UN passes Resolution 1591 on Sudan - Sudan vows to put 164 on trial for Darfur atrocities

Yesterday, the UN Security Council decided to freeze assets and impose a travel ban on those believed to have committed human-rights abuses, or violated the ceasefire agreement in Darfur.

Excerpt from UN News via IRIN March 30, 2005:

Tuesday's resolution also extended the current ban on the sale or supply of military equipment to non-governmental entities or individuals involved in the Darfur conflict to include the Sudanese government. It further demanded that the government immediately cease conducting offensive military flights in the region.

Security Council had adopted an "unwise resolution" says Khartoum

The Sudan's UN Ambassador, Elfatih Mohamed Ahmed Erwa, said the Council had adopted an "unwise resolution" that might aggravate the situation in Darfur.

A UN committee, consisting of all Council members, was established to specify which individuals would be subject to the restrictive measures, and to monitor their implementation.

In addition, the resolution requested UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to appoint a four-member panel of experts based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, to assist the committee for six months.

Once again, the Council condemned the failure of the Sudanese government to disarm Janjaweed militias and bring to justice their leaders and associates who had carried out human-rights violations and other atrocities.

Unless the Council determines that the parties in the conflict have complied with certain demands and commitments, the measures set out in the text will be enforced 30 days from the adoption date.

These commitments were set out in previous Council resolutions in 2004: the April N'djamena Ceasefire Agreement and the November Abuja Humanitarian and Security Protocols, signed by the Sudanese government and the two main rebel groups - the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A), and the Justice and Equality Movement.

The Council emphasised that there could be no military solution to the conflict in Darfur, and urged the government and the rebels to resume the Abuja talks without preconditions, and to negotiate in good faith to reach an agreement quickly.
- - -

US agrees to use UN Court for Darfur Cases

Today, in New York, the UN Security Council is expected to vote on a resolution put forward by France that would authorise the prosecution of Sudanese war crimes suspects by the international criminal court (ICC). But there may be further delay.

This morning, Fox 23 News was the first to break with the news - followed by Associated Press via LA Times - that Washington approves Sudan trials by International Criminal Court, and in return, Americans are exempt from any prosecution.

But the latest this evening from Reuters says France is still engaged in last minute talks with the United States to avoid a US veto. "We are trying to find language that we would find acceptable. We're trying to make the resolution work so that we can avoid a train wreck," said one US official.

See here below an East African news report that explains Kenya signed US immunity yesterday. Perhaps other signatures have been garnered to provide the US with more assurances that its citizens won't get hauled up in front of the ICC on frivolus charges.
- - -

UN Security Council passes Resolution 1591 on Sudan

On Tuesday, the UN Security Council approved what The Economist terms as "mild sanctions" against those carrying out "ethnic cleansing" in Darfur.

The council voted to impose a no fly zone over Darfur; a travel ban and an asset freeze on those responsible for atrocities in Darfur and on individuals who impede the peace process or commit human rights violations in Darfur. The council also voted to strengthen an arms embargo in Darfur that encompasses the Sudanese government.

Last week, the Security Council passed another resolution to deploy nearly 11,000 UN peacekeepers to South Sudan to monitor a peace deal between the Government of Sudan and southern rebels that ended a 21-year civil war.

Sudan Tribune has published the full text of UN Security Council resolution 1591 on Sudan, along with a copy of "Explanations after Vote".
- - -

Kenya to sign US immunity agreement

Copy of an East African news report by Evelyn Kwamboka re the UN's ICC and Kenya's signing of a US immunity agreement:

The Government is today expected to sign an agreement offering the US bilateral immunity in the International Criminal Court (ICC).

But 12 human rights groups yesterday opposed the move, saying it would make Kenya to not only violate international law but also facilitate the protection of foreign criminals.

If it signs the agreement, Kenya will not surrender any US citizen to the ICC, however serious the crime committed.

The move comes barely a month after Kenya joined ICC, which aims at ending war crimes.

On March 9, Attorney-General Amos Wako gave UN officials in New York a document containing the statutes signed by the Foreign Affairs minister Chirau Ali Mwakwere.

Yesterday, the International Commission for Jurists (ICJ) Kenya Executive Director Philip Kichana urged Parliament's Legal Affairs and Administration of Justice Committee to discuss the issue before the agreement is signed.

"They should bear in mind the national interest despite the huge sums of money that may be offered by US in terms of aid," he said.

The ICJ, the Law Society of Kenya, the Kenya Human Rights Commission, the East African Human Rights Institute, Release Political Prisoners and the Legal Resources Foundation signed yesterday's statement.

The US refused to sign the ICC treaty in 2002, saying it feared its soldiers and officials could be targeted by "frivolous" lawsuits.

A UN-appointed commission has recommended that ICC tries those accused of abuses in Sudan's Darfur region but Washington opposes the move, fearing it would legitimise the court.
- - -

Khartoum slams UN sanctions - rebels demand more

The regime in Khartoum says the new UN resolution unfairly puts the government's rights and duties on an equal footing with the rebellion.

Copy of report from Aljazeera March 30, 2005:

The Sudanese government reacted with anger to the UN's Security Council sanctions over violations in Darfur. But in direct contrast the rebels argued the move was too timid to yield a breakthrough in the conflict.

The Sudanese foreign ministry issued a statement which called the U.S. sponsored resolution as "unbalanced and inappropriate" and "ignored the government's efforts in addressing the political, security and humanitarian aspects of the Darfur conflict."

The Sudanese government hinted in its statement that it would not consider itself bound by the resolution.

"The government will also seek to lift any sanctions that the UN will impose based on false information," it said. "The resolution unfairly puts the government's rights and duties on an equal footing with the rebellion."

The main rebel group in Darfur, the Sudan Liberation Movement, said it was disappointed by the scope of the sanctions, arguing they would do little to encourage resolve.

"We support the resolution, although we do not feel that it is strong enough," SLM spokesman Mahjub Hussein said.

The group said it would have preferred a resolution strengthening an arms embargo against Sudan, imposing restrictions on the movement of government officials and the freezing of their assets.

Furthermore, the SLM believes the resolution would have carried more weight if it had obliged the pulling out of armed forces from Darfur and the handing of security responsibilities in the region to an international force.

Under the resolution, backed 12-0 with abstentions from Algeria, China and Russia, any movement of military equipment and supplies into the Darfur region will require the prior approval of the Security Council.
- - -

Sudan says UN sanctions bad for Darfur security

Sudan said on Wednesday a U.N. resolution imposing sanctions on those responsible for violence in Darfur would make it harder to disarm combatants and would endanger lives in the remote region.

Excerpt from Reuters report March 30, 2005:

"We think the resolution is unbalanced and unfortunate," Foreign Minister Mustafa Osman Ismail told reporters in Khartoum in reference to a Security Council resolution passed on Tuesday that imposed a travel ban and asset freeze on some involved in the Darfur conflict.

"It will reflect negatively on the security in Darfur because it will jeopardise and limit the capability of the government to fight outlaws."

He said the resolution, which also strengthens an arms embargo on the government and prevents hostile flights over Darfur, would put the lives of the Darfuri people at risk as well as the thousands of foreigners working in the region.

"It will also reflect negatively on the security of non-Sudanese who are supposed to move freely and to feel in full security," he said.

There are around 1,000 foreign aid workers in Darfur and more than 2,000 African Union (AU) troops in Darfur.

Three members of an AU team were injured in an attack on Tuesday, and last week a U.S. aid worker was shot in the face when gunmen ambushed an aid convoy in Darfur.

The United Nations says the government has done little to try to disarm Arab militias, but Ismail said the rebels had caused delay through intransigence and said the government needed more time.

"We are doing our best but this is an area larger than France. Weapons are everywhere. Rebels are not cooperating," he said. "We need time in order to deal with this."



Picture: A Darfur rebel. The main Darfur rebel group, SLM, believes the new UN resolution would have carried more weight if it had obliged the pulling out of armed forces from Darfur and the handing of security responsibilities in the region to an international force. [Perhaps that's on the table for when UN peacekeepers start assisting the African Union troops in Darfur]

The Sudanese government hinted in its statement that it would not consider itself bound by the resolution and said "the resolution unfairly puts the government's rights and duties on an equal footing with the rebellion."

Further reading:

Mar 30 Xinhua China news: UN official denies Resolution 1591 against Khartoum. A UN official said in Khartoum Wednesday that a recent UN Security Council resolution is aimed to press the conflicting sides.

Mar 31 The Daily Star Lebanon: Khartoum rejects 'unbalanced' UN resolution.
- - -

Sudan vows to put 164 on trial for Darfur atrocities

Sudan has for the first time arrested military and security officials accused of raping and killing civilians and burning villages in Darfur.

Excerpt from the Scotsman March 30, 2005:

Khartoum repeated its insistence yesterday that none of its citizens would be tried outside its borders, in direct defiance of a call by the UN earlier this year for 51 Sudanese - including some high-ranking government officials - to be tried by the international community.

The foreign minister, Mustafa Osman Ismail, reiterated on state television yesterday: "We will never hand over any Sudanese national - whether he is an outlaw, an army officer, or a government official - for trial outside Sudan."

Here is a report by Ophera McDoom in Khartoum via the Scotsman Mar 29:

Ali Mohamed Osman Yassin said a government committee had arrested 15 members of the police, military and security forces in Darfur for human rights abuses and they would immediately be sent to court.

"They are military people ... from army, military and security," Mr Yassin said, adding all the accused were from these "disciplinary forces".

"[They are accused of] different crimes. It includes rape, killing, burning and other things - different kinds of atrocities," he said.

The UN Security Council is expected to vote tomorrow on a French-drafted resolution which would send those responsible for war crimes in Darfur to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Sudan rejects referring any of its nationals to a court outside its borders, saying its judicial system is able to prosecute those guilty of crimes.

"Now it is high time for us to prove ourselves and to prove how genuine we are and how seriously the Sudanese judiciary can do the job," Mr Yassin said.

"This is a start; it is not the end of it - they are progressing and doing a good job."

Mr Yassin said 14 members of the police, the army and security forces were under arrest in West Darfur state and one in North Darfur state.

