Save Darfur: "There is a dire crisis in Darfur. Only bold leadership from President Obama will end it"

Email just received from Save Darfur Coalition:

Dear friend,

"A big lie."

That's what Sudan's ambassador to the United Nations calls a U.N. report that there are "over 1 million people at life-threatening risk" due to the government of Sudan's decision to expel aid groups.

But we know the truth: there is a dire crisis in Darfur. Only bold leadership from President Obama will end it. And only we can ensure our president acts.

Add your name to our citizen open letter to President Obama.

Abdalmahmoud Abdalhaleem, the Sudanese Ambassador to the United Nations, went even further in his recent comments, declaring that "everything is positive" in Darfur. Everything is positive??

With the expulsion of 16 aid organizations and the rainy season in Darfur about to begin, millions of refugees are at growing risk of potentially epidemic disease. Clean water is growing scarce, and lack of medical treatment and sanitation services means diseases like meningitis and cholera are poised to spread through displaced-persons camps.

I'm the Save Darfur Coalition's Senior Director of Campaign Advocacy. It's my job day in and day out to make sure we're putting as much pressure as possible on world leaders to end the genocide in Darfur.

That's the idea behind our citizen open letter to President Obama. We're outlining a tough agenda for the president to follow—one that gives the Sudanese government a choice: restore aid, end the genocide, and resume peace negotiations, or face a range of consequences from international isolation to increased multilateral economic sanctions.

But we realize that a letter with our names on it isn't enough. With no time to lose, we have to get the entire constituency of conscience involved.

Make sure President Obama hears the voices of citizens calling for action. Sign the letter today!

In 2006, I attended the Save Darfur rally on the National Mall and was inspired by the courage and commitment of everyone around me.

It's one of the reasons I joined the Save Darfur Coalition—and the reason I know you will act today. Thank you for all that you do.

—Mark

Mark Lotwis
Save Darfur Coalition

It's been over 2 months since Sudan expelled vital aid groups from the country.

Bold, agenda-setting leadership can't wait another day.

Sign the citizen open letter to President Obama now.

Donate to Help Save Darfur
Help build the political pressure needed to end the crisis in Darfur by supporting the Save Darfur Coalition's crucial awareness and advocacy programs. Click here now to make a secure, tax-deductible online donation.

Is There a Save Darfur Industrial Complex?

From Dissident Voice by Bruce Dixon May 6, 2009:
Is There a Save Darfur Industrial Complex?

African tragedies, observed Ugandan scholar and Columbia University professor Mahmood Mamdani in a March 20 presentation at Howard University, usually occur in the dead of night, outside the sight, concern or hearing of the Western public. The exception to this, he noted, has been Darfur. No armchair observer, Mamdani has traveled and worked extensively in Darfur as a consultant to the African Union in its attempts to peacefully resolve the conflict there.

Mamdani called Save Darfur “the most successful piece of single issue organizing since the Vietnam era antiwar movement, really more successful than the antiwar movement.” But Save Darfur, with slogans like “boots on the ground,” “out of Iraq, into Darfur” and persistent demands for the creation of “no fly zones” is far from being an antiwar movement.

As Black Agenda Report (BAR) pointed in a 2007 article, “Ten Reasons Why ‘Save Darfur’ is a PR Scam to Justify the Next US Oil and Resource Wars in Africa,” Save Darfur is no grassroots movement either.

The backers and founders of the ‘Save Darfur’ movement are the well-connected and well-funded U.S. foreign policy elite. According to a copyrighted Washington Post story this summer,

The “Save Darfur (Coalition) was created in 2005 by two groups concerned about genocide in the African country — the American Jewish World Service and the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum . . .

The coalition has a staff of 30 with expertise in policy and public relations. Its budget was about $15 million in the most recent fiscal year . . .

‘Save Darfur will not say exactly how much it has spent on its ads, which this week have attempted to shame China, host of the 2008 Olympics, into easing its support for Sudan. But a coalition spokeswoman said the amount is in the millions of dollars.’

Though the “Save Darfur” PR campaign employs viral marketing techniques, reaching out to college students, even to black bloggers, it is not a grassroots affair, as were the movement against apartheid and in support of African liberation movements in South Africa, Namibia, Angola and Mozambique a generation ago. Top heavy with evangelical Christians who preach the coming war for the end of the world, and with elements known for their uncritical support of Israeli rejectionism in the Middle East, the Save Darfur movement is clearly an establishment affair, a propaganda campaign that spends millions of dollars each month to manufacture consent for US military intervention in Africa under the cloak of stopping or preventing genocide.

None of the funds raised by the “Save Darfur Coalition”, the flagship of the “Save Darfur Movement” go to help needy Africans on the ground in Darfur, according to 2008 stories in both the Washington Post and the New York Times.

The Appeal of Save Darfur to US Audiences

Mamdani explained the unique appeal of the Save Darfur Movement to US audiences by noting that unlike US responsibility for the one million Iraqi dead over the last six years, the Save Darfur Movement does not demand that we understand Darfur’s history, ethnography, or the complexities of the current conflict there, or acknowledge any culpability of our own. Unlike the killings in Iraq, Save Darfur does not demand that Americans respond as citizens, with a need to account for responsibilities and actions, but merely as human beings with a need to feel powerful and justified. Save Darfur, Mamdani argued, has de-historicized and de-politicized the conflict for its American audience, presenting them with a simple morality play in which they can be the heroes.

Everybody wants to be a hero. Nobody wants to be a citizen.

And what could be more heroically self-justifying and self-affirming than intervening on the side of the angels in the picture of straight-up racial conflict presented to us by the Save Darfur Movement? The trouble is, it’s an utterly false picture. The historic and present uses and definitions of race in America are not nearly the same as those in Africa. Most of Darfur’s janjaweed who committed atrocities against civilians in Darfur are as black as those they murdered, and just as indigenous. The prosecutors at the International Criminal Court who recently indicted the Sudanese president are accountable only to the wealthy nations of the UN Security Council, not to anybody on the African continent. And the casualty figures thrown out by Save Darfur are wildly inflated.

Darfuri Casualties Inflated by Save Darfur and US Authorities

Professor Mamdani noted that in response to a request from members of Congress, GAO, the independent US government agency whose job it is to monitor the accuracy of information disseminated by other organs of government assessed the widely varying casualty figures coming out of Darfur in 2006. 2004-2006 was the time when the atrocities in Darfur were at their height. They took the low-end figures of 50 to 70 thousand dead, which came from the World Health Organization, and the much higher ones of 200 to 400 thousand coming from people affiliated with Save Darfur, and submitted them to the National Academy of Sciences. The scientists told GAO that the lower figures were more accurate, and those were used in its 2006 assessment of the Darfur situation.

The State Department however, produced reports with two different sets of casualty figures, low numbers for the use of its policymakers, and the higher ones produced by Save Darfur and its allies for public consumption.

To this day, Mamdani contended, the US public is being fed grossly inflated on Darfuri casualties. He recounted a briefing he attended where the commander of the African Union’s forces reported 1,500 deaths in Darfur in all of 2008, as many as Save Darfur and the US government claim are dying every month.

Comparing Darfur and the Congo, Fake vs Real Genocides

Nobody disputes that there is a bipartisan military industrial complex in the US, which creates the “facts” it requires to justify interventions around the world. The Save Darfur coalition, comprising as it does figures who trace their activism to the Freedom Movement like Congressman John Lewis, along with the compatriots of the late Jerry Falwell, would not hold on any other issue under the sun. It is a creation of the bipartisan foreign policy establishment, which urgently needs “humanitarian” cover for its imperial ambitions to control Africa’s oil and other resources.

The blatant hypocrisy of the Save Darfur Movement is most evident when one compares the manufactured concern over 50 to 70 thousand dead in Darfur to the ink and air devoted to five million dead in neighboring Congo. But using professor Mamdani’s yardstick, it’s not hard to understand. Intervening in Darfur makes us heroes. But in the Congo, proxies of the US and the West have been instigated the invasion and depopulation and plundering of the whole of Eastern Congo. There is a lake of oil beneath Sudan, much of it in Darfur. But the Chinese are pumping that oil, not Chevron or BP or Exxon.

To return to our own 2007 article on the Save Darfur movement”

The selective and cynical application of the term “genocide” to Sudan, rather than to the Congo where ten to twenty times as many Africans have been murdered reveals the depth of hypocrisy around the “Save Darfur” movement. In the Congo, where local gangsters, mercenaries and warlords along with invading armies from Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Angola engage in slaughter, mass rape and regional depopulation on a scale that dwarfs anything happening in Sudan, all the players eagerly compete to guarantee that the extraction of vital coltan for Western computers and cell phones, the export of uranium for Western reactors and nukes, along with diamonds, gold, copper, timber and other Congolese resources continue undisturbed.

Former UN Ambassador Andrew Young and George H.W. Bush both serve on the board of Barrcik Gold, one of the largest and most active mining concerns in war-torn Congo. Evidently, with profits from the brutal extraction of Congolese wealth flowing to the West, there can be no Congolese “genocide” worth noting, much less interfering with. For their purposes, U.S. strategic planners may regard their Congolese model as the ideal means of capturing African wealth at minimal cost without the bother of official U.S. boots on the ground.

