Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Misinformation about Darfur Peace Agreement has led to violent reprisals against AU peacekeepers - AU media campaign urges Darfuris to support peace

Darfur violence increases as tomorrow's peace deadline nears, VOA Noel King in Khartoum reported today:
African Union (AU) spokesman Nourredine Mezni told VOA from Khartoum that misinformation about the peace agreement has led to violent reprisals against AU troops, although the AU is uncertain who the attackers are.

"There are some inciters from outside, from some parties, who are opposed to this peace agreement," said Mezni. "That is why we have these attacks against our troops in Darfur, because the population look at the troops as a symbol of the Darfur Peace Agreement. The attacks against humanitarian workers, attacks against AMIS [African Mission in Sudan] troops, demonstrations, because there is misinformation on this agreement."
AU peacekeepers in South Darfur

Photo: African Union troops listen to the concerns of villagers in the village of Brikatouly in South Darfur, Sudan (VOA)
Mezni says the African Union is launching a media campaign to urge Darfuris to support the peace deal.

The AU Peace and Security Council is considering what actions to take if the two groups do not sign the agreement.

As noted here on May 18, 2006 JEM leader will have to leave Chad if he does not sign Darfur peace deal by May 31.
AU soldiers on patrol in North Darfur

Photo: AU soldiers patrol the village of Kerkera, located between El-Fasher, the capital of northern Darfur and Kuma, further north, 18 May 2006. A Nigerian peacekeeper was killed in an ambush on Friday, and six others wounded. The same patrol was attacked again a day later, AU officials said. (AFP/File/Ramzi Haidar)

May 30 2006 Sudan Tribune report - AU briefs African, partner's envoys on Darfur peace implementation - excerpt:
The African Union held two meetings to enlighten African and AU partners Ambassadors in Khartoum on the implementation of Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA). Chaired by Baba Gana Kingibe, the meetings involved African Ambassadors accredited to the Sudan led by their Dean the Libyan Ambassador Omar Khalifa Al Hamdy, as well as the representatives of the AU international partners.

The importance of explaining and popularising the DPA to the Darfurians on the main benefits of the Agreement which up to now have not been adequately presented to them was also highlighted.

UN force for Darfur must have clear mandate - Kiir

AFP report May 30, 2006 - excerpt:
Amid criticism of Khartoum for failing to agree to the deployment of UN peacekeepers in Darfur to replace the under-manned African Union mission, Kiir said there had been "a misunderstanding".

"We did not refuse the UN force to come to Darfur," he said. "But they must come with a clear mandate."

He said the matter had been raised with UN troubleshooter Lakhdar Brahimi when he visited Sudan last week.

"Let us now have the dialogue... until UN forces will be prepared to take over from the African Union," he said.

Kiir said "the procedure they (the UN) took was rather wrong," referring to the fact the UN Security Council passed a resolution backing the Darfur mission that could be enforced militarily.
But President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, chief of the northern National Congress Party (NCP), said he had a different opinion, Reuters reported (Sudan ruling parties differ over UN Darfur force May 30, 2006 Opheera McDoom):
"We heard the words of Salva Kiir, and his opinion is different to mine," he told reporters late on Monday night. He declined to answer a question on why he opposed UN transition in Darfur.

Peace talks aimed at ending rebellion in eastern Sudan due to start in Asmara, Eritrea June 13

May 30 2006 AFP report Sudan ex-rebels show unity with Khartoum despite differences - excerpt:
Beshir also lambasted Washington for failing to lift sanctions imposed Khartoum's sponsorship of terrorism despite the signing of separate peace deals with the south and with one rebel group in the western Darfur region.

"They want to give us a new recipe, so they say now you have to solve the problem in the east," he said, referring to yet another Sudanese rebellion.

Talks aimed at ending that conflict are due to start in the Eritrean capital Asmara on June 13.

Interview with Dr Douglas H Johnson, expert on the Abyei Boundary Commission - Hofre Nahas area; part of Bahr El Ghazal transferred to Darfur in 1960s

Click here to read IRIN's important interview May 29, 2006 with Dr Douglas H Johnson, an expert on the Abyei Boundary Commission (ABC) and author of the book 'The Root Causes of Sudan's Civil Wars'.

Dr Douglas H Johnson

Photo: Dr Douglas H Johnson was a member of the Abyei Boundaries Commission (IRIN)

Note this excerpt from the interview:
There are many remaining border disputes. One is the Hofre Nahas area; part of Bahr El Ghazal that was transferred to Darfur in the 1960s, which, by the terms of the CPA, and even by the terms of the Addis Ababa Agreement [which ended the first civil war] before, is supposed to be retransferred to Bahr El Ghazal.
And this excerpt from a blog entry I wrote August 2, 2004 while searching for reports online to try and understand what was going on in Darfur and why:
OIL AND MINERAL RICHES IN DARFUR
Uranium discovered in Hofrat Al Nihas:
France is interested in Uranium and has drilling rights in Sudan

At the moment I am searching for maps to pinpoint Hofrat Al Nihas. (Other names: Hofrat el Nahas, Hofrat en Nahas, Hufrat an Nahas, Hofrat en Nahas). I think it may be in South Darfur, maybe close to a border. Here's why:

Khaleej Times Online report (31 July 2004 by Amira Agarib and Charles Buth Diu - Sudan needs three years to disarm tribes) excerpt: "The oil and precious mineral resources such as uranium discovered in Hofrat Al Nihas have set off fierce competition between US and France. The US has started to invest in oil industry in Chad, France's former colony, while France Total company obtained drilling rights in Sudan."
Now I am wondering if Hofrat Al Nihas is the same place that Dr Johnson refers to as "Hofre Nahas." Just curious.

Further reading:

Aug 16 2005 Sudan: Abyei Boundary Commission report - Mistriyah in north Darfur, is the heartland of the powerful Arab Rizeigat tribe, of which Janjaweed leader Musa Hilal is the chief.

Sep 14 2005 TEXT- Abyei Boundary Commission Report

Mar 1 2006 Dr Douglas H Johnson Abyei Report - A test to Sudan peace deal (Dr Johnson can be reached at douglas@wendoug.free-online.co.uk. www.jamescurrey.co.uk)

Mar 30 2006 Mesirya tribe leader urges resolution of Abyei dispute

May 4 2006 Donald Petterson Abyei - A test of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement parties (Ambassador Donald Petterson was the Chairman, Abyei Boundaries Commission - American Ambassador, Ret.)

May 30 2006 Salient points of the first meeting of Sudan NCP-SPLM final communique

Dinkas say "Abyei belongs 100% to Southern Sudan"

Abyei dispute

Photo: About 50 Dinkas staged a demonstration outside the opening ceremony of the NCP-SPLM meeting on Saturday 27, 2006 in Khartoum, shouting their support for the peace deal and calling for a swift resolution of the Abyei issue. In the picture two demonstrators hold banner "Abyei belongs 100% to Southern Sudan".

May 30 2006 Sudan's Misariyah blame Abyei report for instability in the region - In a petition to the Sudanese presidency Misariyah Arab tribes in the disputed region of Abyei rejected the conclusions of Abyei Boundary Commission (ABC) and blamed it for the administrative deterioration and security instability in the area. The petition warned that the commission's report inflamed disputes between the citizens of the area. In order to contain the disputes the petition said it was necessary to set up a new commission whose final decision would be taken by the people of Sudan. The International Crisis Group think-tank said in a recent report that "the NCP's actions regarding Abyei are a blatant violation of the CPA, creating perhaps the most volatile element of the entire agreement right now."
-- -

For further reports, click on Abyei label here below.

Monday, May 29, 2006

SPLM and NCP first joint meeting in Khartoum reviewed progress made in the implementation of the CPA and discussed bilateral relations

Click here to read the major points of the final communique issued at the end of the first Joint Meeting of the National Congress (NCP) and Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) Monday evening.

Kiir_al_bashir.jpg

Photo: Sudanese president Omer al-Bashir and his First Vice-President Salva Kiir during a joint press conference in Khartoum, May 29, 2006 (SUNA).

At the conference, the President stressed that the country would depend on its own resources for the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and that the Government of National Unity should give people hope after the end of the war in the south, conclusion of the Darfur Peace Agreement and the positive steps being taken to resolve the Eastern Sudan question. Full report Sudan Tribune May 30, 2006.

Note, the report says Salva Kiir said there is no difference on Abyei administration but there is a row of the border of this area and the two partners are determined to resolve this issue in the coming days.

UPDATE: Reuters report Opheera McDoom May 30, 2006:
Differences over key issues like the borders of the oil-rich Abyei region pushed the talks into an extra day and ate away into the night before a rather bland final communique was agreed.

Abyei, on the north-south border, contains one of Sudan's two main oil fields. Under the deal it has an autonomous status and will choose in a referendum in 2011 whether to become part of the north or a possible separate southern Sudan.

The NCP rejects the findings of the Abyei boundary commission appointed under the deal, creating a deadlock which analysts say risks renewed conflict.

And despite three days of long consultations Abyei was not resolved. The final statement said the issue was to be decided by the presidency either by recalling the commission members to defend their report, by referral to the constitutional court, or through mediation by a third party.
- - -

May 28 2006 United Nations Sudan Situation Report 28 May 2006 - SPLM and NCP joint meeting in Khartoum reviewed progress made in the implementation of the CPA and discussed bilateral relations - One AMIS soldier reported killed in attack by armed militia in Masteri.

