Russia’s claim about the famine in Sudan is misleading

The startling claim by Russia earlier this month that Western governments are using reports of famine and starvation to undermine Sudan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity was greeted with scepticism and rejected by members of the UN Security Council, including the United States.

Speaking in the UN Security Council, Russia’s first deputy permanent representative to the UN questioned the Famine Review Committee’s credibility and the accuracy of its 2024 report on Sudan.

“Let us emphasise right away that Sudan is not experiencing nor can experience a severe famine,” said Dmitry Polyanskiy. “Upon examining the FRC report we could not but think that the issue of hunger in Sudan is being politicised and exploited to exert pressure on the Sudanese government. We have an impression that someone is desperate for famine to eventually begin in Sudan.” Hunger, he added, was one of the issues exploited by the West for political gains.

In November last year, Russia vetoed a UN Security Council draft resolution on Sudan presented by the UK. The resolution called for “a comprehensive, nationwide ceasefire; for increased protection of civilians; and for unhindered flow of humanitarian aid into and across Sudan.”

Moreover, media reports argue that Russia’s claims are misleading and further exacerbate the situation.

The 2024 FRC report said at least five areas of Sudan were suffering from famine. It further projected that levels of hunger would spread in five additional areas between December 2024 and May 2025.

Those projections are based on the valid and reasonable assumptions that food shortages would remain in areas encircled by the rebel Rapid Support Forces (RSF). However, the projections do not take into account the changes in food supply and changes as a result of territorial gains in the fighting. Recent victories by the Sudan Armed Forces in Sennar and Medani, as well as local agreements in southern Khartoum, have resulted in aid convoys moving into the affected areas.

Last month, 22 aid trucks entered the besieged southern districts of Khartoum. The convoy, sponsored by the World Food Programme (WFP), UNICEF and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), delivered approximately 750 tonnes of much-needed food and medical supplies.

“Access to the area has been essentially cut off due to the conflict dynamics,” explained Sheldon Yett, UNICEF’s Sudan representative. “It took three months of often daily negotiations with government authorities at all levels and with other parties who controlled access. The trucks were detained on more than one occasion and drivers were understandably reluctant given the risks involved.”

READ: UN estimates 3.2m Sudanese children under 5 will face acute malnutrition in 2025

Such rare moments of agreements between the warring parties facilitated the passage of the convoy through their respective areas of control. Southern Khartoum has been under RSF control since the early days of the conflict. However, prior to the aid convoy, a year earlier the Sudanese authorities suspended participation in the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) system. In a letter to the IPC and its Famine Review Committee in December 2023, Agriculture Minister Abu Baker Al Beshri wrote that, “Sudan is withdrawing from the IPC system because the IPC is issuing unreliable reports that undermine Sudan’s sovereignty and dignity.”

Those unreliable reports appear not to be exclusive to Sudan. Reuters has reported that the authorities in Myanmar, Yemen and Ethiopia have also rejected the IPC’s findings and since ceased working with the IPC.

Contrary to Russia’s claim, the famine in Sudan has actually reached catastrophic levels.

Globally, Sudanese account for 10 per cent of all people in humanitarian need, despite being less than one percent of the global population, according to the New York-based International Rescue Committee (IRC) aid organisation. The IRC says that a total of 30.4 million people across Sudan are in humanitarian need, making it “the largest humanitarian crisis since records began.”

In Sudan’s largest internally displaced person (IDP) camp, Zamzam in North Darfur, more than 400,000 people have been affected by food shortages. Famine has also reached emergency levels in other IDP camps, in particular, Abu Shouk and Al Salam in North Darfur, and the Western Nuba Mountains. In these camps, there are an estimated 12 children dying per day due to famine. Statistically, the highest rates of hunger and death from malnutrition are taking place in RSF-controlled areas, whether in Darfur, in the formerly occupied Al Jazira state or the capital.

In spite of a “good” rainy season, many displaced farming communities were not able to farm. RSF attacks in the most productive agricultural states such as Al Jazira targeted land full of crops for destruction and the looting of farm equipment. Much of the looted equipment, tractors and other large farm vehicles, has reportedly been resold in markets across the Sahel, as reported by the Centre for Strategic & International Studies, a non-profit, policy research organisation.

Critics of the Sudanese Armed Forces decry bureaucratic obstacles that inhibit the delivery of aid. Customs inspections, internal travel documents and visas for international humanitarian staff have at times crippled aid deliveries. To facilitate humanitarian aid delivery, the Adré crossing between Sudan and Chad was reopened by the Sudanese army in August last year. The territory surrounding the border crossing is under RSF control. However, the UN does not recognise the RSF as the sovereign authority, a requirement needed to undertake cross-border aid operations. Since October, a number of aid trucks in North Kordofan state have not been able to deliver their cargo. The trucks are in an area controlled by the Sudanese army but surrounded by the RSF. The convoy cannot leave until safe passage is guaranteed through some form of taxation.

Getting supplies into affected areas, therefore, remains a complex operation fraught with danger. Exaggerations and false predictions open up the likelihood for supporters of intervention to allow sovereignty to be wrested away from the Sudanese government. Meanwhile, not responding in a timely fashion to the needs of the Sudanese people could increase the death toll and suffering in the gruelling 18-month war.

OPINION: The cracks in MAGA: the American right is divided over the Middle East

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.