Humanitarian interventions in forgotten conflicts:

The case of Darfur

Student: Marie Duret Tutor: Carlos Martin Faus

September 1st 2015

Master Thesis presented with a view to obtaining the degree of Master in Political Science, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona

Table of content Abstract: .............................................................................................................................. 4

Acronyms: ........................................................................................................................... 4

1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 5

1.1 Background ................................................................................................................... 5

1.2 Research objectives ........................................................................................................ 6

1.3 Methodology.................................................................................................................. 6

2. Evolutions and important changes of forgotten conflicts and Humanitarian intervention .. 8

2.1 What is a forgotten conflict? : Definition and characteristics .......................................... 8

2.2 Evolution of conflicts ..................................................................................................... 9

2.3 Reasons for a non-intervention ..................................................................................... 12

2.4 Reasons for an intervention .......................................................................................... 14

3. Case study: Conflict in Darfur, Sudan ........................................................................... 16

3.1 Background and comprehensive view of Sudan............................................................ 17

3.2 Analysis of data: What are the factors that lead to Humanitarian intervention in Darfur?

.......................................................................................................................................... 20

3.2.1 Political aspects ........................................................................................................ 20

3.2.2 Security aspects ........................................................................................................ 25

3.2.3 Social aspects ............................................................................................................ 27

3.2.4 Resources in Darfur .................................................................................................. 29

3.3 Tentative answer of the case of Darfur ......................................................................... 30

4. Comparison between USA and Norway ......................................................................... 31

4.1 Key figures .................................................................................................................. 32

4.2 The role of Norway and The United States in Darfur .................................................... 34

4.2.1 The role of Norway ................................................................................................... 34

4.2.2 The role of The United States .................................................................................... 34

4.3 Difference of interest and strategy ................................................................................ 35

5. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 36

Bibliography: ..................................................................................................................... 38

Table of figures

Table 1: Summary of the number of ongoing conflicts nowadays and their year of starting 11

Graph 1 : Evolution of conflict due to Historical events ..................................................... 12

Graph 2 : Summary of the reasons for a non intervention in a conflict................................ 14

Graph 3 : Summary of the reasons for a non intervention in a conflict................................ 15

Map 1 : Map of Africa ....................................................................................................... 16

Map 2: Map showing the region of Darfur ......................................................................... 17

Chronology 1 : Chronology of the conflict of Darfur from 2003 to 2008 ............................ 19

Table 2 : Evolution of the political indicators for the period 2003-2009 in Sudan ............... 21

Graph 4 : Evolution of the index of Political stability and absence of violence of Sudan from

2003 to 2009 ...................................................................................................................... 21

Graph 5 : Evolution of the index of control of corruption of Sudan from 2003 to 2009 ...... 23

Graph 6 : Evolution of the index of voice and accountability of Sudan from 2003 to 2009 . 24

Graph 7 : Explanation of different intensity level index...................................................... 25

Graph 8 : Evolution of conflict intensity index of Sudan from 2003 to 2009 ...................... 25

Graph 9 : Evolution of the Humanitarian need from 2003 to 2008...................................... 26

Graph 10 : Evolution of the HDI of Sudan from 1980 to nowadays .................................... 28

Table 3 : Evolution of the HDI ranking of Sudan from 1980 till 2013 ................................ 28

Table 4 : Summary of the key figures regarding Humanitarian aid for Norway and The

United States ..................................................................................................................... 33

Annex 1 ............................................................................................................................. 42

Abstract:

This paper is an analysis of the forgotten conflicts phenomenon and more precisely the

analysis of humanitarian intervention within them. Humanitarian intervention, by definition and

principle are carried on under impartiality and neutrality with the only will of protecting and

preventing violation of Human rights. We want to see if it is still the case in today’s conflict and at

what happen in a conflict to bring the attention from international community.

The main motivation of this work is to aware his reader about the current phenomenon that is too

little known.

The focus of this paper is the case of Darfur. The analysis will take part in four areas: political,

security, social and resources.

This analysis can be generalised to all forgotten conflict in the sense that there is always factors that

lead to a humanitarian intervention. However, those factors may change according to different case.

Key words: forgotten conflicts, humanitarian intervention, conflicts, peacekeeping operation,

human rights.

Acronyms:

AMIS: African Union Mission In Sudan

AU: African Union

DRC: Democratic Republic of Congo

FCA: Forgotten Crisis Assessment

GNI: Gross National Income

HDI: Human development index

IDP: Internally Displaced Person

UN: United Nations

UNAMID - United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur

SLA: Sudan Liberation Army

WHO: World Health Organisation

5

Humanitarian interventions in forgotten conflicts: The case of Darfur

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

Humanitarian aid has been developed during the Second World War after which many

institutions were created in order to help nations in need. Indeed, after the Second World War, the

need of help and the need to reconstruct appear as essential worldwide.

The end of the Cold War signalled a series of profound changes in the relationship between

humanitarian and political action (Macrae & Leader, 2000). As a matter of fact, in 1990 we can

observe a peak of financial donations and then, important fluctuations over a period of 15 years.

Humanitarian intervention is a 'mean to prevent or stop a gross violation of human rights in a state,

where such state is either incapable or unwilling to protect its own people, or is actively

persecuting them' (Kaldor, 2007). Many scholars identify the 1990s as a ‘decade of humanitarian

intervention’, during which the UN authorized several interventions on humanitarian grounds

(Kaldor, 2007).

However, during this period we can observe many situations in which there is a violation of human

rights but there are no interventions. These situations that remain without any help during several

years are called ‘forgotten conflicts’. Most of the time, those forgotten conflicts occurred or lead to

failed states, a state whose political or economic system has become so weak that the government is

no longer in control1.

In order to control a conflict the United Nations has different means, including Humanitarian

intervention or Peacekeeping intervention. For some people, humanitarian intervention takes place

within the peacekeeping operation. Others consider that humanitarian interventions are

implemented within the peacekeeping operation but isolated from the political framework. To finish,

some argue that ‘humanitarian efforts are free-standing initiatives, structurally independent of

peacekeeping activities’ (Minear and Weiss, 1995). For this research, we will consider that a

1 Failed states, from the Oxford Dictionary found in the online dictionary, available at http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/failed-state

6

Peacekeeping operation is considered as an intervention from the United Nations and therefore, from

different countries taking part in the process.

Darfur, South Sudan is one case of forgotten conflict. Indeed, during five years of conflicts, it did

not bring the attention from the international community while human rights were highly violated.

Indeed, the conflict started in 2003 and the first effort from the United Nations and the international

community appears in 2008.

We could then wonder why some conflict remain forgotten?

What are the factors that attract the attention of the international community with respect to a

forgotten conflict?

1.2 Research objectives

The aim of this work is to provide a quantitative and theoretical analysis supported by one

case study and an analysis between the reaction of USA and Norway in the conflict. In this section,

the analysis will emphasize on the different perceptions of Humanitarian intervention between USA

and Norway in the case of Darfur. The purpose of this paper is to analyze why some conflicts

remain forgotten during some years and at some point, bring the attention of countries and

organizations in a geopolitical point of view.

The lack of literature and knowledge from the public opinion about ‘forgotten conflict’ makes my

work interesting and challenging. This paper may contribute to the gap in this field and inform his

readers about the phenomenon of forgotten conflict. The choice of this study is also personal.

1.3 Methodology

In order to answer to my research question, we will first define the important concepts that

will be used in this paper such as 'Humanitarian intervention', and 'Forgotten conflict'. Then, we will

analyse the evolution of forgotten conflicts over the last 30 years and emphasize on the changes

before and after the Cold War. Afterwards, we will point out the reasons of a non humanitarian

intervention and subsequently of an intervention according to influential authors in this field.

Thereafter, we will analyze the situation in Darfur in Sudan. We will make a case study trying to

understand how the situation in Darfur moved from forgotten conflict to a non forgotten conflict.

In the next part, we will analyse the reaction of two key actors in the case of Darfur: USA and

Norway.

7

The main part of this paper is the case study. We will analyze the conflict in Darfur at different

period of time and by looking at different indicators. The goal of this case study is to determine the

factors that make a conflict change status from forgotten to non forgotten.

For this matter, the research will be divided into four subcategories: The political aspects, the

security aspects, the social aspects and the resources.