May 30 2006 Interview with Dr Douglas H Johnson, expert on the Abyei Boundary Commission - Hofre Nahas area; part of Bahr El Ghazal transferred to Darfur in 1960s

For further reports, click on Abyei label here below.

World Bank to rehabilitate Sudan transport infrastructures

The World Bank has agreed to assign 40 million dollars for rehabilitation of Sudan Railways, 42 million dollars for roads and bridge projects, besides seven million dollars for river transport in first stage. - Sudan Tribune May 29 2006.

Save Darfur Coalition - Does "Free Darfur" harbor genocide supporters? (Anne Morse, Wilberforce Forum)

Since I rarely follow news of the Save Darfur Coalition I am not sure what the following opinion piece is all about but I am logging it here for future reference:
Does "Free Darfur" harbor genocide supporters?
May 15, 2006
By Anne Morse, senior writer at The Wilberforce Forum

Should human rights activists fighting genocide in Darfur join forces with groups with ties to terrorists--fanatics whose dearest wish is to commit genocide?

Save Darfur has done tremendous work promoting the cause of Darfur's persecuted people to Americans. My 17-year-old son and I were among the 10,000 people who attended the rally in Washington, bought t-shirts, and applauded the celebrity speakers. Clearly, Save Darfur, which includes as members Holocaust survivors, has its heart in the right place.

But its leadership has some explaining to do - specifically, why they invited supporters of genocide to help them prevent it.
See full article at Townhall.com.

Irrepressible.info: an Amnesty International campaign

From Amnesty International's campaign irrepressible.info:
The web is a great tool for sharing ideas and freedom of expression. However, efforts to try and control the Internet are growing. Internet repression is reported in countries like China, Vietnam, Tunisia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria. People are persecuted and imprisoned simply for criticising their government, calling for democracy and greater press freedom or exposing human rights abuses, online.

But Internet repression is not just about governments. IT companies have helped build the systems that enable surveillance and censorship to take place. Yahoo! have supplied email users' private data to the Chinese authorities, helping to facilitate cases of wrongful imprisonment. Microsoft and Google have both complied with government demands to actively censor Chinese users of their services.

Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right. It is one of the most precious of all rights. We should fight to protect it.
[via Ethan's link to Amnesty's efforts on blog censorship]

Sudan proposes Libyan role in Darfur peace implementation

The Sudan Tribune is one of the few news sites to pick up on the story that Sudan proposes Libyan role in Darfur peace implementation.

The article claims press reports in Khartoum say al-Khalifa also asked Gaddafi to persuade the dissident rebels groups, particularly SLM/A's al-Nur faction, to join the peace deal.

My heart lifts whenever I read such news. I've followed almost every news report on Col Gaddafi's efforts to broker peace for Darfur and logged most of it here at Sudan Watch.

Map of Libya

Gaddafi seems to mean what he says because throughout the past two years, he's followed through on everything, from opening up routes to get emergency food into Darfur to bringing together warring parties and tribes under one roof.

Al-Bashir welcomes Gaddafi

Photo: Sudanese president al-Bashir welcomes Libyan leader Col Gaddfi to Khartoum March 23, 2006 for Arab summit held in the capital.

Col Gaddafi appears to be a great joiner of people. He speaks different languages, in more ways than one. I believe he continues to be instrumental in building bridges of trust between the warring parties and tribal leaders in the Sudan.

I've found it difficult to believe the regime in Khartoum have control over the so-called Janjaweed. Sudan is a country the size of Europe. Tribal leaders lord it over huge swathes of the Sudan, ruling through benevolence and fear. Searing heat, harsh flat terrain, sand storms, rainy seasons, mud, floods, nomads, livestock, watering holes, camels, tribal customs and traditions all part of a way of life that has not changed since the year dot.

A few years ago, one of the Janjaweed leaders, Musa Hilal, explained to the press that he and the other tribal leaders have no need to take orders from Khartoum. It seems they rule in a way they feel works best. How else does one contain anarchy and retain sovereignty in such a huge poverty stricken country where there is little or no infrastructure?

I imagine all the different Sudanese tribes, dialects, customs, traditions and culture to be as diverse as those in all the different countries of Europe. Some African leaders talk of their vision for a "United States of Africa". Sudan is one quarter the size of the US. My wish for the Sudan is that it separates religion from government. One cannot serve God and mammon alike. There are thousands of different religions. People ought to be free to choose their own faith. Religion and government should be separate. I'd like to see the Sudanese president opening up to the world's media and start a real good blog aimed at fostering real understanding, not propaganda. From what I have seen online, Sudan has a lot to offer. It is a beautiful country with a fascinating history and culture, friendly people and interesting art.

Millions of people in the Sudan have never received an education and do not know how to read or write. Many of them believe if they wear a written message in a pouch around their body it will provide protection from harm and ward off evil spirits.

Man from a Falata tribe in Sudan selling Hidjab

Photo: Man from a Falata tribe selling "Hidjab" which are pages from Quran inside of amulet made of leather. (Vit Hassan, Khartoum)

Man from a Funj tribe in Sudan selling voodoo

Photo: Man from a Funj tribe selling voodoo (Vit Hassan, Khartoum)

Voodoo from skin of a monkey

Photo: Voodoo from skin of a monkey (Vit Hassan, Khartoum)

Note UN SGSR Jan Pronk, in his blog entry 28 April 2006 explains the following about Darfur:
Quite a few tribes are engaged in violent conflict with each other. As a matter of fact, many Sudanese believe that the Darfur conflict is not political, but tribal. In my view it is both. The demands of the rebel movements concerning sharing of power and wealth are of a political nature. A high government official in Darfur, a Darfurian himself, appointed by the Khartoum government and member of the ruling National Congress Party, once told me that there are Darfurians who fight the government and other Darfurians, who do not fight, but the latter share with the rebels a grudge against the government. Darfur against Khartoum; it is a political conflict.

But the conflict is also tribal. The tribal dimension is often underestimated by people outside Sudan. However, tribal conflicts are age-old and deeply rooted. There is an ethnic dimension to the tribal conflicts, to the extent that some tribes are considered to be African, others Arab. There is also an economic dimension: the struggle for land and water, the looting of cattle, the most important resource of many tribes. Tribal conflicts are often related to land claims, with a long history. Some tribes consider themselves as more Darfurian than others, because they settled in Darfur much earlier. Some tribes, though living in Darfur since many generations, are still considered to be Chadian, or West African. Some tribes were favored by the British colonial regime. Others were accustomed to keep slaves. Some tribes are more closely affiliated with the rebels (the Fur, the Zaghawa and the Massaliet). Other tribes are more inclined to support notions of pan-Arabism.

Many tribes have militia, in order to defend their interests. They fight ruthlessly, retaliate out of proportion and often use pre-emptive strikes. Killing of women and children is seen as an acceptable form of revenge for the looting of cattle. Militia do not respect human rights or international law. No wonder that notions of genocide and ethnic cleansing have been used in order to describe the ordeals of the victims of the militia.

The Sudanese government and the authorities in Darfur have taken many initiatives to organize tribal reconciliation conferences. There are old traditions underlying such reconciliations. Respecting them would guarantee that the tribal leaders representing their tribes in the reconciliations have been chosen by the tribes themselves, instead of being appointed by the authorities. The tradition also guarantees that there is mediation by respected facilitators, independent of the government. An essential element of reconciliation is the payment of blood money as a form of compensation of the victims. However, though some efforts were successful, most reconciliations did not last long. The modernization of the governance system in Darfur during the last twenty years has undermined the position of traditional leaders. The war did the same. A new generation with easy access to weapons has lost respect for traditional leaders. Moreover, the government, eager to stay in power, has not been able to withstand temptations to manipulate traditional leaders. The outcome of quite a few of these reconciliations could not be sustained. Some were more or less imposed on weaker tribes, who were threatened that they would be attacked if they would not sign. In other reconciliation conferences appointed leaders dominated the deliberations. Often not all damage that had been done in the past was considered due for compensation. Perpetrators of the crimes often were not indicted, but only had to pay blood money. This practice did not help to bring an end to the impunity prevailing throughout Darfur. Moreover, the agreed sums of blood money often were not paid. So, often new attacks took place, again resulting in revenge and retaliation.

To a certain extent this was due to the fact that the authorities had an understandable interest in reconciliation amongst tribes fighting each other. Too soon success was claimed. The government was even more enticed to do so, when tribal reconciliations were considered an alternative to the political negotiations with the rebel movements.

For these reasons the UN has been reluctant to associate itself with the reconciliation efforts. However, they are necessary, not as a substitute for political talks, but as an essential complement. We have participated as observer in some sessions and promised that, if the conditions of fairness would be met, we could help in the follow up of the reconciliation with reconstruction and development programs to the benefit of the tribes concerned.
r3289642226.jpg

Photo: Musa Hilal, an Arab tribal chief accused by the United States of leading a dreaded militia in Darfur, rides his horse in Misitiriyha in north Darfur, Sudan, May 10, 2005. (Reuters/Beatrice Mategwa/Sudan Watch archive)

20050512181124.jpeg

Photo Musa Hilal, chief of Arab Rizeigat tribe in Mistiriyha, North Darfur, Sudan May 10, 2005 (Reuters/Taipei Times)
- - -

Photos about various tribes, folklore and traditions in Sudan

See "Sudan through my eyes" - a photoset on Flickr created by 27-year-old Vit Hassan in Khartoum, Sudan. [see top right hand corner and click on words "View as slideshow" - wait for a few seconds for slideshow to begin, click on any photo to pause and read captions]
- - -

Sudan Facts and Figures

Sudan is almost the same size as the following 15 countries put together: UK, Ireland, France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg, Austria, Denmark, Switzerland, Slovenia and Greece.

