Why Sudan’s conflict defies diplomacy and de-escalation efforts

Smoke plumes billow from a fire in south Khartoum, main, amid the ongoing violence between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, which began on April 15. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 15 August 2023
Follow

Why Sudan’s conflict defies diplomacy and de-escalation efforts

  • Warring sides have repeatedly violated a series of fragile ceasefires, leading to the suspension of talks
  • Many see a power-sharing arrangement as the only incentive for de-escalation in the short or long run

NAIROBI, Kenya: Now approaching its fourth month, the conflict in Sudan has continued to intensify with little sign of the feuding factions returning to the negotiating table.

More than 4 million people have now fled from their homes — 3.2 million people displaced internally, and close to 900,000 people who have crossed the border into Chad, Egypt, South Sudan and other countries.

Despite the nonstop fighting, neither side is believed to be close to achieving victory or making significant battlefield gains. Nevertheless, many see dialogue following by power sharing as the only way to achieve de-escalation in the short or long run.

Malik Agar, deputy chairman of Sudan’s Sovereign Council, recently set out a government-proposed road map to end the conflict, beginning with the separation of the warring parties and culminating in a comprehensive political process.

Agar’s proposal, outlined on Aug. 6, prioritized the delivery of humanitarian aid and the safeguarding of civilians with a subsequent shift of focus toward an inclusive political process with power-sharing agreements.

However, analysts remain cautious about any such peace initiatives, pointing to several factors that keep the military and its paramilitary foe from committing themselves to a lasting settlement, thereby prolonging the conflict.




This grab from UGC video footage posted on social media on August 8 shows a member of the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) firing an automatic machine gun turret mounted on the back of a truck towards positions held by the Rapid Support Forces in central Omdurman. (AFP/UGC image)

“There have been scarce instances of ceasefires with enduring longevity. Especially in the initial stages of the conflict, ceasefires were frequently breached within mere hours,” Abiol Lual Deng, a South Sudanese-American political scientist, told Arab News.

“This underscores a situation where both sides seem unwilling to accept victory for the opposing faction.”

Instead, analysts believe efforts are needed to address the root causes of the conflict if a sustainable resolution is to be found, including steps to reduce militarization and tribalism, while also reviving the waning interest of the international community.

The power struggle between the Sudanese Armed Forces, led by Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, and the Rapid Support Forces, commanded by Mohamed Hamdan “Hemedti” Dagalo, escalated into violence on April 15.

The conflict has resulted in thousands of casualties, millions of displaced people, and a major humanitarian emergency.

Fighting has killed at least 3,900 people nationwide, according to a conservative estimate by the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project, while more than 4 million people have been uprooted from their homes, according to the UN Refugee Agency, UNHCR.




Chadian cart owners transport belongings of Sudanese people who fled the conflict in Sudan's Darfur region, while crossing the border between Sudan and Chad in Adre, Chad August 4, 2023. (Reuters)

The UN says more than 6 million people are “just one step away from famine,” as aid groups struggle to deliver life-saving assistance through bureaucratic hurdles, security challenges and targeted attacks.

Despite the efforts of the international community to initiate talks and find a solution, the conflict has persisted, as both sides have repeatedly violated a series of fragile ceasefires, leading to the suspension of peace talks.

The SAF withdrew its negotiating delegation from the Jeddah process in July due to the RSF’s refusal to redeploy its forces outside Khartoum.

Diplomats and aid agencies are concerned about the consequences of a prolonged conflict, both from a humanitarian standpoint and as a matter of wider regional security.

Indeed, the violence threatens to push the nation into an all-out civil war, which could drag neighboring states into the fray and leave borders open to exploitation by extremist groups.

The SAF has in recent weeks been ramping up its mobilization through the establishment of training camps in the northern River Nile state and the town of Kassala, providing basic training to volunteers — some of whom are reportedly underage.