Those subcategories will be analyzed at different period of times in the conflicts. We will then be

able to see what changes lead to an intervention from the United Nations.

For this case study, we will use different indicators. For the political aspects, we will look at

different indicators published by worldwide governance indicators. We choose to study the

evolution of the political stability and absence of violence/terrorism. We will also look at the voice

and accountability indicator and the control of corruption. In this political part, we want to answer

to one specific question: What are the political changes into a forgotten conflict that lead to an

intervention?

In the security aspects, we will look at the evolution of the number of death at different time of the

conflict, the number Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) 2and the conflict intensity which gives the

importance of the conflict and it evolution. The conflict intensity is an index published every year

by the Heidelberg Institute for International conflict Research (HIIK). We want to be able to answer

those questions: Which point a conflict needs in order to trigger a humanitarian intervention? How

many people need to die before it brings the attention of international organisations? How many

displaced people?

My third subcategory is the social one. In this category, we will look at the Human Development

Indicator (HDI).The goal in this section is to provide an answer to those questions: Does the HDI

fluctuate during the conflict?

The last subcategory will be an analysis of the Sudanese resources. We want to answer to the

following questions: What kind of resources would be likely to interest a country for it to make a

humanitarian intervention? Who own the resources?

For this, we will look at the Sudanese resources and more specifically the Darfur ones and try to

understand who owns it (state, private company, group of the society).

After making this analysis at different period of time, we will compare the intervention of two key

actors: USA and Norway.

2 According to the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement: ‘persons or groups of persons who have been

forced or obliged to flee their homes or places of habitual residence. Usually in order to avoid the effects of armed con-flict, situations of generalized violence and violations of human rights

8

The case of Darfur is a relevant case for my research. Indeed, this is a major forgotten conflict that

last for a long period and that is still ongoing. It was also considered as the worse Humanitarian

crisis in the world by the United Nations.

This is also interesting because this is an African example, from another continent than USA and

Norway. In this case, we control the geographical variable. The motivation to intervene will not be

due to proximity and migration issue. Indeed, donors are often accused to give money more easily

to neighbouring countries, in order to avoid migration (Nielson, 2002).

The choice of The United States was obvious because it is the most important donator in US dollar

in the world3. We found it interesting to compare it with a Nordic country such as Norway, which is

highly developed and emphasize on social improvement, respect of Human rights and seen

worldwide as a social example.

To finish, this study is not an in-depth comprehensive view of the conflict of Darfur but an analysis

of the factors that lead to an intervention in a forgotten crisis.

2. Evolutions and important changes of forgotten conflicts and Humanitarian

intervention

Historically, humanitarian aid and the number and types of conflicts have evolved. Some

events lead to important changes such as the End of the Cold War and the rise of terrorism. Every

year some new conflicts emerge while some other stays ongoing. Those conflicts that stay

uninterrupted during several years are called ‘Forgotten conflicts’.

2.1 What is a forgotten conflict? : Definition and characteristics

The term “forgotten” references to the fact that some conflicts do not attract the attention of

media, countries and publications of the biggest organizations such as the United Nations. As there

is no attention from the media, forgotten conflicts are unknown from the public opinion. A forgotten

conflict is a ‘conflict that no one is paying attention to’(Félix Santos Álvarez, 2006).

3 In ODA flow

9

Forgotten conflicts have common characteristics. Indeed, they are qualified as isolated, chaotic,

with violence, unclear objectives and difficult to control. They are civil wars but with important

international connections. In fact, they are related to one country in their economic and political

system (Bustelo, 2003).

Their causes are ethnic, religious, nationalist or separatist but they are also marked by political and

criminal roots. All forgotten conflict are different and despite the violence and the violation of

human rights, all the situation tie in the fact those countries want to be insert in the international

system (Bustelo, 2003).

Forgotten conflicts are complex conflict, with multiple actors. In those kinds of conflicts,

population suffer of violation of Human rights, millions of death and an important destruction of the

socio-political infrastructure (Bustelo, 2003).

Moreover, in those conflicts, the organized violence and war become part of the society

organisation (Bustelo, 2003).

As no one is paying attention to forgotten conflicts, they often last due the unwillingness of states to

resolve it. Every so often, the international community is unable to face an important number of

simultaneous crises and has to make choice regarding resolutions of conflicts (Grunewald, 2001).

Moreover, some conflicts rise and fall from the status forgotten to non-forgotten several times. For

this paper, we will consider that the conflict is not forgotten from the first Humanitarian

intervention from the United Nations, including Peacekeeping operation.

2.2 Evolution of conflicts

The evolutions of conflict and more specifically of forgotten conflict are due to historical

events. According to many historians like Boutros-Ghali, in ‘An agenda for peace’ the end of the

Cold War lead to important changes in term of Humanitarian aid. According to him, the end of the

Cold war may suggest that the number of conflicts decrease. In fact, we tend to think that we learn

from the past, and that we will not reproduce the same mistakes (K.Betts, 2004)

Conflicts in the twentieth century were intense. Indeed, the first half was composed of two world

wars, causing the death of hundred million people. The second half was composed of the Cold War

between two superpowers (K.Betts, 2004).

The last decade of the twentieth century with the opening of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the

Soviet Union lead to a new era of peace and cooperation (K.Betts, 2004). Supposely, after the Cold

War, we might see a decrease of the number of conflicts after this intense period of conflicts.

10

However, the event of September 2001 has set off a new wave of conflicts lead by terrorist

movement.

In term of Humanitarian intervention, the end of 20th and the beginning of the 21st century are

considered as very important in term of Humanitarian intervention.

During the Cold War, countries didn't take part in the business of internal affairs of another state. In

this case, the risk of direct confrontations between Russia and The United States was reduced

(Macrae & Leader, 2000).

Thereafter, in the 1990's, the Humanitarian attention focus on the conflicts that broke out after the

end of the Cold War (Crocker, Hampson, & Aall, 2004), with a need of reconstruction and peace.

However, some conflicts remain forgotten during the same period such as Sierra Leon, Sri Lanka,

Kashmir and Afghanistan. All this conflicts experienced a long period of conflicts in which no third

party was enough interested to make an intervention (Crocker et al., 2004).

After the Cold War, the number of conflicts increase also due to Globalization of trade that reduce

importance of countries borders (Macrae & Leader, 2000).

The emergence of terrorism leads to important geopolitical changes in term of Humanitarian

interventions. First of all, the type of conflict changed. More and more conflict emerges inside a

country and not between two distinct countries. These new types lead to an increase of forgotten

conflict due to the fact that organizations and international community don’t want to get involved in

internal affairs of a country (Crocker et al., 2004).

It is hard to measure the evolution of the number of forgotten conflict. Indeed, they often change

status from forgotten to non-forgotten and there is poor information about them.

However, for the purpose of this work, we decided to report all the conflict unfolding nowadays in

the world and look at the year of the beginning (annex1). We cannot track the evolution of conflict

but the situation today is the following one.

The table below is a sum-up of the number of conflicts that are still active today regarding their

years of starting.

11

Table 1: Summary of the number of ongoing conflicts nowadays and their decade of starting

Year of

beggining

Number of conflict on

going

1940-1950 3

1950-1960 1

1960-1970 4

1970-1980 4

1980-1990 7

1990-2000 2

2000-2010 11

2010-2014 9

Source: Elaborated by the author, based on data by IRIN organisation (2015) ‘The world’s conflict’ available at http://newirin.irinnews.org/forgotten-conflicts/

Nowadays, there are more than 40 conflicts that are still on going around the world. Three of them

started between 1940 and 1950. Most of the forgotten conflicts ongoing nowadays started from

1990 and 2000 and from 2000 and 2010. During those two periods, we count 18 ongoing conflicts.

Concerning their geographical area, they are concentrated in the South hemisphere, in Africa mostly,

in the Middle East and in South of Asia.

To summarize, important historical events lead to an evolution of conflicts. The end of the Second

World War, the end of the Cold War and the rise of terrorism lead to new type of conflicts.

Concerning forgotten conflicts, it is hard to measure and predict their evolution. However, the

situation today seems to be worrying, with an important number of forgotten conflicts.