Photo: "Darfur on Fire" - A Sudanese rebel watches as a village attacked by the Janjaweed militia burns. [Scott Nelson/Getty Images Tue 29 Mar 2005 courtesy Scotsman.com]

Another report in the Scotsman March 28, says with only hours to the UN Security Council vote on where to try Darfur's war criminals, the Khartoum regime says it has arrested 15 men who are accused of murder and burning villages in Darfur. The report says if past examples of Khartoum’s "justice" are anything to go by, these men - guilty or not - will be tried and executed very quickly, thus evading UN involvement.

But few news reports educate readers as to the predicament Khartoum is in over the Janjaweed. And why the UN's demands to reign in the Janjaweed were always an impossibility. Sometime last year, even Khartoum revealed in the press it fears retribution once the West got bored and turned its back, so we can't be surprised at their efforts to avoid arresting the people who are protecting them. Without the Janjaweed and Arab tribal leaders, the Khartoum regime would fall. Who else do they have on their side to squash the rebellions in the south, west and east of Sudan?

Even the rebels themselves have said their objective is to overthrow the government. Unless all sides cease fighting [which they have proved they are capable of] and work out a political situation, the conflict seems likely to go on for years. Even if the regime in Khartoum fled tomorrow, who would lead the people of northern Sudan - the one's that fought against southern Sudan's rebels for 21 terrifying years? John Garang, the leader of the southern rebels, couldn't unite them, there is too much mistrust.

Surely Khartoum can see the writing on the wall. Charismatic leadership is needed to unite the whole of Sudan. The world saw how the people in South Sudan rejoiced in the streets at the prospect of peace. If only someone within the African Union or Arab League could get all of the gangs and tribal leaders together. Maybe the Libyan leader has been trying to do something along these lines. Where are the Islamic clerics in all of this? What do ordinary Sudanese folk say? Who would the Sudanese support as a leader for a united Sudan? The media and politicians never properly explain what is really going on.

Darfur: U.N. Sudan Situation Report 29 March 2005

The following is a copy in full of an email received this morning giving the latest situation report by United Nations personnel on the ground in Sudan:

Key Developments:

On 27 Mar., two GOS police officers where killed at close range in the Zam Zam camp, allegedly following an encounter with two persons in civilian clothes who subsequently fled into the camp. As a result, all UN and humanitarian movement to and in the location were stopped with all personnel being relocated. A large quantity of WFP food about to be distributed by the SRC was guarded by AMIS to prevent theft. Following an assessment on 28 Mar., which found the situation to be stable, all humanitarian activities have resumed. The incident remains under investigation.

Security Issues:

North Darfur: On the night of 27 Mar., two persons, reported to be in military uniforms and carrying firearms, climbed the perimeter wall of the WFP El Fasher workshop. Clothes and fuel were stolen. After preliminary investigations, WFP security referred the matter to the police who have promised to increase patrols in the area. Meanwhile, WFP is improving security measures at the workshop.

On 27 Mar., a skirmish between GoS military police and regular military and police officers in the Mawashi market (southern part of El Fasher town) resulted in the killing of two military police officers. The military police were conducting routine patrols in the area to ensure that military and police officers off duty were not loitering in the location when the gunfire between the parties broke out.

South Darfur: There were unconfirmed reports of a 28 Mar. attack on the Nitega village, a well-known stronghold for nomadic militia, by rebel elements resulting in one dead and one injury. AMIS is investigating.
Tension south of Gereida continues, though the parties - GoS military and JEM - have abandoned the location over the past two weeks. Sporadic violence south and southeast of Gereida continues.

Protection Issues:

North Darfur: Humanitarian agencies in Kutum have commenced close liaison with AMIS in the last week to devise strategies for enhanced protection of IDPs in and around Kassab and Fataborno camps. AMIS has agreed to conduct regular patrols on market days on routes and in areas where the volume of incidents is particularly high. Furthermore, AMIS and humanitarian organizations in Kutum involved in protection have agreed on bi-weekly consultations to discuss the protection situation in the area.

Humanitarian Affairs:

Food/NFIs

Jongli: A WFP team in Bor has finalised headcount and registration of IDPs and returnees (totalling 35,202 with the majority being IDPs) and airdrops have now begun in the town and its surrounding villages. The targetted areas are: Bor town, Gakyom, Mamer, Garwanj, Hai flan and Haa Mashwer.

White Nile: ADRA distributed 0.26 MT of lentils, 0.286 MT of vegetable oil and 1.95 MT of sorghum among 52 IDP families in Kosti, White Nile on 24 Mar. Every household also received one plastic sheet and one mosquito net each. 20 blankets were distributed among families with newborns and ill young children. ADRA distributed 0.135 MT of Corn Soya Blend among 15 families having children under five with lactating mothers

Health

North Darfur: UNICEF conducted a visit to Abu Shouk camp on 21 Mar. to monitor water tanking and hand pump operations. Key findings were: inadequate tap stands in some blocks; five platforms for the bladders were damaged; slow water discharge into tanks; long queues at water points and non-functioning of several hand pumps. UNICEF has drawn action plan to deal with the above-mentioned problems in collaboration with the relevant INGOs.
Vector control campaigns have been interrupted in all IDP locations due to lack of pesticides. As a result, fly infestation at all the camps continues to worsen. To date, UNICEF has been unable to procure the spraying chemicals as there is only one supplier in El Fasher, while UNICEF procurement procedures require at least three quotations. A waiver for this administrative requirement has been sent, and they are awaiting response.

South Darfur: Agencies remain concerned that the targetted measles vaccination campaign carried out by MoH/EPI in the past week (reaching only 500 children in Battery camp) will not prevent the continuation of the outbreak, as Battery camp is very near other IDP gatherings and the host community in Kass. The population outside the camp shares much of the same city infrastructure, including water, schools, and the market and, as such, the possibility of spreading the virus is high. The humanitarian community continues to push for a mass campaign to cover the entire population of Kass as well as the major IDP gatherings in South Darfur before the rainy season. WHO has recommended a mass campaign both as a means of preventing further outbreaks, and for covering those who were excluded from last year’s blanket campaign due to violence.

Water

South Darfur: OXFAM completed a water and sanitation (WAT/SAN) assessment of the Tullus areas which found water shortage in the area affecting the population. The Rural Water Group, a national organization working with WES, has stated its intention to commence operations in the area but is requesting assistance from partners to be able to do so. As such, a starting date has yet to be announced.

Returns

Bahr El Jebel: There are persistent reports of population movements in Equatoria that are being investigated by humanitarian agencies. The East Equatoria HAC Commissioner reported the registration of 64 returnees, while, in Juba, the Bahr El Jebel HAC commissioner reported the registration of 458 returnees from Kajokeji and approximately 2,600 from Yei on accumulative basis. Those coming from Yei use Yei-Lainya-Wonduruba-Kuda and Juba road. They come partly on foot, bicycles or vehicles. Vehicles are available only between Yei and Wondruba or Kuda and Juba. In both Bahr El Jebel and East Equatoria, cross line movement has been going on normally. Refugees are also returning from Ethiopia to Juba. UNHCR reported that 136 refugees have arrived in Juba from Ethiopian region of Gambella within this week escaping the ethnic conflict and hunger in the area. At least 300 students have also returned to Juba, as education is a major attraction for return.

General

Bahr El Ghazal: Land has been allocated for resettlement of the IDPs settled in Rumbek about 3.5 km away from their present location. A team comprising representatives from the IDPs, OXFAM-GB, OCHA SRT and EP&R, SRRC County, local chiefs and the liaison officer of the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs inspected the land on 21 Mar. OXFAM-GB and Diocese of Rumbek (DOR) have been tasked to address the water and shelter needs respectively through funds from the Liaison Office. Other needs identified by the IDPs include seeds, tools for agriculture/construction and additional IDP kits for the IDPs that arrived after the last distribution exercise.

Equatoria: Following three meetings in Rumbek by EP&R aimed at mobilizing responses for the Ezo/Tambura identified needs, the following interventions are currently underway in the target locations:
WFP started food distribution on 25 Mar. targeting 20,542 beneficiaries.

Non-Food Items from UNICEF released to EP&R are being transported from Yambio for distribution to the target beneficiaries. The items (collapsible jerry cans, blankets, cooking utensils and IDP kits) will be distributed by World Vision (WVI).

FAO will distribute seeds and tool through WVI by mid-Apr.

UNHCR is identifying implementing partners or NGOs on ground to provide assistance to the refugees in Bagima and Baikpa. Depending on gaps identified on ground, UNHCR may cover areas of water/sanitation, health, education and protection.
Preparation for the training of enumerators by SRRC/SRT for registration of returnees from CAR and DRC is ongoing and training is scheduled to start around mid-Apr. Meanwhile, WVI has carried out a registration in the Nandi and Anderi camps with the aim of assisting returnees to resettle back to their area of origin.

Bahr El Jebel: Education in Juba is already characterised by over crowding, shortages of qualified teachers, facilities, furniture and school supplies. Many schools are in very poor physical condition and in need of major rehabilitation. Student enrolment is expected to increase further following the CPA and may strain the existing facilities unless there are timely and effective interventions. Another concern is the school curriculum has to be reviewed to accommodate English-speaking students. WFP will provide cooking utensils to compliment their school feeding programme and have asked their implementing partners (Accomplish and SCC) to collect these utensils and distribute to schools before the schools re-open in Apr. 2005.

Rebels attack villages in South Darfur - Sudanese FM blames SPLM over Darfur, oil

According to the UN Mission in Sudan, incidents of looting and banditry continue to be reported in Darfur, and the African Union is investigating. There also were reports that rebel groups attacked some villages Saturday in South Darfur state, says UN news centre in a report titled Annan discusses Darfur emergency with representatives of civil groups.

Today, Khartoum media claims a schoolmistress was seriously beaten in a raid by around 20 rebels in Kutum, North Darfur state.

A report at Times Online says tomorrow, March 30, the UN Security Council will finally discuss the findings of the long-awaited inquiry into whether genocide occurred in Darfur. Then it will vote on whether or not to get the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of human rights crimes.