An image grab taken from a handout video posted on the Sudanese paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) page on Twitter on July 28 shows its commander Mohamed Hamdan Daglo addressing RSF fighters at an undisclosed location. (AFP)

Concerns have been multiplied by the fact that recruitment appears to follow tribal lines, which could aggravate inter-communal tensions. Developments such as these could also serve to prolong the conflict.

Sudan had long been undergoing a process of militarization even before the latest uptick in violence. Both the SAF and the RSF had already become the biggest employers in the country, outstripping even the Ministry of Education.

For many in Sudan, the SAF, despite numerous allegations of atrocities, remains associated with statehood, while the RSF is seen as a mercenary militia that grew from a provincial paramilitary unit into a force capable of challenging the national army.

INNUMBERS

* 3,900 Conservative estimate of people killed. (ACLED)

* 4m People have been uprooted from their homes. (UNHCR)

* 80% Proportion of Sudan’s hospitals now out of service. (WHO)

* 6m People who are “just one step away from famine.” (UN)

“The RSF, having no public support in the capital, relentlessly pursues a campaign of violence to displace people that they have no trust in,” Osama Ahmed Odorous Ahmed, an associate professor of strategic and security studies, told Arab News.

“Now, they want to gain control over strategic locations by pursuing grievous offenses including looting, rape, and merciless attacks on innocent civilians.”

The RSF’s lack of support among the people of Khartoum might end up being its Achilles’ heel, however, forcing it to ultimately seek a compromise with the SAF.




Sudan’s history is one of resilience and perseverance, and its people deserve a chance at peace and stability, said Abiol Lual Deng, a South Sudanese-American political scientist. (Supplied)

Marco Arnaboldi, a security professional and an expert on militant Islamism, argues that because the RSF is “well aware of facing opposition from a restive population, which in the end hinders their ability to consolidate power,” it will come to an agreement with the SAF at some point.

He says the RSF’s strategic approach is therefore to bolster its military position before embarking on any negotiations, which makes a prolonged stalemate the most likely scenario.

“The RSF is resolute in enhancing its position through continued military advancements, recognizing the complexities on the ground. Their goal isn’t total control of the nation, let alone effective governance,” Arnaboldi told Arab News.

“From a purely military perspective, a long stalemate looks likely, as the SAF is also showing a dreadful inability to regain the lost territories, especially in Khartoum.

“The RSF, while it is expanding its military control over the country, is grappling with internal disorganization and inadequate supply lines.”

The notion of pressuring the RSF to relinquish control and embrace genuine political discourse might offer a ray of hope, yet this path comes with its challenges.




Experts say addressing the conflict’s root causes is key to preventing further escalation and achieving a lasting solution. (Reuters)

“The splintering of authority and interests among different factions and elites has set back the chances of a harmonious outcome for the nation,” said Odorous Ahmed.

“There is potential for a military resolution supported by external reinforcements for the RSF, as it has external backers, but also diplomatic avenues through negotiated agreements, as well as the exertion of international pressure propelled by regional powers, and the elusive pursuit of political reconciliation.”

Deng underscored the need for a multifaceted approach to de-escalating the conflict and resuming the transition process, involving civilian leaders, regional powers, and the international community.

“A significant step involves insisting on a democratic transition, where civilian leadership plays a pivotal role in steering the nation toward stability and inclusivity,” she said.


UK party threatens to ‘force vote’ on recognizing Palestinian state

Updated 27 July 2025
Follow

UK party threatens to ‘force vote’ on recognizing Palestinian state

  • The Scottish National Party said it would table a “Palestine Recognition Bill” when parliament returns after its summer recess if Starmer did not change his position