12

Graph 1 : Evolution of conflict due to Historical events

Source: Made by the author from K.Betts, R. (2004). Betts - Conflict After the Cold War (1-167).pdf. , Macrae, J., &

Leader, N. (2000). HPG Report Shifting sands : complex emergencies Please send comments on this paper to : Development. Crocker, C. A., Hampson, F. O., & Aall, P. R. (2004). Taming Intractable Conflicts: Mediation in the

Hardest Cases. US Institute of Peace Press.

2.3 Reasons for a non-intervention

There are many reasons that explain why a country is not willing to make a Humanitarian

intervention and let a conflict being forgotten.

Crocker in ‘Taming Intractable Conflicts: Mediation in the Hardest Cases’ emphasize on different

factors that explain why some conflicts don't bring the geopolitical attention and remain forgotten.

One of the main reasons according to him is the ‘tradition of respect for a national sovereignty and

the strong prohibition against interfering in the internal affairs of an independent state’ (Crocker et

al., 2004). Nowadays conflicts tend to occur within a country, and not between two distinct

countries which explains that countries and international organisations don’t want to get involved in

internal affairs.

Furthermore, some conflicts remain forgotten because of the difficulty to enter in it. In some case, a

party inside the country is reluctant and resist against Humanitarian help. It can also be

neighbouring major power that prevents it (Crocker et al., 2004).

The complexity of internal politics is also one important factor. Indeed, it may discourage some

country to get involved in a humanitarian intervention (Crocker et al., 2004).

Historically, the failure of a previous intervention from a third-party effort in peacemaking

operation discourages country to make a humanitarian intervention. International organisations and

countries don’t want to get involved in a peacemaking operation knowing that it might fail.

End of 2WW• Need of reconstruction

End of CW

• We could expect a new era of peace and cooperation• But increase of conflict due to Globalization of Trade

Rise of terrorism

• Increase of conflicts• More conflict within country than between countries that lead to an increase of forgotten conflicts

13

The level of violence is an important aspect concerning the will to intervene. Indeed, the level of

violence needs to be ‘sufficient’ (Crocker et al., 2004).The level of violence is then objectively

assessed by each country. It means that there is a level of violence that needs to be reached to bring

the attention of international community. Therefore, if the international community judge that the

conflict is containable and does not merit engagement, the conflict will remain forgotten.

This argument is also supported by Nielson in his speech for the conference on Forgotten

Humanitarian Crisis in Copenhagen. According to him, the lack of geographical importance can

lead to a situation where the conflict remains forgotten (Nielson, 2002).

The geopolitical situation is another factor. In fact, the objective of stopping the conflict may be less

important than other strategic objective (Crocker et al., 2004). Indeed, countries have different

priorities, and the will to make an intervention in a conflict is not necessary their first one.

The last argument approach by Crocker is the fact that some countries might think that the conflict

is someone else's problem.

Moreover, there is a cost in term of death. The Humanitarian intervention is carried on to prevent

human suffering. Intervening suppose suffers and loses of human being, considering the necessity

of response to resistance and collateral damage (Hawkins, 2001). If we consider that this cost will

be higher than if the conflict goes on, we will tend not to intervene.

To finish, each country evaluate ‘the price of inactions’ to know if they will intervene or not. The

price of inaction is an indicator, which is mainly political and concerns the public opinion. Indeed,

by not acting, a country takes the risk to lose domestic support. The price of inaction only depends

on public opinion, if the public believes that there is a moral imperative to act, the political price of

inaction will be high, and on the contrary, if the public is not aware of the situation or is not

sensitive to the issue the price will be low (Hawkins, 2001).

This is closely related to media coverage and pressure from the public opinion. Politically, if the

public opinion is not pressuring the government, the interest of the government will be more

important than the public opinion.

14

Graph 2 : Summary of the reasons for a non intervention in a conflict

Source: Made by the author with information from Crocker, C. A., Hampson, F. O., & Aall, P. R. (2004). ‘Taming Intractable Conflicts: Mediation in the Hardest Cases’. US Institute of Peace Press, Nielson, P. (2002).

‘Dropping off the Map - Why are some conflicts forgotten ?’, 63, 1–5. And Hawkins Virgil (2001) ‘The Price of Inaction: The Media and Humanitarian Intervention’ available at https://sites.tufts.edu/jha/archives/1504 visited

on April 6th 2015

2.4 Reasons for an intervention

There are many reasons that explain why international community does not want to

intervene in a conflict. In this paper, we are also interested in the reasons why a country decides to

intervene, and what the factors that lead to an intervention are. With those arguments we will be

able to understand why some conflicts remain forgotten during some years and suddenly bring the

attention of countries, media and organizations.

First of all, the countries where those forgotten conflicts happen are usually a source of interest for

developed country. Indeed, it is country where there are resources such as oil, diamonds, gold and

diverse mineral and narcotics that can be exploited (Bustelo, 2003).

Apart from resources interest, there is strategic interest involving geopolitical relationship and

regional security consideration. Humanitarian intervention can be a method to defend national or

allied interests in a zone of conflicts (Crocker et al., 2004). It is in the interest of some countries to

keep the world peace.

Reasons for non

intervention

prohibition against

interfering in internal affairs Complexity

of internal politics

failure of previous

intervention

Level of violence

insufficientlack of

geopolitical importance

price of inaction

difficulty to access

Cost of military death

15

Moreover, conflicts generate population movement. Neighbouring countries are interested to

intervene not to receive in their own territory the displaced population (Aguirre and Rodriguez,

2002). International community might also be interested to intervene to defend their own interest or

to avoid the extent of the conflict.

Furthermore, conflicts generate violence and death. This violence needs to reach a sufficient level in

order to morally sensitize the international community. If this level is considered as sufficient, there

will be an intervention (Crocker et al., 2004).

Some conflict generates problems that overflow the borders of a country, such as environmental

problem. In that case there is a real need and interest to intervene (Bustelo, 2003).

As we have seen before with ‘the price of inaction’, we can also consider ‘the price of action. Public

opinion can be sensitive to one issue and put pressure on government to intervene. In order not to

lose political domestic support, government can be willing to intervene (Hawkins, 2001).

Intervening in forgotten conflicts can also be use in order to improve international reputation, to be

seen as a good governance (Crocker et al., 2004).

Graph 3 : Summary of the reasons for a non intervention in a conflict

Sources: Made by the author with information from Bustelo, M. G. (2003). Conflictos olvidados. Retrieved June 12, 2015, from http://www.seipaz.org/articulo/conflidados.htm, Crocker, C. A., Hampson, F. O., & Aall, P. R. (2004). ‘Taming Intractable Conflicts: Mediation in the Hardest Cases’. US Institute of Peace Press, and Hawkins Virgil

(2001) ‘The Price of Inaction: The Media and Humanitarian Intervention’ available at https://sites.tufts.edu/jha/archives/1504 visited on April 6th 2015

Reasons for an

intervention

Resources interets

Strategic interest

Stopping the population movement

Price of action

international reputation

Level of violence sufficient

Conflict generating

problem that overflow borders

16

3. Case study: Conflict in Darfur, Sudan

In order to understand at which point the international community decides to intervene in a

forgotten conflict, we decided to study the case of Sudan.

Map 1 : Map of Africa

Source: Retrieved from http://www.worldatlas.com/

Sudan is an Arabic country situated on the African continent. The country has common borders with

Libya and Egypt to the north, the Red Sea, Eritrea and Ethiopia to the east, Chad and the Central

African Republic to the west and South Sudan in the south4. It capital is Khartoum and the main

religion is Islamism. In 2014, it population was 38.76 million inhabitants composed of a huge

variety of ethnic groups (UPPSALA, 2015). Sudan is 1 886 068 km2, making it one of the Africa’s

largest country5.

Sudan has been under the control of Egypt and United Kingdom but became independent in 1956.

4 Since 2011, when South Sudan became independent from Sudan. 5 It was the biggest one before the independence of South Sudan in 2011

17

Map 2: Map showing the region of Darfur

Source: Retrieved from savedarfur.org

Darfur is a region situated in the West of Sudan. It population is Muslim and the region is rich in

uranium and copper. Darfur covers an area of about 510,000 km2 surface that is mostly arid. It is

one important geographic zone in term of humanitarian aid mostly because it is situated in a

damaged area where Sudan, South Sudan and Chad are or were in conflict.