Here below, following on from yesterday's posts here re South Sudan's oil, is a copy of a report that quotes Khartoum as saying "the Naivasha agreement stipulated the procedure and party allowed to sign agreements with foreign parties, and that any thing else outside this framework would be unacceptable, and in breach of the agreement." [In other words, the peace agreement does cover procedures regarding who is allowed to sign oil agreements. It does look like South Sudan's "former" rebels are "transgressing the peace agreement by distributing oil concessions"]:

KHARTOUM, Mar 8, 2005 (Sudan Tribune) via SPLM Today -- Sudanese Foreign affairs minister Mustafa Osman Ismail criticized yesterday Sudan People`s Libration Movement (SPLM). He accused the former rebels of fuelling Darfur conflict and transgressing peace agreement by distributing oil concessions.

Ismail has accused the SPLM of fanning the conflict in Darfur and assuming the role of the savoir.

The government approved of the vision that the SPLM might help in settling the crisis there, but surprisingly the SPLM is now blaming the crisis on the government, the minister said in a press statement.

On the oil concession authorized by the SPLM, he said the government has no intention to indulge in media rhetoric. We should resort to the peace agreement for arbitration, Osman stressed.

The government conceives of the oil question as falling within the sole jurisdiction of the oil commission which is supposed to arbitrate between the two parties in case they differ on issues related to oil-share, Ismail said.

The ruling National Congress (NC) secretary-general, Ibrahim Ahmad Omar indicated two weeks ago to SUNA that the Naivasha agreement stipulated the procedure and party allowed to sign agreements with foreign parties, and that any thing else outside this framework would be unacceptable, and in breach of the agreement

The minister said that he discussed with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) the question of government captives with SPLA, adding that the government will discuss the affair the SPLM.
- - -

'Things fall apart' - Sudan example of failing nation

"Sudan and the war in Darfur are among the most infuriating and frustrating problems on the world scene," said Fred Gibson, kicking off a Foreign Policy Discussion Series held Friday at Tahlequah Public Library, OK. USA. He says when oil fields were discovered in the South, the North quickly took over jurisdiction of the area, angering the South and plunging the country into civil war. And he also explains in a March 28 article how the location of Sudan has had an impact on the country's development and lead to some of its problems today.

"Sudan is a classic failed state, providing neither security, rule of law, nor political freedom," said Gibson. "The U.N., the US and various other countries have made weak efforts to stop the genocide, but it hasn't been very effective. They have sent in a few observers, but they are spread much too thing to do much good. Ultimately, they will face world sanctions, but in the meantime the persecution continues. They know what should be done; they just won't do it."
- - -

Sanctions and Civil War

Here is an excerpt from a report courtesy MBendi Profile: Sudan: Oil And Gas Industry Overview that explains a little about sanctions. Note, it says "the Sudanese government continues to stress that oil income is and will continue to be used for development and infrastructure". [A news report out today, quotes the same government as saying it has no money for services like schools and health centres to be put in place before it goes ahead and demolishes slums and moves people out "consensually" to remote areas with no running water, electricity, health facilities or shelter]:

Sudan still suffers from serious barriers to economic progress, though, chiefly an underdeveloped infrastructure and a long-running conflict with rebel movements in the south of the country, which is primarily Christian and animist. Government spending on the conflict has meant that resources available for development are very limited.

The United States imposed economic sanctions against Sudan in November 1997, due to the Sudanese government's sponsorship of international terrorism and poor human rights record. The sanctions prohibit trade between the United States and Sudan, as well as investment by United States businesses in Sudan. In February 2000, the US government extended its sanctions to include Sudapet (the national oil company) and the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company (GNPOC). This was a contentious move in that Canadian international Talisman Energy is a 25% shareholder in GNPOC. Despite their interests in the Sudan, however, no US sanctions have been placed against Talisman Energy. Because of pressure, Talisman stated in December 1999 that it would sell its assets in Sudan, should this be most beneficial for its shareholders. It stated, however, that the assets were not for sale at that time or in the near future. TotalfinaElf has been cited as being interested in acquiring Talisman assets should such a sale happen. In October 1999, Canada announced the formation of a fact-finding mission to investigate the operations of Canadian oil companies in Sudan.

The pressure groups claim that Sudan is using oil revenue to fuel the civil war that is being fought over the southern oil-rich regions. They state that the estimated oil revenue for the Sudanese government is $1,000,000 per day, which is about equal the government's spending on arms and the amount Sudan used to spend on imported oil. They claim that on the first day of oil export shipments in 1999, an import shipment of 20 Polish T-55 tanks arrived in Port Sudan. The Sudanese government continues to stress that oil income is and will continue to be used for development and infrastructure.
- - -

Africa now 'deals with Africa's problems'



The third session of the Pan African Parliament started today [its first anniversary]. SABC News ran a report on the session titled "Africa now 'deals with Africa's problems'. Here is a quote from the report:

The way Africa dealt with the conflict in Darfur, Sudan, reiterates that "we did it because Africa decided to deal with Africa's problems," says Gertrude Mongella, the president of the Pan-African Parliament (PAP).

- - -

Homeless in Sudan's Darfur region reach 2.4 million: UN

You have to wonder about the African solution to the African problem of 2.4 million homeless and facing starvation in Darfur. In an interview, published today by IRIN, the UN's emergency aid chief Jan Egeland warns [donors I guess] to:

"Pay up now or regret it forever. That's how we see it. Sudan may slide into chaos again unless we get resources."

Also today, Japan kindly gave $2.1 million [better late than never] to the African Union's peacekeeping mission in peackeeping mission in Dafur.

A lack of money keeps the African Union reliant on donors to pay for operations.



Photo: Teams of women carefully brush up grains of cereals that spilled from bags air dropped by the World Food Programme. The WFP fed a record 1.6 million people in the Darfur in February in spite of increased attacks that complicate humanitarian tasks. (AFP/HO-WFP/File/Peter Smerdon) Mar 15, 2005.
- - -

Anti-Land Mine Flame 'Could Save Thousands of Lives'

A revolutionary "low-tech" anti-land mine device was launched by British experts today, says Simon Evans, PA correspondent, in The Scotsman March 29, 2005. Here is the story:

It is a torch which directs a flame on to mines, burning them out rather than detonating them across a wide area.

Tearchers at Cranfield University in Shrivenham, Oxfordshire, part of the Defence Academy of the UK, said the gadget was cheaper, safer, more environmentally friendly and faster than existing alternatives.

The torches, which can be made in mobile units, were pioneered by de-mining specialists Disarmco with help from the university's ordnance boffins.

Together they are now applying to patent their invention, codenamed 'Dragon', which they say could save thousands of lives.

Land mines and unexploded ordnance (UXOs) claim more than 8,000 lives annually and maim about 20,000 people, 25% of whom are children, the university said.

Professor Ian Wallace, head of the environment and ordnance department at Cranfield, said: "Dragon is a classic piece of lateral thinking.

"We've used our knowledge of military pyrotechnics to come up with a low-tech answer to a global problem."

He said the devices were also cheap to make, adding: "Local communities, with little training, can use a portable production unit to manufacture the thousands of 'Dragons' required to deal with land mines and UXOs."

A demonstration of the Dragon was staged at the Defence Academy of the UK in Shrivenham today. A landmine was destroyed with spectators positioned 60 metres away.

Because Dragons burn out mines rather than blow them up, the risk of land contamination is reduced making it safer for the user, a spokesman said.

The tubular-shaped device directs a hot flame at the munitions to achieve a deflagration effect, he said.

It can be placed either on the ground next to the munitions or directed at the landmine mounted on a simple wire frame.

Christopher Le Hardy, director of Disarmco, said: "Burning is a more effective and scientifically safer way to dispose of certain types of land mines and UXOs compared with high explosives that are inherently more dangerous."

De-miner Chris Rennick, who lost his right leg below the knee as a direct result of a Type 72 anti-personnel landmine he was attempting to clear in Kuwait in 1992, said: "Dragon could have a significant role to play around the world in making it safer for locals to be better equipped in the disposal of anti-personnel land mines."

Andy Willson, programmes officer for mine action at DFID, said: "The mobile unit has dramatically reduced the typical costs associated with the production of anti-land mines and UXO devices that often run into hundreds of pounds."

Currently 42 countries have stockpiles totalling about 200 million land mines, the university said.

There is a casualty every 20 minutes in the 80-odd countries affected, which include Afghanistan, Angola, Bosnia, Cambodia, Iraq, Laos, Mozambique, Somalia, Sri Lanka and Sudan.
- - -

Sterile Emergency Shelter: Just Add Water

Best of British luck to the students at London's Royal College of Art who have created a shelter that is a balloon impregnated with dry cement. Inflate, water, and once it hardens, you have a concrete quonset hut.

A pair of engineers in London have come up with a "building in a bag" -- a sack of cement-impregnated fabric. To erect the structure, all you have to do is add water to the bag and inflate it with air. Twelve hours later the Nissen-shaped shelter is dried out and ready for use...

Aid agency chiefs have been impressed by the simplicity and economy of the idea. A bag weighing 230 kilograms (approximately 500 pounds) inflates into a shelter with 16 square meters (172 square feet) of floor space. Cost is estimated at £1,100 ($2,100), while an equivalent-size Portakabin (a type of portable building widely used in the United Kingdom) costs about £4,000 ($7,700). The same-size tent costs about £600 ($1,150).

Concrete Canvas comes folded in a sealed plastic sack. The volume of the sack controls the water-to-cement ratio, eliminating the need for water measurement. You literally just add water. "The shelter can also be delivered sterile," said Crawford. "This allows previously impossible surgical procedures to be performed in situ from day one of a crisis."

Via Wired News Need a Building? Just Add Water March 15, 2005.
- - -

Waiting at the well - Naga, Sudan



Photo courtesy http://www.markpelletierphotography.com/photo_galleries.htm

Sudan's eastern rebels say Khartoum not interested in peace - the rebels' objective is to change the government

A report just out by AFP says eastern Sudan rebels are accusing the dictators in Khartoum of not being serious about addressing their complaints of marginalisation and stalling on promised peace talks.

Leaders of the Eastern Front, a coalition of Beja and Rashaidah Arab rebel groups, say they have little confidence Khartoum is truly interested in resolving problems in the eastern states of Red Sea and Kassala.

Free Lions president Mubruk Moubarak Selim said the groups would not be dissauded from their goal of changing the Arab-dominated government.

"The objective is to change the government," he told AFP. "The government does not want peace with us. There will be more fighting between the government and the Eastern Front." Full Story.

