TEXT: U.S. Sudan Policy - Obama unveils new Sudan strategy - Clinton: US to engage Sudan, warns on backsliding

SOURCE: US Department of State
Sudan / A Critical Moment, A Comprehensive Approach
WASHINGTON, October 19, 2009/African Press Organization (APO)/ — Office of the Spokesman.

Sudan is at an important crossroads that can either lead to steady improvements in the lives of the Sudanese people or degenerate into even more violent conflict and state failure. Now is the time for the United States to act with a sense of urgency and purpose to protect civilians and work toward a comprehensive peace. The consequences are stark. Sudan’s implosion could lead to widespread regional instability or new safe-havens for international terrorists, significantly threatening U.S. interests. The United States has a clear obligation to the Sudanese people — both in our role as witness to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, and as the first country that unequivocally identified events in Darfur as genocide – to help lead an international effort.

The United States and our international partners face multiple challenges in Sudan. Six years after its initiation, the conflict in Darfur remains unresolved. In 2003, the ruling National Congress Party (NCP) and government-supported militia, sometimes referred to as “Janjaweed”, launched a genocidal campaign that targeted ethnic groups affiliated with a brewing Darfur rebellion, leading to the death of hundreds of thousands of people and displacing some 2.7 million people and more than 250,000 refugees. Unfulfilled ceasefire and peace agreements, the proliferation of rebel groups, and the involvement of regional states have prolonged the crisis and complicated international efforts to reach a peace agreement. While the intensity of the violence has lessened since 2005, civilians continue to live in unacceptable insecurity. Without an active peace process, a commitment to addressing accountability for crimes committed against civilians, a fully deployed, equipped, and performing United Nations (U.N.)-African Union (AU) peacekeeping force, and serious planning for regional recovery, the situation in Darfur will continue to fester, destabilizing the country and the region.

In a similar vein, delays in implementing key portions of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) — the agreement between the NCP and the southern Sudanese People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) that ended more than two decades of conflict between northern and southern Sudan, which left more than 2 million people dead — represent a dangerous flashpoint for renewed conflict. Per the CPA, the South, where governing capacity is nascent, will vote in a referendum in 2011 on self-determination — whether to secede or remain part of a unified Sudanese state. The Three Areas are also flashpoints for renewed conflict: Abyei, Southern Kordofan, and Blue Nile will engage in a referendum and popular consultations respectively on their status over the next 15 months. In the time remaining before the referenda and consultations, the United States is working to reinvigorate international engagement in the CPA and to bolster the peace accord by supporting national elections in 2010, working to resolve outstanding border demarcation disputes, and ensuring the parties live up to their obligations to prevent a return to war

The international community has demonstrated its commitment to the Sudanese people by supporting the deployment of the first Hybrid AU-U.N. peacekeeping force in Darfur, sustaining the presence of some 10,000 U.N. peacekeepers in southern Sudan, and contributing more than $1 billion in humanitarian assistance to the country every year. Most recently, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Bashir in early 2009, charging him with having perpetrated war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur.

Despite these significant developments, sustained political will to address Sudan’s tough challenges in the international community is sometimes lacking. American leadership is essential to a more effective multilateral approach. The United States is working to reconstitute, broaden, and strengthen the multilateral coalition that helped achieve the signing of the CPA, and will work to more concretely transform widespread international concern about Darfur into serious multilateral commitments. This expanded coalition must meet our responsibility to promote security, justice, and development, while broadening our leverage moving forward.

Critical Lessons Learned from Past Efforts

The United States cannot succeed in achieving our policy goals by focusing exclusively on Darfur or CPA implementation — both must be addressed seriously and simultaneously, while also working to resolve and prevent conflict throughout Sudan.

United States policy must be agile enough to address discrete emerging crises, while maintaining a sustained focus on long-term stability.

To advance peace and security in Sudan, we must engage with allies and with those with whom we disagree. United States diplomacy must be both sustained and broad, encompassing not just the National Congress Party, SPLM, and major Darfuri rebel groups but also critical regional and international actors.

