Are Refugees More Important Than Internally Displaced Persons (Idps?

Are Refugees more important than Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)?
In 2013, conflict first broke out between rebel forces and government-backed forces in South Sudan. This conflict has intensified since and resulted in the forced displacement of many nationals of South Sudan. While some South Sudan nationals fled their homes to countries like Kenya, some fled their homes but remained within South Sudan borders and are currently being sheltered by various camps across the country. Thus, according to the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, those who fled their homes as a result of the conflict but remained in the borders of South Sudan are internally displaced persons (UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 1998). In contrast, those who fled their homes to countries overseas as a result of the conflict are refugees according to the 1951 Convention Relating to the status of refugees (UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 1951). From the above comparison, it is important to realize that what separates a refugee from an internally displaced person (IDP) is one crossing an international border. Though both have fled their homes, one remains
This clearly shows the government of the states of the IDPs and the refugees were unable to protect its civilians from the conflict thus making them IDPs and refugees. With this, how sure can we be that the government would now be effective in performing the primary responsibility of offering assistance and protection to IDPs, if the government was unable to do so when the IDPs were just nationals? So why then leave the primary responsibility of protecting IDPs to this same government and leave the primary responsibility of taking care of refugees to the international community. This communicates that the international community cares more and offer superior benefits to refugees than IDPs even though both are victims of the same