Blue-bereted UN peacekeeping troops have suddenly begun to appear in Khartoum, Sudan

Good news. UN peacekeeping troops wearing their blue berets have suddenly begun to appear in Khartoum. A report just out from UPI says UN has confirmed that foreign troops have been operating in Sudan for several months in preparation of the peace operation, but they were in civilian clothes. Those were traded for military fatigues as soon as the resolution was passed. Read full story at World Peace Herald Sudan entering new age under U.N. colors?

Sudan signs $400m contract with Sudanese White Nile Petroleum for oil field development in southern Sudan

Yesterday, a contract to develop oil in South Sudan was signed by the Government of Sudan (GoS) with a company whose owners are from Malaysia, India and the Sudan. It is not clear if any members of South Sudan's former rebel group SPLM/A, led by Dr John Garang, were consulted on the deal.

A report on the story just out from Reuters says "the deal states both sides will respect any oil contract signed before the date of the peace deal -- January 9, 2005 -- and any deals after a new government of unity is formed will be decided by a joint petroleum commission from the national energy and mining ministry." Also, the report mentions analysts are saying the deal indicates divisions within the SPLM/A [but it is not clear, to me anyway, what they mean by that].

The SPLM/A were not officially recognised as heading up South Sudan until they signed a peace deal with the GoS on January 9, 2005. Before that date, they were referred to as rebels. Now that they are getting organised to start up a Government of South Sudan (GoSS) - sometimes called 'New Sudan" - they are referred to as "former rebels." Having two governments within one country sounds confusing. Note, the Reuters report refers to "a new government of unity" being formed, along with a "joint petroleum commission from the national energy and mining ministry."

As part of the January peace deal, Dr Garang, a US educated economist who fought as a guerilla in the bush for some 40 years, is scheduled to soon be sworn in as Sudan's First Vice-President, taking the title from the President's right hand man, Taha. Apparently, when Sudan's "new government of unity" is formalised officially, Taha's new role will be to float in the background doing this and that for Sudan's President Bashir who recently made Taha responsible for handling Darfur.

The January peace deal, in the eyes of the world, seemed to legitimise the regime in Khartoum. Sudan's President, Omar el- Bashir, recently voted by an American magazine as the world's worst dictator, is part of a regime that stole power through the barrel of a gun well over 15 years ago. During the past 21 years of war in South Sudan, the SPLM/A took it upon themselves to stake their claim on South Sudan, after Bashir's gang staged a coup and staked their claim on the whole of the Sudan. Which of them is legitimate? Neither the SPLM/A or GoS were voted in by the people of Sudan.

Over the past few months, news reports reveal that a UK listed shell company called White Nile agreed an oil development deal with the SPLM/A, giving White Nile part of Block B in South Sudan. Recently, news emerged that in December of last year, when the peace deal between the SPLM/A and GoS was close to being signed, France's energy giant Total oil, in partners with Marathon Oil of Texas, USA, renewed its longstanding agreement with GoS to develop oil in the same area of southern Sudan. [See previous post here below re British White Nile and French Total]

Today, Reuters South Africa says the GoS signed a contract yesterday with a company called White Nile Petroleum (different company from White Nile) to take oil from the reserves of the Thar Jath oil fields, in Block 5a, in South Sudan. [See oil concession map at top of sidebar here on the right] White Nile Petroleum owners are from Malaysia, India and the Sudan.

The Reuters report says:

"The deal states both sides will respect any oil contract signed before the date of the peace deal -- January 9, 2005 -- and any deals after a new government of unity is formed will be decided by a joint petroleum commission from the national energy and mining ministry."

You would think that important sticking points, i.e., what happens with oil agreements re South Sudan signed by GoS before January 9, 2005, would have been clarified in the comprehensive peace agreement signed by both sides on January 9. For now, it seems GoS are saying GoSS cannot override oil agreements in existence before January 9 - and that GoSS must go through a new joint oil commission on any future oil deals, after the "new government of unity" is in effect.

It is not difficult to imagine a lot of mistrust. John Garang must suspect his new government may not have much sway within the new joint commission for petrol and oil. Who'd believe the dictators in Khartoum would be willing to share power? If they do not share power for the benefit of everyone in the Sudan, it seems likely New Sudan will vote to part from Sudan. The war over oil will continue because those in northern Sudan will feel deprived of oil revenues they perceive as belonging to them. As explained here earlier, Sudan's main oil is in South Sudan.

Within the past month, a British government official predicted the conflict in Darfur, western Sudan, will continue for another 18-24 months. And then there is eastern Sudan where people also feel marginalised. A leader of an east Sudan rebel group told AFP today their objective is to change the government. "The government does not want peace with us. There will be more fighting between the government and the Eastern Front," he said. Going by recent news reports, the British Amabassador to Sudan, Sir William Patey, has been working very hard on the diplomatic front. And let us not forget Eritrea and recent reports of Ethiopian troops massing along the border to send a message to Eritrea.

Surely the regime in Khartoum cannot carry on the way they have been going for so long. Even they, a while back, mentioned something to the press about "a pincer" movement aiming to weaken them. They are their own worst enemies. Had they screamed for international aid workers and UN peacekeepers in Darfur over the past year, while the world was watching, maybe they would not be in the pickle they find themselves today. Continuing on as a ruthless, unbending and corrupt dictatorship while refusing much needed aid and protection for the people of Darfur is their downfall.

Regardless of what tricks are pulled, South Sudan must not take up arms again. Sudan must not break up, or it will never have peace because of oil. No matter how tough it gets, Garang and his gang must work in harmony with Bashir and his gang or the leaders should be arrested by the African Union and put on trial for crimes against humanity. The two gangs must work in harmony with the Darfur gang of rebels and cease all violence while they work on a way how to get themselves trained and educated, with the UN's help, on how to run a democracy and make a new and united Sudan that everyone can be proud of. Right now, it is a hellhole and those who are fighting for power, with the blood of millions on their hands, are responsible for sorting it and stopping all violence now. People must be allowed to return to their homes and farms. They must start planting food and replenish livestock to bring up their families. They need to make a living. Children must get an eduction and medical care. The international community cannot keep feeding millions of people in the Sudan because of a handful of thugs that are treated by the UN and AU as a member state. The Sudanese people have no real government. Anarchy reigns.

Read the story about the oil deal, courtesy Reuters South Africa today, copied here in full. It states Sudan's main oil fields are in the south and disputes over oil fuelled the 21-year war in South Sudan cost 2 million lives.

Sudan signs $400 mln oil field development deal

Here is a copy in full of a KHARTOUM (Reuters) report Mon March 28, 2005 11:14 AM GMT+02:00:

Sudan signed a $400 million deal to develop its southern Thar Jath oil fields to an initial capacity of 80,000 barrels per day (bpd) by the end of March 2006, the oil ministry said in a statement on Monday.

The deal was signed late Sunday with the Sudanese White Nile Petroleum company -- a consortium of Malaysian state oil firm Petronas, which owns 68 percent, India's state-run Oil and Natural Gas Corp, which has a 24 percent stake and Sudan's state oil company Sudapet with 7 percent. The remaining one percent is divided between the three companies, an oil ministry official said. It said the reserves of the Thar Jath oil fields, in Block 5a in the southern Unity state, were estimated at a minimum of 250 million barrels. White Nile Petroleum is expected to dig 45 wells in the coming year, it added.

Sudan's main oil fields are in the south, and disputes over oil fuelled a civil war there for more than two decades, claiming 2 million lives mostly from hunger and disease. A peace deal signed in January ended Africa's longest civil war and has revived interest in Sudan's potential oil reserves.

The deal states both sides will respect any oil contract signed before the date of the peace deal -- January 9, 2005 -- and any deals after a new government of unity is formed will be decided by a joint petroleum commission from the national energy and mining ministry.

But an official from the former southern rebel group the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) has said it has signed a deal with a London-listed company called White Nile, giving it part of block B in SPLA-controlled areas.

The news caused consternation as French oil giant Total signed a deal with Sudan in 1980 for the whole of block B, and the deal was renewed in December.

Total and the government both say they are confident of the validity of the deal.

More senior SPLA officials have played down the report of the deal with British White Nile, which analysts say indicates divisions within the former rebels, who are due to join the government in the coming weeks after a two-month delay. - The British White Nile company is different from Sudanese White Nile Petroleum, the company awarded the $400 million contract on Sunday. - Reuters

South Sudan: French energy giant Total in oil talks with SPLM/A over White Nile

Today, the UK's Independent reveals that French energy giant Total has opened talks with the new Government of South Sudan in the hope of getting them to repudiate an oil deal with UK based White Nile. Excerpt:

Total agreed exploration rights with Khartoum in the Eighties and says it has paid an annual fee to maintain those rights throughout the civil war, which made production impossible. It re-signed the deal in December.

The nascent government set up a state-owned oil company called Nile Petroleum last summer, which claims to have taken legal possession of concessions in its territory. White Nile agreed a deal with Nile Petroleum last month. "The signature of contract by White Nile is just not valid. It is against contract rights and against the peace agreement," a Total spokesman said yesterday.

White Nile expected Total to attempt a deal with the new authorities and said they were "fully confident in the relationship with the South Sudan government". White Nile was attempting to demonstrate that relationship yesterday by flying several British journalists to the region for meetings with the authority's new ministers.

Full Story by Stephen Foley, UK Independent, March 24, 2005.


Headquarters of the oil group Total in the western Paris suburb of La Defense. Total is in partners on above southern Sudan deal with US oil company, Marathon, based in Texas, USA.
- - -

South Sudan pipeline to assist region - "SPLM/A could become a dominant power in the region"

A report at Petroleum World News March 7, 2005 says, "Nile Petroleum's holding in UK-listed White Nile would be the first time an African national oil company had a market listing, albeit indirect, on a major international stock exchange". Excerpt:

White Nile Ltd. (UK Based) intends to help South Sudan build its own pipeline, bypassing the north and providing it further regional clout, said Andrew Groves, Director & Co Founder of White Nile.

The autonomous southern authority is a successor to the South Sudan's People Liberation Movement, or SPLM, which has waged a two decades of war against the north's central government before signing a peace treaty on Jan. 9.

A pipeline already routes Sudan's oil from the south to the north's Port Sudan on the Red Sea. "SPLM could become a dominant power in the region," Groves said. "Southern Ethiopia and Uganda would be opening up" to South Sudan's oil exports, he explained. In addition, the autonomous authority intends to build its own refinery, he said.