3.1 Background and comprehensive view of Sudan6

International instance consider that the conflict erupted in 2003. However, to understand this

conflict, we need to have a look at the previous events that will dive Darfur into one of the worst

humanitarian crisis in the world7. Indeed, some old factors were sources of the actual conflict.

First of all, Sudan is a huge country. It extends from north to south on more than 2000km, placing it

in contact with several natural environments. Indeed, the North part is desert or semi-desert, the

centre is composed by a steppe8 zone and in the South a vast zone of savannah and marshes. Those

different conditions imply different way of living especially between nomadic and sedentary

farmers’ breeders. Those are classic factors of tensions because it creates inequalities (Arte, 2007)

There is also an important ethnic and linguistic diversity. In fact, there are more than 100 languages

in Sudan, even if the most common and official is Arabic (Arte, 2007)

6 We decided to include information of Sudan conflict for comprehensive purpose 7 According to the United Nations 8 an ecoregion, in the montane grasslands and shrublandsand temperate grasslands, savannas, and

shrublands biomes, characterized by grassland plains without trees apart from those near rivers and lakes.

18

Moreover, the political history of the country enhanced this cleavage between the North and the

South. In the South, population has suffered slavery from Egypt. Then, at the end of the 19th century,

under the influence of United Kingdom, The North was exploiting for cotton cultivation which was

intended for export. The South of the country is abandoned as the West that is unsuitable for

irrigation (Arte, 2007). In 1956, the elites from the North take the power while the other region stay

abandoned. Those factors will lead to different conflict in Sudan, including the conflict in Darfur, in

the West part of the country (Arte, 2007)

Those geographical factors have made Sudan an uncertain and precarious country that will lead to

the emergence of 3 main conflicts: Conflict between North and South Sudan, a national conflict in

Sudan and a regional conflict in Darfur (Arte, 2007)

The beginning of the 21st century focused on the resolution of the conflict between North and South

Sudan. However, another conflict appears in the region of Darfur (EnoughProject, 2015)

In February 2003, the conflict erupted between two rebels groups against the Sudanese government.

Indeed, Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) attacked the government and the Justice and Equality

Movement (JEM) join them. Together, they began to take some governmental organisations

including El Fasher airport. The reasons of this rebelion are mainly related to economic and

political marginalization and protection for their communities (ICRtoP, 2013). The conflict

intensified months after months and the main violent actor became the militia9 , supported by the

Sudanese government. The government destroyed and burned an important numbers of villages

because they suspected the population to support the armed opposition.

According to the United Nations agencies, when the conflict erupted in 2003, at least 500,000

people were in humanitarian aid need in the region of Darfur (ICRtoP, 2013). At that time, the

conflict of Darfur was considered as the worst humanitarian crisis in the world by the United

Nations.

In April 2004 the first efforts of Peaceful negotiation appear. One year after the beginning of the

conflict, the Sudanese government and the rebel groups sign the Ceasefire Agreement. The goal of

this agreement was 45 ceasefire days to allow humanitarian assistance to reach the region of Darfur

and provide help (SaveDarfur, 2015).

In July 2004, African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) is signed under the direction of the President

of Chad and the Chairperson of the African Union Commission. The Sudanese parties signed a

9 Also known as Janjaweed

19

ceasefire and agreed to receive humanitarian help (SaveDarfur, 2015).

In May 2006, the Abuja agreement is signed by the Sudanese government and Sudan Liberation

Army (SaveDarfur, 2015).

In July 2007, the UNAMID mission is established. The UNAMID is a joint peace operation

between the United Nations and the African Union. It declares that peacekeepers are permitted to

use force to protect civilians and humanitarian operations for an initial period of 12 months. The

mission will be composed of 26 000 personnel, including 19 500 military (SaveDarfur, 2015).

UNAMID will thus be the UN’s largest operation and will be deployed in January 2008. For the

purpose of this paper, we will consider that the conflict will not be forgotten at this point, because of

the implication of the United Nations.

Chronology 1 : Chronology of the conflict of Darfur from 2003 to 2008

Source: Made by the author with the information from SaveDarfur (2015) ‘An intereactive history of the con-

flict’ available at http://savedarfur.org/the-conflict/darfur/ visited on May 4th 2015

2008UNAMID is

deployed

July 2007 UNAMID

is established

May 2006Abuja

agreement

Jul. 2004AMIS start

Apr.2004First

ceasefire

Feb . 03 beginning of the conflict

FORGOTTEN Intervention

of UN

20

As a conclusion, Sudan has some old factors that explain the ongoing conflict, in particular the

geographical factors and the domination from Egypt and United Kingdom. The ongoing conflict

evolved in a damage area where the efforts of peace are slow and little in numbers.

3.2 Analysis of data: What are the factors that lead to Humanitarian intervention in Darfur?

The conflict of Darfur started in 2003 and it is still an ongoing conflict. For the purpose of

this work, we will analyze de period from 2003 to 2008, when we consider that the conflict was

forgotten. The point where we consider that the conflict was not forgotten anymore is the

deployment of the UNAMID mission10. During the period 2003-2008 we want to see how the

indicators change to lead to an intervention.

3.2.1 Political aspects

The analysis of different political index appears as essential for the purpose of this paper.

First of all, we will analyze the index of political stability and absence of violence terrorism, which

measures perceptions of the likelihood of political instability and/or politically motivated violence,

including terrorism (The World Bank Group, 2015).

We will also analyse the control of corruption captures perceptions of the extent to which public

power is exercised for private gain, including both petty and grand forms of corruption, as well as

‘capture’ of the state by elites and private interests (The World Bank Group, 2015).

Therefore, we will analyse the voice and accountability which captures perceptions of the extent to

which a country's citizens are able to participate in selecting their government, as well as freedom

of expression, freedom of association, and a free media (The World Bank Group, 2015). This

indicator is mean to measure the level of democracy.

All the indicators are measured on a scale from 0 to 100, 0 is the lowest score while 100 is the

highest.

10 We don’t consider the deployment of AMIS as an event relevant which change the status of the conflict in

non forgotten because it was a mission established by the AU but rather the UNAMID which was an agreement be-tween the UN and the AU

21

Table 2 : Evolution of the political indicators for the period 2003-2009 in Sudan

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Political

stability and

absence of

violence

3.85 5.77 3.37 1.92 2.4 1.91 0.95

Control of

corruption

6.83 7.8 2.44 9.76 3.88 2.91 7.18

Voice and

accountability

4.81 4.81 4.33 4.81 6.73 6.25 4.27

Source: Made by the author with the information from The World Bank Group (2015) ‘The worldwide Governance indicators’ available at http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#countryReports visited on June 19th 2015

Political stability and absence of violence

The analysis of the political stability and absence of violence allows us to see if the political

situation deteriorates and if it is along with violence. It makes us realize the seriousness of the

conflict, and if there is motivated violence from the government.

Graph 4 : Evolution of the index of Political stability and absence of violence of Sudan from 2003 to 2009

Source: Made by the author with the data from The World Bank Group (2015) ‘The worldwide Governance indicators’ available at http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#countryReports visited on June 19th 2015

According to the data, the level of political stability and absence of violence in Sudan has always

been low. In 2003, when the conflict erupted, on a scale from 0 to 100, the level of political stability

and absence of violence was equal to 3.85.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

22

It increases in from 2003 to 2004 to reach a level of 5.77. After this it falls at 1.92 in 2006. It

increase slightly in 2007 and decrease significantly in 2008 to reach 1.91.

We can conclude from this analysis that Sudan has always been a political unstable country with

violence. Nevertheless it became worse during the conflict. This fall of political stability pursued

with violence is a factor of intervention. In fact, if the level of violence becomes too much

important, the international community become morally involved. Moreover, this indicator

measures the absence of terrorism. The fact that the situation deteriorates involved directly the

international community, especially after the attacks of 2001. Indeed, since 2001, the fight of

terrorism became a priority.

However, this analysis can explain why the conflict stayed forgotten during five years. According to

the theory, the complexity of internal politics is a factor of non intervention (Crocker et al., 2004).

Control of corruption

The analysis of the control of corruption is an interesting indicator because it allows us to

understand how the political class govern the country. It allows us to establish link with democracy

also.

Sudan has a high level of corruption; in 2014 it was among the most corrupted country in the world

(SudanTribune, 2015).It means that the Sudanese government exert his power for private gain. This

high level of corruption can lead to inequalities and intensification of the conflict.