Responding to the very real genocide in the Congo would require ordinary Americans to think like citizens rather then heroic self-affirmers. But that’s a hard sell.

We can only hope that the members of the Congressional Black Caucus and other members of Congress who last month lent their credibility to the Save Darfur people can get over their self affirming “heroism” and begin to meet Dr. Mamdani’s challenge: to act like citizens and the leaders of citizens, to do the homework, to help others do the homework and to face up to our responsibilities for real genocide in the Congo, and prolonging the war in Sudan. It’s not too late.

Bruce Dixon is the managing editor of the Black Agenda Report, where this article first appeared. Read other articles by Bruce, or visit Bruce's website.

Sudan says 'door open' for foreign NGOs but not those expelled

May 06, 2009 KHARTOUM (AFP) —
Sudan says 'door open' for foreign NGOs

Sudan is ready to allow foreign NGOs to operate in the war-torn region of Darfur but rules out the return of 13 aid agencies expelled in March, a senior official said on Wednesday.

Hassabo Mohammed Abdelrahman, head of the government's Humanitarian Aid Commission, was speaking at a joint news conference with visiting UN humanitarian chief John Holmes.

"For the expelled 13 NGOs, it is finished. But this decision at this degree does not close the door for any new NGOs, American, British, French, whatever, with new names and new logos," Abdelrahman told reporters.

"The door is open. Any new NGO that fulfills the criteria is most welcome," he said.

Khartoum expelled the non-governmental organisations and local aid groups after the International Criminal Court in March issued an arrest warrant for its President Omar al-Beshir over alleged crimes against humanity in Darfur.

Sudan accused the NGOs of spying and working for the ICC.

The United Nations says 300,000 people have died -- many from disease and hunger -- and 2.7 million others been made homeless by the Darfur conflict which erupted in 2003.

Khartoum puts the death toll at 10,000.

Holmes said he was in Sudan "to review the humanitarian situation following the expulsion of the NGOs" which "left some serious capacity gaps which we need to fill in order to make sure there is no unnecessary humanitarian crisis."

The UN humanitarian chief stressed that health and sanitation were the most problematic areas, particularly with the rainy season approaching, raising fears of the spread of cholera.

Several cases of suspected meningitis cases have been reported in Darfur camps for the displaced.

France's Kouchner Discusses Rebel Offensive With Chadian Minister

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner on Wednesday met with his counterpart from Chad in Paris as Sudanese-backed rebels were battling their way deep into Chadian territory.

Kouchner discussed the rebel offensive in eastern Chad with Moussa Faki Mahamat, the foreign ministry said.

France has 1,100 soldiers serving in its former colony Chad under a bilateral accord and 800 of its troops are serving in a U.N.-led force that last month took over a European mission to protect refugees in camps.

Source: AFP (PARIS) report via Dow Jones Newswires 06 May 2009: France's Kouchner Discusses Rebel Offensive With Chadian Minister
- - -

From Radio France Internationale May 06, 2009:
Chad/Sudan/France: Within days of treaty, Sudan-backed rebels enter Chad

Photo: Sudanese Minister of International Cooperation Tijani Seleh Fudail, in Doha, Qatar, on 3 May 2009 (Reuters)

Armed rebels supported by the Sudanese government moved deep into Chad on Tuesday. This prompted Chad to accuse Sudan of breaking the peace treaty the two countries signed on Sunday.

The French government has confirmed eyewitness reports that armed groups have entered eastern Chad over the last two days.

"It appears that they have gone several kilometers into Chadian territory," said French Foreign Ministry spokesperson Eric Chevallier. He told RFI that France is still verifying their exact position and number.

Chevallier also said that France was not planning to defend the Chadian government militarily. "There is not such a mutual defense agreement", he said.

Interview: French Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Eric Chevallier
06/05/2009 by Marco Chown Oved

The offensive continued Wednesday as Chadian Foreign Minister Moussa Faki Mahamat was received by his French counterpart Bernard Kouchner in Paris to discuss an international reaction.

The UN mission in Chad said that on Monday it stepped up military patrols around the town of Goz Beida, and ordered humanitarian personnel to restrict their movement. Rebels attacked Goz Beida in June.

Chadian government spokesperson Mahamat Hissene said that "in launching this programmed aggression against Chad, the Sudanese regime has reneged on its signature in Doha".

On Sunday in Doha, Qatar, Sudan and Chad signed an agreement to stop hositilities and the use of force. The two countries have made a number of such agreements before, but they have fallen apart because of accusations that either side is supporting rebels in the other country.

Sudan denies that, in this case, it is supporting the rebels.

Omar Ismail, an advisor to the anti-genocide project at the Center for American Progress in Washington, told RFI that there is little doubt that some of the rebels in Chad are backed by Sudan. He also said that they are probably not tied to Janjaweed militias in Darfur.

Interview: Omar Ismail, an advisor to the anti-genocide project at the Center for American Progress in Washington
06/05/2009 by Marco Chown Oved

Ismael described the fighters as "ragtag rebel groups from different ethnic backgrounds... but they have a common goal, that is, to get rid of [Chadian President] Idriss Deby in [Chad's capital] N'Djamena".

Chad also said on Wednesday that the rebels have the ultimate objective of reaching N'Djamena.

- - -

Rebels, military 'clash in Chad'

NDJAMENA (AFP) 06 May 2009 — Sudan-backed rebels have clashed with Chadian government forces in the southeastern Salamat region and were progressing towards the capital Ndjamena, the rebels claimed Wednesday.

The Union of Resistance Forces (UFR) rebels said a "very short battle" took place Tuesday near Chad's border with Sudan and the Central African Republic.

There was no immediate government confirmation of the clash.

"UFR forces continue to progress towards total control of Chad's main towns," rebel spokesman Ali Ordjo Hemchi said in a statement.

"We are doing everything in our power to reach Ndjamena. Our final objective is Ndjamena," another rebel official told AFP by telephone.

In the statement, Hemchi said the rebels captured 12 army vehicles and destroyed nine others in Tuesday's clash between the towns of Tissi and Haraz-Mangue, claiming the government troops fled.

He gave no details of casualties on either side.

Chad's government announced Tuesday that the rebels had launched an offensive backed by Sudan, accusing its neighbour of reneging on a peace agreement signed at the weekend.

- - -
See Sudan Watch - April 24, 2009: UFR threatens war to overthow Chad's government - UN mission in Chad needs boosting

Mia Farrow on hunger strike for Darfur rebels and refugees

From YouTube by Mia Farrow 05 May 2009:

"Today is the ninth day for me with no food, only water. I am still protesting the expulsion of humanitarians from all of Sudan (including, of course, the Darfur region and the refugee camps). Please call the White House (202-456-1111) and tell President Obama to help get humanitarian groups back in Sudan. For more information go to www.miafarrow.org."



Taking advice from David Blaine and inspiration from Gandhi, the actress aims to fast for 21 days.

From The First Post 

by JACK BREMER
May 06, 2009

Mia Farrow, film actress, Unicef goodwill ambassador and former wife of Woody Allen, this morning began her 10th day of a hunger strike in solidarity with the refugees of Darfur. Holed up at her home in rural Connecticut, she does no intention of starving to death - "I am still a parent and I don't want to die," she says - but she does plan to continue the strike for 21 days in order to raise awareness of the dangers facing the people of Darfur.

At the weekend, five days into the hunger strike, she posted a video address on YouTube. "I'm fine," she said. "I'm feeling not at all hungry."

She went on: "A doctor is coming to check me out. And I was thinking, gee, the people in Darfur don't have doctors because Doctors Without Borders was expelled. The well pumps are breaking because Oxfam isn't there to do maintenance."

Two days later she posted on her website a message saying: "At this point I don't think about food. I am weaker and I am mostly in bed. I am clear-minded. I sleep less." She said she was reading Hermann Hesse's Siddhartha and Paramahansa Yogananda's Autobiography of a Yogi and listening to Bach and Mahler. "I am at peace and busy with my thoughts."

About half a million people are known to have died in the past five years in Darfur and many more have been made homeless. It has been described by the UN as the "world's greatest humanitarian crisis".

Matters were made much worse when the Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir expelled 16 aid agencies from Darfur. This followed the International Criminal Court's issuing of an arrest warrant to face charges for his alleged role in the murder, rape, torture and displacement of millions in Sudan.

Farrow had visited Darfur 11 times before she began her hunger strike. Her campaign is designed to put pressure on Barack Obama's administration to get the expelled agencies back to Darfur.

Before embarking on her hunger strike, Farrow took advice from the illusionist David Blaine who once spent 44 days with no food in a Plexiglas case hanging over the Thames, and losing 34lb as a result. "He told me about how to prepare and what to expect," Farrow said. "He said after six days I won't feel hunger."

And she's taken inspiration from Mahatma Gandhi, who in May 1932 famously went on a 21-day hunger strike against British rule in India.

So far, 75 people have signed up on Farrow's website to join her fast. Some said they would, like the 64-year-old actress, only drink water; others said they would eat the same rations as those in the refugee camps. 

Wealthy foreigners taking over huge tracts of African land

Resentment of 'global land grab' contributed to the change of government in Madagascar.