Assessments of progress and decisions regarding incentives and disincentives must not be based on process-related accomplishments (i.e. the signing of a MOU or the issuance of a set of visas), but rather based on verifiable changes in conditions on the ground.

Accountability for genocide and atrocities is necessary for reconciliation and lasting peace.

It must be clear to all parties that Sudanese support for counterterrorism objectives is valued, but cannot be used as a bargaining chip to evade responsibilities in Darfur or in implementing the CPA.

U.S. Strategic Objectives

The U.S. strategy in Sudan must focus on ending the suffering in Darfur, and building a lasting peace. The three principal U.S. strategic priorities in Sudan include:

1) A definitive end to conflict, gross human rights abuses, and genocide in Darfur.

2) Implementation of the North-South CPA that results in a peaceful post-2011 Sudan, or an orderly path toward two separate and viable states at peace with each other.

3) Ensure that Sudan does not provide a safe haven for international terrorists.

The United States will use all elements of influence to achieve our strategic objectives. The United States Special Envoy for Sudan will play the leading role in pursuing our Sudan strategy. Fundamental to all United States Government efforts to bring about peace and security throughout Sudan is holding responsible parties accountable for creating the conditions that can foster concrete and sustainable improvements in the lives of Sudanese people. This includes frank dialogue with the Government of Sudan about what needs to be accomplished, how the bilateral relationship can improve if conditions transform, and how the government will become even more isolated if conditions remain the same or worsen. The United States will seek to broaden and deepen the multilateral coalition actively working to achieve peace in Darfur and full implementation of the CPA such that backsliding by any party is met with credible, meaningful disincentives, leveraged by the United States and the international community.

Each quarter, the interagency at senior levels will assess a variety of indicators of progress or of deepening crisis, and that assessment will include calibrated steps to bolster support for positive change and to discourage backsliding. Progress toward achievement of the strategic objectives will trigger steps designed to strengthen the hands of those implementing the changes. Failure to improve conditions will trigger increased pressure on recalcitrant actors.

United States policy will also acknowledge that the Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS) must also abide by its responsibilities under the terms of the CPA, and prioritize conflict mitigation and resolution, capacity-building, transparency and accountability, and service delivery. Given the stakes and the pace of events, the United States must ensure that its assistance initiatives in the South are both effective and efficient, reflecting these urgent priorities. The Special Envoy will continue to engage and consult broadly with the SPLM, Darfur rebel and civil society groups, and other actors to ensure that the United States can bring focused efforts to bear on key levers of influence at critical moments.

Key Implementation Elements

Strategic Objective I: A definitive end to conflict, gross human rights abuses, and genocide in Darfur.
Enhance Civilian Protection. The United States will work to strengthen the UNAMID by: (1) strengthening multilateral resolve to impose consequences on actors obstructing UNAMID operations, access, and performance; (2) providing direct U.S. funding, and U.S. diplomatic, logistical, and other support toward the provision of critically needed equipment (including helicopters); and (3) planning contingencies in Darfur by developing a scale of appropriate responses to worsening crises.

Promote a Negotiated Solution to the Conflict. The Special Envoy will establish and maintain a dialogue with armed movements in Darfur and solicit support for the peace process from Sudan’s neighbors. The United States will support a political agreement that addresses the underlying causes of conflict in Darfur by building on Qatar’s peace negotiation efforts, providing direct support to the Joint AU-U.N. Joint Chief Mediator for Darfur, and encouraging the broad participation, including by all diverse representations of civil society, in the peace process. The United States will seek to renew all parties’ commitment to the 2005 Declaration of Principles that obligates the Sudanese Government and all major Darfuri armed groups to seek a peaceful solution to their grievances in Darfur and to adhere to a 2004 humanitarian ceasefire.

Encourage and Strengthen Initiatives for Ending Violent Conflict. The United States will support international efforts to achieve a cessation of hostilities in Darfur and through a variety of means will urge Sudan and Chad to cease support to rebel groups under their influence. The United States will seek to work with a broad array of partners on the ground to gather information on and to fight sexual and gender-based violence in Sudan to support the implementation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1820.