At 212,000 square miles, the whole of Darfur is as big as France and North Darfur is 100,000 square miles 3 times larger than the UK.

North Darfur is more than 1,000 miles from Khartoum, the capital of Sudan - about the same distance as from London to Rome. [Source: http://www.kidsforkids.org.uk/pdfs/SudanFacts2005.pdf]

UN WFP increasing rations to Darfur

World Food Programme says it is increasing its rations to those displaced by the Darfur conflict, after receiving additional contributions from donors. Rations were cut in half in May but from June, they will 84% of the recommended minimum energy content, the WFP said. - BBC May 29, 2006.

Bloomberg report May 29, 2006 says recent donations from the United States, the European Union, Denmark, Canada, Australia and the Sudanese government allowed the WFP to increase the rations that were cut by 50 percent for the entire country at the beginning of May, the Rome-based agency said today in an e-mailed statement. For parts of eastern Sudan, the ration was increased to 64 percent of the daily requirement.

JEM's Ibrahim and SLM/A faction travel to Slovenia in an attempt to get their demands met

Reuters report May 29, 2006 says Darfur rebel group rejects deal as deadline nears - excerpt:
JEM President Khalil Ibrahim said he would travel for talks on Tuesday to Slovenia, which he said was trying to find common ground between the AU and the rebel groups refusing to sign the AU-sponsored deal.

"We are going to meet tomorrow on the 30th in Ljubljana, this is to find a way. Slovenia is trying to find a solution," Ibrahim told Reuters in Cairo by telephone.

"We are going to present our position. If they can make amendments in this agreement. If not I don't think there is a solution," he said.

Ibrahim said the SLA faction which had rejected the May 5 agreement would also attend the Ljubljana meeting.

"We are not going to sign this agreement unless there is a radical change including real regional government for Darfur, and reconstruction of Darfur, compensation for our people and a fair share of power," he said.

There was no immediate word from Slovenia on their role in Sudan's peace process.
These guys make me sick. I'd like to know how they make a living and who funds their hotel and travel expenses. It seems to me they're refusing to join the Darfur peace deal because they want to take over Darfur for themselves and are too greedy and incompetent to work and fight for it using non violent means. They're using millions of uneducated women and children as pawns in their power game and gamble for wealth, oil. They expect a region the size of France to be handed to them on a platter, all at once, no matter what the cost. What makes them think they are fit to govern or are any better than the regime the aim to replace? If they don't sign the Darfur Peace Agreement on Wednesday, lay down their arms and go through the political process like other law abiding citizens around the world, I think they should be treated as criminals and put on trial for crimes against humanity.

Jan 10 2006 Slovene president urges UN to warn world about catastrophe in Darfur

Feb 9 2006 Sudan shows appreciation to Slovene initiative on Darfur

Feb 13 2006 Darfur peace talks in Slovenia postponed indefinitely

Feb 28 2006 AU Mediation regrets Slovenian initiative on Darfur

UN says 2 attacks on AU peacekeepers in Masteri, SW Darfur - several injured - 1 critical - 1 killed

Reuters report Opheera McDoom May 29, 2006 - excerpts:
One African Union soldier was killed and another critically wounded when heavily armed men ambushed a patrol not far from their base in West Darfur, the United Nations said.

"The number of attackers is unconfirmed between six to 12 and they were reportedly armed with RPGs (rocket-propelled grenades) and AK-47 rifles," the U.N. statement sent late on Sunday said.

The AU on Monday confirmed the ambush but could not give details. The identity of the men behind the attack was unknown.

The attack occurred on Friday about 2 km (1.5 miles) from the AU base in Masteri near the border with Chad in south-west Darfur.

A U.N. source said on Monday the AU base in Masteri itself was attacked during the night on Friday and several soldiers injured, one critically. He was not expected to survive.

The area has come under attack many times by armed Arab militia, known locally as Janjaweed. They have been amassing since the peace deal and become bolder in engaging AU troops.

The AU has also come under attack in West Darfur in the past by a third rebel group demanding a seat at the Darfur talks.

Sunday, May 28, 2006

Libyan leader Gaddafi to supervise Darfur Peace Agreement

Today, Libyan leader Col Gaddafi received the Sudanese President's Advisor, Majzoub al-Khalifa, who handed him a message from President Omar Al Beshir, Ljbc reported May 28, 2006:
President Al Beshir thanked Col Gaddafi for his role in the Darfur peace agreement, briefing him on the latest preparations to execute Abuja agreement. He also proposed to set up a committee from Libya, Sudan and the Liberation Movement to supervise this agreement.

The meeting was joined by the leader of the SLM/A, Minni Minnawi, who promised to execute the agreement signed in Abuja. He also called on Col Gaddafi to supervise the peace agreement in Darfur.
May 27 2006 Libyan leader receives AU Commission Chairman Konare

May 28 2006 Sudanese envoy al-Khalifa to meet in Libya with Col Gaddafi and SLM/A's Minnawi re Darfur peace process

Turabi cancels London visit after entry visa delay

According to an unsourced article at the Sudan Tribune May 28, 2006 Hassan al-Turabi, leader of the Sudanese oppostion party PNC, had to cancel his visit to London after a delay in issuing an entry visa. Heh.

Sheikh Hassan Al-Turabi

Photo: Sheikh Hassan Al-Turabi, in a recent interview said, "I was imprisoned because I spoke with the southerners -- the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) -- I spent 30 months in jail for doing so -- and I was also imprisoned, 15 months, for speaking with Darfur's armed opposition groups. Now, I have entered into discussions with the Easterners," he says nonchalantly.

Jan 1 2006 Sudanese Islamist leader Turabi attacks foreign presence

Jan 31 2006 Sudan's Hassan al-Turabi harboured bin Laden

Feb 24 2006 Portrait of Sudan's Islamist leader Hassan al-Turabi

Mar 14 2006 Sudan court frees 8 Turabi party members

Mar 25 2006 Sudan's ruling elite and "security cabal" the National Islamic Front: the men who control Africa's largest country

Apr 9 2006 Turabi says women's testimony is equal to that of a man

Apr 24 2006 Turabi branded apostate for pro-women comments

May 14 2006 Sudan's Turabi condemns Darfur Peace Agreement - Al Turabi Is a Chameleon

May 19 2006 Sudan's Turabi calls for overthrow of Khartoum regime

Moral Blindness: The Case Against Troops for Darfur (by David Rieff)

David Rieff in Boston is a contributing editor at The New Republic. Here are some excerpts from his excellent opinion piece (TNR, 25 May 2006) Moral Blindness: The Case Against Troops for Darfur:

Except for those who frankly favor the anti-government insurgents in Darfur--and they are more to be found on the Christian right, which has supported Minni Minnawi's Sudan Liberation Movement as it once supported John Garang's insurgency in Southern Sudan--advocates of a U.S. deployment have been maddeningly vague about what will transpire in Darfur after foreign forces halt the killing. [-edit-]

To his credit, [Eric] Reeves has written that any outside military force would have to ensure that the rebel guerrillas do not take advantage of the foreign presence to improve their position on the ground. But that is what an international deployment will almost inevitably do, which is why Minnawi and others have been campaigning so hard for one. The deployment of foreign troops, whose mission will be to protect Darfuri civilians, will allow the guerrillas to establish "facts on the ground" that will strengthen their claims for secession. That is what makes the interventionists' claim that the intervention will be purely "humanitarian"--that it will protect civilians being murdered, raped, and displaced by the Janjaweed but do little or nothing else--so disingenuous. For it is virtually certain that this is not the way events will play out if U.S. or [NATO] forces deploy. To the contrary, such a deployment can have only one of two outcomes. The first will be the severing of Darfur from the rest of Sudan and its transformation into some kind of international protectorate, a la Kosovo. But, at least in Kosovo, the protectorate was run by Europeans--by neighbors. In Darfur, by contrast, it will be governed by Americans (who are already at war across the Islamic world) and possibly by [NATO] (i.e., Africa's former colonial masters). Now there's a recipe for stability.