From Globe and Mail
Wealthy foreigners taking over huge tracts of African land
By GEOFFREY YORK May 5, 2009

ANTANANARIVO, MADAGASCAR — When the new Land Reform Minister rummaged through his office in Madagascar's capital, he was shocked to discover the documents for a $2-billion deal to lease huge tracts of farmland to an Indian entrepreneur.

Just weeks earlier, his military-backed government had swept to power on a pledge to cancel a massive $6-billion agreement to lease 1.3 million hectares of farmland, about half the size of Belgium, to a South Korean company. And now, just as the furor was dying down, here was another massive farmland deal, negotiated with even more secrecy than the South Korean one.

It's unlikely to be the last. Many of the world's biggest and richest countries are buying or renting huge swaths of farmland in the world's poorest countries. Under pressure from growing populations and climate change – and worried by the food crisis of 2007-08, when prices soared and exporting countries halted food exports – the rich are seeking food security by acquiring land in Africa and Asia.

Wealthy foreign investors have acquired, or begun negotiating for, an estimated 15 to 20 million hectares of farmland in the developing world – equal to roughly half the size of Newfoundland and Labrador – since 2006. Most of this is in Africa, where the soil is fertile, costs are low and the owners are weak.

Critics are calling it a “global land grab” with neocolonial overtones. The African Union has warned that Africans could be exploited by the massive farmland deals because of their weak bargaining position. Overwhelmed by the rapidly developing trend, they are failing to get sufficient benefits in return, the AU says.

The buyers and leasers of African farmland are the rich and powerful (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, South Korea and the United Arab Emirates) or the hugely populous and land-hungry (China and India). For all of them, Africa is the jackpot, a region where vast tracts of land are cheap and underutilized.

Madagascar, one of the poorest countries in the world, is a prime target of those hungry for land. But there are plenty of other African targets, too. China is seeking 2 million hectares in Zambia to grow crops for biofuels. Saudi Arabian investors are spending $100-million to acquire land in Ethiopia, $45-million for land in Sudan, and millions more for 500,000 hectares in Tanzania. Libya has secured 100,000 hectares in Mali to grow rice. Qatar has obtained 40,000 hectares in Kenya.

The land deals are a sign of a shift in the world's priorities. Farmland is becoming as much of a strategic resource as oil fields.

But the farmland deals are increasingly controversial, sparking a nationalist backlash in some countries. Millions of peasants and nomads could be dispossessed by the land acquisitions. There are fears that food could be exported from countries that are suffering drought and hunger.

“These land acquisitions have the potential to inject much-needed investment into agriculture and rural areas in poor developing countries, but they also raise concerns about the impacts on poor local people,” says a new report by the International Food Policy Research Institute.

“Unequal power relations in the land acquisition deals can put the livelihoods of the poor at risk,” the institute said. “Since the state often formally owns the land, the poor run the risk of being pushed off the plot in favour of the investor, without consultation or compensation.”

The report lists 50 examples of farmland deals by foreign investors since 2006. Most were on a huge scale, and Africa was the biggest single target.

In Madagascar, there was an uproar when a South Korean company, Daewoo Logistics, announced a 99-year deal to lease 1.3 million hectares of land. South Korea is already the world's third-biggest corn importer, and it planned to grow half of its corn requirements in Madagascar.

The deal sparked such fury among the Malagasy people that it fuelled the rise of opposition leader Andry Rajoelina, who seized power in the island nation in March. “Madagascar's land is neither for sale nor for rent,” vowed Mr. Rajoelina, who promptly cancelled the deal.

The Daewoo deal shocked people in Madagascar because of its massive scale, its secrecy and the perception that the Koreans would be shipping food out of the country at a time when many of its people are malnourished and hungry. Some felt that the Daewoo deal had echoes of the colonial era, when Madagascar's French masters took huge swaths of farmland for themselves.

“The land is sacred for the Malagasy people,” said Hajo Andrianainarivelo, the Land Reform Minister in the new military-backed government. Even the country's national anthem sings of the need to protect “the land of our ancestors,” he noted.

The Malagasy people were never consulted on the Daewoo land deal, he said. “It led to a lot of frustrations, and we can understand that.”

Alain Andriamiseza, leader of a political party that favoured the Daewoo deal, says the land lease would have created 70,000 jobs on land that is mostly uncultivated now. The opposition to the deal was “an extremist nationalist viewpoint,” he said. “This is our island mentality; they don't want to give any land to foreigners.”

After the Daewoo deal was cancelled, it emerged that local officials had negotiated to lease 465,000 hectares of Madagascar farmland to an Indian company, Varun International of Mumbai, to grow rice for India's needs.

The minister, Mr. Andrianainarivelo, had denied the existence of the Indian deal when he was asked about it. “So far we have no dossier on it,” he insisted.

But when he was persuaded to forage through his new office, he opened a glass cabinet and suddenly found a thick book of documents on the deal.

He pulled it down and leafed through it in surprise. “They have all these signatures, but nothing is official,” he said, trying to recover his composure. “It's only an application.” Yet the documents clearly stated, on their front page, that the deal involved the “acquisition” of land for “contract farming.”

The foreign land investors are keeping a low profile in Madagascar now, worried about potential attacks from the enraged population. After spending millions of dollars on the aborted deal, Daewoo is winding down its operation in Madagascar, keeping its remaining staff in an unmarked office in a building with tight security. Varun's local office is equally difficult to find, with even the Indian embassy refusing to reveal its location.

Mr. Andrianainarivelo noted that the Indian entrepreneur signed his deal with regional leaders, not the central government. But he admitted that the regional officials could have signed other land deals, too.

“That's why we will change all of the regional bosses,” he said grimly.

Sudan 'launches attack on Chad'

Rebel movement in recent days in the east of Chad.

BBC News report 05 May 2009:
Sudan 'launches attack on Chad'

Chad's government has accused Sudan of launching a military attack, two days after the neighbours signed a reconciliation agreement in Qatar.

Communications Minister Mahamat Hissene said Khartoum was behind a "planned aggression", reported AFP new agency.

A BBC correspondent in Chad says he is referring to alleged Khartoum support for Chad rebels, a common claim. Sudan promptly denied the latest allegation.

In Doha on Sunday, Sudan and Chad agreed to end hostilities.

"While the ink has yet to dry on the Doha accord, the Khartoum regime has just launched several armoured columns against our country," the communications minister told state radio, reported AFP.

The two countries have long been at odds amid mutual allegations of support for insurgents in each other's territory, especially near the war-torn Darfur region along their common border.

Rebels on the move

Sudanese army spokesman Osman al-Agbash promptly rejected Tuesday's claim, telling AFP: "What is happening now inside Chad is between the Chadian army and the Chadian rebels. Sudan has no relation with this."

The BBC's Celeste Hicks in Chad's capital, N'Djamena, says there has been rebel movement in recent days in the east of Chad, but it is not clear if the insurgents have gone on the offensive.

She says the last time Chad's rebels launched a significant attack was on the eastern town of Goz Beida in June last year.

Chad has on a number of occasions since then accused Sudan of egging on the rebels, she says.

In May 2008, Khartoum accused N'Djamena of backing Darfur-based insurgents who launched an unprecedented attack on the Sudanese capital.

Chad denied any involvement and in turn accused Sudan of having backed a push by rebels on N'Djamena three months earlier that reached the gates of the presidential palace before being repulsed.

Solving the dispute between the two countries is seen as a key step in solving the crisis in Sudan's Darfur region.

Many Darfur rebels are from the same ethnic group as President Idriss Deby, and ever since their uprising began, he has been accused of offering them support.

Although Khartoum has repeatedly denied backing the rebels, analysts note the insurgents have operated out of Sudanese territory for several years.

Sunday's talks were brokered by Qatar and Libya, which have been leading reconciliation efforts between Chad and Sudan after they renewed diplomatic relations in November after a six-month rift.

N'Djamena and Khartoum also shunned each other diplomatically for four months in 2006 after an attack by rebels on Chad.

Snapshot of Google's newsreel:

Chad accuses Sudan of supporting new rebel push
eTaiwan News - ‎4 hours ago‎
AP Chad's government is accusing its neighbor Sudan of backing a new rebel push into its territories only days after the two signed an outline for a peace ...

Chad accuses Sudan of armed incursion
Washington Post - ‎8 hours ago‎
NDJAMENA (Reuters) - Chad accused neighboring Sudan on Tuesday of sending armed groups into the east of the country, just hours after the two countries ...

Sudan-backed rebels enter Chad
AFP - ‎1 hour ago‎
NDJAMENA (AFP) — Sudanese-backed rebels swarmed into eastern Chad and closed in on a strategic town Tuesday as the Chadian government accused its neighbour ...

Sudan 'launches attack on Chad'
BBC News - ‎10 hours ago‎
Chad's government has accused Sudan of launching a military attack, two days after the neighbours signed a reconciliation agreement in Qatar. ...

Sudan and Chad in fence-mending deal
AFP - ‎20 hours ago‎
DOHA (AFP) — Sudan and Chad have struck a deal to end hostilities and arrange a summit between their leaders in a move seen as vital for peace-making ...