23

Graph 5 : Evolution of the index of control of corruption of Sudan from 2003 to 2009

Source: Made by the author with the data from The World Bank Group (2015) ‘The worldwide Governance indicators’ available at http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#countryReports visited on June 19th 2015

If we analyse the control of corruption for the case of Sudan and more specifically from 2003 to

2009, we can see that even if the level of the control of corruption stays low, it fluctuate. Indeed,

when the conflict erupted in 2003, the level of control of corruption was 6.83. It stays more or less

stable in 2004 and the fall in 2005 to reach a level of 2.44 when the conflict was at high level of

violence. In 2006 it increases to reach 9.76 and then decrease in 2007 and reach 2.91 in 2008. We

can assume that the political situation has an impact on the conflict, especially in the case of Darfur

where one of the causes of the conflict is due to inequalities. The fact that the country became more

and more corrupted is an indicator that explains why the international community decided to

intervene in Darfur.

This high level of corruption is an indicator that shows us that Sudan is an instable country where

the need to intervene were essential.

As we have already mentioned, the poor political situation can also explain why the conflict stays

forgotten, due to complexity of internal politics.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

24

Voice and accountability

Voice and accountability is a tool to understand how democratic and free a country is.

In the case of Sudan it has always been low.

Graph 6 : Evolution of the index of voice and accountability of Sudan from 2003 to 2009

Source: Made by the author with the data from The World Bank Group (2015) ‘The worldwide Governance indicators’

available at http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#countryReports visited on June 19th 2015

If we look into details the evolution of this indicator, we can see that the situation stays stable from

2003 till 2007 but at a very low level. In 2003, at the beginning of the conflict, the level was equal

to 4.81. It increases a bit in 2007 to reach 6.73. The explanation of the curve is not significant

because the evolution is not remarkable but the conclusion that we can make is that the political

situation of Sudan has been poor during all the conflict while it was forgotten. Indeed, it can be a

factor that leads the international community to intervene in order to solve the conflict.

As a conclusion, we can say that the political situation has been horrific from the beginning of the

conflict. The situation tends to worsening along the conflict according to the analysis of different

political indicators. A deterioration of the political situation in Sudan can explain why the

international community get involve in 2008 through the UNAMID mission.

On the other hand, according to the theory, the complexity of internal politics may discourage some

country to get involved in a conflict (Crocker et al., 2004). The complex political situation of Sudan

explains why the conflict stays forgotten during the first five years while the worsening of the latter

explain why it get attention from international community.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

25

3.2.2 Security aspects

The conflict intensity index is a five-level model of conflict intensity. It is rank from 1 to 5,

1 known as dispute, 2 as non-violent crisis, 3 as violent crisis 4 as limited war and 5 as war (HIIK,

2010). The graph below is a summary of the intensity level index and the meaning.

Graph 7 : Explanation of different intensity level index

Source: Retrieved from Heidelberger Institut für Internationale Konfliktforschung e.V. (HIIK). (2010). Conflict

Barometer . Crises - Wars - Coups d’État. Negotiations - Mediations - Peace Settlements. Conflict.

Graph 8 : Evolution of conflict intensity index of Sudan from 2003 to 2009

Source: Made by the author with information from Heidelberger Institut für Internationale Konfliktforschung

e.V. (HIIK). (2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010). Conflict Barometer . Crises - Wars - Coups d’État. Negotiations - Mediations - Peace Settlements. Conflict.

The conflict of Darfur started in 2003 with an intensity level of 4. The year after and till 2008, it

reaches and stays at le highest level, placing the conflict as a war. The conflict stays from 2004 till

2008 at the highest level of intensity. The conflict reaches a level of violence that was consider as

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

26

sufficient to make an intervention. This is confirmed when we look at the conflict intensity of 2009.

Indeed, it decreased and reaches the level of 4 after the intervention of the international community.

Regarding the number of death, it is hard to know the exact number of death during a conflict,

especially in the case of Darfur where the causes of mortality are numerous (Degomme & Phelan,

2005). Moreover, the UN has proved some disinterest of publishing data regarding the number of

death in Darfur (Reeves, 2013). Besides, it is difficult to obtain reliable data because of different

methodology used to count the death.

In February 2005, most press article mention 50 000 death but the total number was probably much

higher (ForeignAffair, 2005). U.S. Agency for International Development told journalists that the

number of death could reach 350,000 by the end of 2005 (ForeignAffair, 2005).

Despite the lack of reliable data, researchers all agreed that the mortality in Darfur increase

dramatically from 2003 to 2008. According the theory, there is a level of mortality that needs to be

reach in order to attract the attention of international aid. Indeed, if there are an important number

of deaths, the international community is morally involved in the resolution of a conflict. Moreover,

the conflict has been labelled as genocide by many institutions. This strong label encouraged

international aid to intervene on moral and ethical issues

The analysis of people in need gives us a general view of the situation in Darfur. Even if data are

hard to find, the UN provides some.

Graph 9 : Evolution of the Humanitarian need from 2003 to 2008

Source: Edited from EnoughProject (2015) ‘Infographics: The Forgotten Conflicts in Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile ‘available at http://enoughproject.org/multimedia/infographic-forgotten-conflict-darfur visited on May 15th 2015

In september 2003, the United Nations estimated that 500.000 people were in need in the

region of Darfur. From March to October, the WHO estimated that 70.000 people died from

unsanitary conditions. To finish, in July 2007, before the UNAMID mission was established, 4

27

million were estimated in need in the region of Darfur, eight time more than at the beginning of the

conflict. The rapid and disquieting degradation of the situation of Darfur has been a factor that lead

to an involvement from the international community and a change of status from forgotten to non

forgotten. Indeed, the fast degradation has encouraged different countries to help in Darfur.

Concerning the number of IDPs, in September 2003, 223.000 people were considered as IDPs. This

number increase and reach 1.45 million in September 2004 (UN, 2003-2004 in EnoughProject,

2015). It was multiplied by more than 6.5 in one year. In 2005, according to OCHA, the number of

IDP was 1.9 million. In September 2009, the number of IDP was 2.7 million. This important

increase of IDP was a threat for the world security because it means that the conflict can extend to

neighboring countries such as Chad, already in conflict. This increase of the IDP became an

international issue and the need to intervene became important. As a matter of fact, conflicts

generate population movement. Neighbouring countries might be interested to intervene not to

receive in their own territory this population and also international community to defend their own

interest and avoid the extent of the conflict. Furthermore, this region of Africa is already an

important zone of tension where conflicts are numerous. The extent of this conflict could generate a

global crisis in East Africa.

To conclude, we can consider that the United Nations decided to intervene in 2008 because of the

degradation of the situation. The growing number of death, people in humanitarian need and IDP

reached a sufficient level to morally involve the international community. For moral and ethical

issue, the international community had to intervene. Besides, it seems that the conditions of the

population were not sufficiently disquieting at the beginning of the conflict. For this reason, the

conflict stays forgotten at the beginning.

3.2.3 Social aspects

The social aspects are an interesting facet to look at while trying to understand why a

conflict changes status from forgotten to non forgotten. For the purpose of this work, we decided to

look at the evolution of the HDI in Sudan. The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary

measure of average achievement in key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life,

being knowledgeable and have a decent standard of living (UNDP, 2015). It allows us to evaluate

the living conditions of Sudanese population.

28

Graph 10 : Evolution of the HDI of Sudan from 1980 to nowadays

Source: Retrieved from UNDP (2015) ‘Human Development Indicators, Sudan’ available at

http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/SDN visited on May 10th 2015

Sudan has always had a low HDI. If we look at the evolution of the HDI from 2003 to 2008, we can

see that it increased slightly but no significantly.

However, if we have a look at the world rank of Sudan concerning the HDI, the situation seems

more perturbing.

Table 3 : Evolution of the HDI ranking of Sudan from 1980 till 2013

Source: Retrived from CountryEconomy (2014) ‘Sudan-Human Development Index-HDI’ available at

http://countryeconomy.com/hdi/sudan visited on June 8th 2015

We can obviously see that even if the HDI increase from 2003 to 2008, the situation compared to

the rest of the world is worsening. Indeed, from the period 2000 till 2008, Sudan lost 9 places in the

29

HDI world ranking. According to this ranking, Sudanese population are among those that leave the

worst in a development point of view.