If anything, the second possibility is even worse. Assuming the intervention encounters resistance from the Janjaweed and the government of Sudan (and perhaps Al Qaeda), the foreign intervenors will arrive at the conclusion that the only way to bring stability to Darfur is, well, regime change in Khartoum: In other words, the problems of Darfur are, in fact, the product of Al Bashir's dictatorship, and these problems can be meaningfully addressed only by substituting a more democratic government. Such an intervention may well end up being Iraq redux, and it is disingenuous to pretend otherwise. [-edit-]

The idea that, after Bosnia, Rwanda, Kosovo, and Iraq, intelligent activists can still speak of humanitarian intervention as if it were an uncomplicated act of rescue without grave implications is a testimony to the refusal of the best and brightest among us to think seriously about politics. Is this what the marriage of human rights and American exceptionalism has led us to? If so, God help us. [-edit-]

Reeves may sneer at the idea of national sovereignty and bemoan the African Union's insufficiently aggressive line toward the government of Sudan. The fact remains that the consensus in postcolonial Africa has been to maintain the national borders that existed at the time of independence, despite their obvious artificiality, because, in redrawing them, Africa might reap the whirlwind. But that is why there was so little sympathy in Africa for Katangese or Biafra secession; it is why most African leaders insist that the Eritrean secession remain an exception for the sake of continental stability. There is nothing stupid, venal, or contemptible about this. And, whatever Reeves may imagine, there are many thoughtful African leaders whose reluctance to confront Khartoum is based in large part on these considerations. [-edit-]

If, on reflection, Reeves and those who think like him believe that it [military intervention in Darfur] is worth doing anyway, that is a perfectly defensible position. What is indefensible is not seeing--or pretending not to see--the problem.
- - -

How to avoid another Iraqi quagmire in Sudan

Excerpt from Sudan Watch entry entry Mar 23 2006:
People who cry out for military intervention (an act of war) in Darfur ought to take a few minutes to read a most insightful opinion piece by veteran war correspondent Dr Paul Moorcraft, a Brit who has worked in thirty war zones over twenty years and visits Sudan and Darfur regularly.

Dr Moorcraft's op-ed provides an excellent easy to read summary of Sudan's complex situation. It tells us Sudan has all the potential ingredients to be a failed state and that, quote:
More important is the recognition that there is no military solution in Darfur. Neither side can win the war, nor can the AU (nor UN) impose peace where there is none. It will take nine months to a year for the AU to be beefed up. Use this precious time to enforce the peace process, not least in the Nigerian capital, Abuja."

Jan Pronk blogs the big question: Will the UN decide to send a peace keeping force?

The big question since the signing of the Abuja Peace Agreement is: will the UN send a peace keeping force to Darfur? Initially the Government said that this would no longer be necessary. However, there is not yet peace. Despite its misgivings concerning a recent resolution of the UN Security Council the Government now seems to be willing to accede. Read more by UN SGSR Jan Pronk in his blog entry May 27, 2006. Two excerpts:
I have never understood why the international observers present in Abuja refused to put up a reference to a UN force in the agreement, while at the same time in New York and Washington were pressing the UN to prepare itself for the transition. However, by signing the agreement parties are bound to abide all Security Council resolutions concerning Darfur. The preamble of the agreement explicitly says so. That will imply also possible future resolutions concerning a transition. [- edit -]

President Beshir has agreed to the proposal to send an assessment mission to Darfur. That is the result of Brahimi's visit. So, we are one step further. The next steps will have to be taken later on. Former Minister of Foreign Affairs Mustapha has stated that the phase of confrontation between Sudan and the United nations is over. "We are now entering the phase of negotiations". Those negotiations will be difficult. Sudan is clearly of the opinion that the UN can only come under Chapter 6 of the Charter, that means: upon the invitation of the sovereign state Sudan. That would be an operation similar to the one in Southern Sudan. However, the Arab militia, the Janjaweed, the rogue commanders and the rebel movements that have not agreed to peace will require a much more robust mandate. The fact that since the peace agreement has been signed, four weeks ago, militia are still attacking villages and rebel positions, makes this all the more necessary.
DSC02131.jpg

Click on the images at Jan Pronk's blog to see amazing close ups of a haboob (sand storm) over Khartoum.
- - -

Notable quote from Jan Pronk's blog entry May 27, 2006:

Brahimi, a former minister of Foreign Affairs of Algiers, and since many years one of the most experienced diplomatic advisors of Kofi Annan, was able to dispel the Sudanese apprehensions. "Do you really believe that I, having fought colonialism in my country and later on elsewhere in Africa, at the end of my career would lend myself to support re-colonisation?"
- - -

Jan Pronk

UN Secretary-General's Special Representative in the Sudan, Jan Pronk, reading a book 'The New Rulers of the World' by John Pilger.

'Als ik vlieg heb ik tijd om boeken te lezen. Ik lees ook NRC Handelsblad, met een vertraging van een maand. Vind ik niet erg.' Naast Pronk een Roemeense bodyguard. [In English, I guess, it says: next to Pronk is his/an Italian bodyguard] (Source: Jan Pronk Weblog)

Saturday, May 27, 2006

Sudanese envoy al-Khalifa to meet in Libya with Col Gaddafi and SLM/A's Minnawi re Darfur peace process

Sudanese Presidential Advisor, Majzoub al-Khalifa, headed for Tripoli today to inform Libya's leader on the steps adopted since the signing of the Darfur Peace agreement, Sudan Tribune reported May 27, 2006:
Al-Khalifa announced that he will meet in Libya with the SLM leader Minawi, and other signatories of DPA to discuss the ongoing arrangements for their return to play their role in implementation of the peace agreement.

He further said that an African Union's delegation, headed by Ambassador Sam Ebok, would remain in Khartoum to discuss the formation of joint committees to implement Darfur peace agreement on the ground.

A joint delegation of the African Union and the government visited Al-Fasher, Genaina and Nyala and other areas in Darfur to meet with signatories of the peace agreement and to discuss implementation of the peace agreement on the ground.

Libyan leader receives AU Commission Chairman Konare

Libyan leader Col Gaddafi received on Saturday the AU commission chair Alpha Omar Konare, who presented to him the implemented procedures to execute the peace agreement in Darfur, Ljbc reported May 27, 2006.

Dutch minister in Sudan for talks on Darfur reconstruction conference

Dutch Development Cooperation Minister, Agnes van Ardenne arrived in Khartoum Friday evening in a visit to Sudan to review donor conference preparations for the reconstruction of Darfur with Sudanese officials, SudanTribune reported May 26, 2006.

Agnes is due to hold talks with the Foreign Minister Lam Akol Friday evening and will be received by the Sudanese President and the two Vice Presidents Saturday.

Aid flows back to Darfur - 20 WFP trucks bringing food to North and South Darfur - Jim Lobe in Washington says "Sudan: Grim And Getting Grimmer"

Sapa-AFP report by Joelle Bassoul, Kuma, May 26, 2006:
Darfur's fledgling peace deal is fragile but it is already saving lives, say residents threatened by starvation who welcome the halt in Sudanese rebel attacks on food aid convoys.

"Thank God, it is quiet now." These same words of relief come out of the parched mouths of nearly all the famished villagers around El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur.

Delivering rations to the population had become a perilous task for aid agencies on desert tracks infested with marauding gunmen, who frequently hijacked food convoys and nearly obliged the United Nations (UN) to stop its relief operation.

Khartoum and the largest rebel faction from the Sudan Liberation Movement signed a peace agreement on May 5, raising hopes of an end to the more than three years of conflict that turned Darfur into one of the world's worst unfolding humanitarian tragedies.

Aid trucks crawling on the bumpy roads meandering through the dry hills from El Fasher to Kuma, 80 kilometres to the northeast, were easy targets for armed rebels, who would attack convoys, steal the vital food aid and disappear.

In March, around 20 armed men on camels tried to stop an aid truck, but the driver escaped and went to police in El Fasher.

When they went after the men, clashes ensued around Kerkera, halfway between El Fasher and Kuma, leaving 14 rebels and three police dead, according to the African Union Mission in Sudan (Amis).

Some convoys had started travelling with armed escorts, which would only have led to further bloody clashes.

But calm has returned to the area since the peace deal was signed, despite one SLM faction and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) so far refusing to sign up.

"The situation is calm and no notable incident has happened," since the signing, said Kerkera inhabitant Ishak Yaacub.

People from villages around Kerkera, population 3,000, come to the market to sell their meagre products, mainly dried tomatoes and onions. Others trade in food aid handed out by the World Food Programme (WFP).

African Union soldiers are pleased to see the market functioning normally.

"The attacks against convoys were a big problem," said a Kenyan officer who requested anonymity.

Because of the attacks, the UN threatened to end relief efforts late last month.

"Unless these attacks and harassment stop immediately, the UN and its partners will be obliged to suspend all relief assistance to this particular area," the world body said in a statement.

It said it would hold armed groups and their leaders responsible "for the failure to assist the extremely vulnerable populations under their control."

The UN also said that some aid agencies' vehicles had been stolen "for military purposes". Outside Kerkera, the Kenyan officer points to a four-wheel drive parked in front of a police post.

"It was requisitioned by the rebels and then recovered by government forces," he said.

The SLM however rejected the UN's accusations, blaming the attacks on government forces and their proxy militias.

"Since the signing of the peace deal, the road has become usable without problem once again," said Kuma's mayor, Abdullah Juzu.

On the road outside Kuma, some 20 tarpaulined trucks with the WFP logo emblazoned on their sides are bringing vital food supplies to El Fasher and Nyala, South Darfur's capital.

"The drivers bravely drive hundreds of kilometres, sometimes even coming from Port Sudan, in the far northeast, and they must have security," said the Kenyan officer.

