The famine situation in Sudan has intensified to five regions and is anticipated to spread to five more by May, according to the global hunger monitor. This escalation occurs as ongoing conflict hampers essential humanitarian aid, worsening one of the most severe starvation crises in recent history.
The Famine Review Committee, part of the Integrated Food Phase Classification (IPC), has confirmed famine conditions in Abu Shouk and al-Salam, two camps for internally displaced people in al-Fashir, the besieged capital of North Darfur, as well as in various residential and displaced communities in the Nuba Mountains.
Moreover, the committee indicated that famine, which was first identified in August, continues to impact the Zamzam camp in North Darfur.
The five-member review committee evaluates and validates famine findings from technical analysts. In its report released on Tuesday, the committee forecasted that famine would extend to an additional five areas in North Darfur—Um Kadadah, Melit, al-Fashir, Tawisha, and al-Lait—by May.
The IPC estimates that approximately 24.6 million people, nearly half of the Sudanese population, urgently require food assistance through May. This figure marks a significant rise from the 21.1 million initially projected for the period of October through February.
The findings have emerged despite the Sudanese government’s ongoing disruption of the IPC process that assesses acute food insecurity, which is crucial for directing aid to the neediest regions.
Yesterday, the government announced the suspension of its participation in the global hunger-monitoring system, claiming that the IPC releases “unreliable reports that undermine Sudan’s sovereignty and dignity.”
Funded by Western nations and overseen by 19 major humanitarian organizations and intergovernmental institutions, the IPC operates as an independent entity.
As a cornerstone of the global hunger monitoring and alleviation framework, the IPC aims to raise awareness of emerging food crises, allowing organizations to act promptly to avert famine and widespread starvation.
The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) are embroiled in a civil conflict with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and are strongly against declaring a famine, fearing such a declaration could lead to increased diplomatic pressure to relax border controls and greater foreign engagement with the RSF.
In a letter dated December 23 to the IPC, the famine review committee, along with diplomats, received claims from Sudan’s agriculture minister stating that the latest IPC report is missing updated malnutrition data and assessments related to crop productivity from the recent summer rainy season.
The letter asserts that the growing season was successful.
It further expresses “serious concerns” regarding the IPC’s capability to gather data from areas under RSF control.
The IPC system relies on a “technical working group,” typically led by the national government, to analyze data and periodically release reports that categorize areas on a scale of one to five, ranging from minimal to stressed, crisis, emergency, and famine.
In October, the Sudanese government temporarily halted the government-led analysis, as per a document reviewed by Reuters.
After resuming its work, the technical working group refrained from acknowledging the existence of famine.
The latest report from the Famine Review Committee indicates that the government-led group omitted critical malnutrition data from its analysis.
Since the civil war commenced in April 2023, food production and trade have plummeted, displacing over 12 million Sudanese individuals, making it the world’s largest displacement crisis.
Read More Sudan stories:
War and climate – the factors threatening Sudan’s food supply
Children die as world ignores Sudan’s humanitarian crisis
The RSF has plundered commercial and humanitarian food supplies, disrupted farming operations, and besieged certain regions, leading to inflated trade costs and skyrocketing food prices.
Additionally, the government has restricted humanitarian organizations’ access to many regions within the country.
“We have the food. We have the trucks on the road. We have the people on the ground. We just need safe passage to deliver assistance,” stated Jean-Martin Bauer, director of food security and nutrition analysis within the UN’s World Food Program.
Upon inquiry from Reuters, the RSF dismissed the looting allegations as “baseless.”
The RSF further asserted that millions of individuals residing in its controlled territories are facing “the threat of hunger” and emphasized its commitment to “fully facilitating the delivery of aid to those affected.”
The government contended that the issues associated with delivering aid stem from the actions of the RSF.
The IPC report indicates that both conflict parties have enforced “bureaucratic procedures and approval processes” that “substantially limit both the scope and scale of humanitarian efforts.”
According to the IPC report, only 10% of individuals in the locations reviewed received food assistance in the past three months.
The government has been slow to grant visa approvals for aid workers, and several aid workers have indicated that it has discouraged NGOs from operating in the severely affected Darfur region, which is predominantly under RSF control.
The government has informed aid organizations that “there are no legitimate needs in Darfur, so you should not work there, and if you continue to respond to needs there, you should not anticipate visas,” shared a senior aid official who preferred to remain unnamed.
The backlog of visa applications awaiting approval for non-UN aid workers has surged in the last four months, with the approval rate experiencing a substantial decline, as evidenced by data from Sudan’s INGO Forum, which represents and advocates for international non-governmental organizations within the country.
In October, the Sudanese government pressured the UN to withdraw the top humanitarian aid official for Sudan’s struggling Darfur region after the official visited the region without government authorization, according to three sources who spoke to Reuters. Requests for authorization had stagnated, the sources claimed.
The government informed the UN that the official would be expelled if not withdrawn, and the UN complied.
