Food Aid in Sudan

Abstract

“In 2004, the UN’s Humanitarian Coordinator for Sudan called Darfur the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. A comprehensive food aid programme soon followed, at the time the largest in the world. Yet by 2014, while the crisis continued, international agencies found they had limited access to much of the population, with the Sudanese regime effectively controlling who received aid. As a result, acute malnutrition remains persistently high. Food Aid in Sudan argues that the situation in Sudan is emblematic of a far wider problem. Analysing the history of food aid in the country over fifty years, Jaspars shows that such aid often serves to enrich local regimes and the private sector while leaving war-torn populations in a state of permanent emergency. Drawing on her decades of experience as an aid worker and researcher in the region, and extensive interviews with workers in the food aid process, Jaspars brings together two key topics of our time: the failure of the humanitarian system to respond to today’s crises, and the crisis in the global food system. Essential reading for students and researchers across the social sciences studying the nature and effectiveness of contemporary humanitarianism, development and international aid.”

Humanitarianism in the Modern World

“…28 However, his suggestion disregards the coping strategies of the starving, the significance of which is encapsulated in the observation that 'relief is generally merely a footnote to the story of how people survive famine'. 29 In addition, the shift towards failures of response and the raising of questions such as 'who allowed the famine to happen?' ignores Sen's analysis of the significance of different political regimes for the emergence and prevention of famine, and his transfer-oriented recommendation for public policy.…”

“…28 However, despite this new feminised public image of aid work (such as in Red Cross advertisements), and despite the emergence of 'feminine' organisations like the SCF and the prominent role of female fieldworkers in Quaker relief, men still dominated the humanitarian arena, and in some cases denied access to women and disputed their capability of conducting humanitarian field work. 29 At the same time, as victims, women continued to benefit from idealised notions of motherhood or paternalistic chivalry towards the 'fair sex'. While we know about the contributions of women in the early ad hoc campaigns (including the anti-slavery movement and philhellenism), much remains to be learned about female leadership, mobilisation, activism, 30 and negative and positive discrimination in humanitarian efforts.…”

“…33 The First World War and the period of political and economic instability that followed, with its collapsing empires, civil and border hostilities, expulsions, and waves of refugees, created a vast humanitarian crisis. The war became a node for organised humanitarianism 29 Bertrand M. that displaced ad hoc charity efforts. 34 However, the rise of international and humanitarian organisations after 1918 only resumed an ongoing trend that the war had interrupted.…”

“…A paradox of the moral economy is that often the most pressing calls for donations are those proclaiming a beneficiary's entitlement and the obligation of the benefactor to provide aid, factors that appear inconsistent with the voluntarist character of humanitarianism. 29 Such moral commitment appeals seek to create correlates with the request for government intervention, and therefore entail a measure of charitable self-abrogation. However, the dividing line for the individual donor and public agencies remains that between de facto choice and legal obligation.…”

Conclusion

“…28 Abandonment may well be the major outcome, in particular for groups facing governments with adverse moral economies. 29 Mark Duffield suggests that, rather than marking the beginning of a new era, all this may be the 'long anticipated arrival' of a system of techno-governance facilitated by decades of cybernetic behaviourism. 30 Nevertheless, a novel kind of defensive humanitarianism with roots in the expressive age, with automated interfaces, and with thick 'firewalls' between donors and recipients may be in the making.…”