UN chief hails Sudan-Chad agreement on ending hostility
Xinhua - ‎May 4, 2009‎
UNITED NATIONS, May 4 (Xinhua) -- UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon hailed on Monday the agreement signed between Sudan and Chad on Sunday to halt violence ...

Sudan, Chad Agree to Stop Hostilities
Voice of America - ‎May 4, 2009‎
By VOA News Sudan and Chad have signed a new agreement aimed at ending hostilities against each other. Representatives of the two countries signed the ...

Chad and Sudan agree to end feud
Aljazeera.net - ‎May 4, 2009‎
Chad and Sudan have agreed to end hostilities against each other and normalise relations after reconciliation talks in the Qatari capital, Doha. ...

Chad and Sudan agree to halt attacks
Reuters UK - ‎May 4, 2009‎
DUBAI (Reuters) - Chad and Sudan have agreed to halt violence against each other and refrain from using force to resolve their conflicts, Qatari and African ...

UN chief hails Chad-Sudan talks for normal ties
Xinhua - ‎May 3, 2009‎
UNITED NATIONS, May 3 (Xinhua) -- UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Sunday welcomed the peace talks between Chad and Sudan to normalize their bilateral ...

Sudan and Chad sign normalization agreement
eTaiwan News - ‎May 3, 2009‎
AP Sudan and Chad have signed an agreement sponsored by Qatar and Libya to normalize relations. The gradual normalization process will conclude with the ...

Chad faces a new rebel attack
African Press Agency (subscription) - ‎55 minutes ago‎
APA-Ndjamena (Chad) Having already experienced a rebel attack that narrowly failed at the entrance of N'Djamena in February 2008, Chad was anew in turmoil ...

Africa: UN Chief Applauds Pact to Ease Tensions Between Chad And Sudan
AllAfrica.com - ‎1 hour ago‎
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today welcomed the agreement signed between Chad and Sudan over the weekend, expressing the hope that it will ease the strain ...
- - -

See Sudan Watch - April 24, 2009: UFR threatens war to overthow Chad's government - UN mission in Chad needs boosting

Asteroid TC3 found in Nubian desert of N. Sudan

Photo: Peter Jenniskens, a scientist at the SETI Institute in Mountain View, Calif., joined students of the University of Khartoum at the location of one of the larger finds from the first search campaign on Dec. 8, 2008. (NYT)

From New York Times:
Recovered Pieces of Asteroid Hold Clues to Early History
By KENNETH CHANG
March 25, 2009

Scientists who for the first time tracked an asteroid on a collision course with Earth, and watched as it exploded in the atmosphere, have now picked up some of the remnants on the ground.

The discovery and analysis of the meteorites, reported in Thursday’s issue of Nature, give scientists solid data on the composition of meteorites that originate from at least one type of asteroid, known as F-class.

Millions of asteroids, mostly small, whirl around the solar system, and over the years people have picked up tens of thousands of meteorites, the surviving rock fragments of asteroids that collide with Earth.

“But we don’t know where a single one of them comes from,” said Michael E. Zolensky, a cosmic mineralogist at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, during a NASA-sponsored news conference on Wednesday.

That changed when Petrus M. Jenniskens, a scientist at the SETI Institute in Mountain View, Calif., organized a search team to comb through a Sudan desert to look for pieces of an asteroid that had been spotted less than a day before it hit Earth last year.

“For the first time, we can dot the line between the meteorite in our hands and the asteroid astronomers saw in space,” said Dr. Jenniskens, the lead author of the Nature paper.

The 280 pieces, about 10 pounds in total, are of a rare type of meteorite known as ureilites. The hodgepodge of minerals in ureilites indicates they were heated up but not fully melted, suggesting that they were once part of a much larger asteroid that possessed planetlike geological processes.

Because ureilites are now linked to F-class asteroids, also rare, the hope is that scientists can now determine the history of asteroids, which contain some of the most primitive materials left over from the early solar system.

“It’s like the first step towards a Rosetta stone of understanding asteroids,” Dr. Zolensky said.

The cascade of discovery started when Richard Kowalski, working with the of the University of Arizona, spotted a moving white dot on his computer screen late Oct. 5 at an observatory on Mount Lemmon outside Tucson. He sent the coordinates to the Minor Planet Center at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.

A computer program at the center automatically calculates the orbits of reported projects, but it failed for the object Mr. Kowalski reported, because Earth’s gravity appeared to be greatly distorting its orbit. The next morning, when Timothy B. Spahr, the center’s director, took a closer look, the asteroid, designated 2008 TC3, looked as if it was being pulled directly into Earth.

Dr. Spahr notified Steven R. Chesley, a scientist in NASA’s Near-Earth Object Program Office at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. “For the first time ever, I saw an impact probability of 100 percent pop up on the computer screen,” Dr. Chesley said. “And this was, needless to say, the kind of thing that makes you sit up straight in the chair.”

Because the asteroid was dim, the astronomers knew that it was small, about the size of a car and 80 tons, and would not cause any significant damage. Notice quickly spread, and asteroid watchers, professional and amateur, pointed their telescopes toward it.

With hundreds of observations coming in during the day, the computers at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory refined the trajectory. “Our last pre-impact prediction was accurate to about a kilometer and a couple tenths of a second in the impact time,” Dr. Chesley said.

The asteroid disintegrated about 23 miles over the Nubian desert of northern Sudan about an hour before sunrise, 20 hours after Mr. Kowalski discovered it. It released the energy of one to two kilotons of TNT.

“We figured that probably was the end of the story,” Dr. Chesley said. The expectation was that none of 2008 TC3 survived the passage through the atmosphere.

But still, Dr. Jenniskens, an expert on meteor showers, wondered. “If we could find something, it would be tremendous,” he said. “So you have to try. It was really a long shot.”

In December, he flew to Sudan and organized a team of 45 students and staff members from the University of Khartoum to search through the desert for fragments of 2008 TC3. And they found the shiny black fragments that had come from space.

A version of this article appeared in print on March 26, 2009, on page A21 of the New York edition.

Britain and France Lead The Attack Against Sudan

This article appears in the May 8, 2009 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
Britain and France Lead The Attack Against Sudan
by Douglas DeGroot

[PDF version of this article. See also interviews with Sudan Undersecretary for Foreign Affiars, Dr. Mutrif Siddiq, and the Governor of North Dafur, Osman Yosuf Kibr.]

April 30, 2009 —President Barack Obama's Special Envoy to Sudan, Air Force Maj. Gen. Scott Gration (ret.) and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, have signaled a change in approach of U.S. policy toward Sudan, away from confrontation, and toward bilateral diplomatic engagement. After meeting officials at the Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs on April 2, Gration said: "The United States and Sudan want to be partners, and so we are looking for opportunities for us to build a stronger bilateral relationship."

Later, after a three-day trip to Sudan, Kerry said on National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" program on April 20: "I found a government that is far more prepared to move on other issues that are of importance to the United States, and I think it's important for us to deal with those officials. And we'll have to work around and deal with the complications of the ICC." (The International Criminal Court is the privately established body, of which the United States is not a member, which issued an "arrest warrant" in 2008 for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir.)

Given this shift, the head of the United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID), Rodolphe Adada, was apparently surprised when he was criticized by U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice at a closed session of the UN Security Council on April 27, according to the Sudan Tribune. Adada, a former foreign minister of the Democratic Republic of Congo, told the UNSC, "Darfur today is a conflict of all against all. The armed movements fight amongst each other, or violently purge their own members."

He countered the anti-Sudan media hype, saying that the situation in Darfur has now become a low-intensity conflict, and provided figures of 2,000 people who died from violence there since January 2008. Adada said that the ICC arrest warrant has complicated prospects for a political solution.

Rice, a dyed-in-the-wool anglophile, questioned his use of the phrase "low-intensity conflict." She claimed he was not in agreement with his superior, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon. However, it is clear that Adada and the Secretary General are collaborating closely on operations in the region. Prior to Adada's meeting with the UNSC, a UNAMID spokesperson said that Adada intended to review issues affecting the deployment of UNAMID, which "required key enablers to enhance the capacity of the Mission and enable it to carry out its mandate more effectively." This refers specifically to helicopters, which are desperately needed by UNAMID, and is the precise terminology which has been used by Ban Ki-Moon.

Colonial Powers Push Regime Change

Despite the U.S. shift, the two primary former colonial powers in Africa, the U.K. and France, have remained steadfast in their policy of regime change. On April 21, a high-level Sudanese delegation ended talks in Paris with French officials and Britain's Lord Mark Malloch-Brown, a Foreign Office Secretary, and a key figure in the founding of the ICC. The two ex-colonial powers refused to establish bilateral relations with Sudan, and "reiterated their commitment to international criminal justice and cooperation with the ICC," according to the Sudan Tribune. One of the Sudanese participants in the talks, Presidential Assistant Nafi Ali Nafi, called the ICC "a political tool used against African leaders who are viewed to be uncooperative with Western programs in Africa." While speaking at Khartoum University on April 28, Nafi revealed that the proposal put forward to Sudan at the Paris meeting, was for the formation of "a national interim government" headed by al-Bashir. France would support suspending the ICC arrest warrant against him, if he withdrew as a candidate in the 2010 elections. U.S. anti-Sudan activist John Prendergast had offered Sudan the same deal earlier.

