by Hassan Hussain

Internal displacement is one of the most pressing humanitarian challenges today. Over the past five years, conflict-related violence has led to a 49% increase in the number of internally displaced persons (IDPs). Sudan now has the highest number of IDPs globally, with approximately 11 million people displaced, according to the IDMC 2024 Global Report on Internal Displacement. Despite making up the majority of the world’s forcibly displaced populations, IDPs receive significantly less protection than refugees due to limited engagement, investment, and coordination within the humanitarian system.

This blog explores the unique challenges of protecting IDPs in Sudan. It highlights the complexity of protecting IDPs and illustrates the critical role of local actors in shaping and responding to the crisis, and the challenges they face in the current aid climate. The blog calls for a more nuanced understanding of the intrastate induced internal displacement. 

Power struggle leads to mass displacement

Sudan is experiencing one of the worst humanitarian crises in Africa. Since April 2023, the country’s transition from an authoritarian regime to a fragile democracy has been marred by conflict. The power struggle between General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan of the Sudan Armed Forces and General Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti) of the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has resulted in large-scale violence. The RSF originated as a counterinsurgency force but has since evolved into a dominant paramilitary group. Initially formed from Janjaweed militias, the RSF has grown into a powerful entity, contributing significantly to Sudan’s displacement crisis.  Khartoum and other regions have been engulfed in conflict.

The ongoing violence has forced millions to flee their homes, exacerbating an already dire humanitarian situation. Reports indicate that entire communities have been uprooted, with many fleeing to makeshift camps or seeking refuge in neighbouring countries. The rapid deterioration of security conditions has also hindered humanitarian organisations from providing timely assistance.

Security restrictions and increasing urbanisation pose challenges

Protecting IDPs in Sudan presents several challenges. Unlike refugees, IDPs remain under the jurisdiction of their home country. In Sudan, where the state is party to the conflict, access to IDPs is often restricted for political and military reasons. The government may allow humanitarian aid only in areas under its control, leaving populations in RSF-held regions largely without support. Humanitarian organisations must navigate this complex landscape, often facing a choice between complying with government directives or risking expulsion.

Security restrictions also pose significant obstacles. Protection-related activities are often classified as security risks, with the government imposing strict regulations on humanitarian work. In some cases, authorities require direct oversight of data collection efforts, limiting the ability of organisations to operate effectively.

In RSF-controlled areas, the absence of clear command structures and security guarantees further complicates aid delivery. ‘No-go’ zones near active conflict areas make it nearly impossible to reach those most in need. Key transportation and logistical hubs, such as El Fasher and El Daein in Darfur, remain particularly difficult to access. Sporadic fighting and shifting frontlines make it even harder to establish consistent humanitarian corridors, creating additional risks for both aid workers and displaced communities.

In Sudan, an added layer of complexity is increasing urbanisation. Many displaced individuals are absorbed into host communities yet continue to face the same vulnerabilities as those in formal displacement settings. They struggle with limited access to livelihoods, adequate shelter, education, and healthcare. This urbanisation of displaced communities presents significant challenges for humanitarian responders, as most organisations operating in Sudan have traditionally focused on rural contexts and are less equipped to address the unique needs of displaced populations in urban areas.

The essential role of the grassroots organisations

Local emergency response teams and community-based organisations particularly the Emergency Response Rooms – a form of youth-led local-response associated with the Sudanese uprising of 2019 – play a crucial role in providing aid to IDPs. In Khartoum and other areas, these grassroots groups are often the main providers of shelter, food, and healthcare. In regions like Gedaref, they collaborate with international actors to facilitate aid distribution. Their ability to operate in volatile environments and their deep community ties make them indispensable in responding to urgent needs.

Coordination between Emergency Response Rooms and international organisations remains a challenge. Many Emergency Response Rooms lack formal registration and the infrastructure required by international donors, limiting their access to funding and support. This raises concerns about the long-term role of these groups in humanitarian efforts. If expected to register as national entities, they may face government restrictions, while failing to do so could exclude them from future aid efforts. Additionally, humanitarian partnerships often favour larger, established organisations, which may sideline smaller, community-led initiatives despite their effectiveness in reaching affected populations.

Recent funding cuts, particularly from USAID, have further strained resources, exacerbating the crisis. Political scrutiny and operational constraints continue to hinder humanitarian efforts, leaving millions of displaced people vulnerable. The unpredictability of funding streams forces many local organisations to rely on ad-hoc donations, making it difficult to plan and sustain long-term interventions. This financial instability, combined with bureaucratic hurdles, significantly weakens the overall humanitarian response.

Conclusion

Sudan’s displacement crisis highlights the difficulties of protecting IDPs in conflict settings. Political interests, security restrictions, and coordination challenges create significant barriers to effective humanitarian intervention. Addressing these issues requires a more flexible and inclusive approach, ensuring that both local and international actors work together to provide meaningful protection and assistance to Sudan’s displaced population. Greater investment in local humanitarian actors, streamlined coordination mechanisms, and sustained international commitment are critical to alleviating the suffering of IDPs. Without these measures, millions will remain trapped in precarious conditions, with limited access to essential services and protection.

This piece is part of a series that addresses the conflict as well as other subjects pertaining to Sudan, such as employment, forced displacement, gender, humanitarian needs, migration and political participation. 

[To read more on this and everything Middle East, the LSE Middle East Centre Library is now open for browsing and borrowing for LSE students and staff. For more information, please visit the MEC Library page.]