Chirac: Sudanese government has no choice but to accept UN peacekeepers

Sep 28 2006 AP report via IHT - excerpt:

French President Jacques Chirac said Thursday that he fears Darfur is on the brink of a new humanitarian crisis, and he insisted that the Sudanese government has no choice but to accept UN peacekeepers.

Chirac said he deplored Sudan's military operation in the remote western region of Darfur. But he also said the international community should not threaten Sudan, and instead should work to convince it to change its stance.

"I don't think we should use threats in this affair," Chirac told RFI radio and TV5 television. "I think we should try to convince them, and I think we must work to help Arab countries that were tempted to support the position of (Sudanese President Omar) el-Bashir to realize that there are consequences, and that we have to do everything to find a political solution that clearly allows the Sudanese president to accept UN troops," Chirac said. "There is no alternative to that."

Sudan, eastern rebels sign security deal

The Sudanese government and eastern rebels signed a draft security protocol on Thursday, raising the prospects for an end to the low-level revolt in the economically important region, state news agency SUNA reported. - Reuters 28 Sep 2006.

Egypt blames Darfur rebels for deteriorating security

Sep 28 2006 Reuters by Jonathan Wright:

"The parties which did not sign the agreement (are) those primarily responsible for the current deterioration of the security situation," the [Egypt] Foreign Ministry statement said.

"Egypt thinks the Sudanese government has a share of responsibility and they are advising them not to get into a confrontation of the kind with (former Iraqi President) Saddam Hussein," said one diplomat, who asked not to be named.

Military confrontation with UN forces in Darfur could cause NCP to cancel South Sudan's peace agreement

Sep 27 2006 Sudan Tribune excerpt:

For the first time since the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement on 9 January 2005, the Sudan People's Liberation Movement accused its partner in the government of the national unity, the ruling National Congress Party, of violating the peace deal.

This development comes after a statement made by Ibrahim Ahmed Omar, a leading member of the National Congress Party, saying if there is a military confrontation with the UN forces in Darfur, the NCP would cancel the CPA.

According to the Satellite TV al-Jazeera, Omar also condemned the SPLM stance in favor of the UN takeover from the African Union forces in Sudan's troubled region of Darfur.

Al-Jazeera broadcasted a photocopy of the SPLM's statement in Arabic language.

Darfur's Chairman Minnawi will announce the establishment of the first Darfur government in next few days

Sep 27 2006 Xinhua excerpt:

Sudanese President Omar el-Bashir issued on Wednesday a presidential decree on setting up an interim authority in the western region of Darfur.

The decree stipulated that a regional interim authority of Darfur should be established in accordance with the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA)

The interim authority will be chaired by Minawi, who was appointed as the senior assistant of the president following the signing of the DPA, and will include governors of three states in Darfur.

Minawi will announce the establishment of the first Darfur government in the next few days, according to the decree.

Abdelwahid al-Nur is in Asmara, Eritrea

Sep 26 2006 Sudan Tribune excerpt:

The former leader of the SLM who is currently based in Asmara after his dismissal from the SLM last July, Abdelwahid al-Nur told Alayam newspaper that the solution to the problem of Darfur would be achieved by recognizing Darfur as one state, ruled by a majority of the sons of the region, and for Darfurians to be represented fairly in the central government according to their population quota. In addition, individual compensation should be paid to the region's IDPs who had been affected by the war based on the principle of positive discrimination.

AU to expand its peacekeeping strength in Darfur from some 7,800 to 10,500 troops

The African Union (AU) is to expand its peacekeeping strength in Darfur from some 7,800 to 10,500 troops, spokesman of AU mission in Sudan Nouredinne Mezni told Xinhua on Wednesday:

The expansion of the African forces was prescribed in a peace agreement signed by the Sudanese government and Darfur rebels in the Nigerian capital Abuja on May 5, Mezni said, adding that the mission currently stands at some 7,800 soldiers and civilian policemen.

"The Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) has given the AU forces new tasks in the framework of its security arrangements, including safeguarding the refugee camps, disarming militia fighters and setting up nonmilitary areas," Mezni told Xinhua.

The present African forces could not carry out these new tasks without reinforcing their strength, Mezni stressed.

The spokesman added that six fresh battalions would arrive soon in Darfur, and every battalion would consist of 500 to 650 troops.

Note the time wasted calling for UN troops. AMIS should have had 12,500 personnel in Darfur by now.

US's Schwarzenegger signs Pension Fund Bill to stop investing in Sudan

E Canada news report says a bill banning California's state pension funds from investing in companies with interests in Sudan went into effect Tuesday with the signature of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Excerpt:

The move comes a day after US Congress passed a bill imposing sanctions on the Sudanese government. The new California law could provoke protests and suits by trade organizations who claim that individual states do not have authority to intervene in international diplomacy.