LONDON: A minor opposition party in the British parliament on Sunday threatened to bring forward legislation on recognizing Palestinian statehood and “force a vote” if Prime Minister Keir Starmer continues to oppose the move.
The Scottish National Party (SNP), which pushes for the independence of Scotland, said it would table a “Palestine Recognition Bill” when parliament returns after its summer recess if Starmer did not change his position.
The prime minister has committed to recognizing Palestinian statehood but said it must be part of a peace process in the Middle East.
The SNP threat comes after more than 220 British MPs, including dozens from Starmer’s ruling Labour party, demanded Friday that the UK government follow France and recognize a Palestinian state.
The call, in a letter signed by lawmakers from nine UK political parties, came less than 24 hours after French President Emmanuel Macron said that his country would formally do so at a UN meeting in September.
“Unless Keir Starmer stops blocking UK recognition of Palestine, the SNP will introduce a Palestine Recognition Bill when Parliament returns in September and force a vote if necessary,” said Stephen Flynn, SNP’s leader in the UK parliament.
“Keir Starmer must stop defending the indefensible, finally find a backbone and demand that Israel ends its war now,” he added.
If France formally recognizes a Palestinian state it would be the first G7 country — and the most powerful European nation to date — to make the move.
Starmer has come under rising domestic and international pressure over recognizing Palestinian statehood, as opposition intensifies to the ongoing war in Gaza amid fears of mass starvation there.
The UK leader on Saturday spoke to his French and German counterparts and outlined UK plans to airdrop aid to people in Gaza and evacuate sick and injured children, his office said.
The SNP holds nine seats in the 650-seat UK parliament.
 


Camp David meeting 25 years on: Could the Middle East plan have worked?

Updated 26 July 2025
Follow

Camp David meeting 25 years on: Could the Middle East plan have worked?

  • Many still wonder whether the talks could have led to an agreement and altered the course of Middle East history
  • US President Clinton concluded that Israeli PM Barak and Palestinian leader Arafat were unable to “reach an agreement”

LONDON: Emerging from lush woodland, amid birdsong and with wide smiles, it was a scene that could not have been further from the slaughter currently unfolding in Gaza. 

Yet through the quarter of a century that has passed since the Palestinian and Israeli leaders joined President Bill Clinton for talks at Camp David, a direct line can be drawn to the daily massacres Palestinians are now facing. 

What began with cautious optimism to make major headway toward a final status peace agreement ended in failure on July 25, 2000.

Clinton solemnly “concluded with regret” that after 14 days of talks, the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat had not been able to “reach an agreement at this time.”

Israel and the US media perpetuated a myth that Arafat had turned down a generous offer of a Palestinian state. Palestinians and other diplomats involved say Israel was offering nothing of the sort. 

Within weeks of the talks ending, the right-wing Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon visited Haram Al-Sharif, the site of Al-Aqsa Mosque, in Jerusalem, igniting the Second Palestinian Intifada uprising against Israeli occupation.

Ariel Sharon, flanked by his security guards as he leaves the Temple Mount compound in Jerusalem on September 28, 2000. (AFP file photo)

While the talks have gone down in history as a failure, the six months that followed culminated in what many believe was the closest the two sides have come to a final status agreement.

But by the start of 2001, with Clinton out of office, Israeli elections looming, and violence escalating, the window of political timing slipped away.

Many were left to wonder whether the mistakes made during the Camp David meeting resulted in a missed opportunity that could have led to an agreement, thus altering the course of Middle East history.

Perhaps decades of episodes of bloodshed and occupation could have been averted.

Tents sheltering displaced Palestinians are seen amid war-damaged infrastructure in Gaza City on July 17, 2025. (AP)

With hindsight aside, is there anything that can be learned from those two weeks of negotiations that brought together the leaders from either side?

The talks at Camp David convened eight years after the first of the two Oslo Accords was famously signed in 1993 between Arafat and the then Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin at the White House.

The agreement was designed as an interim deal and the start of a process that aimed to secure a final status agreement within five years. 

Under Oslo, Israel recognized the Palestinian Liberation Organization as the representative of the Palestinian people, and the Palestinian side recognized Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin (left) and Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Chairman Yasser Arafat shake hands on August 10, 1994 at the end of their meeting at the Erez crossing, as Shimon Peres (2nd L) looks on. After signing the Oslo Accord with Arafat, Rabin was assassinated by a Jewish extremist. (AFP/File) 

The agreement led to the establishment of the Palestinian Authority to have limited governance over parts of the West Bank and Gaza, which Israel had annexed in 1967 along with East Jerusalem. A phased Israeli military withdrawal from occupied Palestinian territories was also meant to take place.