We can conclude from this ranking that the situation of Sudan get worse and worrisome. It is a

reason why the international community wanted to intervene and try to make the situation gets

better.

3.2.4 Resources in Darfur

Sudan and the region of Darfur are rich in resources. Indeed Sudan as the 5th biggest reserve

in Petrol of the African continent (Arte, 2007). It has important resources in copper, uranium and a

large deposit of natural gas. It has one of the three largest deposits of high-purity uranium in the

world, and the fourth-largest deposits of copper (Flounders, 2006).

The Sudanese government relies on Darfur because of it in Petrol and Uranium (Duhayon, 2006)

According to theory, countries where occur forgotten conflicts are usually source of interest in terms

of resources. It is country where oil, diamond, gold can be exploited (Bustelo, 2003).

It is an important aspect to analyze to understand why in those country there is intervention or not.

In the case of Darfur, the resources are important and could be one of the reasons why some

countries intervene in 2008 with the United Nation within the UNAMID mission.

In order to analyse the situation, we need to understand what the resources in Darfur are, and who

owns and control it.

Concerning the petrol, The United States owned party of the petrol of Sudan. But after the events of

2001, and the Sudanese civil war, they decided to remove their operating company.

China has then worked with Sudan in providing the technology for exploration, drilling, pumping

and the building of a pipeline and buys much of Sudan’s oil. China is the largest recipient of Suda-

nese oil production. In 2007, 425 000 barrels were exported each day to China on a daily production

of 500 000 barrels. Sudan is the third biggest oil supplier for China.

In exchange, China delivers weapons and military equipment to Sudan (Angsthelm, 2007).

This agreement between the two countries created some problems concerning the resolution of the

conflict. Indeed, China is a constant member of the Security Council of the United Nations along

with The United States, United Kingdom, France and Russia. The permanent member of the council

possess a veto right that they can use in the decision taken in the Security Council. China has tried

since 2003 to avoid hardening of the resolutions of the UN Security Council concerning Darfur

30

even if it never used her veto. The fact that China has a resource relation with Sudan can explain

why the conflict remains forgotten during some years (Angsthelm, 2007).

Indeed, it was not in the interest of China to be in favor of an intervention from the United Nations

because it relies on the Sudanese oil production.

As we have seen, Darfur is an important zone of resources. Those resources have a direct influence

on the resolution of the conflict. On one hand, we can assume that the fact that China maintains

relation with Sudan concerning oil is slowing down the resolution of the conflict. On the other hand,

we can assume that developed country have resources interest in Darfur such as copper, oil and

uranium.

3.3 Tentative answer of the case of Darfur

After the analysis of different indicators, we can conclude that despite the traditional opinion

that tend to think that Humanitarian interventions are only driven by resources interests, there are

other indicators that explain why forgotten conflict bring the attention of international community.

Indeed, the political situation is one key to understand why a conflict bring the attention of

international community. In the case of Darfur, the political situation was already poor at the

beginning of the conflict and tends to be worse till 2007, before the intervention of the United

Nations. The world peace is an argument that can explain the will to intervene, especially at the

beginning of the twentieth century where the fight of terrorism became a priority.

Moreover, the security aspects are essential in order to understand why a conflict stays at the status

of forgotten for several years and then bring the attention from the international community. Indeed,

in the case of Darfur, the number of deaths and IDP was an important aspect. The number of death

increasing significantly has morally and ethically involved the international community.

Furthermore, the increasing number of IDPs involved security issues. Indeed, for world security, it

appears as essential to intervene in order that the conflict does not extend in other countries. The

deaths due to sickness also involve security issue. In order not to spread the sickness and have an

increase number of death, it appears as essential to intervene.

The social aspect is one facet to analyse to understand the sudden interest of the international

community. The degradation of the Sudanese HDI was an indicator of the investment in the

resolution of the conflict in Darfur.

31

To finish, the important resources of the region of Darfur has played a major role in the setting of

the Peacekeeping mission. Without a doubt, developed countries were interested in the Sudanese oil,

copper and uranium.

However, some of the aspects analyzed in this paper are controversial and help us to understand

why the conflict stayed forgotten. In fact, the terrible political situation of Sudan can explain why

the conflict remains forgotten during several years. According to the theory, in forgotten conflict

where there is a complicated political situation, countries don’t want to get involved.

Moreover, resources can be a brake to an intervention. In the case of Darfur this is clear that China

slow down the process to protect her own interests. To finish, the level of violence can explain why

the conflict stayed forgotten. As a matter of fact, the level of violence needs to be perceived as

sufficient by the international community.

Some other factors were not analyzed in this paper. For instance, the role of media is a central

aspect. In the case of Sudan, the media are not free and control by the government that doesn’t want

report about the case of Darfur (Duhayon,2006). Indeed, that explains why the conflict remained

forgotten during several years. For example, the first article that describes the situation in Darfur in

United Stated was released in December 2003, almost one year after the beginning of the crisis

(SaveDarfur, 2015)

One last argument that we didn’t analyse is the difficulty to access the field. Despite all the

indicators seen before, one important reason why there is forgotten conflict remains in the difficulty

to access the field. Indeed, in the case of Darfur, the region is hard to access because of insecurity

and restriction on travel. 11.This is one of the main obstacle that face the Humanitarian helps and

different organization (HPG, 2004)

4. Comparison between USA and Norway

As we have seen before, there are some factors that lead to the involvement of international

community in a forgotten conflict. However, there might be some difference of strategy and interest

depending of country. That’s why, in order to understand those difference, we are going to analyse

the case of USA and Norway in the intervention of Darfur.

11 For this paper, we decided not to control this variable because this is the case for most forgotten conflict. It

make this work more generalizable.

32

4.1 Key figures

In 2013, Norway was the eighth largest government donor of official humanitarian

assistance. Norway’s ODA was equal to 1.1% of gross national income (GNI)

(GlobalHumanitarianAssistance, 2015), making it one of the most important donor in percentage of

GNI. Between 2008 and 2012, 68% of Norway’s humanitarian assistance went to countries

classifies as fragile12.

During the last decade, the largest recipients of Norway’s humanitarian assistance have been West

Bank and Gaza, Jordan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Norway’s policy regarding

Humanitarian assistance is following some principles such as promoting peace, reconciliation and

development (Store, 2006), ensuring that people in need receive assistance according to

humanitarian principles, that the international community is equipped to meet future global

humanitarian challenges, and to prevent and respond to humanitarian crises

(GlobalHumanitarianAssistance, 2015).

Norway is a member of the Good Humanitarian Donorship and adheres to it principles

(GlobalHumanitarianAssistance, 2015).

Concerning The United States, it was in 2013, the largest government donor of official

humanitarian assistance, in US dollar. The US’ ODA was equal to 0.2% of gross national income

(GNI). Between 2008 and 2012, 90% of the US’ humanitarian assistance went to countries classifies

as fragile13.

In the last 10 years the largest recipients of its humanitarian assistance have been Sudan, Ethiopia

and Pakistan (GlobalHumanitarianAssistance, 2015).

The US policy concerning Humanitarian assistance is following several principles such as increase

food security, promote global health systems, reduce climate change impacts, promote sustainable

and broad-based economic growth, prosperous and democratic states, and paying close attention to

the challenges women and girls face in post-disaster environments and prevent conflicts.

(GlobalHumanitarianAssistance, 2015).

The The United States is also a member of the Good Humanitarian Donorship and adheres to it

principles (GlobalHumanitarianAssistance, 2015).

12 According to the 2014 OECD Fragile States report. 13 According to the 2014 OECD Fragile States report.

33

Table 4 : Summary of the key figures regarding Humanitarian aid for Norway and The United States

Norway The United States

Rank in 2013 8th 1st

ODA in % of the GNI in

2013

1.1% 0.2%

% of

humanitarian assistance

that went to countries

classifies as fragile

68% 90%

Largest recipient West Bank and Gaza,

DRC14, Jordan

Sudan, Ethiopia, Pakistan

Humanitarian principles ○ Make sure that people in

need receive assistance

funded according to

humanitarian principles

○ make sure that the

international community

has the necessary

equipment to solve

humanitarian challenges

○ prevent and respond to

humanitarian crises

○ increase food security

○ promote global health systems

○ reduce climate change impacts

○ paying close attention to the

challenges women and girls face in

post-disaster environments

○ prevent and respond to crises,

conflict and instability.

