USAID Testimony: J. Brian Atwood, Administrator, March 23, 1999

This is an archived USAID document retained on this web site as a matter of public record.

Testimony of J. Brian Atwood Administrator
before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
Subcommittee on Africa
March 23, 1999

Mr. Chairman, I want to take this opportunity to thank you and Senator Feingold for not only holding this hearing, but also for your continued work on behalf of the people of Sudan. I am pleased to testify today on the status of U.S. assistance efforts in Sudan.
Mr. Chairman, last July you and your colleagues passed a very important Senate Resolution on Sudan.
This Resolution drew broad public attention to the ongoing tragedy in Sudan and the need for peace. It also highlighted the importance of providing urgently needed humanitarian assistance in concert with a longer-term strategy of building local capacity inside Sudan. I commend you for advocating such an approach because I believe that it is the only one that offers a way out of this conflict. We share not only your hope for a better future for Sudan, but, of course, your great frustration with this conflict that seems to have no end.
Today, we can report some progress. Since your Resolution passed last July, there has been a cease-fire. Since that time, we have been able to work with nongovernmental organizations on humanitarian efforts, to repair roads and increase food distribution, and to carry out capacity-building efforts among the civilian population. And we are working to expand the cease-fire.
Mr. Chairman your resolution encourages us to try and break the pattern of the past and find ways to deal more effectively with these difficult problems.
Today I cannot come before you with news of a significant breakthrough, but I can report that we do have a different approach that may offer hope.
I want to focus on three areas wherein the U.S. government and others in the international community are currently involved in Sudan. First on the diplomatic side, the donor group was able to convince the combatants to agree to a ceasefire. The U.S. in concert with other donors is now actively involved in a reactivated peace process.
Second, we have worked to build capacity in the south and to empower people to deal with military leaders and factions through a new development program.
Third, we have modified our food and disaster assistance programs over the past several years to build local capacity, build roads and increase self-sufficiency. We believe that this approach will enable people to see that peace is more in their interest than war. This approach, we believe, will give people in Southern Sudan a stake in the peace process.
Let me expand on these three points.
In terms of the diplomatic efforts, the U.S. has been supporting the Inter-governmental Authority on Development (IGAD), the regional organization for addressing the issues of peace and food security in East Africa, which has been brokering the Sudan peace process. The U.S has recently taken a lead role in the IGAD Partners Forum, or IPF as it is known, which is the donor counterpart to IGAD.
This donor's group -- the IPF -- met two weeks ago in Oslo, Norway, to develop recommendations for a revitalized peace process. The members of the IPF, including the U.S., are prepared to provide both financial and technical support to jump-start the peace process.
In addition, the U.S. Government is closely collaborating and coordinating with other donors to increase pressure on both sides to extend the cease-fire scheduled to expire on April 15th.
With regard to the new development assistance program, the $9 million, three-year Sudan Transition Assistance for Rehabilitation, or STAR program, was developed as a natural complement to our humanitarian assistance efforts. While USAID's humanitarian assistance program has followed a strategy of meeting urgent humanitarian needs and supporting medium- and longer-term self-sufficiency initiatives for several years, this new Development Assistance program complements this goal by building local democratization capacity in opposition-held areas.
The program is supporting local community-building efforts and public administration training in relatively secure areas in southern and eastern Sudan. Through these efforts, we hope to strengthen grassroots Sudanese organizations, including cooperatives and nongovernmental organizations, or NGOs.
The development program will also provide democratization training to nascent civil administration entities, as well as the leadership of the National Democratic Alliance, the coalition of opposition groups from both the north and the south. Training will focus on transparency, accountability, public finance, and respect for the rule of law and human rights.
For example, the program recently provided assistance to support a peace conference between the Nuer and the Dinka, the two main ethnic groups in southern Sudan, that have been fighting each other for years. The conference, which was held earlier this month, was coordinated by the New Sudan Council of Churches, and involved traditional leaders and a diverse cross-section of players. The conference was part of a grass-roots process that brings in communities that often fall outside the mainstream of political negotiations.
USAID observers at the conference thought it marked an important step in improving political relationships in southern Sudan. The U.S. Government is strongly supportive of this process and will continue to support it elsewhere in southern Sudan. The goal is to support the empowerment of the people to hold their leaders accountable.
With regard to the changes in the humanitarian assistance program I cited earlier, there are several points I would like to make. First USAID has consistently been the major donor of humanitarian assistance in Sudan. In food aid alone, the U.S. provided 62 percent of the food which the World Food Program flew into Sudan last year.
However, due to the long-term nature of the situation and the size of the relief resources that have been pumped in year after year, USAID has developed a strategy of increasing local capacities and self-sufficiency.
There are numerous examples of this strategy:

We have created agricultural extension services to increase local capacity for food self-reliance;
We have supported seeds and tools programs which have helped generate surplus food production to be used in food deficit regions;
We have provided basic health care, including the training of local health care workers, the establishment of primary health care centers, and vaccination programs for vulnerable groups;
We have introduced livestock vaccination and animal health programs which, among other things, have immunized one million head of cattle against rinderpest disease ;
We have helped to reintegrate internally displaced people in southern Sudan by providing basic agricultural packages and training; and,
We have made a substantial investment in the repair of roads inside southern Sudan. The road repair program alone will save a projected $9.25 million in transport costs, as 36,000 metric tons of food are expected to be moved on roads improved through USAID-funded activities.

In addition, the road repair program has facilitated and increased the impact of other USAID programs such as the provision of agricultural extension services to boost production, and the creation of barter shops to absorb surplus production and provide needed goods for the local population.
This is not a "business as usual" program in the humanitarian context. This approach, in conjunction with our new development program, is an effort to break the cycle of dependence on relief by shifting more towards support for peoples' productive capacities.
I might add that it is an approach that the UN and other donors are now adopting. Your resolution supported this approach, and we can say today that it offers more promise than anything we have seen in fifteen years.
I also want to address the issue of Operation Lifeline Sudan, the negotiated access agreement between the United Nations, the government of Sudan, and the rebels leaders. OLS provides the framework under which most assistance is provided in Sudan. While the US has been a strong supporter and donor to OLS since it began over 10 years ago, we have also voiced our concern over management issues for several years. While reform of OLS continues to be a priority of the U.S. Government, expanded support for non-OLS NGO operations remains a key element of our strategy, in line with Senate Resolution 267.
We are not only expanding our support for non-OLS NGOs, but are also increasing the geographic coverage to areas previously not served by OLS. Over the past two years, there has been a concerted effort to increase such assistance in Bahr el Ghazal and the Upper Nile where needs have been severe. We are also expanding operations in the Nuba Mountains and currently ascertaining how we can gain access to the people in the inaccessible Blue Nile and Beja regions.
Unfortunately, the current conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea is a major obstacle to our ability to access these areas.
In fiscal year 1998, support to non-OLS NGOS totaled $12.4 million in combined food and disaster assistance. To date, in this fiscal year, support to non-OLS organizations totals $25.8 million.
While recognizing there are limitations, we are supporting a coordinated donor approach to put continual and aggressive pressure on the government regarding new and ongoing access issues. It is up to the donors to ensure that OLS does its job. To that end, we are engaged in a reinvigorated donor strategy, coordinated through the IGAD Partner's Forum, not only on the extension of the cease-fire, but also to react much more proactively than in the past on access issues. As I wrote in a Washington Post article last year, we believe the standard for OLS operations should be "unfettered access," a phrase that was used last year by Sudan's foreign minister.
Despite all that is being done, we recognize the reality that unless this war is brought to an end, famine will continue to be in Sudan. The constraints faced by any assistance efforts in Sudan are overwhelming. They include the daunting scope and size of the problem in Sudan; the complexity of the logistics operation; the violence directed against civilians by the militias, some of which are not controlled by either side; and the continued problem of access to those in need.
In summary, we believe the U.S. Government's expanded efforts in Sudan directly support the goals of the Senate Resolution you and Senator Feingold sponsored, Mr. Chairman. We are working in partnership with key donors to make progress on the peace process and to extend the ceasefire. We are working with our many NGO partners on the ground to strengthen the capacity of groups and individuals in Sudan to improve their lives and to make decisions about peace. I believe this course offers our only hope.
Once again, I appreciate your commitment to the people of Sudan, and your support for our effort to break the cycle of violence with a new approach to assistance.

This is an archived USAID document retained on this web site as a matter of public record.

Last Updated on: July 18, 2001