By the year 2000 it was clear that the Oslo process had stalled with Palestinians deeply unhappy about the lack of progress and that the Israeli occupation had become more entrenched since the agreement. The building of Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land had accelerated, restrictions against Palestinians had increased, and violence continued.

Clinton, who was in the final year of his presidency, was determined to push for a blockbuster agreement to secure his legacy.

Arafat, on the other hand, was strongly against the talks taking place on the grounds that the “conditions were not yet ripe,” according to The Camp David Papers, a detailed firsthand account of the talks by Akram Hanieh, editor of Al-Ayyam newspaper and close adviser to the Palestinian leader.

“The Palestinians repeatedly warned that the Palestinian problem was too complicated to be resolved in a hastily convened summit,” Hanieh wrote.

Caption

Barak came to the table also looking to seal a big win that would bolster his ailing governing coalition. He was looking to do away with the incremental approach of Oslo and go for an all-or nothing final agreement.

The leaders arrived on July 11 at Camp David, the 125 acre presidential retreat in the Catoctin mountains. The secluded forested location was cut off further with a ban on cell phones and just one phone line provided per delegation to avoid leaks.

It was something Clinton joked about when he greeted Arafat and Barak before the press, saying he would not take any questions as part of a media blackout.

There was even a lighthearted moment when Arafat and Barak broke into a gentle play fight as they insisted one another entered the lodge first — an image unthinkable in the current climate.

But behind the scenes there was less joviality and deep concern grew among the Palestinian camp about how the talks would unfold. 

The core issues to be discussed included the extent of territory that would be included in a Palestinian state and the positioning of the borders surrounding them.

This photo released on September 28, 1995 by the White House shows Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin (2nd L) and PLO leader Yasser Arafat (2nd R) are shown signing maps representing the re-deployment of Israel troops in the West Bank. Looking on are Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak (3rd L) ; US President Bill Clinton (C) ; King Hussein of Jordan (3rd R) and PLO leader Yasser Arafat (2nd R). (AFP/File)

There was also the status and future of Israeli settlements, and the right of return of Palestinian refugees displaced when Israel was founded in 1948.

What proved to be the most contentious issue, and the one the US proved to be least prepared for, was the status of Jerusalem, and in particular sovereignty over its holy sites.

Palestinians want East Jerusalem to be the capital of their future state with full sovereignty over Haram Al-Sharif — the third holiest site in Islam. The site, known as the Temple Mount by Israelis, is also revered by Jews.

Because nothing was presented in writing and there was no working draft of the negotiations, there are differing versions of exactly what the Israelis proposed. 

Israeli claims that Barak offered 90 percent of the West Bank along with Gaza to the Palestinians turned out to be far less when applied to maps. Israel also wanted to maintain security control over the West Bank.

Israel would annex 9 percent of the West Bank, including its major settlements there in exchange for 1 percent of Israeli territory.

Israel would keep most of East Jerusalem and only offer some form of custodianship over Haram Al-Sharif, nowhere near Palestinians demands. And there was nothing of substance on returning refugees.

While US media interpretations of the talks often claimed the two sides were close to an agreement, Hanieh’s account describes big gaps between their positions across the major points of contention.

With a sense of foreboding of what was to come, Hanieh wrote: “The Americans immediately adopted Israel’s position on the Haram, seemingly unaware of the fact that they were toying with explosives that could ignite the Middle East and the Islamic world.”

The fact the proposals were only presented verbally through US officials meant that nothing was ever formally offered to the Palestinians.

Barak’s approach meant “there never was an Israeli offer” Robert Malley, a member of the US negotiating team, said in an article co-written a year later that sought to diffuse the blame placed on Arafat by Israel and the US for the talk’s failure.