Schwarzenegger said his bill would send a message to strife-torn Darfur that California "does not stand for murder and genocide."

"We cannot watch from the sidelines and be content to mourn this atrocity as it passes into history," Schwarzenegger said with actor and political activist George Clooney at his side.

"We must act and that is exactly why we will divest from the Sudan. Divesting will show our defiance against the murderers and their inhumanity."

What a load of dopey Hollywood twaddle. How would sanctions and divestment help the poor people of Sudan and its development? Sudan is poverty stricken and up to its eyeballs in debt. If misguided activists had not pushed out Western companies from Sudan, we might have been able to pressure oil companies like British Petroleum to help the locals and get drinking water piped and pumped where needed. I say, the more Western companies do business with Sudan and invest in the country's infrastructure, the better. Sudan needs technology know-how, skills and education. Don't pave the way for unscrupulous ruthless opportunists to fill the gap!



Photo: U.S. actor Don Cheadle (L) speaks as California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger listens before signing legislation to divest state pension money from Sudan in Los Angeles, California. USA Sep 25, 2006. Activists have been pressuring companies and governments to divest from Sudan. (Reuters/Lucy Nicholson)

UPDATE; More on the Sudan divestment thingy at The Sudanese Thinker.

Peacekeeping non-existent peace in Darfur - Why can't the African Union do it?

Channel 4 gets blogging with J.J. King's review on what bloggers are saying about Darfur 21 Sep 2006. It links to this blog Sudan Watch and the Guardian's CiF where there's more brilliant commentary by British economist Daniel Davies whose blog is called D-squared Digest. See CiF's Demonstrate for Darfur and the following comment by Daniel:

[Why can't the African Union do it? ]

A good question; the answer is that the AU simply does not have the money to finance AMIS unless the UN were to keep its promises about funding. All sorts of solutions would be better than UNMIS, but the brute facts of the matter are that this is a genuine and imminent humanitarian crisis and UNMIS is the only genuinely politically possible peacekeeping force solution.

I personally think it's an absolute scandal that the UN has nickel-and-dimed AMIS into the ground in order to promote its own proposal but these are the facts and a humanitarian emergency is no time to stand on one's dignity.

Well said Daniel! Mainstream media ought to pay Daniel for educating readers on the facts of matters in Sudan. He tells it like it is and has a nice way with words that makes for easy reading. His commentary appears easy to do. It's not.

UK's Beckett: Future of Africa linked to climate change

Interesting comments, especially by UN Deputy Secretary-General Mark Malloch Brown (note he reminds us that in Darfur there is no peace for peackeepers to keep), in this article atBlack information Link 28 Sep 2006:

The problems of international development and climate change were interlinked, Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett stated yesterday.

Speaking at a Fringe event organised by IPPR, Channel Four, Amnesty, Oxfam and Safer World, a number of issues, including Darfur, climate change, Uganda and Zimbabwe were raised.

Ms Beckett was joined on the panel by International Development Secretary Hilary Benn MP, Tidjane Thiam, Commission for Africa, Monica Naggaga, Oxfam, Mark Malloch Brown, United Nations and David Mepham, IPPR who chaired the event.

Mr Mepham began the session by raising the crisis in the Darfur region of Sudan.Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett highlighted that the United Nations extended the mandate of the Africa Union last week, ensuring that a security vacuum was not allowed to develop.

However, this move was stepping away from the brink and was not a positive move forward, she asserted. The Africa Union should work with all sides in the conflict and receive back-up and support from all other nations.

International Development Secretary Hilary Benn added that the Africa Union was dealing with the symptoms of the problem and a political solution was needed. Moreover, a way of bringing groups together to begin a move to some form of regional Government was needed.

Indeed, UN troops were already in Sudan following the civil war there, making it unusual that the country now opposed a UN force in Darfur, he argued. Monica Naggaga stressed that the Africa Union needed support to provide protection to people in Darfur, in particular the 200 women raped every month.

Elsewhere, Mark Malloch Brown asserted that Darfur was by far the biggest problem in the world today. The UK, United States and many in Europe wanted to do more, he added, applauding the UK's efforts in this since 2003.

Tidjane Thiam reiterated calls for a political solution, highlighting that minority rights had to be protected in the country.Mr Mepham asked whether the imposition of a no-fly zone across the north of the country was an option.

In response, Mark Malloch Brown argued that countries were reluctant to deploy troops to Darfur, partly because of the size of the country and scale of the task at hand, and peacekeeping was about having a peace to keep, a situation missing in Sudan.