As the latest convoy heads off, the drivers are pleased to see no cloud of dust on the horizon, usually the first warning of an imminent rebel attack.
- - -

Jim Lobe says "Sudan: Grim And Getting Grimmer"

In contrast to the above report, an opinion piece by Jim Lobe in Washington - entitled Darfur, security situation still volatile despite peace accord (Inter Press Service/Sudan Tribune, May 26, 2006) - opens by saying:
"Despite a recent peace accord, a new UN Security Council resolution, and agreement by Sudan to permit a UN assessment team to travel to Darfur to determine how to strengthen peacekeeping forces there, the situation in the region, as well as in eastern Chad, has continued to deteriorate, according to sources here."
Ahem. Mr Lobe: What sources? Why are they not revealed? Are the rebels the sources? Where is "here"?

Note, the first report above, by sapa-AFP is from Darfur, Sudan and the second gives the impression to readers it is a news report when in fact it is an opinion piece by Jim Lobe, an American.

The same piece by Mr Lobe, reprinted at AllAfrica May 27. 2006, via Inter Press Service Johannesburg (of which he is the Washington Bureau Chief) is featured as an 'analysis' and the title has changed to Sudan: Grim And Getting Grimmer.

Any article that quotes the International Crisis Group and/or it's Sudan expert John Prendergast, I've learned to ignore. They make it their job to get attention, whip up storms and spin the media to get attention. I see it as propaganda. See July 9, 2004 Echo Chamber Project Interview with Jim Lobe, Inter Press Service, Washington Bureau Chief - excerpt:
ECHO CHAMBER PROJECT: So, when you're covering it you're working outside of those blinders in a way. Do you try to challenge the viewpoints of a lot of the cultural biases?

LOBE: Well, I mean, I'm a product of the culture too, and to that extent my coverage is going to be affected by what my -- you know, what my cultural upbringing says is possible or impossible.

Rebel troops to sign Sudan peace deal by Wednesday

Compared to American news reports on Darfur in papers such as the Washington Post and New York Times, notice the difference in tone and content of the following report from SABC News in South Africa May 27, 2006 entitled Rebel troops to sign Sudan peace deal by Wednesday. It seems much less aggressive and combatative and actually manages to impart some positive constructive news without politicising the story or putting an emotive, activist type spin on the facts:
Two rebel groups have till Wednesday to sign the Abuja peace agreement for Darfur. After more than three years of civil war in Western Sudan, this could bring lasting peace to this war torn region. While there's pressure on the Sudanese government to allow the UN to monitor compliance with the agreement, South Africans in the African Union's mission are quietly - but proudly - contributing to stability.

Returning to the Fata Burno refugee camp with food bought in Kutum is hazardous as many women have fallen prey to the Arab militia along the route. Few are willing to talk about the assaults and rapes that have taken place. Since the African Union has started regular escorts, incidents have decreased in Sector 6 - the sector dominated by South African forces.

Richard Lourens, a colonel and South African sector commander in Kutum, says: "We have pre-deployment training and we have mission-ready training - gives us an edge to come here and make a difference with regards to peace keeping."

South Africans the most self sufficient troops

More than 440 South African soldiers and police members have been deployed in Darfur - most serve as protection forces and military observers. Others teach about the dangers of the harsh local environment and expert shooting. Baba Kingibe, an AU special representative to Sudan, says: "The South African contingent who are based in sector 6 in Kutum, are the most self-sufficient unit we have."

These skills are sure to impress the UN once it requests countries to contribute forces to its mission. Yesterday Sudan has agreed to allow an African Union-UN assessment mission into the country ahead of a possible deployment of UN troops to war-torn Darfur. Speaking after a meeting with Omar Hassan al-Bashir, the Sudanese president, Lakhdar Brahimi, the UN troubleshooter, said the mission would start work in Khartoum and then go to Darfur. The Sudanese government and the main Darfur rebel faction signed a peace agreement on the fifth of this month.

Blowing up handpumps is not a good idea - Darfur delegates protect civilians

In Darfur, two British Red Cross women have been working in the field helping to ensure respect for civilians by all those fighting in the conflict - Reuters reported April 13, 2006:
Caroline Birch and Kirsty MacDonald have just returned from south and west Darfur respectively, on separate assignments with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

As protection delegates Caroline and Kirsty were carrying out a vital role of the ICRC in conflict zones - to promote adherence to international humanitarian law by all parties involved.

"I was extremely well-received," Caroline said. "The ICRC is seen in a very positive light because it is impartial and neutral.

"I would speak to survivors, often people who had run to a neighbouring village, to find out exactly what had happened. Then I would meet with the leader of those accused of the attack and, by talking to them, try to prevent it happening again," she said.

Caroline also explained to those fighting that international humanitarian law prohibits attacks against infrastructures necessary for civilians' survival, such as hand water pumps.

"In Darfur, those involved in the conflict want to fight by the rules, they responded well when we pointed out that blowing up hand pumps was not a good idea," she said.

Caroline also visited detainees to ensure their conditions are humane.
Woman at water point in Darfur

Photo: Water points, installed by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), can be seen here at the Kassab camp for displaced people. In 2004, the Red Cross repaired and installed safe water supplies that provided 200,000 people with two million litres of water a day. (British Red Cross)

Red Cross convoy in N Darfur

Photo: An International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) food aid convoy can be seen here, returning from a distribution in the southeastern part of Northern Darfur. In just ten days, the Red Cross can distribute 600 tonnes of food aid to 20,000 people. (British Red Cross)

UNICEF's Clean-water project in Sudan keeps children healthy and in school

Since the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in Sudan in 2005, UNICEF, the European Community's Humanitarian Aid Department and the state water project in South Kordofan have been working together to turn the situation around by building and rehabilitating the region's water system.

In 2005, the project increased access to safe drinking water for 166,000 children and women. Some 10,000 schoolchildren are benefiting from newly installed sanitation systems. And more than 20 school hygiene clubs have been formed, empowering hundreds of children with skills and knowledge about good hygiene and sanitation practices. Full report by UNICEF 25 May 2006.

ibc_sudan_echo_cleanwater.jpg

Photo: Selma (centre) and her friends chatting around one of the hand pumps installed in their village in Sudan's South Kordofan State. The pumps were installed with support from UNICEF and the European Community's Humanitarian Aid Department. (UNICEF) via POTP with thanks.

Jan 26 2006 In Darfur, handpumps are on the frontline of peacebuilding

Jan 30 2006 The war on terrorism that most Americans don't know about

Feb 5 2006 Peacekeeping waterpumps - East Africa a front in war on terrorism

Feb 23 2006 Drilling for Sudan's drinking water is more important than drilling for oil

Feb 28 2006 Water to spark future wars: UK

Mar 5 2006 The 21st century's most explosive commodity will be . . . WATER

Eric Reeves says only NATO military action can save Darfur

Further to an earlier entry here at Sudan Watch, note the following excerpt from concluding paragraph of Eric Reeves' latest opinion piece at The New Republic May 27, 2006:
"Never has it been more obvious that only NATO military action can save Darfur. The people of Darfur have been waiting for help for three years. If working through the United Nations is the best the international community has to offer, they will be waiting for a long time to come."
Now it is clear (to me anyway) that Eric Reeves - a penpusher sitting behind a desk in the leafy suburbs of cosy Boston - who has never done a days work in the real world (or would ever be willing to send his children or any other Bostonian to invade the Sudan) is onside with the Sudanese rebels.

This latest piece of his tells me what I have suspected and said here several times before: he wants the West to wage war on the Sudan - a country the size of Europe - for Western forces to invade it militarily in order to overthrow the current regime in Khartoum, giving the Sudanese rebels what they have wanted all along (including those in South Sudan).

The Sudan is really none of Eric Reeves business. He is not an elected member of the US government. I wish a professional writer would publish rebuttals to educate readers as to the dangers of Reeves' rants. He is giving the rebels confidence and feeding them with what they want to hear. He adored John Garang and was awestruck and puffed up to receive a phone call of appreciation from Garang around the time of the CPA signing (there is a blog entry here in the Sudan Watch archives noting Reeves. account of the story).

One can only conclude that Eric Reeves, like all the others who are making a living off the backs of starving Africans, is out to make a name for himself and is probably just another one looking to go down in history with a book to sell. If he does not provide more balanced analysis I shall start getting on his case. The man is a menace, misguided, naive and dangerous. Who am I to say such things? A nobody. But this is my blog, I can say whatever I want, I have nothing better else to do all day and have nothing to sell, no ads or political party to promote, no donations to attract. I take no sides except for that of the millions of defenceless women and children in the Sudan, Chad, northern Uganda, Ethiopia and DR Congo.

Note how Eric Reeves demonises the so-called Janjaweed (and everyone else it seems, except the rebels) by taking a look at the following excerpt from his latest piece and compare it with that of the news reports on North Darfur, listed here below.

Eric Reeves:
"This past week there have been widespread Janjaweed attacks on villages near the town of Kutum in North Darfur, where the Janjaweed are reported to be continuing a massive mobilization. The Gereida area in South Darfur continues to be threatened by the Janjaweed, and late last month Khartoum launched a large military offensive in the area. In West Darfur, international aid workers were attacked by "unidentified men in uniform," likely Janjaweed or Khartoum-allied paramilitary forces. Doctors Without Borders reports large numbers of civilians injured in recent military clashes between rebels and Khartoum's forces near Labado, also in South Darfur.