It's unclear how a construction deal between White Nile and the South Sudan government would turn out. But the interests of the company and the authority are set to become strongly intertwined.

White Nile previously said South Sudan - via state-owned Nile Petroleum - will get a substantial stake in the company following the award of the oil rights.

Nile Petroleum's holding in U.K.-listed White Nile would be the first time an African national oil company had a market listing, albeit indirect, on a major international stock exchange.

Separately, Groves said the South Sudan government had also been contacted for potential oil rights by numerous companies, Energy Africa, which is part of Tullow PLC of Ireland and Sinopec of China. Sinopec and Tullow couldn't be reached.
- - -

UN peacekeepers for South Sudan to assist African Union in Darfur - Janjaweed in South Darfur causes alarm

Good news concerning security in Sudan. The UN Security Council voted unanimously yesterday to send 10,000 troops and up to 715 civilian police to South Sudan for an initial period of six months to support the peace agreement between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) led by Dr John Garang, a former rebel and US educated economist.

The primary mandate of the UN peacekeeping force (UNMIS) includes assisting the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) "with a view towards expeditiously reinforcing the effort to foster peace in Darfur," said the US-sponsored resolution.

Recent UN news reports suggest it could take until June for UN troops to start arriving in South Sudan and at least six months to reach full strength. Meanwhile, there is growing talk of Khartoum agreeing to doubling the number of AU troops in Darfur, bringing the contingent to more than 6,000 troops, in addition to the 9,000-10,000 aid workers currently in Sudan.

Why can't China and other countries with oil interests in Sudan supply tens of thousands more aid workers? The rainy season will fall upon Darfur again soon. Last year, there were huge problems getting aid through. It had to be airlifted. Several months ago, Libya had agreed to provide a route for aid trucks to get into Darfur bu, in two recent interviews, US Secretary of State Rice, reveals problems [that have not been reported in the press as far as I know]. In one interview she says the access for humanitarian aid has worsened over the last month and in another interview she says, about Libya: "We've worked with the Libyans to have another supply route. It was going pretty well for a while. I think there's been some slowing in that over the last month or so. We're very concerned about it and we're pressing that issue very hard with Khartoum." It makes one wonder if Libya is now unable to open the route from Libya into Darfur because of certain issues between the international community and Khartoum, especially the one in the news last month concerning Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's comments on Kofi Annan's call for NATO and EU intervention in Darfur.

In the UN draft resolution approved yesterday, point number 5 states, quote: "request the Secretary-General to report to the Council within 30 days on options for how UNMIS can reinforce the effort to foster peace in Darfur through appropriate assistance to AMIS, including logistical support and technical assistance, and to identify ways in liaison with the AU to utilize UNMIS's resources, particularly logistical and operations support elements, as well as reserve capacity towards this end" [Coalition for Darfur has links to two draft resolutions, including the one by France]

A report just out via UPI says Foreign Minister Mustafa Osman Ismail said that while his country welcomed the peacekeeping forces in the south, he insisted against "expanding their mission" to Darfur. I wonder why. One can only speculate that Khartroum feel weakened by losing power over South Sudan and fear losing power over Darfur. Even if they see the writing on the wall, it's going to be a long haul. The warring parties need to be forced to sit down and keep talking until a deal is sorted. Why is the inevitable being dragged out for so long? It will end up in a political deal whether it is a week or decades from now. Someone should knock their heads together, pronto. Imposing sanctions, no fly zones, embargoes and travel bans won't help. Too long to explain here the reasons why. I still maintain the Chinese could be doing a lot more to help behind the scenes. Sudan has a lot going for it but appears to be its own worst enemy.

At the present time, a nine-man African Union Ministerial Committee, represented by South Africa, Algeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon, Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal and Sudan are on a four-day visit to Sudan, interacting with the Sudanese government, NGOs and others in different parts of the Sudan to assess areas of need and the type of interventions that can be initiated. Their report will be presented to the international donors conference next month in Oslo, Norway.

Intense negotiations have gone on between all sides and many others, including the World Bank, over the past few months regarding the UN peacekeeping force, development of Sudan's infrastructure and resources, along with its debts and international funding for development and aid. As a result, Darfur has been unusually quiet for a good number of days, which is good news.

However, according to the latest UN situation report dated March 24, 2005, there is an increased presence of bandits and Janjaweed near two IDP camps in South Darfur, causing considerable disquiet amongst IDPs. One can never be sure of how much control Khartoum has over Sudan's bandits and militias. Sudan's First Vice-President Taha, recently interviewed in the national palace by Emily Wax for The Washington Post, called the Janjaweed "bandits" and said they were beyond the government's immediate control.

Over the past year, Khartoum has defended its killings of civilians by saying it occurs because the rebels in Darfur hide behind and live amongst their kin. Rebels do not wear uniforms. Civilians are treated by their government as rebels or rebel supporters. The Government of Sudan uses Arab militias, known as Janjaweed, to smash the rebellion in Darfur because the Sudanese Army forces are full of soldiers from Darfur who cannot be trusted to defend against the uprising.

Since January of this year, reports of attacks in Darfur are few and far between. Every few days or so I receive, via email, UN Sudan Situation Reports. Up until the end of last year, the emails reported many incidents of violence. Lately, the fighting in Darfur has definitely subsided. Wheeling and dealing by all sides is going on involving billlions of dollars. Peace, security and the future of Sudan and the 'New Sudan' in the south is at stake. Sudan's rebels are switched on and appear to know when to move and not to move.

Here is a copy of the latest UN situation report received by email today. Note, under "Protection Issues" Khartoum controls the "Form 8" business which, I guess, involves rape victims. Going by the report, victims can opt to pursue legal action and seek legal redress. You have to wonder what it means for the victims.

24 March 2005
Key Developments:

The Security Council unanimously adopted a draft resolution this afternoon to establish the United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) with an authorised troop strength of up to 10,000 and a civilian component including up to 715 civilian police. This new mission's primary mandate is to support the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement but it has also been tasked to assist the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) foster peace in the Darfur region. Please see [see above link] accompanying copy of the draft resolution, as it was adopted, for more details.
Humanitarian assistance in SLA areas in North Darfur was again interrupted due to a breakdown in the notification system, as the replacement for the SLM/A Humanitarian Coordinator was unavailable for several days. A new SLM/A focal point has been identified and a meeting took place with UN officials on 23 Mar.

Security Issues:

South Darfur: Protection agencies operating in the Beliel and Kalma IDP camps have reported an increased presence of bandits and armed men on camels in their immediate vicinity. This has added to the instability of the situation and has raised considerable disquiet amongst the IDP population.
West Darfur: UN and NGO Agencies have resumed road travel on West Darfur roads south of Seleia with assessments on-going in Arara, Beita, Masterri, and areas north of Serba. With yesterday's opening of Sanidadi, only the roads under assessment remain NO GO.

Protection Issues:

General: A mission comprising representatives from the UNAMIS Human Rights Office and GoS met with UN and NGO agencies working on protection to discuss the recent Ministry of Justice (MoJ) circular disseminated to GoS officials, Ministry of Health (MoH), police, the prosecutor's office, NGOs and UN agencies. The mission stated that every clinic or hospital (including all NGO clinics) can treat GBV survivors freely without any fear of negative consequences. However, not every NGO clinic can fill Form 8 for the survivor in the event she opts to pursue legal action. The only NGO clinics with authority to fill in Form 8 in North Darfur are IRC, Saudi Red Crescent, and the Egyptian military clinic (all operating in the Abu Shouk camp), as well as MSF- Belgium in Kebkabiya and Saraf Umra. The GoS representatives explained that there is a need to separate the issue of access to medical services from those of seeking legal redress, reiterating a previous message that only Sudanese medical officials employed by the MoH are authorized to fill in Form 8.

West Darfur: HAC Zalingei has requested a meeting to discuss protection matters and approaches with international agencies operating in the area. OCHA and UNHCR will follow up on the proposal, which has been welcomed in the humanitarian community.

Humanitarian Affairs:

Food/NFIs

North Darfur: Oxfam reported that it is developing a market bulletin on a monthly basis. The first such bulletin is likely be released by the end of this month. Oxfam is currently conducting an assessment on the livelihoods options together with the women development associations' network in El Fasher town.
FAO completed a three-day workshop on livestock, pastures, grazing lands, animal migration routes and water resources problems yesterday in El Fasher town.
South Darfur: Agencies involved in the distribution of NFIs remain slow to present distribution plans for the forthcoming rainy season, potentially delaying responses to OCHA and UNJLC. It is expected that cases of ARI, malaria and water-borne diseases will increase with the onset of the rainy season.
West Darfur: The UNJLC is about to reach targetted stock levels soon and plans a general distributions of NFI in West Darfur. A number of obstacles exist, however, including the upcoming rains and gaining access to some areas of need.

Health

North Darfur: According to the WHO weekly morbidity and mortality weekly bulletin released today, acute respiratory tract infections accounted for the largest number of reported deaths cases in North Darfur in the last reporting week. At today's health coordination meeting, WHO also unveiled plans to conduct a campaign against leprosy and TB in North Darfur.
South Darfur: 2,000 meningitis vaccinations arrived in South Darfur for use by humanitarian agencies, and WHO/MERT has requested staff numbers and locations from all agencies in order to prepare a plan of priority vaccinations for the most at-risk.
West Darfur: MSF-CH has said that it is planning on withdrawing from its role in water provision in Abu Zar School. The Wat/San sector is collectively discussing ways to fill the gap.

Returns

Bahr El Jebel: In an effort to update its beneficiary caseload figure, WFP fielded eight teams of 35 persons to conduct a headcount, verification and registration of IDPs, returnees and vulnerable people. The exercise is to be conducted in Terekeka, Glatokh, Kuda, Mekiu and Rokon from 21 to 26 Mar.

