The Crisis In Darfur, The Sudan

Brief History of The Sudan according to the CIA World Fact Book as of September 19 2006:

[Military regimes favouring Islamic-oriented governments have dominated national politics since independence from the UK in 1956.

Sudan was embroiled in two prolonged civil wars. The first civil war ended in 1972, but broke out again in 1983. The second war and famine-related effects resulted in more than 4 million people displaced and, according to rebel estimates, more than 2 million deaths over a period of two decades.

Peace talks gained momentum in 2002-04 with the signing of several accords; a final Naivasha peace treaty of January 2005 granted the southern rebels autonomy for six years, after which a referendum for independence is scheduled to be held. A separate conflict that broke out in the western region of Darfur in 2003 has resulted in at least 200,000 deaths and nearly 2 million displaced; as of late 2005, peacekeeping troops were struggling to stabilise the situation.

Sudan also has faced large refugee influxes from neighbouring countries, primarily Ethiopia and Chad, and armed conflict, poor transport infrastructure, and lack of government support have chronically obstructed the provision of humanitarian assistance to affected populations.

Janjawid armed militia and Sudanese military have driven about 200,000 Darfur region refugees into eastern Chad; large numbers of Sudanese refugees have also fled to Uganda, Ethiopia, Kenya, the Central African Republic, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo; southern Sudan provides shelter to Ugandans seeking periodic protection from soldiers of the Lord's Resistance Army.]

So why did the conflict in Darfur start?
The Darfur conflict erupted in 2003 when mainly ethnic African rebel groups, complaining of discrimination by the Arab-dominated government, launched their revolt. The government responded with a military assault.

Is the conflict Arab against non-Arabs/ ethnic Africans? Is there a case for Genocide?
U.N. officials warned that a new Sudanese military campaign is fueling the worst outbreak of violence since the conflict began. U.N. human rights monitors reported that Sudanese planes were indiscriminately bombing villages.

The situation in Sudan has sometimes been compared to that of Rwanda 10 years ago. But is anything on that scale happening in the Darfur region of Sudan? The US Congress has called it genocide, and the United Nations gave the government 30 days to help the people and stop helping the Janjaweed militia, who have been blamed for the worst of the atrocities.

Have war crimes been committed?
The barrister John Jones has worked in three war crimes tribunals, including the one for Rwanda: "There's a hierarchy of crimes, genocide being the crime of crimes. In Sudan, if you have African groups and Arab militias, you certainly have ethnic groups, and if one is trying to exterminate the other, then arguably you have genocide.

"But certainly if you don't have that then you have crimes against humanity, possibly. Crimes against humanity being widespread and systematic attacks on the civilian population."

Hilton Dawson, chairman of the British parliament's group on Sudan, believes there is no genocide. "I think it's wicked murder on a huge scale, but I don't believe that it's the simple targeting of one ethnic group by another. I've talked to people on the ground on all sides. There's a more complex mix of races and cultures than one would assume from simply being told that this is Arabs against Africans or vice versa."

World Food Programme's Greg Barrow also agrees with Hilton Dawson and points the following information:

“Some 1.4 million people have been displaced in the conflict in Darfur. While the historic conflict between Arabs and Africans is a recurring theme in Sudan, it would be wrong to assume that it is always Arabs who are the victors, and Africans the vanquished.“

In camps for internally displaced people (IDP) in Darfur, where the United Nations' World Food Programme (WFP) works, we have found many examples of families and communities whose stories do not fit into simple stereotypes. “

It is true that black Africans are in the majority among the hundreds of thousands of displaced and most of them say they fled attacks by the Arab Janjaweed militia.

But there are also displaced Arab communities, whose villages were attacked by African groups, and who are victims of inter-African ethnic fighting. “

There are even parts of South Darfur where the WFP currently cannot work because of a dangerous traditional conflict between rival Arab groups.

Most of the displaced, whether Arab or African in origin, are farmers.”

Didn’t these groups sign a recent peace treaty?
Yes, a peace deal was signed in May, the Sudanese government backed the deal, but only one rebel faction - Minni Minawi's faction of the Sudan Liberation Army - signed up, one of the other groups, fighters loyal to the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) refused to sign the deal.

As part of the deal, the government agreed to disarm the Janjaweed, but there is little to suggest that this has happened. At the same time, Minni Minawi's men now seem to be fighting on the side of the government against the other rebel groups.

All this means that violence has actually increased since the peace deal was signed. It was meant to bring peace. Instead, British-brokered deal has rekindled war

In Darfur's refugee camps, survivors tell of attacks by rebel groups that used to protect them

Hawah Sali is a Tunjur, a branch of the Fur, the region's largest tribe, hence the name Darfur, which means "land of the Fur".