A representative of Crisis Action asked whether the ministers could confirm the carrots and sticks deployed to enforce peace in Darfur. In the same round of questions, the subject of trade embargos against Sudan was raised.

Hilary Benn asserted that it was best not to discuss the carrot and sticks to be offered as negotiations were still on-going.However, the people of Sudan had an incentive to aim for a peaceful solution as the country had generous oil reserves, he stressed.

Furthermore, the Sudanese claim that they were not consulted over the role of the Africa Union was untrue, the Minister proclaimed. The Africa Union, the Arab League, China and many others had an important role to play, Mr Benn maintained. Margaret Beckett added that the Sudanese had appealed to the Arab League and fellow African nations for support on the premise that the measures to secure peace in Darfur were merely imperialist mechanisms being deployed by the UK and others.

Mr Malloch Brown stated that the Sudan conflict was not on the BBC every night, ensuring that its profile was not constant. Therefore it was crucial for people to keep up the pressure on Governments, he argued.

Indeed, many multi-national corporations could be pressured into ceasing oil extraction from the country, he asserted. On questions on climate change from the audience, a representative of Christian Aid raised the suggestion that African nations could be compensated for the detrimental effects they faced from climate change.

Elsewhere, a representative from Manchester Friends of the Earth asked how useful it was to Africa, if the UK cut carbon emissions year on year. Additionally, a question on the exportation of flowers from Africa was raised. In response, Mark Malloch Brown stated that a real investment strategy for Africa was needed.

On the export of flowers, he asserted that the initial positive benefits had now led to unintended consequences that had to be addressed. Margaret Beckett argued that climate change and development were intrinsically linked issues.

Indeed, an increase in global temperatures was estimated to result in a four per cent decline in the GDP of African nations. A partnership between developed and undeveloped countries, including technology transfer, would highlight how climate change and development were not mutually exclusive, she maintained.

Moreover, the UK was responsible for only two per cent of world carbon emissions, she claimed, making a global, and not just individual, agreement on climate change imperative. Mr Benn added that the issue of climate change also involved individual choices, raising the problem of how such environmental measures are enforced.

Moreover, if people believed that the scale of the problem was impossible to remedy, support for measures would be lost. The Government had pressed the World Bank for an energy investment framework to address the issue of developing countries creating larger capacities for electricity generation, Mr Benn went on to say.

It was essential to help countries like China invest in electricity generation without the consequences of global warming, he argued. Labour MP Kerry McCarthy asked a question on aiding people of Uganda to return to their homes after fighting. A further question on the country related to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The issue of Western Sahara and the Morocco backed block on the UN resolution on the conflict was also raised. Monica Naggaga stressed that the UK should support the resettlement of Ugandan refugees. Mark Malloch Brown stated that ICC rulings could not be taken away but could be suspended, a useful bargaining tool in negotiations with the LRA in Uganda, he maintained.

On Western Sahara, he highlighted that UN resolution after UN resolution had been passed but to no avail.Tidjane Thiam asserted that minority rights had to be protected, highlighting South Africa as a good example of a constitution that ensured this.

Hilary Benn asserted that the UK Government had helped to fund Mega FM in Uganda, a project that was proving an important tool in getting people to feel safer and move back home following positive news reports.In the final round of questions, Tidjane Thiam asserted that China had an increasingly important role to play in international development.

Moreover, a new scramble for African resources may be about to begin, Mark Malloch Brown asserted. He argued that the problem of Zimbabwe, including the illegal immigration into South Africa, had tried to be addressed by the UN and South Africa but to no avail. This had to be addressed, he concluded.

AMIS should have had 12,500 personnel in Darfur by now

Note this excerpt from a report last year by Refugees International 11/9/2005 - No Power to Protect: The African Union Mission in Sudan:

AMIS needs more troops on the ground to effectively fulfill their mandate. With a strengthened mandate, they will need even more troops. AMIS also needs to receive more training to be able to respond effectively to the challenges of their mission.

According to planning from earlier this year, AMIS was to get to a mandated level of a little over 7,700 personnel (Phase II) by September 2005, with a decision on increasing personnel to 12,500 (Phase III) to be made that same month. Because of a series of delays, including problems with accommodations and fuel, AMIS still has not reached its 7,700 target, which is to include 6,171 soldiers (protection forces and Military Observers) and 1,586 unarmed Civilian Police.

The majority of the protection forces are from Nigeria and Rwanda. Gambia, Senegal, and South Africa, have also contributed troops, with Kenya contributing a few dozen Military Police. No other member country of the African Union has sent combat troops to Darfur, although 25 countries have contributed Military Observers. Fifteen countries have contributed Civilian Police.