Education

Bahr El Jebel: 320 desks produced by Swedish Free Mission with support from UNHCR were distributed to four schools in Bahr El Jebel State. According to Sudan Aid, students coming from the neighbouring countries and the countryside are facing language problem as they once received instruction in English, while here all schools except church schools are in Arabic. The result is overcrowding in church schools where a class accommodates 70 - 90 students per class. There is a need to improve rural schools so that the number of pupils coming to towns is reduced.
- - -

See readers' comments at BBC News online report titled "South Sudan peace force approved". Here are a few:

"The situation in the Darfur region will have a negative effect on the south-north peace accord. The only thing that the UN and international community can do is to put more pressure on the northern government to stop the killings in Darfur. As a Sudanese I want the northern government to tell us what part of Sudan is this community called the jajiweed located and where do they get Sudanese army uniform and weapons? Stop misleading the world, we need the conflict to come to an end. - Palath Thonchar, NY"

"If Khartoum withdraws completely from the South and stop its interference in the southern Sudan affairs there will be peace there. What the SPLA/M needs is financial and technical aid to transform it into a modern political party and into a conventional army. The other key factor in the peace is the construction of the infrastructure including roads, telecommunications, schools and hospitals. The leadership in southern Sudan should also diversify its production. Social justice is also key to lasting peace and prosperity. - Henry Maina Reriani, Nairobi "

Douglas H. Johnson, Parliamentary Brief: Comprehensive Sudan peace agreement: playing for time

Douglas H. Johnson is author of The Root Causes of Sudan's Civil Wars' (James Cuney, 2003) and editor of the Sudan volume of the British Documents on the End of Empire series. The following piece, published online at the SudanTribune February 28, 2005, is copied here in full for future reference.

"Comprehensive Sudan peace agreement: playing for time"
By Douglas H. Johnson, Parliamentary Brief

Feb, 2005 -- The signing of a comprehensive Sudan peace agreement in Nairobi on 9 January brings to an end the final negotiation phase, extended over nearly three years, of the 'Peace Process' begun a dozen years ago. It sets in motion a six month 'pre-interim period' to be followed by a six year 'interim period' during which the provisions of the agreement are to be implemented. Only on the conclusion of that will we know with any certainty whether peace has come to Sudan.

The agreement includes protocols on state and religion, self-determination, power sharing, wealth sharing, security, a ceasefire agreement, the status of the border areas of Abyei, Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile, and a separate set of modalities for implementation, which alone runs to over a hundred pages.

To assess whether an agreement of such complexity can bring a lasting peace to Sudan one must first examine the extent that it addresses the causes of the war, and then gauge the extent that either side is willing or able to implement it.

Western Journalists repeatedly state that the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Amy (SPLM/A) is fighting for 'greater autonomy for the Christian and animist South'. This is wrong. The SPLM has always repudiated the idea that there a 'Southern problem' that needs a special attention, and have claimed instead that the South's own grievances are part of a wider national problem of sectarian, racial and regional imbalance.

The official goal of the SPLM has always been, and still remains, a 'New Sudan'. This ostensibly means a Sudan freed from the dominance of Islamic sectarian politics, and where underdeveloped regions have a greater say in their own administration, greater control over their own resources, and a greater share in the nation's governance. Independence for the South has been presented as a secondary option, a fallback position for the South alone, in the event that Northern intransigence makes the 'New Sudan' unobtainable.

The SPLM's position has been vindicated, in part, by events. The war is not confined to the South, but has spread to other 'marginalized' areas with Muslim populations. This not only includes the 'African' regions of Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile, but the fully 'Northern' Muslim region of the Eastern Sudan, where the SPLA has long had a military presence.

The fighting in Darfur is part of the same trend. Whatever ideology still divides them, the anonymous authors of The Black Book and the spokespersons for the Sudan Liberation Movement/ Army and the Justice and Equality Movement have all articulated Darfur's grievances in terms very similar to the SPLM' s original position: their common enemy is seen as the clique from the central Nile Valley who have dominated Sudan's governments and controlled its economy since independence.

It is a restructured Sudan, not secession, that is presented as a solution for the grievances of Darfur, the East, Blue Nile and the Nuba Mountains, and the South is seen as a key player and guarantor in such a restructuring.

The National Islamic Front (NIF) seized control in a coup in 1989 to prevent such a restructuring being negotiated between the SPLM and the government of Sadiq al-Mahdi (Southern secession was not even on the agenda at that time).

Since then they have imposed their version of an Islamic state, ruthlessly suppressing the Muslim opposition and generating a series of rebellions throughout the Muslim North. It is partly for this reason that they cannot afford to make any concessions on the Islamic state: to do so would be to give an opening to their Muslim opponents.

When the current peace process was revitalised by the Bush administration in 2002, Khartoum managed to persuade the president's envoy, former Senator Reverend Jack Danforth, that they represented the will of the Muslim majority in the North.

ln consequence, the solution that both Danforth and the State Department favoured, and which set the agenda for the renewed peace talks, was the preservation of the Islamic state in the North and regional autonomy for the South, protected by US-style constitutional guarantees for minority rights.

The SPLM's 'New Sudan' was not an option even to be discussed. Secession thus became the only realistic alternative. The Machakos Protocol of July 2002, which is the basis on which all subsequent protocols have been negotiated, thus enshrined a unitary Sudan as an Islamic state with a separate Southern regional administration, but with the Southern option to secede after a fixed period.

Negotiations since 2002 have focused on how the SPLM and the South can function within such a state over the next six years. Ostensibly this is to create the conditions by which Southerners will be persuaded to voluntarily remain part of a united Sudan.

Conversely, the provisions must also set up a viable Southern state which will have a chance of surviving on its own should Southerners choose secession. Thus the SPLA is not to be disbanded (as the old Anyanya was), but both it and the national army are to be reduced, and both are to contribute to a national force which will be stationed in parts of the current war zone.

The SPLM is to take over the administration of the entire South, including those are as currently under government control. The South is also to have a certain amount of economic autonomy.

The revenues from the Southern oil fields are to be divided equally between the Southern and National governments, but the Southern government has no power to renegotiate any of the oil leases the National government has granted prior to the date of the final peace agreement.

Southerners are also to have a share in the national government. Not only does SPLM chairman John Garang become vice-president of the Sudan (as well as president of the South), but Southerners have been offered a quota of 30 per cent of appointments in the central government.

Separate provisions have been made for the regional states of the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile, both of whom have contributed substantially to the SPLA, but neither of whom desire to be incorporated into an autonomous or independent Southern state.

Each is to have its own autonomous regional government, but the SPLM/A in both regions will have to share not only the civil administration, but the security forces with the government and its current allies.

An agreement this complex will need goodwill to implement, not only for the immediate cease fire and six month 'pre-interim' period, but throughout the following six years and especially during the final referendum in the South. So far there are worrying indications that such goodwill is not forthcoming.

The government's behaviour in Darfur has shown that it is unwilling to apply either the letter or spirit of cease-fire agreements. This is not surprising considering its numerous, documented violations of the agreements to cease offensive operations in the South or avoid attacking civilians.

The devastation of the Shilluk Kingdom in 2004 (see Parliamentary Brief, August 2004) was just the most recent example of such violations. The failure of the US and the UK not only to impose some sanctions on Khartoum for these violations, but to even make public protests, is one reason why Khartoum, quite rightly, decided that it could get away with similar violations in Darfur with impunity.

Just as worrying as this past behaviour are reports that the government is also trying to establish new militias in the border areas (Blue Nile, Nuba Mountains and Abyei) to resist the implementation of the peace agreement on the ground.

The last minute absorption of the government's Southern militias into the national army is also an indication that Khartoum is going to try to maintain its own allies within terri tories to be handed over to the SPLM administration. Any sustained effort by Khartoum either to circumvent or to undermine the provisions of the agreement will mean that, once again, secession of the South will become the only alternative.

In the South, opinion in the SPLM is already divided over whether to try to make the agreement for a united Sudan work or to go all out for secession.

If the latter opinion prevails then it is unlikely that Garang and the SPLM can make effective use of their role in the central government to bring an end to the Darfur fighting or insist on negotiations with Sudan's internal Muslim opposition, thus diluting the NIF's Islamic state.

The South's erstwhile allies in Blue Nile and the Nuba Mountains (and even, possibly, in the Dinka enclave of Abyei) could be abandoned in favour of a narrowly constructed Southern nationalism.

Such short-term thinking would be counterproductive, because whether the South remains part of Sudan or becomes independent, it will need allies in the North, and especially along its borders. This requires a recognition of common goals, as well as common grievances.
- - -

Causes of conflict in Sudan: Testing the Black Book

The following is an excerpt from a January 2005 Working Paper by Alex Cobham titled "Causes of conflict in Sudan: Testing the Black Book." [Source of link via Coaliton for Darfur, with thanks]

The authors of the Black Book sought to show the effect of this discourse on access to power in the Sudan. To do this, they determined the regional origins of each minister appointed in each government from independence in 1956 until 2000, and compared it with the underlying population distribution.

This data is summarised in table 1, and shows how the ministerial share of the northern region varied between 60% and 80%, with the sole exception of the second democratic period (1986-89) when the share fell to 47%. The northern regions’ population makes up less than 5% of the total.

The claim of the authors, which is expanded upon to some extent in part II (Anonymous, 2004b; Arabic version 2002), 4 is that this distortion had real and significant effects on the performance of government duties at every level - from the employment of outsiders to work on oil fields inconveniently located in marginalised regions, to the allocation of funds for public health expenditure. Disproportionate access to power brought disproportionate provision of government support, and unfairly reduced the human development opportunities of the marginalised.

This paper seeks to evaluate the validity of the Black Book's claim. The authors were later revealed to be associated with one of the two Darfur rebel groups, the Justice and Equality Movement, so it should in no way be seen as neutral in regard to the current conflict. As a basis for making greater demands in negotiations, claims of unfair treatment are of course likely to be helpful. If the claims are borne out however, there are important implications not only for the settlement eventually reached but for the conduct of the large-scale development effort that will follow.

Section 2 compares the basic economic and human development performance of Sudan with each of the neighbouring countries, and assesses the relative strengths and weaknesses.

Section 3 sets out the available data on government and state finances, including deriving the regional pattern of central subsidy and contribution. The extent of development expenditure per capita is also calculated.

Section 4 constructs and examines regional data on education and health indicators, to assess whether these patterns of expenditure and finance have results in terms of the human development opportunities for the inhabitants of different areas of the Sudan.

Finally, section 5 draws conclusions about the validity of the claims made in the Black Book.
- - -

For further reports, click on Abyei label here below.

Sudan: U.S. thwarts justice for Darfur

March 24 Reuters Brussels -- The US is blocking UN Security Council action on the crisis in Darfur on account of US hostility to the ICC, Human Rights Watch said today.

