Incidence and Ramifications of Armed Conflict in Countries with Major Desert Locust Breeding Areas

Despite many areas of progress in recent years, desert locust surveillance and control is impaired by many obstacles, the most intractable of which is insecurity. Insecurity involves rebellions, insurgencies, civil and international war, banditry, terrorism, and minefields. Obstruction of desert locust operations in breeding areas by ongoing armed conflict and landmines constitutes “direct” insecurity. “Indirect” insecurity, although less obvious, is arguably more broadly deleterious by debilitating government function and diverting funds, personnel, and equipment from desert locust management. Indirect “active” insecurity is armed conflict and civil unrest that is occurring at the same time as a desert locust episode, but not in the breeding areas. Indirect “inactive” insecurity refers to the after-effects of insecurity, including weak funding because of prior inattention to capacity maintenance during times of direct and indirect active insecurity, disabled or militarily-appropriated vehicles and other resources, destruction of infrastructure, and deployment of mines. We provide examples of direct and indirect insecurity across 35 years, from 1986 through May 2020, in 13 African and Asian countries (Chad, Eritrea, Ethiopia, India, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Western Sahara, and Yemen) with desert locust breeding areas to illustrate the complexity, pervasiveness, and chronic occurrence of insecurity. The upsurge of 2020 is used to show how direct insecurity still contributes to the genesis and expansion of desert locust episodes. Possible mitigation of direct insecurity effects on some desert locust operations is discussed.