Recent economic growth and the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) have been seen as grounds for optimism about future food security in Sudan. However, solving the North-South conflict (if indeed it is solved) does not resolve conflicts within either the North or the South and may even encourage a variety of conflicts. The classic neoliberal prescription of peace, growth and foreign investment may deepen (and obscure) the needs and grievances of those historically left behind in a dysfunctional development process. Historically, some of those marginalised by patterns of development in Sudan have chosen to rebel, while others have had their grievances diverted against those even more marginal than themselves. Dysfunctional and violent processes of development must be reversed. They cannot be adequately compensated for-but may be legitimised-by attempts to use food aid as a ‘safety net’. Meanwhile, those who benefited from war may have incentives to derail the peace.