"The US is hanging the people of Darfur out to dry by stalling on justice," said Richard Dicker, director of Human Rights Watch's International Justice Program. "After labeling Darfur a genocide, the US is now blocking the credible threat of prosecution by the ICC, which could immediately deter further violence in Darfur."

"In the guise of taking action on a peacekeeping force in the North-South conflict, the US is pushing aside measures needed to deal with atrocities in Darfur," said Dicker. "Vague commitments to accountability are not enough. The heinous crimes committed in Darfur need immediate investigation and prosecution by the ICC." Full Story.

France puts U.S. in tight spot on Sudan

March 23 (AP) - France on Wednesday presented a UN resolution allowing for the prosecution of Sudanese war crimes suspects at the International Criminal Court, forcing the US to choose between accepting a body it opposes or casting a politically damaging veto.

The US circulated three Sudan resolutions Tuesday one authorizing a peacekeeping force, another imposing sanctions, and a third tackling the issue of where to punish those responsible for atrocities. It said a vote on the final issue would have to be put off because of the divisions in the council over the court. But France, Britain and others were determined to handle the issues at once. Full Story.

Further reading -- Nigeria wants new panel on Sudan crimes, not ICC. People's Daily Online news says China opposes economic sanctions against Darfur crisis.
- - -

Quotation

Mahatma Gandhi once said, "When I despair, I remember that all through history, the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time they seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it, always." - via Be
- - -

UN chief meets Sudanese President, calls for Intl engagement in Darfur

March 23 (AP) -- U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan urged the Sudanese government and Darfur rebels Tuesday to stick by a frequently-broken cease-fire, saying it could take months for UN peacekeepers to deploy in the region if they are approved.

At the request of the US, the council voted last week for a second week-long extension of the UN political mission in Sudan. But many members including France, Algeria and Britain made clear they are fed up with the delays and want a vote next week on a new resolution.
- - -

UK calls on Sudanese rebels to resume Darfur peace talks

March 22 (AP) -- A British minister on Tuesday called on two Sudanese rebel factions to resume peace talks with the Sudanese government to end the crisis in Darfur.

Foreign Office Minister Chris Mullin said the Darfur rebel groups SLMA and the JEM "should reconsider their current position and agree to the immediate resumption of the peace talks in Abuja without preconditions."

"The current position of non-engagement is unacceptable and is unnecessarily delaying peace in Darfur," said Mullin, after meeting with Minni Minnawi of the SLM in London.

Britain has also called on the Sudanese government to do more to end the Darfur conflict.
- - -

Sudan criticises aid agencies over Darfur aid money

March 20 (AFP) -- Sudan has accused humanitarian agencies operating in Darfur of using only a fraction of funds from donors on the crisis and retaining much of it for their own activities, the independent al-Sahafa daily reported Sunday.

The paper quoted the governor of South Darfur state, Al-Hajj Atta al-Mannan, as saying that just over 10 percent of the total amount of financial assistance donated for the crisis in Darfur had reached the needy. He claimed that the majority of the money was used to fund activities not related directly to the plight of the people of Darfur.

"The share of the people of Darfur from this fund was only 12 percent while the remainder was spent on administrative operations and workers of the international organisations in Darfur," Mannan charged. Full Story.
- - -

Appeal for billions in development aid

Sudan needs almost eight billion dollars (six billion euros) for reconstruction and development over the next two years to recover from two decades of North-South civil war, an assessment team has indicated. The team, made up of representatives of the Khartoum government and the ex-rebel SPLM, said 7.8 billion dollars (5.8 billion euros), would be required through 2007.

Much of that was to be funded with domestic oil revenues, and international donors would be asked to contribute 2.66 billion dollars (two billion euros) of the total, the team said.

But the amount did not include the massive expenditures that will be needed for UN peacekeeping operations in the South, it said. Nor did it cover money that would be required to restore stability to Darfur.
- - -

Sudan Airways to Fly to London

March 21 -- Sudan Airways will fly the London route, barely a month since it resumed flights to Entebbe Airport. The airline's country manager, said on Saturday, the move to be implemented in April, was aimed at popularising the airline and cope with the demand.

"We shall be embarking on the London route. We have already ordered for one Airbus for that purpose. We want all those people who choose to fly Sudan Airways to continue enjoying the high class services of their first choice airliner while they also get the opportunity of flying with it to London," Adam said."

"It's just as well though that we also had to introduce the London route since there is an overwhelming demand for it," he said.
- - -

Darfur rebels call on Arabs to protect minorities

March 22 (Reuters) -- Darfur rebels want an Arab summit this week to show support for minorities in Arab countries and help bring war criminals to justice, rebel leaders said on Monday.

"We are calling on the Arab leaders at the Arab summit in Algeria to pass a resolution to respect the rights of non-Arabs in Arab countries," Khalil Ibrahim, a leader of the JEM, told Reuters from the Eritrean capital Asmara.

Abdel Wahed Muhamed al-Nur, a leader of the SLA, another rebel group, said he wanted the Arab states to back the recommendations of a UN-appointed inquiry commission that suspected Darfur war criminals be put on trial at the International Criminal Court.

"We call on the Arab states to support the trial of the people the UN has said are perpetrators of war crimes," he told Reuters from Kenya's capital Nairobi.

Arab leaders met in the Algerian capital Algiers on Tuesday.
- - -

AU force presence encourages Darfur displaced to return home

March 20 (PANA) -- The presence of the African Union monitoring mission in Sudan has encouraged certain local communities in Darfur, especially in Tine and Labado to return to their homes, the continental body's assessment mission reported Saturday.

"The recent arrival of AU civilian police in a number of camps hosting internally displaced persons has also encouraged the local population to resume their normal activities without fear of harassment," says an AU press release issued Saturday after a weeklong tour by a high level team in Darfur.

The visit to Darfur was recommended in a resolution adopted by the 17th session of the AU Peace and Security Council on 20 October 2004, which urged the AU Commission to report regularly on the situation in Darfur and on the operations and activities of its mission.

AU Commissioner for Peace and Security Council, Ambassador Said Djinit, led the assessment team, which left Khartoum for Darfur on 11 March. The head of AMIS, Ambassador Baba Gana Kingibe, ANIS Force Commander, Major General Festus Okonkwo, as well as representatives of AU partners accompanied Djinit.

The assessment team visited all the eight AMIS military sectors with headquarters at El Fasher, Nyala, El Geneina, Kabkabiya, Tine, Zalingei, El Daien and Kutum. It also met with SLA and JEM representatives and field commanders as well as senior Sudanese officers in the Western Command area.

"The meetings focused on strengthening further cooperation between the AU and the Sudanese parties and how to pave way for an early resumption of Abuja peace talks," the release said. Full Story.

US contracted Brian Steidle and two other Americans to work as AU monitors in Darfur, Sudan

Brian Steidle, who served four years in the US Marine Corps, recently spent six months working for a US State Department contractor as a ceasefire monitor with the African Union force in Darfur. His sister, Gretchen Steidle Wallace, assisted in the writing of this piece. I am copying it here below in full, for future reference, incase the link becomes broken.

Apart from the fact that the US State Department contracts Americans to work for the African Union as neutral observers, and allows one of them to freely use the media [which I find most strange] in a way that could create difficulties for aid workers currently in Sudan, what I also find odd about the piece is that it appears to be a conglomeration, both in tone and content, of almost every piece on Darfur I have read at The Washington Post. I stopped linking to the Post a while back because of inaccuracies in its reports that appeared politically motivated, were more emotive than fact and, in my view, naive and not at all balanced. [Note how Samantha Power's sensational reports on Darfur are not so frequent since Senator John Kerry failed in his bid for the US Presidency]. Last year, even Khartoum complained about The Washington Post and its reporter Emily Wax. I don't blame them. Such reports seem like American propaganda and make one wonder why the Americans need to produce propaganda when it comes to such serious issues as Darfur and the Sudan.

UPDATE: I have just googled Gretchen Steidle Wallace and found that Brian Steidle is now working with his sister, Gretchen Steidle Wallace, founder of Global Grassroots, a non-profit organisation founded in 2004, who is also currently working on a documentary film to profile the hardship and innovation of women in the refugee camps in and surrounding Darfur, Sudan.

The point I am getting at in this post is the regime in Khartoum read The Washington Post. High profile reports by Brian Steidle could impact on aid workers who risk their lives trying to reach those in the Sudan who are suffering the most dismal of lives on this planet. [Further update below].

"In Darfur, my camera was not nearly enough" By Brian Steidle, The Washington Post, March 20, 2005:

Our helicopter touched down in a cloud of camel-brown sand, dust and plastic debris. As the cloud gradually settled into new layers on the bone-dry desert landscape, we could make out the faces of terrified villagers. "Welcome to Sudan," I murmured to myself, grabbing my pen and waterproof notebook.

A former Marine, I had arrived in Sudan's Darfur region in September 2004 as one of three U.S. military observers for the African Union, armed only with a pen, pad and camera. The mandate for the A.U. force allowed merely for the reporting of violations of a cease-fire that had been declared last April and the protection of observers. The observers sometimes joked morbidly that our mission was to search endlessly for the cease-fire we constantly failed to find. I soon realized that this was no joke.

The conflict had begun nearly 1 1/2 years earlier and had escalated into a full-scale government-sponsored military operation that, with the support of Arab militias known as the Janjaweed, was aimed at annihilating the African tribes in the region. And while the cease-fire was supposed to have put a stop to that, on an almost daily basis we would be called to investigate reports of attacks on civilians. We would find men, women and children tortured and killed, and villages burned to the ground.

The first photograph I took in Darfur was of a tiny child, Mihad Hamid. She was only a year old when I found her. Her mother had attempted to escape an onslaught from helicopter gunships and Janjaweed marauders that had descended upon her village of Alliet in October 2004. Carrying her daughter in a cloth wrapped around her waist, as is common in Sudan, Mihad's terrified mother had run from her attackers. But a bullet had rung out through the dry air, slicing through Mihad's flesh and puncturing her lungs. When I discovered the child, she was nestled in her mother's lap, wheezing in a valiant effort to breathe. With watery eyes, her mother lifted Mihad for me to examine.