The Israeli leader’s approach and failures over implementing Oslo led Arafat to became convinced that Israel was setting a trap to trick him into agreeing major concessions.

The Palestinians also increasingly felt the US bias toward Israel’s position, and that all the pressure was being applied to Arafat. This undermined the US as an honest broker.

“Backed by the US, Israel negotiated in bad faith, making it impossible for Palestinians to consider these talks a foundation for a just peace,” Ramzy Baroud, the Palestinian-American editor of the Palestine Chronicle, told Arab News. “The talks were fundamentally designed to skew outcomes in Israel's favor.”

Another reason for the failure was the lack of ground work carried out before they started.

“It was not well prepared,” Yossi Mekelberg, associate fellow of the Middle East and North Africa Program at Chatham House, told Arab News. “They went there with not enough already agreed beforehand, which is very important for a summit.”

The US hosting has also been heavily criticized, even by members of its own negotiating teams.

“The Camp David summit — ill-conceived and ill-advised — should probably never have taken place,” Aaron David Miller, another senior negotiator, wrote 20 years later. He highlighted “numerous mistakes” and a poor performance by the US team that would have made blocked reaching an agreement, even if the two sides had been in a place to reach one.

Aaron David Miller, a senior negotiator for the US, wrote 20 years later that the Camp David summit was  ill-conceived and ill-advised./ (Supplied)

When Arafat held firm and refused to cave to pressure to accept Israel’s proposals, the summit drew to a close with little to show toward a final status agreement.

“While they were not able to bridge the gaps and reach an agreement, their negotiations were unprecedented in both scope and detail,” the final statement said.

There are various opinions on whether the talks were doomed to failure from the start or whether they can be viewed as a missed opportunity that could have brought peace to the region and averted the decades of bloodshed that followed.

The latter viewpoint stems as much from the diplomatic efforts in the months that followed Camp David.

Against a backdrop of escalating violence and during Clinton’s final months in office, focus shifted to a set of parameters for further final status negotiations. Both sides agreed to the landmark plan in late December but with reservations.

The momentum carried over to the Taba summit in Egypt three weeks later but the impending Israeli election meant they ran out of time. In the closing statement, the sides declared they had never been closer to reaching an agreement.

With the arrival of President George W Bush in office and Sharon defeating Barak in Israel’s election, political support for the process evaporated and the intifada raged on for another four years.

“It was a missed opportunity,” Mekelberg said of Camp David. “There was a great opportunity there, and had it succeeded, we would not be having all these terrible tragedies that we've seen.”

The way that Arafat was blamed for the failure left a particularly bitter aftertaste for Palestinians.

“The most egregious demonstration of Israel’s and the US’s bad faith was their decision to blame the talks’ collapse not on Israel’s refusal to adhere to international law, but on Yasser Arafat’s alleged stubbornness and disinterest in peace,” Baroud said.

The talks were “unequivocally doomed to failure,” he said because they rested on the false premise that the Oslo Accords were ever a genuine path to peace. 

“The exponential growth of illegal settlements, the persistent failure to address core issues, escalating Israeli violence, and the continuous disregard for international principles concerning Palestinian rights all contributed to Camp David’s collapse.”

He said if any lessons are to be taken by those attempting to negotiate an end to Israel’s war on Gaza and implement a wider peace agreement, it would be that “neither Israel nor the US can be trusted to chart a path to peace without a firm framework rooted in international and humanitarian law.”

In the coming days, Saudi Arabia and France will co-chair a conference at the UN on the two-state solution to the conflict, that seeks to plot a course toward a Palestinian state. Perhaps this could help build the sustainable international framework that was lacking in July 2000.
 