Nafi charged that those who are collaborating with foreign powers to accomplish regime change in Sudan were committing treason. He pointed out that the Darfur rebel group, Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), was not founded to better the lot of the Darfur population, but was merely an arm of the Popular Congress Party led by Hassan al-Turabi, in the latter's fight with the government. Turabi is a long-time member of the British-intelligence-connected Muslim Brotherhood. The JEM's mostly London-based leadership refuses to negotiate agreements with the government on Darfur issues.

The Darfur the West Isn’t Recognizing as It Moralizes About the Region

From New York Times
By HOWARD W. FRENCH
March 29, 2009
The Darfur the West Isn’t Recognizing as It Moralizes About the Region

For many who survey an African landscape strewn with political wreckage, nowadays merely to raise the subject of European colonialism, which formally ended across most of the continent five decades ago, is to ring alarm bells of excuse making. Clearly, the African disaster most in view today is Sudan, or more specifically the dirty war that has raged since 2003 in that country’s western region, Darfur.

Rare among African conflicts, it exerts a strong claim on our conscience. By instructive contrast, more than five million people have died as a result of war in Congo since 1998, the rough equivalent at its height of a 2004 Asian tsunami striking every six months, without stirring our diplomats to urgency or generating much civic response.

Mahmood Mamdani, a Ugandan-born scholar at Columbia University and the author of “When Victims Become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism, and Genocide in Rwanda,” is one of the most penetrating analysts of African affairs. In “Saviors and Survivors: Darfur, Politics, and the War on Terror,” he has written a learned book that reintroduces history into the discussion of the Darfur crisis and questions the logic and even the good faith of those who seek to place it at the pinnacle of Africa’s recent troubles. It is a brief, he writes, “against those who substitute moral certainty for knowledge, and who feel virtuous even when acting on the basis of total ignorance.”

Mr. Mamdani does not dismiss a record of atrocities in Darfur, where 300,000 have been killed and 2.5 million been made refugees, yet he opposes the label of genocide as a subjective judgment wielded for political reasons against a Sudanese government that is out of favor because of its history of Islamism and its suspected involvement in terror.

At his most provocative Mr. Mamdani questions the distinction between what is often labeled counterinsurgency and genocide, saying the former, even when it kills more people, is deemed “normal violence” while the latter is considered “amoral, evil,” and typically it is the West that does the labeling.

Although he uses the United States war in Iraq as an example, with the International Criminal Court recently issuing an arrest warrant for Sudan’s leader, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, Mr. Mamdani’s most compelling example is the treatment of a crisis in neighboring Uganda.

In Uganda, long one of Washington’s closest African friends, Mr. Mamdani traces the history of ethnically targeted “civilian massacres and other atrocities” against the brutal insurgency known as the Lord’s Resistance Army. In 1996, under President Yoweri Museveni, a second phase of that war began “with a new policy designed to intern practically the entire rural population of the three Acholi districts in northern Uganda,” Mr. Mamdani writes. “It took a government-directed campaign of murder, intimidation, bombing and burning of whole villages to drive the rural population into I.D.P. (internally displaced persons) camps.”

In 2005 Olara Otunnu, a former Ugandan ambassador to the United Nations, denounced the government’s tactics, saying, “An entire society is being systematically destroyed — physically, culturally, socially and economically — in full view of the international community.”

But as elsewhere in Africa, Mr. Mamdani says, the International Criminal Court has brought a case against only the enemy of Washington’s friend, the Lord’s Resistance Army, remaining mute about large-scale atrocities that may have been committed by the Ugandan government. In this pattern the author sees the hand of politics more than any real attachment to justice.

Many argue that what makes Darfur different from other African crises is race, with the conflict there pitting Arabs against people often called “black Africans,” but here again Mr. Mamdani takes on conventional wisdom. “At no point,” he states flatly, “has this been a war between ‘Africans’ and ‘Arabs.’ ”

Much foreign commentary about Sudan speaks of its Arabs as settlers, with the inference that they are somehow less African than people assumed to be of pure black stock. If whites in Kenya and Zimbabwe, not to mention South Africa, vociferously maintain their African-ness, what then to make of the Arab presence in Sudan, whose slow penetration and widespread intermarriage, Mr. Mamdani writes, “commenced in the early decades of Islam” and “reached a climax” from the 8th to the 15th century, “when the Arab tribes overran much of the country”?

More interestingly, the author maintains that much of what we see today as a racial divide in Sudan has its roots in colonial history, when Britain “broke up native society into different ethnicities, and ‘tribalized’ each ethnicity by bringing it under the absolute authority of one or more British-sanctioned ‘native authorities,’ ” balancing “the whole by playing one off against the others.”

Mr. Mamdani calls this British tactic of administratively reinforcing distinctions among colonial subjects “re-identify and rule” and says that it was copied by European powers across the continent, with deadly consequences — as in Rwanda, where Belgium’s intervention hardened distinctions between Hutu and Tutsi.

In Sudan the result was to create a durable sense of land rights rooted in tribal identity that favored the sedentary at the expense of the nomad, or, in the crude shorthand of today, African and Arab.

Other roots of the Darfur crisis lie in catastrophic desertification in the Sahel region, where the cold war left the area awash in cheap weapons at the very moment that pastoralists could no longer survive in their traditional homelands, obliging many to push southward into areas controlled by sedentary farmers.

He also blames regional strife, the violent legacy of proxy warfare by France, Libya and the United States and, most recently, the global extension of the war on terror.

This important book reveals much on all of these themes, yet still may be judged by some as not saying enough about recent violence in Darfur.

Mr. Mamdani’s constant refrain is that the virtuous indignation he thinks he detects in those who shout loudest about Darfur is no substitute for greater understanding, without which outsiders have little hope of achieving real good in Africa’s shattered lands.

MSF: Darfur, Sudan has not been an emergency since 2004

MSF says the magnitude of violence in Darfur has been huge but it is not genocide. The situation on the ground has not been an emergency since 2004.

UPI report May 04, 2009 KHARTOUM, Sudan:
Experts differ on 'genocide' in Darfur

Accusing the Sudanese government of genocide in Darfur may have prolonged the conflict and complicated peace talks, some activists and diplomats said.

"Genocide puts a moral price on this that limits the room to maneuver," a Western diplomat in Khartoum told the Los Angeles Times. "How can you deal with a genocidal government? Can you compromise with evil?"

Two consecutive American presidents and several activist groups have labeled as 'genocide' the bloody campaign by the Sudanese Arab-led government and allied militias. Others doubt the six-year war fits the legal definition, including Human Rights Watch and Doctors Without Borders, the Times reported Monday.

The magnitude of violence in Darfur has been huge but it is not genocide, said Thierry Durand, director of operations for Doctors Without Borders.

"The situation on the ground has not been an emergency since 2004," Thierry said. "The real problem is the dependency in the camps. But the whole thing has become over-politicized."

Ceasefire committee formed to stop the conflict between Murle and Lou-Nuer

From Sudan Radio Service 30 April 2009 (Pibor county):

A ceasefire committee formed to stop the conflict between Murle and Lou-Nuer communities has begun meeting with local authorities community leaders in Pibor county, Jonglei state.

A member of the ceasefire committee, Gatkouth Dup, spoke to Sudan Radio Service by phone from Pibor county on Thursday.

[Gatkouth Dup]: “We formed two committees, the ceasefire committee that I am a member in and the committee that will process the full reconciliation for all the counties in the conflict. That is why we decided to come to Jonglei. We started in Bor and this morning we came to Pibor.

Our mandate is to bring the two communities together, Lou-Nuer and Murle. It is disturbing to hear that our people are killing themselves and we represent them. It’s a concern for all of us. The approach is for the two communities to come together and if they agree then we can bring all the communities such as Dinka, Nuer, Murle and Anyuak communities. All eleven counties should be represented and then we can negotiate for the best reconciliation.”

Dup said the team will spend three days in Pibor then travel to Akobo, Nyirol and Uror counties on the same mission.

The teams were appointed last month by the southern Sudan Peace Commission to find a solution to the conflict between Murle and Lou-Nuer.

Nile Commercial Bank has been temporarily closed

From Sudan Radio Service 30 April 2009 (Juba):

The branch manager of the Nile Commercial Bank in Juba has refuted media reports that the Government of Southern Sudan suspended her.

The Sudan Tribune website reported that Martha Michya had been suspended by the Government of Southern Sudan for allegedly accusing senior government officials for failing to pay back loans that they had borrowed.

Speaking to Sudan Radio Service from Juba on Thursday, Martha Michya said the report was untrue.

[Martha Michya]: “No, I was not suspended by the government. I work in Nile Commercial Bank. I was suspended by my office and not by the legislative assembly. They got the report from Sudan Tribune about me, and the office suspended me about it without any investigation. It’s not because of my work but because of what was written in Sudan Tribune.”

Nile Commercial Bank has been temporarily closed.

Speaking to Sudan Radio Service last week, a member of the board of directors of the bank attributed its closure to bankruptcy caused by outstanding loans and the bank’s rapid expansion within a year.