"In the past Minni controlled the area and the government couldn't get in," he says. "Now he's with the government and they are killing people together. It has never been so bad before." Asked why things have turned out like this, he blames the peace deal. "That's why we're here. I don't know the details of what's in the agreement. But it's just created problems."

These new fissures on the rebel side plus the split over whether to sign the peace deal have added new complexity to Darfur. The old template of an Arab versus African conflict that prompted thousands of people in the west to denounce genocide and ethnic cleansing now looks even less accurate.

What about the peacekeeping in Darfur?
The African Union has extended the mandate of a peacekeeping force in Sudan's Darfur region through Dec. 31, avoiding a showdown for now over Sudan's refusal to permit the United Nations to take over the mission.

Unfortunately the African Union forces are overmatched for the challenges that they face. There are 7,200 of them but this is too small, it is also too lightly armed and immobile.

The AU said last month it would boost its contingent in Darfur to 11,000 troops and the UN agreed to send 105 staff officers and technical experts to bolster the AU force there.

Also last month, the Security Council unanimously agreed to extend the mandate of the 12,273-strong UN force in southern Sudan for two weeks until October 8 and boost it to up to 20,000 so that it could be shifted to Darfur.

The United States has been leading international efforts to force Sudan to accept deployment of a 20,000-strong UN peacekeeping force.

But Sudan does not trust the United States or the UN – Why?
The United States has also been on the forefront of trying to place UN economic sanctions against Sudan. The US has itself been applying forms of sanctions against the Sudan. Sanctions are the last thing poor countries need when they are in economic trouble.

Another reason the Sudanese have hatred of US involvement is due to the medical factory attack by the US.

On Aug. 20, 1998 a US Tomahawk cruise missile destroyed the $100 million El-Shifa Pharmaceuticals factory in North Khartoum. While the attack killed or injured several people, the loss of the factory was catastrophic for the people of Sudan. Without the lifesaving medicine it produced, Sudan's death toll from the bombing has continued, quietly, to rise.

The El-Shifa facility had been called the Pride of Africa at its opening, which drew much fanfare, heads of state, foreign ministers, and ambassadors. The factory even became a supplier of medicine to Iraq as part of the United Nations Food for Oil program.

More importantly, this factory provided affordable medicine for humans and all the locally available veterinary medicine in Sudan. It produced 90 percent of Sudan's major pharmaceutical products. Sanctions against Sudan make it impossible to import adequate amounts of medicines required to cover the serious gap left by the plant's destruction.

Thus, tens of thousands of people - many of them children - have suffered and died from malaria, tuberculosis, and other treatable diseases.

The Clinton administration outlined that the factory was linked to Ossama bin Laden and was producing chemical warfare. The US failed to provide any valid proof

Incidentally, the attack came three days after President Clinton's appearance before a federal grand jury investigating his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Noam Chomsky (the new friend of Hugo Chavez) made the claim in one of interviews that after the US bombed Sudan in 1998, it blocked a potential UN inquiry into this matter. Sudan approached the Security Council, but the US refused to permit even an inquiry.

There is believed by some people that the US has oil interests in Sudan and by placing the UN troops in Sudan will be able to give rebel groups a chance to strengthen and call for autonomy in various regions of Sudan and possibly independence.

According to the CIA world fact book on Sudan…
Oil production: 401,300 bbl/day (2005 est.)
Oil exports: 275,000 bbl/day (2004)
Oil proved reserves: 1.6 billion bbl (2005 est.)
Exports partners: China 71.1%, Japan 12%, Saudi Arabia 2.8% (2005)

China & Russia, are both Sudan's strongest allies. Both countries refused to vote for the recent UN resolution to send in peacekeepers

China has lucrative oil ties with Sudan. China has agreed a deal totalling $4 Billion for oil exploration with Sudan. Oil reserves in Sudan are currently three times what the CIA estimates and it is believed that Sudan could posses one of the worlds largest reserves.

The US and China are fighting for the same resources for their respective economies but some believe the US is trying to prevent China growing too quickly and becoming a major influence in world politics.

Strategic Studies believe that the Sudan government could collect a minimum of $30 billion in total oil revenue by 2012, with the potential for much more if exploration succeeds.

Apart from the killing what else is happening?
Rogue rebel chiefs have turned to looting. Eleven aid workers have been killed in the last three months, all Sudanese nationals, and more than 25 vehicles stolen at gunpoint, mostly by rebels.

"Not only do they steal cars, but we have to re-negotiate access on a near daily basis," says The U.N. chief of humanitarian affairs in Darfur, Manuel Aranda da Silva. Humanitarian groups have been pressing rebels to return stolen goods and to allow safe conduct by addressing their families and tribes, who also benefit from the aid.