The rebel groups are far from innocent in all this: In North Darfur, the two main factions of the Sudan Liberation Army--only one of which has signed the peace agreement--are locked in extremely fierce fighting."
'Extremely fierce fighting' eh? If you want to know what he means by that, read the following list of reports on what the rebels were up to in North Darfur. Unfortunately, I am unable to spend time right now on searching out a slew of news reports here in Sudan Watch archives that point out how the rebels taunt and provoke the so-called Janjaweeed into attacking so they can make a meal of it in the press and get people like Eric Reeves spreading the word to US politicians and his chums at USAID and all the others he fancies rubbing shoulders with. Eric Reeves, despite his claims of being independent comes across as heavily political with aims to influence US foreign policy. Most undemocratic. He's more dangerous than George Galloway. Nobody elected Eric Reeves - he's unaccountable.

Apr 28 2006 UN threatens to suspend aid in Darfur blaming rebels and SLA attacks in North Darfur

May 3 2006 Sudan's SLA rebel attacks on aid workers in North Darfur breaks international humanitarian law

May 18 2006 After peace, Darfur's rebel forces turn on each other and fight for Tawilla, North Darfur making it one of the most insecure regions of Darfur

May 22 2006 AU concerned about janjaweed "massing" near Kutum, North Darfur

May 22 2006 Fears Janjaweed will turn on Sudanese government if they try to take their arms by force

May 23 2006 Rebels' rivalry subverts hope for Darfur peace

What does warmongering 'humanitarian' Eric 'disingenuous' Reeves want for Darfur and Sudan, does he (or anybody else) know?

Eric Reeves certainly has a way with words (its how he makes his living, he's a professor of English) but his arguments and rationale sound cracked - and dangerous. Unless I've missed something, it seems to me the Darfur Peace Agreement is the only way to get adequately equipped peacekeepers in Darfur with a mandate to protect - and get warring parties to discuss and agree a ceasefire and disarmament, not to mention the start of building bridges of trust. So why does Eric Reeves denigrate and undermine such a historic step, and go out of his way to foment distrust?

Note this excerpt from Global Voices Online May 10, 2006:
"SudanReeves writes a critical assessment of the recent Darfur agreement (Abuja Peace Agreement)
... The Abuja agreement is little more than another request to trust a regime that has never abided by any agreement with any Sudanese party-not one, not ever. And it asks the survivors of genocide to accept the promises of genocidaires rather than providing the meaningful security they so desperately need."
I say, he sounds as uncompromising as the two rebel factions that are refusing to join the peace deal - which makes me wonder about his motives [click here to read what supporters of the dissident rebel faction SLM/A are demanding - they don't want much overnight eh? crazy!]

What does warmongering "humanitarian" Eric disingenuous Reeves want, does he (or anybody else) know? To overthrow the regime in Khartoum? To split up the Sudan? Why doesn't he say? What is the aim of his propaganda? Military intervention in the Sudan would result in all aid workers being immediately dismissed from the country. How will aid be delivered and reach those most in need? Who will invade, how much will it cost, who will pay for it, how many years of occupation? He doesn't say.

What comes out of Khartoum these days seems less disingenuous than much of what comes from Eric Reeves' naive perspective. It seems to me, people outside of Darfur (including the rebel leaders with bases in Europe) who have jumped on the Darfur bandwagon all appear wanting to make a name for themselves - whether it's words to sell, careers to further, positions and power to gain or books, articles, speeches to write and photo opportunities.

If they are such "concerned peace loving humanitarians", why not focus on DR Congo and northern Uganda where far worse things are happening than in Darfur right now - instead of pushing to make war on the Sudan with the aim of overthrowing the current regime in Khartoum, and risking setting the tinder box of Africa alight. It's about time journalists started getting to grips with Eric Reeves and printing rebuttals to his rants. He's a one man propaganda machine that makes Americans appear naive and puts them (and their Government) unfairly in a bad, warmongering light.

UPDATE: May 27, 2006 - Eric Reeves now makes clear what he wants: Eric Reeves says only NATO military action can save Darfur

British PM Blair calls for major reforms to modernise UN

May 27, 2006 Ottawa Citizen report - UN 'not legitimate' now, Blair says - excerpt:
"A Security Council which has France as a permanent member, but not Germany; Britain, but not Japan; China, but not India, to say nothing of the absence of proper representation from Latin America or Africa, cannot be legitimate in the modern world," Mr Blair said.

While differences over Iraq split the Security Council, Mr Blair argued the UN needs the "capacity to intervene militarily," citing the need to stop the killing in Sudan's Darfur region as an example.

Mr Blair said the secretary general should also be given increased powers over management and spending, many of which reside with the General Assembly, where developing countries hold a majority. Mr Blair called the General Assembly's control over hiring and firing the UN's top names "absurd," and many observers say it has led to political cronyism at the world body.

Friday, May 26, 2006

British Govt statement on the Sudanese Govt's decision to agree to a UN Technical Assessment Mission for Darfur

UK Department FID Press Release May 25, 2006 via ReliefWeb:

The Government of Sudan today agreed to allow a joint African Union/United Nations Technical Assessment Mission to travel to Darfur as soon as possible. The Mission is a necessary step in preparing the way for a UN force for Darfur. Their decision came during a visit to Khartoum by Lakhdar Brahimi, Special Envoy of the UN Secretary General.

The Prime Minister, Tony Blair, said:

"I welcome the agreement reached between the UN and the Sudanese government to allow the joint African Union/United Nations Technical Assessment Mission. They will now begin preparations for the UN to take over the peacekeeping operation from the African Union. As I agreed with President Konare, this should begin as soon as possible."

Lord Triesman, FCO Minister for Africa, said:

"This is a welcome decision. Both the UN Security Council and the African Union's Peace and Security Council have called for a UN force for Darfur. It needs to deploy as quickly as possible. The Government of Sudan now needs to sustain its support of the UN as it continues its preparations to deploy."

Hilary Benn, Secretary of State for International Development, said:

"The Darfur Peace Agreement signed in Abuja on 5 May is an important step towards peace for Darfur. Stabilising security in Darfur is crucial if the agreement is to succeed. A UN force will build on the achievements already made by AMIS, who we will continue to support during this transition period."

Thursday, May 25, 2006

UN Security Council to visit Sudan on 5 June, 2006

The UN Security Council with all its members, headed by the envoy of Britain, Sir Emyr Jones Parry, is due to begin a five-day visit to Sudan on June 5th to get acquainted with the situation in the country. Full report ST May 26, 2006.

British Ambassador Sir Emyr Jones Parry

Photo: British Ambassador Sir Emyr Jones Parry is seen in this March 29, 2006 file photo. (Keith Bedford/Reuters)

United Nations Security Council Report of the Secretary-General on Darfur 19 May 2006

Brief intermission to digest this report. Note, number 4 for starters.

I. Introduction

1. The present report is submitted pursuant to paragraphs 6, 13 and 16 of Security Council resolution 1556 (2004), paragraph 15 of resolution 1564 (2004), paragraph 17 of resolution 1574 (2004) and paragraph 12 of resolution 1590 (2005). It covers the months of March and April 2006.

II. Insecurity in Darfur

2. The security situation over the reporting period was marked by serious armed clashes between the warring parties, numerous acts of banditry and hijacking of vehicles, continued in-fighting between the factions of the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA), and further destabilization along the Chad/Sudan border.

3. In Northern Darfur, there were hostilities between the Sudanese Armed Forces and SLA forces in Haskanita, Al Lait and Al Tawisa early in March, four major clashes and several other skirmishes being reported. Those clashes resulted in a number of casualties among both combatants and civilians. On 8 April, the Sudanese Armed Forces launched attacks against villages in the Jebel Wana area using two helicopter gunships. Three SLA soldiers were reportedly killed and at least 17 people injured. Late in March, the Sudanese Armed Forces and armed tribesmen attacked and looted the SLA-controlled village of Debbis and, early in April, militia attacked a number of villages in the region of Madu. On 7 April, a large convoy of Sudanese Armed Forces was ambushed by SLA in Jebel Wana between El Fasher and Kafod, and about 40 Government soldiers were killed. Government forces then attacked several villages in the area, allegedly using helicopter gunships.

4. Tensions between the SLA factions of Minni Minawi and Adbul Wahid remained high in Northern Darfur. On 3 April, the two factions clashed in the area of Khazan Jedid, while combatants of the SLA faction of Abdul Wahid launched an attack the same day in an attempt to retake control of Korma. They were repulsed by SLA troops within Korma, and scores of combatants were reported killed. There were further clashes between the SLA factions on 19 April. The Minni Minawi faction launched an attack on six villages in the Tawilla area. According to witnesses, as many as 400 attackers rode in trucks, on camels and on horseback. It is reported that the violence resulted in civilians killed, scores of people wounded, women raped, looting, and thousands of people displaced. The attack indicates the beginning of a new pattern of rebel troops attacking civilians on a large scale and committing human rights violations against non-combatants. Other intra-SLA clashes in mid-March and early April led to thousands of people becoming displaced and caused some to flee out of fear that their villages might be the sites of attack. In the area between Tawilla and Korma, efforts undertaken by the African Union Mission in the Sudan (AMIS) to reduce misunderstanding and promote peaceful coexistence between the Arab and Fur communities were disrupted when SLA soldiers of the Minawi faction invaded the area.

5. In the Jebel Marra area, more clashes were reported between SLA, Sudanese Armed Forces and armed tribesmen. On 17 March, there was fighting between SLA and Sudanese Armed Forces in the area of Daya and Tibon, and SLA claimed that the attackers used vehicles with AMIS and United Nations markings. This practice represents a clear affront to the neutral status of AMIS and the United Nations humanitarian operation.

