So what. But just a couple of moths ago, the ED spoke to the Security Council on the situation in Haiti, ending with an appeal for more UNICEF funding. “Lastly, we call on donors to [...] contribute to funding appeals... Without immediate donor support, our life-saving assistance and protection services [...] are at serious risk...UNICEF stands ready to work with this Council". As if the members of the Security Council were donors and not guarantors of peace.
Perhaps I am reading too much into it. Not everyone is in the habit of staring down war lords. But perhaps it's slowly dawning on UN leaders that development doesn't depend on money given to the aid industry, but on the decisions that governments in developing countries have to make.
More Insights from Outside the Bubble, by Detlef Palm
Write to Detlef at detlefpalm55@gmail.com
Let’s be honest about Sudan. This catastrophe did not emerge in a vacuum, nor was it engineered in Northern Europe. The UAE, Saudi Arabia and Egypt have been decisive external actors—financing factions, shaping incentives, and sustaining the very power structures that now tear the country apart.
ReplyDeleteIf regional powers insist on playing kingmakers, they cannot outsource the bill when the project collapses. Responsibility follows influence.
European taxpayers did not arm militias, bankroll generals, or turn Sudan into a chessboard for Gulf and Nile geopolitics. Yet once again, they are told to foot the humanitarian bill while those who helped break the country continue business as usual.
Aid is not a substitute for accountability. If Sudan is to be stabilised, those who broke it should be the first to pay—financially, politically, and diplomatically.
The press release - and my observation on it, was about South Sudan, not Sudan.... (though I agree with your above view of Sudan)
DeleteThanks. Three aspects which I’ll be happy to develop further - a bit later.
ReplyDelete1/ for decades we have observed - and continuously shared - that UNICEF substituted itself for Government ‘s own responsibilities. Examples abound. Strategies sometimes differ.
2/ Many Governments we work with, do not care for the basic services accessible to all. So, insisting four times in late 2025 that they themselves first of all should, is welcome.
3/ Believing that saying this out loud to the Security Council these days is good enough, is not enough. UNICEF is well positioned to examine in 2026 every bilateral MoU between the USA and the recipient (?) country. I studied painstakingly the recent one with Nigeria. It overtly degrades everything multilateralism stands for. It is empty of engagement and commitment from either side. In fact, I shall argue that the intentional misconceptions - in particular those concerning women and children - are harmful for the entire human rights ethic. A disaster only waiting to happen.
Fri Jan 9 Ludo Welffens