Support Accountability. In addition to supporting international efforts to bring those responsible for genocide and war crimes in Darfur to justice, the United States will work with Darfuri civil society to support locally-owned accountability and reconciliation mechanisms that can make peace more sustainable.

Improve the Humanitarian Situation. The United States will work with other donors and humanitarian organizations in the field to insist that the Government of Sudan fulfill its obligations to its citizens, by improving humanitarian access and coverage in Darfur. The United States will place a premium on core humanitarian principles and on the use of shared, concrete, and transparent humanitarian indicators to gauge the situation on the ground.

Strategic Objective II: Implementation of the CPA that results in a peaceful post-2011 Sudan or an orderly transition to two separate and viable states at peace with each other.

Address Unimplemented Elements of the CPA. The United States will work with international partners to encourage the parties to implement the necessary legislation and planning for the 2010 elections and the 2011 referenda. Among other issues, the United States will work with international partners to: (1) provide assistance for census resolution, voter registration and education, political party assistance, polling place administration, balloting mechanics, and ensuring international and local domestic election and referenda monitoring; and (2) encourage the parties to enact the necessary legal reforms to create an environment more conducive to a credible election process and referendum, including through the enactment of a credible referendum law. The United States will assist the parties in resolving census and referendum disputes in accordance with the CPA. In addition, the United States will support efforts to push for the timely and transparent demarcation of the North-South border through the provision of technical expertise and support international efforts to professionalize and equip the Joint Integrated Units (JIUs) responsible for providing security in key areas.

Reinvigorate and Strengthen International Engagement on CPA Implementation. The Special Envoy has organized a “Forum for Supporters of the CPA”, and reinvigorated the “Troika” (the U.S., U.K, and Norway all act as CPA guarantors) to coordinate and rejuvenate international efforts to support CPA implementation. The United States will also work to strengthen the role of the Assessment and Evaluation Committee (AEC), the primary forum charged with mediating CPA implementation disputes between the two parties.

Defuse Tension in the Three Areas. In Abyei, Southern Kordofan, and Blue Nile, the United States will: (1) assist in the development and/or reinvigoration of U.N.-assisted disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) programs; (2) restore and strengthen NGO operations to provide vital development assistance and conflict prevention resources, and to offset the potential for conflict once new borders are drawn; and (3) as appropriate, provide direct technical support to local administrations.

Promote the Development of Post-2011 Wealth-Sharing Mechanisms. The United States will work with international partners to support the parties in developing a post-2011 wealth-sharing agreement and resolve other post-2011 political and economic issues.

Promote Improved Governing Capacity and Greater Transparency in Southern Sudan. The United States will work to improve security for the southern Sudanese people by supporting DDR and conflict prevention initiatives and strengthening the capacity of the security sector and criminal justice system. The United States will also work to improve economic conditions and outcomes. The United States will provide technical advisors to vital ministries and will work to strengthen entities such as the U.N. Development Program’s Local Government Reform Program (LGRP). The United States will work with international partners to implement the World Bank Multi-Donor Trust Fund South Strategy in a timely manner and to improve access to capital, particularly microfinancing, for agricultural enterprises and local private sector ventures. The United States will support efforts and initiatives that assist in increasing trade between Sudan and its neighbors. Transparency in fiscal expenditures will be critical to attracting investment, and the United States will support World Bank anticorruption efforts in Southern Sudan.


Strategic Objective III: Ensure that Sudan does not serve as a safe haven for terrorists.

Prevent Terrorists from developing a foothold in Sudan. The United States has a strategic interest in preventing Sudan from providing safe haven for terrorist organizations. The United States will work with the international community to reduce the ability of terrorists and non-state actors inimical to U.S. interests from developing a foothold in Sudan.


Outreach and Consultation
The strong voices of committed advocates and members of Congress have been indispensable to elevating Sudan on the U.S. policy agenda. These stakeholders are assets in U.S. efforts to end the suffering of the Sudanese people and bring stability to the country. Consistent efforts to maintain a regular dialogue with these communities will strengthen U.S. policy and be vital to success. The Special Envoy will meet regularly with advocates and will maintain open lines of communication with Congress to ensure that serious and substantive consultations are a regular part of the policy implementation process.