 


Israeli military says it has airdropped aid into Gaza

Updated 3 min 24 sec ago
Follow

Israeli military says it has airdropped aid into Gaza

  • The military’s statement did not say when the humanitarian corridors for UN convoys would open, or where
  • It also said the military is prepared to implement humanitarian pauses in densely populated areas

JERUSALEM: Israel’s military said Saturday that it airdropped humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip, as thousands of Palestinians face the threat of widespread famine.
“In accordance with the directives of the political echelon, the IDF recently carried out an airdrop of humanitarian aid as part of the ongoing efforts to allow and facilitate the entry of aid into the Gaza Strip,” the military posted on Telegram.
The drop included seven packages of aid containing flour, sugar and canned food, it added.

In an earlier statement, Israel’s military said humanitarian corridors will be established for United Nations convoys.

The statement issued late Saturday came after increasing accounts of starvation-related deaths in Gaza following months of experts’ warnings of famine. International criticism, including by close allies, has grown as several hundred Palestinians have been killed in recent weeks while trying to reach aid.

The military’s statement did not say when the humanitarian corridors for UN convoys would open, or where. It also said the military is prepared to implement humanitarian pauses in densely populated areas.

The statement added that the military “emphasizes that combat operations have not ceased” in Gaza against Hamas. And it asserts there is “no starvation” in the territory.

Israeli airstrikes and gunshots killed at least 53 people in Gaza overnight and into Saturday, most of them shot dead while seeking aid, according to Palestinian health officials and the local ambulance service, as starvation deaths continued.

Deadly Israeli gunfire was reported twice within hours close to the Zikim crossing with Israel in the north. In the first incident, at least a dozen people waiting for aid trucks were killed, said staff at Shifa hospital, where bodies were taken. Israel’s military said it fired warning shots to distance a crowd “in response to an immediate threat” and it was not aware of any casualties.

A witness, Sherif Abu Aisha, said people started running when they saw a light that they thought was from aid trucks, but as they got close, they realized it was Israel’s tanks. That’s when the army started firing, he told The Associated Press. He said his uncle was among those killed.
“We went because there is no food ... and nothing was distributed,” he said.

On Saturday evening, Israeli forces killed at least 11 people and wounded 120 others when they fired toward crowds who tried to get food from an entering UN convoy, Dr. Mohamed Abu Selmiyah, director of Shifa hospital, told the AP.

“We are expecting the numbers to surge in the next few hours,” he said. There was no immediate Israeli military comment.

Elsewhere, those killed in strikes included four people in an apartment building in Gaza City, hospital staff and the ambulance service said.

Another Israeli strike killed at least eight, including four children, in the crowded tent camp of Muwasi in the southern city of Khan Younis, according to the Nasser hospital.
Also in Khan Younis, Israeli forces opened fire and killed at least nine people trying to get aid entering Gaza through the Morag corridor, according to the hospital’s morgue records. There was no immediate comment from Israel’s military.


Families of Americans slain in the West Bank lose hope for justice

Updated 26 July 2025
Follow

Families of Americans slain in the West Bank lose hope for justice

  • American-born teenagers Tawfic Abdel Jabbar and Mohammad Khdour were killed in early 2024 by Israeli fire while driving in the West Bank

BIDDU, West Bank: When Sayfollah Musallet of Tampa, Florida, was beaten to death by Israeli settlers in the West Bank two weeks ago, he became the fourth Palestinian-American killed in the occupied territory since the war in Gaza began.
No one has been arrested or charged in Musallet’s slaying – and if Israel’s track record on the other three deaths is any guide, it seems unlikely to happen. Yet Musallet’s father and a growing number of US politicians want to flip the script.
“We demand justice,” Kamel Musallet said at his 20-year-old son’s funeral earlier this week. “We demand the US government do something about it.”
Still, Musallet and relatives of the other Palestinian-Americans say they doubt anyone will be held accountable, either by Israel or the US. 
They believe the first word in their hyphenated identity undercuts the power of the second. 

BACKGROUND

They believe the first word in their hyphenated identity undercuts the power of the second.