6. Systematic attacks by militia on civilians also continued. Umm Shugeira village in Southern Darfur was attacked by about 200 uniformed militia on horseback and on camels, and many cattle and sheep were looted. On 13 April, at least 15 villagers were killed and 19 wounded when approximately 500 armed militia launched an attack on Kurunje village south-west of Sheiria. The attackers dragged men and women from their homes, beat them, looted their houses and stole livestock. Also in the Sheiria area, Sudanese Armed Forces supported by armed tribesmen on horseback and on camels attacked Arto and surrounding villages on 16 April. Nine villagers were reported killed and 18 wounded, while 26 people were reportedly missing. On 21 April the militia, supported by the Popular Defence Force, attacked Dito, killing 25 SLA combatants.

7. On 9 April, a group of about 160 SLA fighters attacked the market at Gueighin, south-west of Buram. In retaliation, armed militia attacked and burned the villages of Higlige, Nabakaya Halalif and Talhaya. On 16 April, Sudanese Armed Forces recaptured Donkey Dereisa, which had come under the control of SLA in December 2005. On 24 April, Sudanese Armed Forces attacked Joghana, causing further displacement of civilians. Some villages around Joghana were reportedly burned during the attack.

8. In Western Darfur, armed tribesmen on 10 April attacked the Jebel Moon area and Bir Siliba, a village close to the Chadian border. Instability in Chad has further complicated the security situation in the border region of Western Darfur, and armed groups operate on both sides of the border. On 21 March, the Chadian army reportedly attacked Chadian opposition groups in Hejaer Merfaine (Chad) and Dudei close to Masteri, south-west of Geneina. On 15 March, a group from the National Movement for Reform and Development (NMRD), supported by the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), clashed with Sudanese Armed Forces and armed tribesmen in Abu Sorouj. Up to 250 vehicles of the Chadian opposition were reportedly deployed between Masteri and Kongo Haraza.

9. As the Security Council was informed during informal consultations held on 26 April, tension along the border increased further after the Government of Chad accused the Sudan of having supported an apparent coup attempt in Chad on 13 April. The Government of the Sudan has denied any involvement in the Chad incidents. Elements of the Chadian armed opposition returned to Western Darfur following the events of 13 April but, on 19 April, it was reported that Beida in Western Darfur was shelled from a position within Chad, one of the shells landing near a non-governmental organization compound. Despite the Tripoli Agreement of 8 February 2006, tensions between Chad and the Sudan have not diminished and the two countries have continued to trade accusations of support to different armed groups. The security situation in the area remains precarious.

10. New armed groups have continued to be formed in Darfur as local populations have sought ways to defend themselves against attack. Those groups often recruit people younger than 18 years of age. Moreover, credible allegations have surfaced that boys aged 15 or under have been arrested and tortured by the Sudanese Armed Forces and aligned militias, on suspicion of belonging to rebel groups.

11. Banditry remains another serious problem, and humanitarian and commercial vehicles are subjected to frequent ambushes and attacks. For example, in Northern Darfur, a United Nations convoy was stopped and robbed by armed men between Kabkabiya and El Fasher on 25 March. On 4 April, non-governmental organizations staff conducting a polio immunization campaign in the Shangil Tobayi area reported that SLA combatants in the village of Umm Zakaria abducted 10 staff members and two vehicles. The staff members were later released. In Southern Darfur, armed banditry continued in the area north of Menawashi along the Nyala-El Fasher road and on the route between Yassin and Assalaya south-east of Nyala.

12. Attacks on humanitarian compounds and convoys continued also in Western Darfur. For example, in Geneina, armed militia attempted to break into a United Nations guesthouse on 12 April. On 18 April, three non-governmental organization vehicles carrying commodities from Nyala to Zalingei were ambushed and shot at near Fogadiko village. In a separate incident the same day, four non-governmental organization vehicles were ambushed by heavily-armed men north of Geneina.

13. As reported in my quarterly report on the Sudan dated 14 March 2006 (S/2006/160), a troubling anti-United Nations campaign has been witnessed in Khartoum and other Sudanese cities. The campaign, which has included unacceptable language and personal attacks on the leadership of the United Nations Mission in the Sudan (UNMIS), has focused largely on the envisaged transition from AMIS to a United Nations-led operation in Darfur.

III. Human rights and protection

14. Civilians in Darfur continued to suffer the consequences of persistent violence and insecurity, with new displacement of populations, high levels of sexual and gender-based violence, and consistent denial of access to humanitarian assistance. As the conflict has become increasingly erratic and fragmented, civilians have become more exposed to attacks and abuse, and the population's need for protection more acute. Displaced persons continued to arrive from villages under attack or caught in crossfire, swelling camp populations. Some camps, such as Al Sereif in Nyala, are at the very limits of their capacity, leading to rising tensions over food and services. Harassment by armed elements, criminality, and shooting incidents have recently occurred in the Kerenek (Western Darfur) and Kalma (Southern Darfur) camps and appear to be on the rise elsewhere. Authorities' attempts to assert control over the camps have contributed to an atmosphere of intimidation and volatility, and the population of the camps views the Sudanese police with increasing suspicion and even open hostility.

15. More generally, the protection provided to the civilian population in Darfur by international organizations has been eroding. United Nations and other international organizations, and non-governmental organizations, have all seen their ability to move freely and assist the populations reduced as insecurity continues to grow throughout Darfur. Protection of civilians has been further weakened by funding shortages that have caused United Nations and non-governmental organizations to cut down on their programmes. Activities that are most likely to be abandoned are those that are not of an immediate life-saving nature, such as educational or foodfor-work programmes. This is unfortunate, because these activities are particularly effective at creating a protective environment for the most vulnerable sections of the population.

16. Meanwhile, high-ranking State officials and leaders of armed groups and militia have not been held accountable for violence and crimes against civilians. Although the Special Criminal Court on the Events in Darfur has been promoted by the Government as a key tool for bringing justice to the region, only one case of a large-scale attack typical of the conflict in Darfur has come before it: the attack on Tama in October 2005. The lack of a good faith effort to investigate and hold individuals accountable for war crimes, crimes against humanity and other offences reinforces a widely shared sense of impunity.

17. The institutional frameworks developed through capacity-building, such as the establishment, in 2005, of State commissions on sexual and gender-based violence, have not yet led to tangible results on the ground. The number of reports to UNMIS of young women and girls who have been raped and otherwise brutalized has not decreased during the reporting period, and the police have rarely taken adequate action to investigate, arrest or prosecute the perpetrators. UNMIS has documented numerous cases of sexual and gender-based violence in the past months involving armed perpetrators wearing camouflage military-style uniforms that occurred on the outskirts of Masteri, near the Chad border, during firewood and grass collection. In Nertiti (Jebel Marra, Western Darfur), where the number of reported rapes had decreased earlier in 2006 following coordinated interventions by the United Nations, the number of incidents of gender-based violence around camps for internally displaced persons, and close to the military camp, increased again from late March and into April.

18. Since 2005, the Government has pledged to provide UNMIS with free and unfettered access to all detention facilities in the Sudan, including national security and military intelligence facilities. However, local Government officials continued to limit this access. In my January report (S/2006/148), I noted that my Special Representative had requested that this agreement be put in writing. This had still not been done as at the end of March. Meanwhile, in Southern Darfur, national security officials denied UNMIS access to detention facilities throughout the month of March.

19. I have previously noted that local human rights defenders and displaced persons who raise human rights concerns to the police, or who cooperate with the international community, remain at risk of arrest and detention. These concerns were similarly raised by the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Sudan during her visit to the country late in February and early in March 2006. I support her call for the Government to cease treating human rights defenders as a threat to the State. On 11 March 2006, the Humanitarian Aid Commission sent a letter to a prominent national non-governmental organization engaged in protection and human rights work, ordering it to suspend its activities. The letter, a copy of which was sent to national security and military intelligence, followed a series of threats to and harassment of the staff members of the organization by security officials in Western Darfur. I was pleased to note, however, the letter of 28 March 2006 from the Ministry of Social Affairs and Information of the State of Western Darfur, stating that the organization could resume its activities. It is important that the directive in the letter is upheld and that human rights defenders are not restricted from carrying out their work in the Sudan.

IV. Humanitarian situation

20. The continuing violence rendered the delivery of humanitarian assistance difficult in large parts of Darfur throughout both March and April. The fighting in the Haskanita area in Northern Darfur has prevented the humanitarian community from effectively accessing tens of thousands of newly displaced people. In large parts of Jebel Marra, it has been impossible to resume humanitarian activities since fighting erupted there in the second half of January 2006, leaving around 200,000 people without humanitarian assistance, including as many as 40,000 recently displaced persons. Access to other areas, such as Gereida in Southern Darfur, continues to be precarious.

21. Humanitarian access has been further limited by the administrative measures taken by the Government of the Sudan, despite the extension of the moratorium on restrictions for humanitarian work in Darfur until 31 January 2007, and the signing of the status-of-forces agreement on 28 December 2005. The Humanitarian Aid Commission has further restricted the freedom of non-governmental organizations to hire national staff. Although paragraph 64 of the status-of-forces agreement provides that United Nations offices, funds and programmes, when they perform functions in relation to the UNMIS mandate, enjoy the same rights as UNMIS itself, national security officials at Nyala airport in Southern Darfur have been harassing United Nations staff without travel permits, forcing many to return to Khartoum. At the same time, Government-imposed embargoes on certain essential items, including fuel, foodstuffs and other humanitarian assistance entering SLA-held areas in Southern Darfur, have prevented the access of civilians to vital goods and constitute a violation of international humanitarian law.