Obama Unveils New Sudan Strategy

New York Times - Ross Colvin, Caren Bohan - ‎3 minutes ago‎

By REUTERS WASHINGTON (Reuters) - US President Barack Obama on Monday unveiled a new strategy toward Sudan, offering incentives if the Khartoum government ...

Obama to offer incentives to Sudanese government

Times LIVE - ‎13 minutes ago‎

President Barack Obama is shifting US policy toward Sudan to one based on working with the Khartoum government instead of isolating it. ...

Obama has little choice on Sudan

guardian.co.uk - ‎19 minutes ago‎

Given his tough rhetoric on Darfur during last year's US election campaign, Barack Obama will face inevitable criticism over his new policy of engaging ...

---

Warning that Sudan was "poised to fall further into chaos if swift action is not taken,", he also said he would renew sanctions on Sudan this week. more by Barack Obama - 3 minutes ago - New York Times (15 occurrences)

---

Sudan Now Campaign Demands Obama Put Sudan Policy Into Practice

Reuters - ‎20 minutes ago‎

WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Sudan Now campaign, which comprises several human rights and anti-genocide groups, commends the Obama ...

Clinton: US to engage Sudan, warns on backsliding

Reuters - ‎21 minutes ago‎

WASHINGTON, Oct 19 (Reuters) - Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday said the United States pledged "broad engagement" with Sudan's government but ...

Act now in Sudan

guardian.co.uk - ‎22 minutes ago‎

There has been much controversy over the uk's role in Afghanistan, with many questioning what we are doing there and whether we are giving enough support to ...

Clinton Says New Sudan Policy Can End Conflict

Bloomberg - Janine Zacharia - ‎30 minutes ago‎

Oct. 19 (Bloomberg) -- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the US will seek to end “gross human rights abuses” in Darfur, ...

US releasing "comprehensive" strategy on Sudan: Obama

Xinhua - Wang Guanqun - ‎31 minutes ago‎

WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 (Xinhua) -- US President Barack Obama on Monday called for "a definitive end" to conflict in Sudan, and pledged American engagement with ...

US offers 'incentives' to Sudan

BBC News - ‎35 minutes ago‎

The US has offered Sudan "incentives" in return for "verifiable changes" on the ground, in an apparent softening of its stance on the African nation. ...

Obama offers Sudan incentives to end Darfur 'genocide'

AFP - ‎7 minutes ago‎

WASHINGTON — US President Barack Obama unveiled a new policy on Sudan Monday and warned Khartoum of more US pressure if it failed to respond to his fresh ...

All 74 related articles »

UPDATE: See Sudan Watch, 19 October 2009: U.S. policy on Sudan - Remarks by Clinton, Rice, Gration

How did Obama win the peace prize?

Warmest congratulations to US President Barack Obama on being awarded a Nobel Peace Peace Prize.  Here's hoping that Save Darfur.org and other Sudan activists will feel greatly inspired by the award and all pull together to work for peace in Sudan and the rest of the world.  

My heroes the late great Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King and John Lennon were all murdered but only King received a Nobel Peace Prize.  I would love President Obama to share his peace prize money equally between the estates of Gandhi and Lennon and ask the world to pull together to stage a global concert calling for world peace and safe drinking water for all.

Taking a break. Back soon. Love and peace.  Here are some must-reads:

The poor are not the problem but the solution

What's Missing in the Darfur Sudan Debate: Addressing Property Rights Could Help Bring Peace

Water Is The New Gold

[P.S. This posting has been updated with a link to show that Martin Luther King was the recipient of The Nobel Peace Prize 1964. At the age of thirty-five, he was the youngest man to have received the Nobel Peace Prize. When notified of his selection, he announced that he would turn over the prize money of $54,123 to the furtherance of the civil rights movement.]
- - -

New UNAMID Force Commander, General Patrick Nyambumba 




Photo: US Special Envoy to Sudan Gration meets with UNAMID's Deputy Joint Special Representative (Center) and new UNAMID Force Commander, General Patrick Nyambumba (Right)  September 2009 UNAMID HQ