Member of the Good

Humanitarian donorship

Yes Yes

Source: Made by the author based on the information from Global Humanitarian Assistance (2015), 'Norway' available at http://www.globalhumanitarianassistance.org/countryprofile/norway visited on June 24th 2015 and Global Humanitarian Assistance (2015), 'The United States' available at http://www.globalhumanitarianassistance.org/countryprofile/norway visited on June 24th 2015

According to this table, we can see that Norway and USA have similar profile in term of

humanitarian assistance. They are both important donors, The United States in terms of dollars and

Norway in percentage of GNI. They are both member of the Good Humanitarian donorship,

meaning that they agree to some principles when they decide to take part in a humanitarian

intervention.

14 Democratic Republic of Congo

34

They both give an important percentage of aid to ‘fragile states’, where forgotten conflicts occurred.

They are important actors regarding Humanitarian action but also important actors in the case of

Darfur. In the following part we will analyze their reactions concerning the UNAMID mission.

4.2 The role of Norway and The United States in Darfur

4.2.1 The role of Norway

Norway has been involved in the crisis of Darfur before the UNAMID mission. In February

2004, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Norway, Jan Petersen declared ‘Norway is extremely concerned

about the further deterioration of the already dramatic humanitarian situation in Darfur province

in western Sudan in the last few days’ (Norwegian Government, 2004).

Norway has been concerned by the conflicts and has been discussing with the Sudanese authorities

and the UN secretary general Kofi Annan to raise the issue. It was important for Norway to urges

the conflict to enter in ceasefire to be able to provide humanitarian help (Norwegian Government,

2004). The role of Norway at the beginning of the conflict was to pressure the UN and the Sudanese

government to intervene in order to solve the conflict.

Jan Petersen declared ‘Norway will together with other donors do what is necessary to provide

humanitarian relief and protection for the population of Darfur, and has urgently requested the UN

to take a leading role in these efforts. We also urge the parties to find a solution to the conflict at the

negotiating table.’

For the UNAMID mission, Norway and Sweden have allied to assist the UN in the implementation

of peace. The Norwegian-Swedish unit was composed of 400 personnel, which represent an

important regarding the other countries. Only Sweden and Norway have made significant troop

offers, although others have offered staff officers (Sudan Tribune, 2007).

4.2.2 The role of The United States

The United States has an important role in the case of Sudan and more specifically, Darfur.

Indeed, USA contributes approximately to 25% of UNAMID’s budget. It is also the largest single

donor to Sudan. Moreover, USA played a primary role on the deployment of the troops for

UNAMID. The U.S was working with the UN and other allies to train troops from the UNAMID

mission and provide equipment (Embassy of US in Sudan, 2008)

35

In February 2008, when President Bush went to Darfur, he gave an additional $100 million to train

and equip African troop-contributing countries to prepare them for their participation in UNAMID.

Moreover, the U.S imposes sanctions on companies owned or linked by the Sudanese government

to increase pressure.

4.3 Difference of interest and strategy

Despite the important efforts made by Norway and The United States, we wonder why the

conflict in Darfur remain forgotten during several years and bring attention in 2007 with the

deployment of the UNAMID mission. The difference between US and Norway lies in the different

aid that they provide in the UNAMID mission.

In the case of The United States, since the event of September 2001, the priority is given to world

security and fight against terrorism. Indeed, Darfur is an unstable and insecure region of Africa, in

which the promotion of peace and stability is essential. The fear remains in the fact that if there is

no intervention, Sudan could become an ungoverned space propitious for terrorist element.

This hypothesis is confirmed once we know that The United States contribute at one-eighth of

UNAMID security operation (UN peacekeeping, 2015). Moreover, the use of military force

confirms the fact that US is protecting its own interest. Since the event of September 11th 2001 The

US policy tend to unilaterally defend its interests by use of military force (Nan, 2010).

As we have seen in the third part, resources play an important role in the deployment of a humanitarian

intervention. We can’t take for granted that the US intervene for this reason, but it could be one of the

reasons. Indeed, the needs of petrol from the US are important and they have already implemented

pipeline in neighbouring countries.

On the other hand, Norway adopted another strategy. The fact that Norway allied it forces with

Sweden reduce the hypothesis that the involvement was driven by interest. In fact, they shared with

Sweden a common mission means that Norway was not interested by own interest.

The alliance with another Nordic country that is well-known in social progress and protection of

Human Rights shows us that the involvement in the mission was driven by moral and ethical

matters. Norway and Sweden have a world reputation to keep in terms of humanitarian help and

protection of human rights. For this purpose they needed to get involved in the UNAMID mission.

Moreover, the strategy adopted by Norway (without Sweden), was mostly pressuring different

actors to make an intervention. Norway pressured the UN and the Sudanese government to raise and

36

solve the issue. When we look at the achievement of Norway in the conflict of Darfur, it is mostly

based on negotiations and pressure.

To finish, the fact that the conflict of Darfur stays forgotten during several years is probably not due

to a total disinterest of countries but rather a priority issue.

The analysis of those two key actors helps us to understand that strategies are different across

countries. While some decide to provide military support, other decides to pressure different parties.

This confirms our analysis of the conflict where some changes inside the conflict will lead to the

involvement of international community. Those will then act with their own strategy under certain

principles and interests.

5. Conclusion

The previous analysis of the forgotten conflicts phenomenon contains some limitations. First

of all, to have a broader vision of the conflict, we should analyze more indicators and the role of media.

Moreover, most of the forgotten conflicts happen within countries. Using data from the country to

analyse the case of one region is not the most reliable way. Moreover, in order to have a deeper analyse

of difference of strategy, we should also analyse the situation inside country we are comparing and not

only their intervention itself.

In a future research, we should include more key actors of the conflict. The role of France seems to be

an essential actor in an African conflict just as the role of the European Union.

By analyzing the conflict in Darfur that start in 2003 and bring the attention in 2007, we can understand

that Humanitarian interventions are driven by interest and strategy. It explains partially why some

conflicts stay forgotten. First of all, different factors explain us why a conflict stays forgotten. The

instability of the political situation can restrict humanitarian interventions. Indeed, countries don’t want

to get involved in the business of another country or in wars. Moreover, in some case where the political

situation is poor, governments can disagree to receive help.

The resources owned by the country can slow down intervention as well. The case of Darfur illustrates

perfectly this facet. In fact, if the resources in conflict are exploited by another powerful country, the

latter can restrain or be opposed to make humanitarian intervention to protect its own interests.

The social and security aspects also explain why a conflict stays forgotten. Indeed, contrary to the

principle of the United Nations, a conflict needs to reach a sufficient level of atrocity to bring attention.

If the international community consider that the number of death is not sufficient to be morally involved,

37

there won’t be any interventions.

The previous analysis helps us to understand at which point the international community decide to

intervene. The general political situation of the country is an important facet. A poor political situation

can lead to a rise of terrorism, which will lead to an intervention. Moreover, a conflict that stays

forgotten during several years can extent to other countries due to displaced persons that flew their

home. International community needs to intervene in order to prevent this extension. The level of

violence and death is also major in the will to intervene. There is moral and ethical issue under this facet.

Indeed, if the level of death is consider as sufficient, the international community will intervene.

As expected, resources are a major aspect in the will to intervene. Humanitarian interventions are often

driven by interests, especially in countries where oil is present.

However, the analysis of key actors makes us understand that intervention, interests and strategies

differs from countries. It seems that there are always interests in making humanitarian intervention, but

it is not necessary appalling interests that go against Humanitarian principle. For instance, a country can

have interests in resources but also in world peace.

Without any doubts, Humanitarian actions are a strategic mean. As a UNHCR observed, ‘the UN’s

humanitarian activities have become politicized, it is rather that we’ve been transformed into the only

manifestation of international political will.’ (Minear, 1997).

Humanitarian intervention is becoming a tool to defend or get some new interests while population are

suffering.

To conclude, the phenomenon of forgotten conflicts remains worrying and little known by the public

opinion. The fact is that the number of forgotten conflict is increasing years after years especially during

the last decade and are still unknown from the public opinion. Those conflicts generate violence,

violation of Human Rights, displaced persons and long term wars. Most of the time, they stay forgotten

during several years and suddenly bring the attention from the international community.