ICRC has its largest operation in the world in Sudan

From Sudan Radio Service 30 April 2009 (Juba):

The International Committee of the Red Cross has revealed that Sudan is its largest operation in the world, with a budget of over 90,000 million USD in 2009.

An ICRC spokesman, Saleh Dabagge, told journalists at a workshop in Juba that most of the money is spent in Darfur:

[Saleh Dabagge]: “The ICRC has its largest operation in the world in Sudan and this year, 2009, our budget is about 92,000 million USD for the whole of Sudan. But because of the crisis in Darfur and because the ICRC mandate covers before anything else the situation of armed conflict, most of our budget, I think around 80 or 85 percent of this budget, goes to Darfur because of the armed conflict taking place there.”

Saleh added that the ICRC is mainly involved in dialoguing with partners in conflict to avoid violation of international humanitarian law. It also visits prisoners of war, tracks unaccompanied minors, and re-unites family members.

The International Committee of the Red Cross has been working in Sudan since 1978 mainly in the eastern part as a result of the war between Ethiopia and Eritrea. It started operating in south Sudan in 1986.

President Obama and Sudan - A Blueprint for Peace (By John Prendergast, Omer Ismail, Jerry Fowler, and Sam Bell)

Friday 01 May 2009 opinion piece (via www.africancrisis.co.za/AllAfrica)
Sudan: President Obama and Sudan - A Blueprint for Peace
By John Prendergast, Omer Ismail, Jerry Fowler, and Sam Bell. Copy in full:

The third in a series of open letters to President Obama spelling out a practical roadmap to end the crisis in Sudan.

On March 30, key activists met with President Obama and his Special Envoy for Sudan, Major General Scott Gration, in the West Wing of the White House. President Obama made it clear that his administration would work vigorously to bring an end to the war in Darfur and help implement the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between the North and South. After extensive consultations with members of President Obama's team, UN officials, diplomats from other key countries, and Sudanese actors, this paper is an attempt to put forward a blueprint to achieve President Obama's objective of a comprehensive peace for all of Sudan. The good news is that this is a goal shared widely throughout the international community. The key missing ingredient for its achievement is strategic leadership from the United States.

In this paper we lay out the structures we think are necessary to achieve peace in Darfur and implement it in the South, East, and transitional zones between the North and South, all areas of active or potential conflict. We also lay out a set of focused and meaningful sticks and carrots necessary to leverage the various parties to find a peaceful solution to the interlocking conflicts within Sudan and regionally.

In Darfur, the expulsion of key humanitarian aid groups and closure of Sudanese aid organizations have created increasingly precarious conditions for the 2.7 million internally displaced camp dwellers, although some arrangement to expedite the resumption of some aid operations appears to be pending. Brutal harassment of Sudanese human rights defenders has silenced internal voices of dissent. President Omar el-Bashir's use of starvation as a weapon of war is an attempt to distract the world from the real issues of accountability in Darfur, the elections in Sudan early next year and the implementation of the CPA. The Government of Sudan should face clear costs from the international community for so blatantly abrogating its responsibility to protect its own population.

In the South, there is a mere one year and nine months left before the scheduled date for an independence referendum, and implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, or CPA, is grinding to a halt on key benchmarks. Meanwhile, localized violence demonstrates both the South's institutional fragility and vulnerability to traditional divide-and-conquer strategies directed from Khartoum. If left unchallenged, Bashir will continue to view efforts to foment violence, instability, and displacement in the South and Darfur as his most effective instruments of control. Bashir's use of proxy militias (the Janjaweed in Darfur, the Murahaliin in North-South border areas, and other militias throughout the South) has served as an effective means for him to maintain power in Khartoum, but it has also unleashed the centrifugal forces that could violently rip Sudan apart.

President Obama must be firm in responding to the impending humanitarian crisis, promoting protection of civilians and accountability, and working toward a viable long-term peace that includes both Darfur and a reinvigorated CPA. If the expulsion of key groups from Darfur and elsewhere was suddenly lifted by Khartoum, the situation on the ground would improve greatly. But the essential dynamics of the situation would remain unacceptable - with no clear peace process for Darfur, the CPA fraying, UNAMID ineffective, civilians desperately vulnerable, and President Bashir still a wanted fugitive from international justice.

Forging A Multilateral Peace Strategy

Here's the opportunity: a global consensus exists for peace in Sudan, even if there is not agreement on the best path to achieve this goal. China, the Arab League, the African Union, the European Union, and the United States all want peace, but little has been done to build the necessary infrastructure to help bring it about. What has long been missing in Sudan is America's strategic leadership. The rebels, the ruling party, Sudan's neighbors, and other key actors have all been waiting for President Obama and his team to engage.

The CPA itself was reached after a sustained investment in diplomacy, led in part by the United States, supported by relevant regional and international powers, and backed by significant incentives and pressures. That hard-won agreement would not now be in jeopardy if the investment in diplomacy had been maintained and the international community had continued its pressure to ensure that the agreement was implemented. It is not too late for the United States to re-invest in ensuring that the outstanding issues preventing full implementation of the CPA are addressed, and the Obama administration must take these steps or watch the possible violent disintegration of Sudan and destabilization of the broader region over the next several years.

The Obama administration must lead in constructing a multilateral strategy for peace by establishing an inclusive peace process for Darfur, re-vitalizing implementation of the CPA and the dangerously neglected Eastern Sudan Peace Agreement, and ending Sudan's proxy war with Chad. Toward that end, General Gration should focus on building a multilateral coalition of countries with significant leverage. At the same time as the processes are being constructed, the United States should work assiduously to create the necessary unilateral and multilateral carrots and sticks to press the parties in the direction of a peaceful and comprehensive settlement of Sudan's multiple, interlocking conflicts. It is vital that the administration work closely with other key governments in dealing with Sudan; a reliance on bilateral diplomacy will provide Khartoum the opportunity to play one party off against the other, as it has historically done with great success.

• Darfur peace process: The structure should be similar to the Naivasha talks that produced the CPA, and some of the ingredients are already in place. As did Kenyan General Lazaro Sumbeiywo with the Naivasha process, AU/UN mediator Djibril Bassolé should lead the Darfur process, which can be based in Doha, Qatar (although Qatar's recent diplomatic support for Bashir in the wake of the ICC indictment has impaired its credibility as a facilitator of negotiations). He must be supported by a strong team of diplomats and regional experts and backed by a small group of countries with leverage, high-level support, and full-time representation at the talks. We believe that this inner circle should consist at a minimum of the US, UK, France, China, and Egypt. An outer circle group of countries and multilateral organizations (UN, AU, Arab League) should also be engaged in a formal manner to discourage spoilers, and other key nations such as Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa would need to be thoroughly consulted.

• CPA implementation: The Assessment and Evaluation Commission established by the CPA is clearly insufficient to monitor and press the parties to implement the deal (largely because it lacks sufficiently senior representation and clear reporting guidelines). As a matter of international peace and security, CPA implementation should be at the forefront of the U.N. Security Council's agenda and the Council should back a new ad-hoc mechanism to guide implementation. The Obama administration should quickly work with other Security Council members, relevant U.N. agencies, and the regional Intergovernmental Authority on Development, or IGAD, to establish core benchmarks for the parties, a clear timeline, and genuine penalties for failure to meet deadlines. An international meeting on CPA implementation could provide a vehicle for reenergizing efforts around the CPA and provide the launching pad for the creation of the ad-hoc implementation mechanism.

• Chad/Sudan peace process: The Sudanese government continues to seek a military solution for Darfur through regime change in Chad, and Chad continues to back the JEM in response. The Obama administration should work with France and China to support high-level negotiations in Libya aimed at reducing state support for foreign armed groups and eventual normalization of relations.

• Eastern Sudan Peace Agreement monitoring: Eastern Sudan remains volatile. The Obama administration should work with its international partners (particularly the UK and Norway) and with the Eritrean and Saudi governments to establish a monitoring group for the agreement that will report on implementation and make recommendations for improvements.

Building The Necessary Leverage

A serious peace process with credible mediation putting forward fair proposals will secure a deal for Darfur. A competent and higher level oversight mechanism with the involvement of countries with influence will ensure the implementation of the CPA. Having the right balance of meaningful pressures and incentives will ensure that prospects for success are much greater.

In broad strokes, the U.S. should present the Sudanese regime with a choice:

Behind Door One: if the Sudanese government permits unimpeded humanitarian access, removes the indicted president, and secures peace in Darfur and the South, a clear process toward normalization will be mapped out. Almost all of the incentives for Sudan come in the form of more normal relations with much of the world, the lifting of sanctions, a return to more normal patterns of trade and diplomacy, and the other benefits that would naturally flow from Sudan achieving stability as a result of more equitable power and wealth sharing.

Behind Door Two: if President Bashir and his party remain defiant by continuing to undermine efforts at peace for the country, a series of escalating costs will ensue, including diplomatic isolation, targeted economic sanctions, an effective and expanded arms embargo, and, if necessary to stop massive loss of civilian life, eventual targeted military action.

