long time, even during peace, to bring these rates down to acceptable levels, if there is any measure of acceptability when dealing with the life of infants and toddlers.

The reasons are manifold. Firstly, Bahr-el-Ghazal and Upper Nile are very barrenlands, unconducive to fast and effective development. For example, sand has to be imported in order to build small structures, notably for water points and health facilities. The harsh environment will make it very difficult to build the road networks that are necessary to bring transportation costs to acceptable levels.

Secondly, southern Sudan's resources have been consistently plundered over centuries, whether through slavery or the exploitation of its oil resources to the benefit of the northern elite. Furthering the effect of this predation, no effort has ever been made by the central government, colonial or otherwise, to systematically develop the south's infrastructures. The few structures - primarily health and schooling facilities - that were built have been severely damaged by the war, and those remaining are very unevenly spread throughout. Lastly, against this backdrop of high vulnerability and widespread under development, the 22-year-old conflict has taken a heavy toll on the population, causing 2 million deaths and over 4 million displaced persons by USAID estimates.

A large portion of the southern displaced persons is expected to go back to their home areas in the coming year. They will return to places where food production remains as uncertain as ever, trade limited, health infrastructures few and scattered and water very scarce. In other terms, the population is going to remain very vulnerable to hunger and malnutrition for the foreseeable future. As any development attempt is bound to be very long and difficult, this vulnerability will translate into further local emergencies in the near to medium term.

Hopes are great that the peace agreement will result in sustainable development andbetter lives in the south. Very soon, major donors will pledge a large amount of funds to the reconstruction - indeed, the construction - and the development of southern Sudan. This support is obviously both needed and welcome. But the risk is high that this be done at the expense of overlooking the emergencies that will continue to crop up, under the false premise that peace suddenly obliterates humanitarian crises. Hopefully, such crises will become rare events over time but is fundamental to keep on addressing them through relief assistance as a complement to the larger developmental effort that is required.

American generosity, tested as ever in the still unfolding Tsunami disaster in Asia, has been amply demonstrated by the unflinching support, private and public, extended to the Sudan at times of war. To address emergencies in the country will require the same levels of attention and assistance in times of peace: as always, hunger remains oblivious to the stroke of a pen.

Roger Persichino worked as Head of Mission for southern Sudan for Action Against Hunger - USA between 2000 and 2002, before joining headquarters in New York, where he is now acting Director of Operations.