Opinion: International response to Sudan must be by and for its people

Sudan is on fire. More than two months since the onset of clashes between the Sudanese Armed Forces, or SAF, and the Rapid Support Forces, or RSF, the conflict has devolved into a full-blown catastrophe for millions from Khartoum to Darfur. The unwillingness of both sides to commit to a sustained ceasefire, despite the good-faith efforts of international brokers, has set the stage for an entrenched war, with consequences that are sure to reverberate across the region. Given the utter collapse of Sudanese infrastructure and state capacity, as well as understandable Western hesitancy to funnel aid to either of the two warring parties, the international community faces undeniable challenges in formulating a response. That’s exactly where Sudanese civil society can fill the gaps. Even in the face of death, desperation, and a health care sector obliterated by the conflict, local civil society — and in particular the medical community — have sprung into action, rallying to help those most in need and save lives. Sudanese civil society members are fighting every day to keep their country afloat, the Western response should honor their undying commitment. --— Obstetricians performing cesarean sections by phonelight, midwives racing through streets engulfed in gunfire to collect patients, and emergency room doctors manually pumping air into a dying patient’s lungs for 24 hours straight are just a few of the awe-inspiring and horrifying stories I’ve heard from doctors on the front lines. Health personnel in Sudan have persevered under circumstances almost beyond comprehension — at least 19 have been killed while others are targeted with daily death threats, detained and denounced as partisan by both warring parties, and forced to take shelter in crowded wards. The humanitarian response The courageous efforts of Sudanese health personnel and civil society organizations demonstrate that they will be dependable and effective aid partners if the international response provides them with what they need. At the center of the United States’ and the international community's humanitarian strategy must be a concerted effort to stand up mechanisms that bolster support to these organizations, integrate them into the aid delivery process, and ensure that they have a seat at the table. The United States has undoubtedly played an integral role in the international response since the start of the conflict in April, from attempts to broker lasting ceasefires, to dispatching USAID Administrator Samantha Power to support refugees in Chad, to marshaling more than $550 million in funds to support Sudan and neighboring countries. And while National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan’s recent statement following the collapse of negotiations was a welcome demonstration of the U.S.’ continued commitment to ending the conflict in Sudan, the economic sanctions and visa restrictions he outlined do not come close to addressing the near- and long-term humanitarian fallout. No one understands the needs of the people more than the Sudanese civil society groups working daily on the ground, but they’ve continued to be shut out of the policymaking process. The U.S. Congress, for example, has held only one hearing to assess policy responses with members of the State Department and USAID, but notably without any representatives of diaspora groups. Meanwhile, international efforts to deliver aid have been hampered by violence and looting by armed groups, diversion by the SAF and RSF, and various administrative and logistical difficulties on the ground. Partnerships with Sudan-based and diaspora organizations Stronger partnerships with Sudan-based and diaspora organizations can help bypass these challenges. These groups, who have allegiance only to the everyday people they serve, can act as a critical resource for fostering local connections with key players and maximizing the impact of international aid. In 2019, following the ouster of Sudan’s longtime dictator Omar al-Bashir, USAID established the Office of Transition Initiatives to support Sudan’s transition to democracy by strengthening civil society. According to USAID, the guiding principles of OTI were flexibility and adaptability to respond quickly to an unpredictable political environment. That model provides an instructive example for how USAID can act now. To stem the immediate bleeding while laying the groundwork for a long-term humanitarian response, USAID needs to develop a similarly nimble response mechanism. The agency should establish channels that enable rapid sharing of information and quick decision-making processes with trusted partners in Sudan alongside peer nations and international aid groups. Such a mechanism would allow USAID to cut through bureaucratic red tape and be more flexible in earmarking essential aid to account for rapidly changing conditions on the ground. Meanwhile, Congress has buried its head in the sand on Sudan. It’s past time for the legislative branch to organize a focused and streamlined coalition to work on both short- and long-term humanitarian solutions. A good place to start would be to revive the congressional caucus on Sudan, which was originally formed in 2001 to address the civil war and rampant human rights violations. Jump-starting this caucus would help facilitate engagement with diaspora groups and other outside experts while boosting the prospects for generating sustainable, bipartisan policy outcomes. Without more comprehensive humanitarian action informed by close relationships with Sudan-based organizations and diaspora groups, the struggle to prevent further bloodshed and protect Sudanese civilians, doctors, and medical facilities will falter. Sudanese civil society members are fighting every day to keep their country afloat, the Western response should honor their undying commitment.