Most Sudanese villagers assume that a khawadja -- a foreigner -- must be a doctor. And my frantic efforts to signal to her to lay her struggling daughter back down only convinced her that I had medical advice to dispense. It broke my heart to be able to offer her only a prayer and a glance of compassion, as I captured this casualty with my camera and notepad. I pledged, with the linguistic help of our team's Chadian mediator, that we would alert the aid organizations poised to respond.

"This is what they do," the mediator -- a neutral party to the conflict -- screamed at me. "This is what happens here! Now you know! Now you see!" I was unaware at that time that when the aid workers arrived the next day, amid continued fighting, they would never be able to locate Mihad.

Mihad now represents to me the countless victims of this vicious war, a war that we documented but given our restricted mandate were unable to stop. Every day we surveyed evidence of killings: men castrated and left to bleed to death, huts set on fire with people locked inside, children with their faces smashed in, men with their ears cut off and eyes plucked out, and the corpses of people who had been executed with gunshots to the head. We spoke with thousands of witnesses -- women who had been gang-raped and families that had lost fathers, people who plainly and soberly gave us their accounts of the slaughter.

Often we were the witnesses. Just two days after I had taken Mihad's photo, we returned to Alliet. While talking to a government commander on the outskirts of the town, we heard a buzz that sounded like a high-voltage power line. Upon entering the village, we saw that the noise was coming from flies swarming over dead animals and people. We counted about 20 dead, many burned, and then flew back to our camp to write our report. But the smell of charred flesh was hard to wash away.

The conflict in Darfur is not a battle between uniformed combatants, and it knows no rules of war. Women and children bear the greatest burden. The Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) camps are filled with families that have lost their fathers. Every day, women are sent outside the IDP camps to seek firewood and water, despite the constant risk of rape at the hands of the Janjaweed. Should men be available to venture out of the camps, they risk castration and murder. So families decide that rape is the lesser evil. It is a crime that families even have to make such a choice. Often women are sexually assaulted within the supposed safety of the IDP camps. Nowhere is really safe. If and when the refugees are finally able to return home and rebuild, many women may have to support themselves alone; rape victims are frequently ostracized, and others face unwanted pregnancies and an even greater burden of care.

The Janjaweed militias do not act alone. I have seen clear evidence that the atrocities committed in Darfur are the direct result of the Sudanese government's military collaboration with the militias. Attacks are well coordinated by Sudanese government officials and Arab militias, who attack villages together. Before these attacks occur, the cell phone systems are shut down by the government so that villagers cannot warn each other. Whenever we lost our phone service, we would scramble to identify the impending threat. We knew that somewhere, another reign of terror was about to begin.

Helicopter gunships belonging to the government routinely support the Arab militias on the ground. The gunships fire anti-personnel rockets that contain flashettes, or small nails, each with stabilizing fins on the back so the point hits the target first. Each gunship contains four rocket pods, each rocket pod contains about 20 rockets and each rocket contains about 500 of these flashettes. Flashette wounds look like shotgun wounds. I saw one small child's back that looked as if it had been shredded by a cheese grater. We got him to a hospital, but we did not expect him to live.

On many of the occasions we tried to investigate these attacks, we would find that fuel for our helicopters was mysteriously unavailable. We would receive unconvincing explanations from the Sudanese government's fuel company -- from "we are out of fuel" to "our fuel pumps are broken." At the same time, government helicopters continued to strafe villages unimpeded.

Those villagers who were able to escape flocked to existing IDP camps, where they would scrounge for sticks and plastic bags to construct shelter from the sun and wind. In even these desperate situations, however, the Sudanese government would not give up its murderous mission. First it would announce the need to relocate an IDP camp and assess the population of displaced people, often grossly underestimating the numbers. Then after international aid organizations had built a new, smaller camp, the government would forcibly relocate the population, leaving hundreds to thousands without shelter. It would bulldoze or drive over the old camps with trucks, often in the middle of the night in order to escape notice. It would then gather up and burn the remaining debris.

The worst thing I saw came last December, when Labado, a village of 20,000 people, was burned to the ground. We rushed there after a rebel group contacted us, and we arrived while the attack was still in progress. At the edge of the village, I found a Sudanese general who explained why he was doing nothing to stop the looting and burning. He said his job was to protect civilians and keep the road open to commercial traffic and denied that his men were participating in the attack. Then a group of uniformed men drove by in a Toyota Land Cruiser. The general said they were just going to get water, but they stopped about 75 yards away, jumped out, looted a hut and burned it. The attacks continued for a week. We have no idea how many people died there but tribal leaders later said close to 100 were missing.

Since I left Darfur last month, I have tried, in press conferences, newspaper interviews and congressional testimony, to publicize conditions there in the hope that the international community will intervene more vigorously instead of watching the atrocities run their course. That way we won't look back years from now and ask why we didn't stop another genocide.

I believe this conflict can be resolved through international pressure and international support of the African Union. Weapons sanctions and a no-fly zone throughout Darfur are critical. I have seen that the mere presence of A.U. forces can discourage attacks and, with more support, they could stop the conflict.

In December, the Sudanese general at Labado had told us that his mission was to continue clearing the route all the way to Khartoum, hundreds of miles away. The next town in line was Muhajeryia, roughly twice the size of Labado. The African Union placed 35 soldiers into Muhajeryia, not to protect the village, but to protect the civilian contractors who were establishing a base camp. Yet this small force alone was able to deter the government of Sudan, with a force of a few thousand soldiers and Janjaweed militiamen, from attacking. Shortly after that, the A.U. was able to deploy 70 more soldiers from the protection force and 10 military observers to the scorched village of Labado. Within one week, approximately 3,000 people returned to rebuild. In addition, the A.U. negotiated the withdrawal of Sudanese government troops from the area.

To secure and protect all villages in Darfur, the African Union needs several things: an expanded mandate that would allow it to protect civilians and ensure secure routes for humanitarian aid, advanced logistics and communication support, and an increase in the size of the protection force by tens of thousands.

The attention paid to Darfur in Congress and at the United Nations hasn't been enough. For the first time, we might be able to stop genocide in the making. We must not fail the men, women and children of Darfur.

During my time in Darfur, as I listened to the victims, I was astounded at their composure. Their unwavering faith provides some rationale to what seems to me an inexplicable horror. By handing over their lives to God, somehow each day is a gift, despite the massacres. "We're going to die," they acknowledge with fear, "but we hope to survive . . . Inshallah [God willing]." Unfortunately, they just don't have a choice.

We do.

Author's e-mail: steidlebs@globalgrassrootsnetwork.org

[End of report via http://www.sudantribune.com/article.php3?id_article=8637]
- - -

Brian Steidle: One eyewitness [out of 9,000 on the ground in Sudan]

On Friday, Eugene Oregon of Coalition for Darfur blog, attended a presentation by Brian Steidle hosted by the US Holocaust Memorial Museum's Committee on Conscience. Please see Eugene's post on the presentation.

Note also the following excerpt from a March 17 post at Passion of the Present:

Brian Steidle understands the anatomy of a genocide. As one of three American State Department contractors on the African Union’s (AU) monitoring team in Sudan, the 28-year-old former Marine captain witnessed the systematic destruction of villages in south Darfur in late 2004. He’s now working with Gretchen Steidle Wallace (his sister), who runs a nongovernmental organization (NGO) called Global Grassroots Network to raise awareness about the government of Sudan’s complicity in the Darfur genocide. On March 15, between meetings with Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick and an appearance on Wolf Blitzer Reports, Captain Steidle sat down with American Prospect writing fellow Mark Leon Goldberg at a coffee shop in Arlington, Virginia.

- - -

Returning to the Washington Post report, it seems that, apart from the evidence of castrations, Brian Steidle says nothing much that has not already been reported by mainstream media during the last year. There are 9,000-10,000 aid workers on the ground in Sudan. Some have lost their lives. Many experience difficulties gaining entry into Sudan and timely access to people in need of aid. Doctors Without Borders and other aid agencies go to great lengths to be neutral and not get involved politically or publicise details and photos incase it breaks trust, hinders access and affects reaching those in need of aid.

Over the past few days, I have wondered why Khartoum recently made a point of complaining to the press about aid workers and entry into Sudan. One wonders what agencies like MSF, Oxfam, Save the Children UK and others, including UN and AU workers, are thinking about Brian Steidle and his sister who appear either irresponsible or dangerously naive. There are ways of getting news into the press but publicising already reported news and showing photos [which not even the UN has done] obtained through working for the US State Department, US contractors in Sudan and the African Union is something that aid workers and others concerned over Sudan go to great lengths not become involved with. It's no wonder Khartoum does not trust any foreigners entering Sudan, even those from the African Union. Last year, the British government warned that one needs to be careful because Khartoum could take it upon themselves to deny access to anyone entering Sudan and dismiss aid workers from the country as it has done in the past. You have to wonder if the US government has given Brian Steidle the green light. But why? Could oil have anything to do with it? Nothing would surprise me about what goes on in Africa these days.

I've only recently discovered that Marathon Oil company, based in Houston, Texas, USA [the home state of US President George W Bush] is a partner of the French Total Corp., which holds longstanding oil leases in a southern area of Sudan marked by fierce fighting throughout a 21-year war. Associated Press reported recently that Marathon, a major contributor to the Bush re-election campaign, has resumed payments to the Khartoum government and will be part of Total's operations in the oil fields.

John Garang and his Southern Sudan rebels recently negotiated an oil agreement, involving the same area assigned to French Total, with a new British oil company called White Nile. It looks like the deal is in the midst of being settled - or not. Khartoum says Sudan's contract with French Total still stands and that the former South Sudan rebels SPLM, soon to installed in charge of Southern Sudan, are not authorised to agree oil contracts for South Sudan, that supersede existing agreements, without first going through and getting approval within central government. More on this at a later date.

And then there is the business of bringing Sudan's war criminals to court. The UN Security Council may, within the next week, announce a new resolution on Sudan. The weeks of delay could be all part of the strategy, adding pressure on Khartoum anticipating billions of dollars in aid and development funding. Thing is, I have yet to read one word about how anyone will physically get Sudan's war criminals to whatever court is decided. It would be best if the regime in Khartoum stepped down before it is overthrown. Pressure needs to be put on the individual war criminals, name and shame them all, in particular Sudan's President Bashir, recently listed as the world's worst dictator, and his Vice-President Taha.