Humanitarian action, in principle and by definition, is a response to basic human needs for protection

and assistance (Minear and Weiss, 1995).

Darfur was considered as the worst humanitarian crisis of the 21st century where Human rights were and

are still being violated every day. However, the United Nations intervene five years after the beginning

of the conflict. The case of Darfur is not isolated and interventions are needed in several part of the

world. The need to spread information about the phenomenon of forgotten conflict is real in order to

stop violation of human rights.

38

Bibliography:

Aguirre Mariano and Rodríguez Elizabeth, ‘Conflictos armados y crisis ambientales’, en María

Novo (Dir.), Globalización, crisis ambiental y educación, Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y

Deporte, Madrid, 2002

Angsthelm (2007) ‘Conflits et pétrole, l’exemple du Darfour’, available at http://archives-fig-st-

die.cndp.fr/actes/actes_2007/angsthelm/article.htm

Arte (2007), le dessous des cartes [Report] ’Le conflit au Soudan’ available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYvDN7BPrMM watched on May 24th 2015

Bustelo, M. G. (2003). Conflictos olvidados. Retrieved June 12, 2015, from

http://www.seipaz.org/articulo/conflidados.htm

CountryEconomy (2014) ‘Sudan-Human Development Index-HDI’ available at

http://countryeconomy.com/hdi/sudan visited on June 8th 2015

Crocker, C. A., Hampson, F. O., & Aall, P. R. (2004) 'Taming Intractable Conflicts: Mediation in

the Hardest Cases.' US Institute of Peace Press.

Degomme, O., & Phelan, M. (2005). Darfur : Counting the Deaths. Methods, 1–44.

Duhayon Olivier (2006) 'Le Darfour : oublié et pourtant une des pires crises humanitaires depuis

déjà quelques années…'1-7

Embassy of US in Sudan (2008) 'The United States Accomplishments in Sudan' available at

http://sudan.usembassy.gov/us_acmp_sudan.html visited on August 8th 2015

EnoughProject (2015) ‘Infographics: The Forgotten Conflicts in Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue

Nile’ available at http://enoughproject.org/multimedia/infographic-forgotten-conflict-darfur visited

on May 15th 2015

Félix Santos Álvarez. (2006). D. Félix Santos Álvarez, 61–81.

Flounders Sara (2006) 'The U.S Role in Darfur, Sudan' available at

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-u-s-role-in-darfur-sudan/2592 visited on June 19th 2015

39

Foreign Affairs (2005) 'Darfur and the Genocide Debate', available at

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/sudan/2005-01-01/darfur-and-genocide-debate visited on

August 3rd 2015

Global Humanitarian Assistance (2015), 'Norway' available at

http://www.globalhumanitarianassistance.org/countryprofile/norway visited on June 24th 2015

Global Humanitarian Assistance (2015), 'The United States' available at

http://www.globalhumanitarianassistance.org/countryprofile/norway visited on June 24th 2015

Grunewald, F. (2001). Zones grises, crises durables, conflits oubliés : les défis humanitaires,

83(June), 15–16.

Hawkins Virgil (2001) ‘The Price of Inaction: The Media and Humanitarian Intervention’ available

at https://sites.tufts.edu/jha/archives/1504 visited on April 6th 2015

Heidelberger Institut für Internationale Konfliktforschung e.V. (HIIK). (2010). 'Conflict Barometer

2010. Crises - Wars - Coups d’État. Negotiations - Mediations - Peace Settlements. Conflict.'

Retrieved from

http://www.konfliktbarometer.de/de/konfliktbarometer/pdf/ConflictBarometer_2010.pdf\nhttp://ww

w.konfliktbarometer.de/de/konfliktbarometer/

HPG (2004) 'Humanitarian issues in Darfur, Sudan' HPG briefing notes 1-4

K.Betts, R. (2004). Betts - Conflict After the Cold War (1-167)

ICRtoP (2013) 'The crisis in Darfur' available at

http://www.responsibilitytoprotect.org/index.php/crises/crisis-in-darfur visited on June 14th 2015

IRIN organisation (2015) ‘The world’s conflict’ available at http://newirin.irinnews.org/forgotten-

conflicts/

Kaldor, M. (2007). Human Security. Polity. Retrieved from

https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=gJsuLTflHecC&pgis=1

40

Mary Kaldor, Human Security: Reflections on Globalization and Intervention (Polity Press, Cam-

bridge, 2007), p.16

Macrae, J., & Leader, N. (2000). HPG Report Shifting sands : complex emergencies Please send comments on this paper to : Development. Minear Larry (1997) 'Humanitarian action and peacekeeping operations' available at https://sites.tufts.edu/jha/archives/110 visited on July 8th 2015 Minear Larry and Thomas G. Weiss, Humanitarian Politics (New York: Foreign Policy Association,

1995) available at https://sites.tufts.edu/jha/archives/110

Nan Mada lina Elena (2010) 'New Humanitarianism with Old Problems: The Forgotten Les-son of Rwanda' available at https://sites.tufts.edu/jha/archives/780 visited on June 16th 2015

Nielson, P. (2002). Dropping off the Map - Why are some conflicts forgotten ?, 63, 1–5.

Norwegian Government (2004) 'Norway seriously concerned about the situation in Darfur'

available at https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/norway_seriously_concerned_about/id253551/

visited on July 14th 2015

Reeves Erik (2013) ' Human mortality in Darfur: What is unspoken, and what this silence means'

available at http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article47961 visited on May 7th 2015

SaveDarfur (2015) ‘An intereactive history of the conflict’available at http://savedarfur.org/the-

conflict/darfur/ visited on May 4th 2015

Store Ghar Jonas 'The Role of Human Rights in Peace Agreements - Norway’s facilitation of peace

processes' available at https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/the-role-of-human-rights-in-peace-

agreem/id420830/ visited on August 2nd 2015

Sudan Tribune (2015) 'Corruption' available at http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?mot141

visited on August 8th 2015

Sudan Tribune (2007) ' Norway, Sweden in new territory with Darfur force' available at

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article24109 visited on July 14th 2015

The World Bank Group (2015) ‘The worldwide Governance indicators’ available at

http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#countryReports visited on June 19th 2015

41

UN, ‘The UN Responds to the Crisis in Darfur: A Timeline’, 2003-2004 in EnoughProject (2015)

‘Infographics: The Forgotten Conflicts in Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile’available at

http://enoughproject.org/multimedia/infographic-forgotten-conflict-darfur visited on May 15th 2015

UN peacekeeping (2015) ' The UN - African Union Mission in Darfur' available at http://www.betterworldcampaign.org/un-peacekeeping/missions/darfur.html visited on July 8th

UNDP (2015) ‘Human Development Indicators, Sudan’ available at http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/SDN visited on May 10th 2015

UPPSALA Department of Peace and Conflict Research (2015), 'Sudan' available at

http://www.ucdp.uu.se/gpdatabase/gpcountry.php?id=145 visited on June 30th 2015

42

Annex 1 : Ongoing forgotten conflict in the world today and their years of beginning

Region/country Since

Kashmir 1947

Israel/Palestine 1948

Myanmar 1948

North/South Korea 1953

Democratic Republic of Congo 1960

Colombia 1964

Philipines 1969

Indonesia 1969

Western Sahara 1970

Philipines 1971

India 1979

Peru 1980

India 1980

Senegal 1982

Turkey 1984

Uganda/south Sudan 1987

Somalia 1988

Armenia/Azerbaijan 1988

Democratic Republic of Congo 1994

Uganda/Democratic Republic

of Congo

1995

Chechnya 1999

Afghanistan/Pakistan 2001

Darfur 2003

Yemen 2004

Iran 2004

Pakistan 2004

Thailand 2004

Mexico 2006

North Africa 2007

43

Ethiopia 2007

Nigeria 2009

Libya 2011

South Kordofan/Blue Nile 2011

South Sudan 2011

Sinai Peninsula 2011

Syria 2011

Mali 2012

Central African Republic 2013

Iraq 2014

Ukraine 2014 Source: Elaborated by the author, based on IRIN organisation (2015) ‘The world’s conflict’ available at http://newirin.irinnews.org/forgotten-conflicts/