U.N. human rights monitors reported that sexual violence, which has been a horrific feature of the conflict, continues in South Darfur, particularly near camps for internally displaced people (IDP) near the town of Gereida.

But a rape case successfully prosecuted in court recently offers a glimmer of hope, said U.N. human rights spokesman Jose Luis Diaz . In Kabkabiya in North Darfur, a soldier was convicted of raping an 11-year-old girl and sentenced to five years in prison, he said.

"This shows that there can be results and action against this kind of abuse when there is a will, even though there is in addition to a lack of will in many cases, a lack of judicial infrastructure in Darfur to carry out such prosecutions."

What is the world doing about it?
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned that Sudanese President Omar al-Beshir "if it continues waging war against its own citizens, challenging the African Union, undermining its peacekeeping force and threatening the international community - then the regime in Khartoum will be held responsible, and it alone will bear the consequences," the chief US diplomat said.

The United Nations Security Council passed a resolution two weeks ago to send 20,000 peacekeepers to Darfur to end the crisis. The resolution required the Sudan's government to agree to the presence of UN troops, but Omar al-Bashir refused.

Mr Bashir said: "We don't want the United Nations back to Sudan, no matter the conditions." He has likened a UN force in Darfur to "Western colonisation" and has vowed to personally lead the "jihad" against it.

Mark Malloch Brown, Britain's outgoing United Nations' deputy secretary general said "The megaphone diplomacy coming out of Washington and London: 'you damn well are going to let the U.N. deploy and if you don't beware the consequences' isn't plausible,"

"The Sudanese know we don't have troops to go in against a hostile Khartoum government; if Sudan opposes us there's no peace to keep anyway; you're in there to fight a war," he added. "It's just not a credible threat."

What was instead needed was a carrot and stick package, backed by an international consensus, of incentives and sanctions that could be clearly understood by Khartoum.

He said Khartoum wanted normalized relations with Britain and the United States, the ability to use their new oil wealth, a supportive U.N. deployment and protection from the International Criminal Court.

He particularly noted efforts to bring China, a major oil client of Sudan, into the international coalition to bring pressure to bear on Khartoum.

In the meantime, the West should put its hands into its pockets and fill the $300 million shortfall in aid to the starving millions in Darfur, Malloch Brown urged.

US Ambassador John Bolton took Mr Brown to task "These remarks bring discredit to the UN and are a stain on its reputation,"

"We are proud we have called the attention of the international community to the tragedy in Darfur ... And to have Malloch Brown attack those efforts brings great discredit to this effort," he added.

The fighting has realistically been going on since 2003, what has the world been doing since then?

According to Amnesty International, the world has been arming the Sudanese government
Amnesty International revealed that uncontrolled arms exports had fuelled the killings.

Military aircraft and components sold to Sudan from the Russian Federation, China and Belarus, with helicopter spare parts from Lithuania

Tanks, military vehicles and artillery transferred to Sudan from Belarus, Russia and Poland

Grenades, rifles, pistols, ammunition and other small arms and light weapons exported to Sudan from many countries, but mainly China, France, Iran and Saudi Arabia;

The recent involvement of arms brokering companies from the UK and Ireland attempting to provide large numbers of Antonov aircraft and military vehicles from Ukraine and pistols from Brazil;

Military training and cooperation offered by Belarus, India, Malaysia and Russia.

So what is the solution?
There is no quick solution to this issue. There is no right or wrong, there are no sides to choose, but one thing is certain, we should all start by getting all parties together and ageing to a peace treaty.

Secondly, as the UN is not allowed to keep peace in Darfur, we need to get the African Union troops to be better trained and better equipped. The UN can provide the necessary training and finances required. It can also provide the AU with technical assistance as and when required.

The only way to get the UN troops to monitor Darfur would be if the US stops verbally pressurising Sudan. No country is going to be told what to do by any bullies. The UK should make a special contribution to obtaining peace in Sudan as it was once running the country.


Useful Reads:
Sudan: Arms trade fuelling human rights abuse in Darfur
Amnesty International, AI Index: AFR 54/142/20041, 6 November 2004

Arms to Sudan trade revealed
By Andrew Gilligan, Evening Standard 24.08.04

Revealed: the extent of Britain’s arms trade
Sunday Herald, 30 July 2006
By Neil Mackay Investigations Editor

Year Later, US Attack On Factory Still Hurts Sudan
Boston Globe, August 22, 1999
By Jonathan Belke

China Invests Heavily In Sudan's Oil Industry
Washington Post, December 23, 2004
By Peter S. Goodman