This blog post presents the CSRF’s initial thoughts on the impact of COVID-19 on aid in South Sudan.

The ground has shifted beneath our feet in ways that we have never known before. Governments around the world are grappling with how to effectively respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, borders have closed, and economies are screeching to a halt as entire countries impose lockdowns. A global humanitarian crisis on an unknown scale continues to unfold due to both the pandemic itself and the accompanying economic and social disruptions. The global humanitarian system is pivoting to prepare for and respond to the impact of COVID-19 on ongoing humanitarian crises, as well as emerging ones.

As the aid sector in South Sudan makes that shift, it can benefit from both previous lessons from pivoting in response to the events of December 2013 and July 2016 (and indeed from decades of emergency response) and relevant experience from outside South Sudan. To help make this more accessible, the CSRF will be publishing a series of practical blogs and analysis, alongside highlighting useful resources, tools and lessons to help inform conflict sensitive responses in South Sudan.

Our usual ways of working will need to be adapted – and the principles of conflict sensitivity still apply

At the time of writing, there are no confirmed cases of COVID-19 in South Sudan ¹. However, the pandemic is likely to have wide-ranging ramifications for peace and conflict dynamics in the country. For example, the knock-on effect of global economic decline, regional border closures, and falling oil prices will have implications for South Sudan’s fragile economy. If more stringent lockdown procedures are applied, this will further impact livelihoods; as resources become scarce, there is a risk of rising criminality and increased intercommunal conflict over access to resources; and as more speculation and fake information spreads, this may inject additional fear and tension into complex conflict dynamics. The implications for the peace process during this important time are unclear.

South Sudan is navigating through the implementation of the Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (R-ARCSS).  The Presidency and Cabinet of the Revitalised Transitional Government of National Unity (R-TGoNU) have only just taken up their posts within the last six weeks. The attention of international and regional diplomats on the implementation of the R-ARCSS could lessen due to leaders focusing on their own pressing domestic concerns. At the subnational level, uncertainty also applies. Governors have yet to be appointed, leaving open the question of who would lead the state, county and payam level responses, where health services are weaker or nonexistent. In areas where there are power vacuums, contested spaces, or long running grievances, some may seek to exploit the uncertainty for their own gain. How these subnational dynamics interact with national conflict dynamics may also play out in complex ways. Nonetheless, both President Salva Kiir and First Vice-President Riek Machar are presenting a united national government response to preparations for COVID-19, which sends a clear signal and positive message to state and county level actors on the need to set aside differences and work together during this period

The South Sudan aid community benefits from having an established aid architecture, with existing coordination mechanisms and a field presence in remote locations. Agencies are looking at how programming priorities, geographic coverage, technical expertise, and staff can be refocused. This will help to ensure a timely response and that programme adaptation reflects the changes in context while balancing existing needs and concerns. However, this comes amidst significant challenges to usual ways of working. The sudden closure of borders and cancellation of flights has meant that a lot of staff outside of the country were unable to come back in or had been sent out as non-essential staff in anticipation of travel restrictions and flight cancelations. The ‘usual’ surge mechanisms are unable to kick in. This will put increasing pressure on South Sudanese aid actors, as well as remaining international staff, to support COVID-19 prevention measures as well as continue to deliver essential programmes. For both national and international staff, concerns about their families and their communities will contribute to the overall stress of the current situation.

The existing humanitarian challenges will continue to apply ², but the ability to overcome them will be more challenging due to changes that COVID-19 may bring (with particular concern about knock-on implications for high levels of food insecurity ³). For example, humanitarian access could be further constrained if internal access by air, road and barge is curtailed. Pre-positioning of supplies is still underway ahead of the rainy season. The expected early onset of the rains and forecasted above average rainfall, coupled with increased intercommunal violence around the country (for example in Tonj, Great Pibor Administrative Area and Jonglei), will negatively impact aid agencies’ ability to pre-position supplies. The returns and resettlements process had been expected to receive more focus following the swearing in of the Presidency, yet moving large numbers of people over vast distances at such a time raises serious concerns with regards to protection, and fears that such a move could put rural communities with few services at risk and exacerbate pre-existing tensions. However, as has been discussed globally ⁴, the risk that the virus, if it does arrive, could spread rapidly within crowded POC sites and refugee camps also presents grave scenarios.

When it comes to ensuring that aid is conflict sensitive in this fast changing context, such rapid adaptation clearly comes with risks. What works in other places may not work in South Sudan and, while underlying medical principles and technical health approaches may be universally applicable, how they are interpreted and understood may differ from context to context. South Sudan has some of the highest illiteracy rates in the world ⁵ and there are over 60 different languages spoken across the country. Words may mean different things in different cultures and languages, and considering the implications of this for public information and engagement is critical. Many lessons were learned from Ebola in this regard ⁶. Indeed, the Ebola responses provide lessons based on both positive and negative experience – from things like working with community networks to dealing with the challenges of mistrust and negative stigmatisation of certain groups and of humanitarian workers themselves ⁷. Previous experience has taught us that technocratic approaches that do not take into account the specifics of a context can cause serious problems ⁸. Building on what is already there (e.g. in terms of understanding, programmes, and relationships) can provide greater effectiveness and sustainability.

Practical considerations for a conflict sensitive response to COVID-19

During times of crisis, the pressure to respond quickly can mean that things like context analysis and conflict sensitivity may be overlooked, yet these are the times when they are needed the most to inform an effective response amidst a fast changing context – also because this will help inform longer-term understanding of broader humanitarian consequences. This is especially important in a context like South Sudan where aid cannot be separated from the context of a fragile peace process and conflict dynamics intertwined with decades of tensions and grievances. Over the past few years, there has been concerted attention to put in place processes to ensure that operational presence and aid interventions are sensitive to the context. As the aid community in South Sudan shifts to respond to the effects of the pandemic, here are some practical considerations for how to support a conflict sensitive response to COVID-19:

• Facilitating effective coordination and information sharing is paramount. At the Juba level, effective coordination which also capitalizes on specialized experience across the board should continue; at field level the role of existing coordination hubs should be maximised (whether related to humanitarian response, essential services, or peacebuilding) to integrate COVID-19 information sharing and response – and also inform national decision making.

• Remote capacity should be put to good use to support staff on the ground in South Sudan by providing practical analysis, technical expertise and information. Conflict analysts and conflict sensitivity experts with existing understanding of South Sudan should provide tangible, actionable and real-time support to operational agencies. Adapted conflict sensitivity tools may be needed which integrates the enhanced health risks of the current context.

• Peacebuilding and development programmes offer important opportunities to build on existing trusted relationships, experience in specific contexts, and communication networks that could integrate priority support for COVID-19 response e.g. public awareness raising or identifying vulnerable groups. This would allow the important foundations of existing, and valuable, work to be maintained while redirecting efforts towards arising needs.

• Donors should provide the flexibility and appropriate support needed to enable aid actors to rapidly adjust to the emerging situation. They should also require that adjusted programmes have been assessed for their conflict sensitivity and, where gaps are found, are being addressed.

Over the coming weeks, the CSRF will seek to explore the most vital ramifications of COVID-19 for South Sudan in more detail and with practical support. Sign up for our weekly newsletters or follow us on twitter to receive up to date information and analysis.

‘The Government of South Sudan urges all South Sudanese who experience signs and symptoms of COVID-19, such as high fever, cough and shortness of breath, to call the toll-free hotline 6666 to seek help.’