Here is a snippet from a Snowmail (Channel 4 News UK) authored by Krishnan on Friday, 9 October 2009:

SEARCHING FOR THE REASON BEHIND OBAMA’S NOBEL PEACE PRIZE

It is one of those things that has everyone scratching their heads. Obama has just said he is surprised and deeply humbled. His supporters look a little embarrassed. His detractors are foaming at the mouth. Whatever way you look at it giving the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama seems a tad premature. Is it an award for beating George Bush? An award for being black? The Nobel committee say he has given hope to the world and made great moves on nuclear disarmament. And there is no doubt Obama has changed the game in many ways. But substantive achievements are thin on the ground. He's likely to send more troops to Afghanistan, while his forces kill Afghan civilians by mistake month in month out. Even liberal America thinks it is strange - we'll be talking to Joe Klein of Time magazine and the head of Oslo's International Peace Institute.

Barack Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize: http://bit.ly/1MJJ3l
How did Obama win the peace prize?: http://bit.ly/TWWMB

How did Obama win the peace prize?
09 October 2009
By Channel 4 News

Barack Obama was "humbled" - and others taken aback - by the award to the US president of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. So how is the winner chosen?

According to the will of Alfred Nobel, the prize should be given to "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".

The Norwegian Nobel committee said they had chosen Obama "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples".

But much of the selection process takes place in secret.

The Norwegian Nobel committee writes to various people around the world each year asking them to submit their nominations.

The names of the nominees are only revealed 50 years later, but the prize committee announces the number of nominees each year and Obama was one of 205 people put forward in 2009.

Past winners have included Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, Kofi Annan, John Hume, David Trimble, Nelson Mandela, FW de Klerk, Mikhail Gorbachev, Henry Kissinger, and Aung San Suu Kyi.

Mahatma Gandhi was nominated in 1937, 1938, 1939, 1947 and 1948. He was assassinated in January 1948 and the rules of the prize state that it cannot be awarded posthumously unless the winner's name has already been announced before their death.

But the prize was not awarded that year because the committee decided "there was no suitable living candidate".

Joseph Stalin was nominated for the peace prize in 1945 and 1948 for his efforts to end the second world war but he was not chosen as the winner.

Adolf Hitler was nominated in 1939 by EGC Brandt, a member of parliament in Sweden, but Brandt later withdrew the nomination.

Winston Churchill was nominated for the peace prize but never won. He did win the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1953.

- - -

From BBC Friday, 9 October 2009 - Nobel prize win 'humbles' Obama

ANALYSIS

By Paul Reynolds
BBC News, London
The award is certainly unexpected and might be regarded as more of an encouragement for intentions than a reward for achievements.

After all, the president has been in office for a little over eight months and he might hope to serve eight years. His ambition for a world free of nuclear weapons is one that is easier to declare than to achieve and a climate control agreement has yet to be reached.

Indeed, the citation indicates that it is President Obama's world view that attracted the Nobel committee - that diplomacy should be founded "on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population".
- - -

By Mark Mardell
BBC North America editor
There was already a huge weight of responsibility on Obama's shoulders, and this medal hung round his neck has just made it a little heavier.

- - -

Nobel prize win 'humbles' Obama Barack Obama says he is "humbled and deeply surprised" to win the Nobel Peace Prize just 10 months into his presidency. "Surprised and humbled" US media on Obama award In pictures: Nobel prize rows Mardell: Heavy responsibility Head-to-head: Obama's prize Obama rewarded for world view World reaction to Obama win Should Obama have won?

- - -

From Gulf Times, Saturday, 10 October 2009L
Nobel for Obama seen as premature honour
By Sarmad Qazi and Ramesh Mathew

Qatar residents yesterday expressed their surprise at the news of US President Barack Obama winning the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, attributing his selection “more to his intentions rather than achievements.”

A majority of those surveyed by Gulf Times said that while the first-ever African-American president of the United States may be strongly committed to bridging differences in the world, it was too early to confer the prestigious award on him.