If the benefits of Door One and the consequences of Door Two are meaningful, the chance for peace in Sudan increases dramatically. The missing ingredients in efforts to date for Darfur and CPA implementation have been adequate leverage and lack of strategic vision for resolving comprehensively the country's conflicts. Without real sticks and carrots, the warring parties in Sudan will remain focused on military confrontation. The international community needs to help change the incentive structure in Sudan from war to peace.

On the incentive side, phased cooperation with and-ultimately-normalization with the United States is the largest carrot the Obama administration has to offer. Removal of certain unilateral sanctions and penalties could be undertaken in response to verifiable changes on the ground in Darfur and the South. Full normalization should only occur once the Sudanese government adheres to its obligations under various peace agreements. Any negotiating process must be guided by the reality that Khartoum has a long history of grabbing carrots, then failing to follow through on commitments.

On the pressures side, there seems to be an erroneous belief that there are no meaningful pressures left to use. We have spelled out a number of points of leverage that are available. That reflects our view that the Sudanese government responds much more directly to pressures than they do to incentives. Until now, most sticks have been unilateral and have had limited effect on the regime's calculations. Substantial and focused multilateral pressures have not been tried and should form the basis of the new administration's strategy. Clearly, equally robust pressures and incentives should be developed and applied impartially to the rebel factions and SPLM to the degree to which their actions may warrant these measures.

We believe leverage for peace in Sudan can best come from the following actions. Some of these initiatives should occur immediately to build leverage for negotiations, while others should be utilized only if the situation in Darfur deteriorates as a result of ruling party actions or intransigence.

Immediate Points Of Leverage

• Isolate Bashir: Although Bashir is experiencing a short-term surge in support from Arab and African governments in the aftermath of the arrest warrant, this will erode quickly in the face of longer term trends that include his use of starvation as a weapon, continuing support for Hamas, and Khartoum's warmongering, which puts Chinese and Arab investments at risk. Private diplomacy can explore ending Bashir's tenure and finally addressing the impunity that has reigned throughout his two decades in power. There are already telling signs that support for Bashir in key Arab and African states is more rhetorical than practical, with a number of senior leaders increasingly seeing him as a distinct liability. Bashir's actions are making Sudan's fragmentation more likely, not less, and that is an outcome that key players in the region should hope to avoid. Personal and direct diplomacy by President Obama will be crucial in shaping regional attitudes toward Bashir.

• Reinforce the Government of Southern Sudan: The main deterrent to the resumption of war between the ruling party and the South is a strong GOSS. That requires investing in good governance, anti-corruption measures, agricultural production, and the modernization of the South's army (the SPLA). This includes providing the air defense system that President Bush promised to the GOSS well over a year ago in order to neutralize the ruling party's one military advantage: air superiority.

• Support the elections and referendum: The national elections recently re-scheduled for 2010 and the 2011 referendum could trigger a return to war in the South if they are unilaterally undermined by the ruling National Congress Party. International support should be directed to holding fair and transparent processes that allow the Sudanese people to choose their leaders and decide their fate. Sudan's multiple crises all stem from a failure to establish reasonable power-sharing mechanisms in this large and incredibly diverse country, and a great deal of attention needs to be put into ensuring that elections can be conducted in an environment of safety and security.

• End simmering regional conflicts: Conflicts and rivalries throughout the broader region of East and Central Africa make it much harder to resolve Sudan's internal wars. Multilateral efforts should focus chiefly on the simmering conflicts between Ethiopia and Eritrea, on ending the threat posed by the Lord's Resistance Army, and on ending Chad's destabilizing civil war.

• Re-contextualize counter-terrorism cooperation: Khartoum has for years used its cooperation with the United States on counter-terrorism to deflect serious pressure over human rights and implementation of the CPA. Consistent with its stated policy, the Obama administration must make clear to the Sudanese government that cooperation on counter-terrorism is not a chit it can trade for U.S. compromises on human rights and peace efforts.

• Secure the support of key diplomatic players: As stated above, some of Bashir's staunchest supporters have new reasons to back away slowly from their despotic ally. If the CPA collapses and the North-South war resumes, China and Egypt would be among the biggest losers. Former southern rebel commanders indicate that if they are forced to go back to war, the first targets they will hit will be Chinese oil installations. And if they go back to war, some of the southerners will fight for independence this time, rather than their previous vision of unity, and previous divisions within southern communities would likely be stoked in a violent fashion by Khartoum. Egypt's worst fears of a potentially hostile new state in the Nile Basin could be realized. These two countries, along with key African countries, Saudi Arabia and other Arab League states, should be engaged to become part of the solution in Darfur and the South. President Obama should also make clear to relevant nations that ending blind support for Bashir to the detriment of the peace process is a priority for his Administration and has the potential to affect bilateral relations with the U.S. if not addressed.

• Military planning: Military planning should begin to develop ways to ensure delivery of humanitarian aid if the regime continues to deny aid as a weapon of war. It would be irresponsible not to prepare for worst case scenarios.

Future Sticks If The Situation Deteriorates

• Strengthen multilateral, targeted economic pressures: President Obama should work through the U.N. Security Council to bring on board a larger collection of nations with targeted sanctions against those individuals and parties most responsible for violence in Sudan, whether they are government or rebel actors. If the Security Council fails to pass these broader sanctions, then the U.S. should build an international coalition to bring this pressure, working particularly with the European Union, individual European countries and Japan. Along with the ICC, these instruments can create much higher legal, financial, and political costs to those who are responsible for violence against civilians and preventing progress toward peace.

• Expand the arms embargo: Given the Sudanese government's continued attacks against civilians in Darfur and compelling evidence that weapons from other nations, including China, are finding their way to the frontlines, a comprehensive arms embargo on offensive weapons against the Bashir regime should be imposed by the U.N. Security Council. The embargo should include a robust international monitoring mechanism to ensure its effectiveness.

• Protect civilians: UNAMID is failing to achieve its central goal of protecting the civilian population in the region, but the question of how to bolster UNAMID's ability to protect civilians seems to have fallen off the international community's radar screen in recent months. Much of this failure can be traced directly to the practice of giving the Sudanese government-the prime perpetrator of the genocide-a de facto veto over the mission's composition and operations. This has to change. A robust force on the ground in Darfur with a competent lead nation, an experienced division-level headquarters staff, and a clear command-and-control structure is essential for saving lives, creating an environment amenable to the peace surge, and establishing the international credibility required to ensure that a broader peace strategy succeeds. Galvanizing the political will necessary to build this capacity could finally give UNAMID a chance to succeed in protecting civilians. The effort to fully staff the U.N. force in Darfur at 26,000 should be accompanied by a shift in the U.N. force's mandate that would allow it to protect civilians who want to go home to their villages of origin, which should be the ultimate goal of our Darfur policy.

• Effectively end offensive military flights: President Obama and other key members of the administration have taken a robust position in the past regarding the need to counter Sudan's aerial attacks on civilians in Darfur, and have voiced support for enforcing a no-fly zone. Continued Sudanese aerial attacks in Darfur-there were over 40 last year-have rightly generated considerable attention, as has the expulsion of key relief agencies. The U.N. Security Council has demanded an end to offensive military flights several times, most recently in Resolution 1769, which authorized UNAMID. UNAMID has not enforced that demand. It is clear that the administration and the U.N. Security Council need to consider how best to counter these continuing aerial attacks.

Putting It All Together: Building The Coalition For Peace

President Obama and members of his administration have spoken passionately about their intention to act boldly to end the crisis in Darfur and promote international efforts toward a peaceful future in Sudan. Now they have the chance to do so at a crucial juncture in Sudan's history.

But the United States can't do it alone, and the Obama administration's engagement and close coordination with other key governments is essential. Special Envoy Gration can lead U.S. efforts toward peace in Sudan, but he must recognize the need to work closely both with U.S. allies and with those leaders who continue to back Bashir following the ICC arrest warrant issuance.

President Obama should now begin stronger and more sustained efforts to build a coalition for peace. But this effort will only be successful if the President himself treats the situation in Sudan as a strategic priority, sets objectives for U.S. policy, builds the necessary leverage, and invests in the diplomacy necessary to achieve an equitable and lasting solution.

Original date published: 1 May 2009

Source Url: http://allafrica.com/stories/200905010193.html?viewall=1

Posted By: Jan
AfricanCrisis Webmaster
Author of: Government by Deception

Save Darfur Coalition, ENOUGH Project, and Genocide Intervention Network came together and outlined a strategy for peace in Darfur

Email just received from Save Darfur Coalition at savedarfur.org:

Friend, with the rainy season in Darfur approaching and aid yet to be restored, we're calling for bold, agenda-setting leadership on Sudan. Join us by signing on to a citizen open letter to President Obama.

Dear Friend,

Civil disobedience is not something I would normally do. But dramatic times call for dramatic action.

Just ask Rep. John Lewis, a living civil rights hero who was arrested 40 times during the civil rights movement—and as of Monday morning, twice for Darfur.

John Lewis believes that citizens of conscience must stand up to injustice. So with aid yet to be restored to Darfur and the rainy season coming soon, he stood up. Will you join us?

We need bold leadership to restore aid and end the violence—click here to sign a citizen open letter to President Obama.

The rainy season in Darfur is coming soon, and it will only make matters worse for the over 1.1 million people at risk due to Sudan's expulsion of major aid organizations.