And they say Israel and its law enforcement have made them feel like culprits — by imposing travel bans and, in some cases, detaining and interrogating them.
Although the Trump administration has stopped short of promising investigations of its own, the US Embassy in Jerusalem has urged Israel to investigate the circumstances of each American’s death.
Writing on X on July 15, US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee said he’d asked Israel to “aggressively investigate the murder” of Musallet and that “there must be accountability for this criminal and terrorist act.”
Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland and 28 other Democratic senators have also called for an investigation. 
In a letter this week to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Attorney General Pam Bondi, they pointed to the “repeated lack of accountability” after the deaths of Musallet and other Americans killed in the West Bank.
Israel’s military, police and Shin Bet domestic security agency did not offer comment on the Palestinian-Americans’ deaths. Families have demanded independent investigations
American-born teenagers Tawfic Abdel Jabbar and Mohammad Khdour were killed in early 2024 by Israeli fire while driving in the West Bank. 
In April 2025, 14-year-old Amer Rabee, a New Jersey native, was shot in the head at least nine times by Israeli forces as he stood among a grove of green almond trees in his family’s village.

 


Famine, starvation: challenges in defining Gaza’s plight

Updated 26 July 2025
Follow

Famine, starvation: challenges in defining Gaza’s plight

  • Available indicators are alarming regarding the food situation in the enclave

PARIS: The UN and NGOs are warning of an imminent famine in the Gaza Strip — a designation based on strict criteria and scientific evidence.
But the difficulty of getting to the most affected areas in the Palestinian territory, besieged by Israel, means there are huge challenges in gathering the required data.
The internationally agreed definition for famine is outlined by the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, or IPC, an initiative of 21 organizations and institutions including UN agencies and aid groups.
The IPC definition has three elements. Firstly, at least 20 percent of households must have an extreme lack of food and face starvation or destitution. Second, acute malnutrition in children under five exceeds 30 percent.

Almost a third of people in Gaza are not eating for days and malnutrition is surging.

UN’s World Food Programme

And third, there is an excess mortality threshold of two in 10,000 people dying per day.
Once these criteria are met, governments and UN agencies can declare a famine.
Available indicators are alarming regarding the food situation in Gaza.
“A large proportion of the population of Gaza is starving,” according to the World Health Organization’s chief, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.
Food deliveries are “far below what is needed for the survival of the population,” he said, calling it “man-made ... mass starvation.”
Doctors Without Borders, or MSF, said on Friday that a quarter of all young children and pregnant or breastfeeding women screened at its clinics in Gaza last week were malnourished, blaming Israel’s “deliberate use of starvation as a weapon.”
Almost a third of people in Gaza are “not eating for days” and malnutrition is surging, the UN’s World Food Programme said Friday.
The head of Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City on Tuesday said that 21 children had died across the Palestinian territory in the previous 72 hours “due to malnutrition and starvation.”
The very few foodstuffs in the markets are inaccessible, with a kg of flour reaching the exorbitant price of $100, while the Gaza Strip’s agricultural land has been ravaged by the war.
According to humanitarian organizations, the 20 or so aid trucks that enter the territory each day — vastly insufficient for more than 2 million hungry people — are systematically looted.
“It’s become a technical point to explain that we’re in acute food insecurity, IPC4, which affects almost the entire population. It doesn’t resonate with people,” said Amande Bazerolle, in charge of MSF’s emergency response in Gaza. “Yet we’re hurtling toward famine — that’s a certainty.”
NGOs and the WHO concede that gathering the evidence required for a famine declaration is extremely difficult.
“Currently, we are unable to conduct the surveys that would allow us to formally classify famine,” said Bazerolle.
She said it was “impossible” for them to screen children, take their measurements, or assess their weight-to-height ratio.
Jean-Raphael Poitou, Middle East program director for the NGO Action Against Hunger, said the “continuous displacements” of Gazans ordered by the Israeli military, along with restrictions on movement in the most affected regions, “complicate things enormously.”
Nabil Tabbal, incident manager at the WHO’s emergency program, said there were “challenges regarding data, regarding access to information.”