22. Equally worrying is the fact that the humanitarian community has been subjected to an increasing number of targeted attacks, as described above. In Northern Darfur, the intra-SLA fighting and the practice of hijacking nongovernmental organization cars have led to serious gaps in the provision of humanitarian assistance. Four key non-governmental organizations have suspended food distribution, camp coordination, and water and sanitation operations in the Shangil Tobayi, Tabit, Gallap and Dar es Salaam areas, and other such organizations have scaled down their activities. As a result, 80,000 people have currently no access to vital services, around 1,000 children per month no longer receive routine vaccinations, and a polio immunization campaign for 20,000 children under the age of 5 had to be suspended.

V. Darfur peace process

23. During the reporting period, a concerted push was made by the African Union (AU) mediation team and participants in the inter-Sudanese peace talks in Abuja to conclude the peace negotiations. During March, the focus of the talks was on security issues. On 12 March, AU presented for the parties' consideration a draft text entitled "Enhanced Ceasefire Agreement for Darfur" and prompted the parties, for the first time, to indicate and map where their forces were deployed in the field. On 22 April, the AU mediation presented the parties with a draft text entitled "Final status security arrangements", which framed the negotiations in several important areas, including disarmament of the Janjaweed, the length of time the movements would be allowed to retain their armed forces, the numbers of former combatants to be absorbed into the Sudanese security services, and the processes for their disarmament, demobilization and societal reintegration.

24. On 25 April, the African Union mediation team presented a comprehensive draft Darfur Peace Agreement, and high-level negotiations intensified with a view to concluding the negotiations by 30 April. The 85-page document prepared by the African Union mediation covers power-sharing, wealth-sharing, security arrangements, and a Darfur-Darfur dialogue and consultation.

25. On 5 May 2006, following a period of intensive negotiations, the Government of the Sudan and the Minawi faction of the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army signed the Darfur Peace Agreement. The comprehensive set of commitments paves the way for the long-awaited restoration of peace to the region, the return of displaced persons, and economic recovery and reconstruction.

26. Meanwhile, Government-sponsored tribal reconciliation initiatives continued to be pursued in Darfur. In Zalingei, Western Darfur, the Government's initiative to engage tribal leaders successfully ended months of fighting between the Al-Hutiya and Al-Nuwaiba communities. In Southern Darfur, however, an initiative of the State Government to help reconcile the Birgit, Zaghawa and Misseria communities in Sheiria was not successful. The Zaghawa representatives did not participate in the tribal talks, and the Birgit and Misseria delegates expressed the view that the reconciliation effort was premature. These examples underline the importance of organizing an inclusive Darfur-Darfur dialogue and consultation to give all Darfurians a sense of engagement in and commitment to the peace process, and to address the many local conflicts that cripple Darfur.

27. During the period under review, the Joint Commission did not meet. The serious deterioration in the situation and the consequent political instability in Chad continued to loom over the Darfur peace process. On 16 April, Chad decided to withdraw its delegation from the Abuja talks, in protest at alleged Sudanese involvement in the recent attack against N'Djamena.

VI. United Nations support to the African Union Mission in the Sudan

28. As at 21 April, AMIS had a total of 6,978 personnel in Darfur, comprising 701 military observers, 1,408 civilian police, 28 international civilian staff, 12 Ceasefire Commission personnel and a protection force of 4,829 troops. UNMIS continued to liaise closely with AMIS, through regular contacts with the AMIS Special Representative in Khartoum, AMIS personnel in Darfur, and periodic meetings between the United Nations assistance cell and the AU Commission in Addis Ababa. A joint United Nations-AMIS liaison mechanism has been established in El Fasher to enhance coordination and facilitate the provision of United Nations assistance to AMIS.

29. On 31 March, I met with the Chairman of the African Union Commission, Alpha Oumar Konare to discuss the future of the AU peacekeeping operation in Darfur, as well as options for a United Nations peace support operation in Darfur. At the request of the Chairman, a delegation led by the Assistant Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations travelled to Addis Ababa for further consultations with the AU Commission from 12 to 14 April. The discussions led to a renewed commitment to proceed with joint planning for a transition, which was articulated in the joint AU-United Nations communique of 12 April. Several concrete areas for United Nations assistance to AMIS were also identified.

30. The delegation then travelled to Khartoum and, on 15 April, met with the President of the Sudan, Omar Hassan Al-Bashir, to discuss the Government's concerns regarding the envisaged transition to a United Nations peace operation in Darfur. President Al-Bashir expressed the view that any discussion of, or preparations for, a transition from AMIS to a United Nations operation would be premature prior to the conclusion of an agreement in Abuja.

VII. Observations

31. I was pleased by the signing, on 5 May, of the Darfur Peace Agreement in Abuja by the Government of the Sudan and one faction of the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army. I commend the Government and the senior leaders of the Minni Minawi faction of SLM/A for demonstrating commitment to reach a political settlement. I also wish to pay tribute to the AU Chief Mediator, Salim Ahmed Salim, for his tireless efforts throughout the many rounds of negotiations, and President Sassou Nguesso and President Obasanjo, as well as their international partners, for their decisive role in the final stages of the process.

32. While the signing of the Agreement represents a major achievement, the parties must now proceed decisively in good faith, and the people of the Sudan and the international community must urgently tackle the challenge of implementation. Darfur is still far from being at peace, and the violence and the deplorable death of an African Union interpreter at the Kalma camp on 7 May 2006 illustrates this tragic reality. I am especially concerned by the fact that there are rebel leaders who have not yet signed the Agreement, and the international community must work to convince them to choose peace over conflict, for the sake of their people.

33. In her visit to Darfur late in April, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights found a dramatic and ongoing deterioration in human rights, security and humanitarian conditions. Both the High Commissioner and the Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs have called attention to the urgent need for the Government to ease travel restrictions and create a safer environment for human rights and humanitarian activities. During his visit to Darfur early in May, the Under-Secretary-General was successful in negotiating the reinstating of the Norwegian Refugee Council as Kalma camp coordinator after its expulsion without explanation by the Government of Southern Darfur earlier in 2006. While this is a positive development, a more definitive step towards facilitating human rights and humanitarian work would be the reform of the law on non-governmental organizations, which currently places undue restrictions on the work of those organizations and on humanitarian access to vulnerable populations.

34. Even as the final rounds of discussion in Abuja were being held, all parties continued to engage in totally unacceptable levels of violence and despicable attacks against civilians, in breach of humanitarian law and earlier ceasefire commitments. I would like to emphasize, therefore, the need for all parties, and the Government of the Sudan in particular, to observe the ceasefire and desist from violence while implementation modalities for the new agreement are being developed.

35. Every effort must be made to ensure that the people of Darfur are protected and assisted, so that they can fully benefit from this historic opportunity to bring peace to Darfur. The immediate priority for the international community must therefore be to strengthen AMIS, so that it can move ahead with implementing the agreement and providing real security for civilians. Concrete requirements for support to AMIS include increasing the number of troops, and providing enhanced logistics and greater financial support. In response to the requests of the African Union, several United Nations experts are already on their way to El Fasher to help AMIS in establishing a Joint Operations Centre and provide assistance with aviation and communications. The United Nations is also ready to start exploring, without delay, the additional AMIS requirements which could then be quickly presented to a donor conference. To this end, the Secretariat is ready to participate in a special meeting with the African Union and donors' representatives in Addis Ababa.

36. A second, critical, priority is to address the continuing humanitarian crisis in Darfur. The 14,000-strong humanitarian community working in the region provides vital services to millions of people in need, despite access restrictions, a volatile security situation, sporadic targeted attacks, and administrative obstacles. A shortage of funding has caused operations to be scaled down, however, and food rations will have been halved as from the beginning of May. I therefore repeat my urgent appeal to the international community to continue supporting the humanitarian effort for Darfur in this critical phase of implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement. Not a single day can be lost in this regard and, as the UnderSecretary-General has argued, the Government of the Sudan must join forces with the international community to bridge the current food deficit and prevent a catastrophic humanitarian crisis.

37. At its meeting at the level of Foreign Ministers held on 9 May 2006, the Security Council confirmed these two priorities and stated, also, the importance of finalizing detailed planning proposals for a United Nations operation in Darfur.

38. A first-hand assessment of the situation on the ground is urgently required. During the technical assessment, the United Nations and the African Union will consult with the Government of National Unity of the Sudan on the way forward, the new requirements for AMIS arising from the Abuja Agreement, and the possible transition to a United Nations operation. These consultations are essential, as no peacekeeping mission can succeed without the support and cooperation of the parties concerned.

39. Finally, the attacks which occurred in Chad in April have further aggravated tensions and fuelled the instability and insecurity along the common border, as well as in Darfur and Chad as a whole. It is therefore essential that every effort be made by the two Governments to defuse tensions and to implement the Tripoli Agreement of 8 February 2006.

Source: S/2006/306 [via Coalition for Darfur, with thanks]