Yesterday, the Save Darfur Coalition, the ENOUGH Project, and the Genocide Intervention Network came together and outlined a strategy for peace in Darfur that presents the Sudanese regime with a choice:

Behind Door One: If Sudan permits unrestricted humanitarian access, secures peace in Darfur, fully implements the Comprehensive Peace Agreement for South Sudan, ensures free and fair elections in Sudan, and removes the indicted President, a clear process toward normalization of relations with the U.S. will be mapped out.

Behind Door Two: If President Bashir and his party renege on recent humanitarian commitments and continue to undermine efforts at peace, they will face diplomatic isolation, targeted multi-lateral economic sanctions, an effective multilateral arms embargo, and if necessary to stop massive loss of civilian life, targeted military action.

Now is the time for bold agenda-setting leadership to help ensure that Sudan chooses the most mutually beneficial path, and to prepare real consequences if it does not.

Add your name to the citizen open letter today.

We will end this genocide by speaking out, loudly and as one, from the steps of the Sudanese Embassy in Washington, D.C. to our homes and communities.

Please don't spare a moment before signing on to the citizen letter—it is your hard work and support that gives all of us hope.

Sincerely,

Jerry Fowler
President, Save Darfur Coalition

P.S. I hope you will join me in thanking Representatives John Lewis, Donna Edwards, Jim McGovern, Keith Ellison, and Lynn Woolsey; Rabbi David Saperstein; and ENOUGH Project founder John Prendergast. There's no better way to show your appreciation than adding your name to the citizen open letter.

Donate to Help Save Darfur
Help build the political pressure needed to end the crisis in Darfur by supporting the Save Darfur Coalition's crucial awareness and advocacy programs. Click here now to make a secure, tax-deductible online donation.

The Save Darfur Coalition is an alliance of over 180 faith-based, advocacy and human rights organizations whose mission is to raise public awareness about the ongoing genocide in Darfur and to mobilize a unified response to the atrocities that threaten the lives of more than two million people in the Darfur region. To learn more, please visit http://www.SaveDarfur.org.

SLA-Nur's Hussein Abu Sharati "spokesperson of Darfur displaced" says IDPs not to cooperate with UNAMID

Hussein Abu Sharati, the spokesperson of Darfur displaced, slammed a statement made by the joint representative and head of the UN peacekeepers in Darfur, known as UNAMID.

"We have a minimum of 160 deaths every month and 56 women raped this month of April. This month also we have 136 people detained by the security forces," said Hussein Abu Sharati, referring to the displaced. The spokesperson further said they collected their information from all the IDPs camps.

He added that water shortages, cholera and polio outbreaks have affected the IDPs since the eviction of the aid groups — though the figures cited by Adada had only counted violent deaths.

Adada’s remarks had already provoked a reaction from a rebel leader serving under the Sudan Liberation Army command of Abdel-Wahid Al-Nur, who said that Darfuri civilians had handed a letter to the SLA founder declaring that they would not deal with the UN peacekeepers unless Adada retracts the report.

Abu Sharati today added that they decided to not cooperate with the UNAMID. He urged the UN and the African Union to replace Adada by another official. "We request the UN and the international community to give the necessary attention to ensure the protection of the displaced population there,” he said in Darfur by phone.

Source: Sudan Tribune Monday 4 May 2009:
Darfur displaced dismiss UN-AU monthly death figures

May 3, 2009 (NYALA) – A prominent figure among the internally displaced persons (IDPs) of Darfur criticized statements made by the African Union-United Nations joint envoy in Darfur saying that violence in the war-torn region has subsided substantially.



Photo: Rodolphe Adada (ST)

Speaking before the UN Security Council, Rodolphe Adada said last Monday that some 130-150 people were dying each month due to violence in Darfur, versus the tens of thousands who were killed in 2003-2004. The number includes civilians, fighters and peacekeepers themselves, he added.

Yet people in the camps are still dying every day as result of the ongoing violence said Hussein Abu Sharati, the spokesperson of Darfur displaced, who slammed the statement made by the joint representative and head of the UN peacekeepers in Darfur, known as UNAMID.

"We have a minimum of 160 deaths every month and 56 women raped this month of April. This month also we have 136 people detained by the security forces," said Hussein Abu Sharati, referring to the displaced. The spokesperson further said they collected their information from all the IDPs camps.

He added that water shortages, cholera and polio outbreaks have affected the IDPs since the eviction of the aid groups — though the figures cited by Adada had only counted violent deaths.

Adada’s remarks had already provoked a reaction from a rebel leader serving under the Sudan Liberation Army command of Abdel-Wahid Al-Nur, who said that Darfuri civilians had handed a letter to the SLA founder declaring that they would not deal with the UN peacekeepers unless Adada retracts the report.

Rebels warned that UNAMID personnel would not be allowed into “liberated areas” until a retraction and apology were made.

Likewise, Abu Sharati today added that they decided to not cooperate with the UNAMID. He urged the UN and the African Union to replace Adada by another official. "We request the UN and the international community to give the necessary attention to ensure the protection of the displaced population there,” he said in Darfur by phone.

Nevertheless, the UNAMID spokesperson Noureddine Mezni had stood by the data, saying it was comprehensive.

Abu Sharati also urged Abdel-Wahid Al-Nur to not engage in talks with the government unless the government and its militias definitively stop violence and attacks on the civilians.

Sudan has more displaced people than any other country in the world. According to a report released Friday by the Norwegian Refugee Council, during the year 2008 the country had 4.9 million or about one in eight of the population, more than half of them in Darfur.

Comment on this article...

1 Comment

Darfur displaced dismiss UN-AU monthly death figures

4 May 2009 06:25, by Akol Liai Mager
United Nations has clearly misused Donors money. The monies were donated to feed/protect Darfur civillians, but UN got to pay these wrong groups: UNAMID, the Basole’s group, Thabo Mbeki’s group and who knows which group is next in the row.

IDPs and Ocampo are suppose to be recipients of Donors money. IDPs should get 80% of these donors’ money, 10% to "Save Darfur Now & Darfur Friends" for papers-work and 10% to protect Ocampo who has received several dead threats.

For Mr. Ocampo, IDPs’ Chairperson has more evidences for you to note; figures of monthly death and raped.

"Save Darfur Now" & "Darfur Friends" should lodge a join application to the UN’ Headquaters in New York to demand from it’s Secretary General Ban Ki-Mon to sack Adada, Mbeki and reconsider UNAMID’s roles in Darfur.

Down, Down with Adada!

Note activist groups referred to as: "Darfur displaced", "Save Darfur Now" & "Darfur Friends".

MU professor to run for presidency of Sudan

MU professor to run for presidency of Sudan
By MARÁ ROSE WILLIAMS
The Kansas City Star, 03 May 2009

Abdullahi Ibrahim has taught history at the University of Missouri for more than 15 years, but now he is retiring to follow his heart and soul.

That path will take the history professor home to Sudan and, he hopes, lead to his election as president of the African nation.

While in Sudan on a one-year sabbatical in 2008, Ibrahim announced his candidacy for president of his homeland, which has been led nearly 20 years by a military dictator.

“We are sad to lose professor Ibrahim, but we understand that his country needs him,” said Jonathan Sperber, the chairman of MU’s history department.

That Ibrahim, 67, would seek to become the next leader of Sudan is no surprise to his colleagues, Sperber said. Actually, it fits with his life.

In the 1960s, when young Americans rallied for social justice, Ibrahim became a political activist in Sudan.

“It seems like it was a global spiritual movement for change,” he said. “In our country, it toppled a dictatorship. This is the reason why I know change happens. I saw it. I was part of it. So nobody can make me pessimistic about Sudan.”

Sudan has been embroiled in civil wars since 1956. In recent years, the western Darfur region has gotten global attention because of a conflict that has included the rape, torture, murder and displacement of hundreds of thousands of Sudanese citizens.

In March, the International Criminal Court indicted Sudan’s current president, Omar al-Bashir, for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur.

The victory that Ibrahim and the other Sudanese revolutionaries of the 1960s won was short-lived, “but it had a lasting impact,” Ibrahim said.

Ibrahim continued as a political activist, and was arrested and jailed in the 1970s in Darfur.

Ibrahim left Sudan in 1981 to get a doctorate in history from Indiana University. He worked as a researcher and professor at several universities before joining the MU faculty in 1994.

But Ibrahim — who had left his family in Sudan — never lost touch with his homeland.

Since 1996, he returned every other year, visiting his wife and an ailing mother who has since died. Ibrahim’s wife now lives with him in Missouri.

Ibrahim’s said his desire to be at the forefront of change in his country has never waned.

“I’m not just a scholar,” he said. “I am an activist, too. And now I’m tempted to bring this alliance into center stage to try and reconnect with the past. We have a record of change. We have seen dictators come and go.”

Ibrahim has no party affiliation. He will run as an independent on a platform of peace and to re-establish the alliance of farmers, students, intellectuals and business class that he worked for as a young activist.

“I’m confident,” he said. “I can win.”

To reach Mará Rose Williams, call 816-234-4419 or send e-mail to mdwilliams@kcstar.com.