Sidelined suffering: The struggle for international attention
The Israeli war on Gaza over 14 months has displaced 90 per cent of the population at least once, and killed over 45,000 people with another 11,000 missing. Consequently, a surge of global solidarity with the Palestinian cause quickly emerged. Protests erupted across the world, including in cities such as Manila, Tunis, Tehran, Sarajevo, Belgrade, Karachi, Beirut, Harare, Tokyo, Stockholm, London, Johannesburg, Quezon City, Milan, Washington, D.C., Paris, Berlin, Dhaka and many more. Demonstrators took to the streets, demanding an end to the war and denouncing the inaction of world leaders in response to what many described as genocidal warfare following Israel’s air, land and sea offensive on Gaza. Among the largest of these demonstrations was a protest in London, where 250,000 people participated.
Palestinian flags were raised on rooftops, at universities, and in international institutions worldwide. In the United States, approximately 80 schools and universitiessaw peaceful student encampments, with students demanding transparency regarding university investments in Israel and divestment from financial and cultural entities supporting the occupation of Palestine. In December 2023, South Africa filed a case against Israel at the International Court of Justice, citing the genocidal nature of its actions in Gaza.
Around 2100 km away from Gaza, a raging war has displaced 12 million people, killed 150,000 over 20 months and left another 25 million facing hunger. Sudan has topped the International Rescue Committee’s (IRC) list as “the largest humanitarian crisis” for the second consecutive year. Despite the magnitude of the crisis, the conflict has been forgotten, slipping through the cracks of the unforgiving trends of politics and media. Famine, displacement and continued atrocities such as murder and mass rape in Sudan rarely make it to the headlines of major media outlets. Consequently, protests and other solidarity have been scarce, both in the MENA region and internationally.
Some may argue that Sudan’s case is a civil war, and therefore more complex to understand and engage with compared to a case of occupation in Palestine or Ukraine. Others contend that the international agenda has limited capacity. As the Gaza war took centre stage the Sudanese conflict had to be sidelined. This type of discourse creates competition over “international attention,” a phenomenon often dictated by the priorities of the Global North. Such dynamics reinforce the Global North’s role as the dominant actor in shaping responses to major causes and conflicts around the world.
Attempts to frame the Palestinian and Sudanese causes as contesting narratives for international attention disregards the long history of cooperation and solidarity between the two people. Sudan has been long known for hosting the Arab Summit which resulted in the “three noes”—no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel and no negotiations with Israel. Despite recent normalization between the two country’s leaders -Netanyahu, an accused war criminal and Al-Burhan, a military leader for transitional period in Sudan- Sudanese parties voiced their support of Palestine, rejected the agreement and demonstrated in the capital.
The Sudanese experience of neglect, marginalization and disregard, mirrors the cycle of the Palestinian conflict within over 70 years of occupation. Palestinians have frequently been similarly sidelined on the international agenda, only to re-emerge during times of escalation like the 2014 and 2021 wars, despite continued occupation of West Bank and blockade of Gaza. The similarity in experience suggests that international attention does not simply shift between conflicts but instead aligns with the interests of the Global North, prioritizing issues and attention based on this enduring factor.
The Global North has for decades intervened in conflicts in Africa when its interests were at stake like military interventions against AL-Shabab in Somalia in 2006. However, after decades of exploitation of Africa’s resources and engaging in failed military and diplomatic interventions, the west became fatigued with Africa, finding ways to protect its interest without addressing the humanitarian suffering and instability in the country. A reality that the global north has participated in creating for millions of people.
This indicates that it is not the suffering of Palestinian lives that is perceived as important, but rather the consequences of recent escalations on the interests of the Global North. Israel, identified as the West’s most important ally in the region, drives this attention. The latest international focus on the Palestinian cause stems from the attention Israel received at the start of the war, which could not be separated from attention to Palestinian suffering. As the war’s consequences become confined to Gaza, international attention is shifting to other issues despite the raising death toll.
International attention to one conflict over another should not be creating competition between supporters of the different causes but rather motivate rethinking and challenging a system where human suffering is measured by the attention it receives from the Global North. The Palestinian case has been equally important to Palestinians before the recent war as it is during it. Similarly, the conflict in Sudan is of importance to Sudanese regardless of international attention or lack thereof. The reality that the loss of family members, homes, and war atrocities will most likely never experience fatigue or loss of consistency in their demands for freedom and justice.
The relevance of these conflicts to the interests of the Global North should not dictate how they are approached. Instead, the shared struggles should motivate increased cooperation and consistency of activism on all fronts, recognizing the systematic and shared experience of oppression in the region would challenge attempts to create competition over international attention. Rather focusing on shared aspects would encourage a wider scope of activism in the region and cooperation between grass root initiatives in different countries. Additionally, it would disengage work on these cases from the ever-changing trends of politics and media.
If the Global South was to place its shared interests at the centre of its policies, it would not only force the Global North to reconsider how it understands and interacts with conflicts in the region but will also return agency to the local populations and those with close and constant proximity to the conflicts. Connection between those dedicated to addressing issues in the Global South will harness their collective power. The impact potential has been demonstrated through initiatives like the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement in Palestine.
The ties between Palestinians and Sudanese are not confined to their historical relationship but extend to their shared aspirations for freedom. There is a growing recognition that the liberation of Palestinians is inherently linked to the freedom of all oppressed populations, particularly those in the Global South, from foreign domination and control. Highlighting these intersections would redefine approaches to achieving freedom. Collective efforts would become more necessary and impactful, while resistance to oppressive systems would grow more resilient.
Until the full potential of connection between suffering populations in the region is achieved, competition over international attention will continue to spark debates and fuel political and media trends that disregard the suffering of the people.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.