The Nobel Committee said Obama won the prize for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples” while highlighting his efforts to support international bodies and promote nuclear disarmament.
Following are the comments of some of the respondents.

Garry Friend (Australia)
I was surprised to hear that President Obama won the award. Somebody of his stature winning the Nobel Peace Prize in such a short time… it’s a good cause.
I must point out that a lot of his “efforts” appears to be talk, but it’s good that somebody in his position can in future have some input in really making a difference to this region in particular and all over the world.
The award to him is also a good thing if it pushes him to achieve global harmony.

Ibrahim Saleh al-Naimi (Qatari)
I wish him the best of luck. I am not qualified to judge him but if he has won it I think it was to support his good efforts.
He has not done anything concrete yet in the Middle East, although we all appreciated his landmark speech in Cairo.
The Nobel Peace Prize is too early for Obama and I hope this gives him a real incentive to push for peace. People are fed up with wars and there lies a real opportunity for Obama in the White House.

Abbas Moussa (Lebanon)
I think it is a compliment to Obama because he has got such a coveted prize in such a short period, but the selection has opened doubts that Nobel Prizes are politicised.
It would have been better for the Nobel committee to have waited for a couple of years and then see if he really deserved it. But coming this early, the award might tend to lose its prestige.
We know Obama is trying, especially to bring peace to the Middle East but there’s nothing on the ground. Some of the other world leaders have actually done so much more for global peace. Without exaggeration, take the example of HH the Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani’s contributions in Lebanon, in Sudan, in relief efforts for Katrina victims and in quake-hit Kashmir.

Ashraf Siddiqui (Pakistan)
The deadline for nomination of the Nobel Peace Prize was February 1 when President Obama had been in office for only two weeks. According to the Nobel Committee, Obama’s outreach to the Muslim world and attempts to curb nuclear proliferation became the basis of his selection. It is a great surprise for me and I’m sure for most others as well.
I would say Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari has played a much bigger role in the fight against terrorism by providing unconditional support, amidst strong opposition from the people of his own country. I, therefore, hope the Nobel Committee reconsiders its decision or President Obama comes up with a suggestion to share the award with President Zardari for supporting him.

Anthony Tallant (UK)
I am really surprised at the news. How could a person sending armies to volatile territories one after another be chosen for the award? Be it in Afghanistan or in Pakistan, results are still a far cry.

Lennie Crammer (Sri Lanka)
It is too early to comment on Obama’s performance and the situation in most war-hit countries like Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan has not changed much after Obama assumed office. Even while appreciating the efforts that the US president has been making for long-lasting peace in such countries, I very much feel it was too early to confer on him a top honour as the Nobel Peace Prize.

Ali Mostafa (Indonesia)
How could a president’s performance be evaluated in such a short a period as nine months? Being an Indonesian I should have been proud of this achievement as the US president had done his elementary schooling in Menteng on the outskirts of Jakarta. However, I feel it was too early to honour Obama with the Nobel Peace Prize without understanding his real achievements. Like many others, I’m also a little bit surprised at the Nobel committee’s choice.

Simon D’Silva (India)
It is too premature to talk about Obama’s achievements in just about nine months that he has been in office. Needless to say, the Nobel honour to him at this juncture has surprised me. Before the committee reached such a decision, they should have waited a little more and evaluated the results of his peace missions to such countries as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq. He still has major challenges to overcome as Al Qaeda and many other such elements are active. For achieving real global peace, the US president has miles to go.

Habib (Afghanistan)
When I first heard that Obama won the prestigious award, I thought that it was a joke and it took me a few minutes to realise it was true.
Most of my compatriots also could not comprehend this choice of Obama for the prize because he has hardly completed one year in the White House. All we got from Obama were promises and nothing else and he should be the winner of “promises award” and not peace.
The Middle East peace process is at a standstill, thanks to his failure to pressurise Israel to stop building settlements. We heard in the media about his intentions to increase the number of US troops in Afghanistan and this is not the behaviour of a peacemaker.
My only explanation is that the Nobel Prize committee had no real candidates to choose from. It was better if they announced that there was no winner for this year, instead of denigrating themselves by selecting Obama.