As of October 21, AMIS had deployed 4,890 protection forces, 686 Military Observers, and 1,176 Civilian Police. According to AMIS, around 120 of these Civilian Police are women; less than 1% of the protection forces and Military Observers are women, which is similar to the percentage normally found on a UN mission. AMIS Military Observers and protection forces are deployed evenly across eight Sectors; the Civilian Police are concentrated around IDP camps. According to AU officials, discussion about Phase III won't start until after a joint donor/UN/AU assessment mission, scheduled to take place by the end of 2005.

US tells Sudan: cooperate or expect confrontation

Expect confrontation? Music to the rebels' ears. Note how the flaming Americans love to be combatitive. They have no intention of sending their own troops to Darfur. Which countries do they expect would be willing to carry out the 'confrontation'? Why don't they support Africa's peacekeepers? There should have been at least 12,500 in Darfur by now but the US and EU didn't cough up the funds and Africa (conveniently) couldn't find troops to send. Nobody appears to have followed through on Libya's offer of 100,000 troops. Reportedly, AMIS costs $1 billion a year and yet their troops have not been paid for eight months. What is going on, does anybody know? Who is funding the rebels? Mainstream media and activists sure are feeding us a lot of garbage. See Sept 27, 2006 VOA - and this Reuters excerpt:

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told Sudan in firm terms on Wednesday it must choose between "cooperation and confrontation" with the rest of the world and accept a UN force for Darfur.

"We are not going to sit by and watch this kind of death and destruction continue and we will use whatever tools are necessary, through the U.N., to be able to stop that" she said, without specifying what these tools might be.

"The Sudanese government faces a clear and consequential decision," said Rice, adding, "This is the choice between cooperation and confrontation."

When asked what Rice meant by this, U.S. special envoy for Sudan, Andrew Natsios, also declined to provide specifics, saying it was more diplomatic to leave the consequences vague. "But we never make idle statements," said Natsios, who plans to travel to Sudan in the next few weeks.

"If the government of Sudan chooses cooperation - if it works with the United Nations and welcomes the U.N. force into Darfur, then it will find a dedicated partner in the United States," said Rice.

Note, the report says The Save Darfur Coalition ran a full-page advertisement in The New York Times on Wednesday, showing mass graves in Darfur. "When all the bodies have been buried in Darfur, how will history judge us?" said the headline on the advertisement. I wonder how much the ad cost. If I had donated to savedarfur.org, I'd feel conned. Maybe the NYT published it without charge.

Heh. Here's an amusing comment from a reader south of azania at Aljazeera's Shedding crocodile tears over Darfur plight:

Condi Rice needs to be told that the ONLY "FORK" in the road is her FORKED TONGUE AND THAT OF HER BOSS GWBUSH!...they NEVER TALK staright simple English but in "FORKED TERMS" and with hypocrisy written all over thair faces and speech.What exactly can they do about DARFUR ...ZULCH!! SWEET ZERO NOTHING!! JUST LIKE LEBANON, RICE left the troublede mideast region during the israeli war with hisbollah/ lebanon with tail betwwen her LEGS! Khartoum will NEVER ALLOW ZIONISTS AND USA MARINES TO BE DEPLOYED IN THE DISGUISE OF U.N.FORCES In darfur or part of Sudan. Dont look far, just look at RICEY face and you can see the incarnation of IBLIS*.

*Iblis is the name for the devil in the Qur'an.

Note, Al-Ahram Weekly Interview - America goes too far - Historian Paul Kennedy tells that the great wheel of history is turning against the United States: "We are making very slow progress in terms of sending UN forces to Darfur because the Chinese government has a lot of reservations on it."

UK's Blair: "We must show that an African life is worth the same as a western one"

Key points from Tony Blair's speech 26 Sep 2006 - via Guardian:

We must also take action on Darfur, he says. We must show that an African life is worth the same as a western one, says Mr Blair.

I say, let's hope Africans and Arabs are saying the same.
- - -

As-Sudan literally means the Land of the Blacks in Arabic - An Arab is defined by language and culture and not skin color

Excerpt from blog entry authored by Amanda in South Sudan:

It seems that my issue is that I am being mistaken for a northern Arab. To me that is ridiculous, but virtually any Black person whose skin is more brown than ebony could be mistaken for someone from the North.

Firstly let me help you to expand your definition of an Arab.

In the United States at least, and I believe the same is true for much of Europe we think an Arab is a light skinned/olive skinned individual with curly to kinky hair who, speaks Arabic. Like African Americans, Arabs come in all shades of skin color.

I used to look at all Sudanese as being Black, after all As-Sudan literally means the Land of the Blacks in Arabic. I was initially shocked and offended some years ago to learn that the northern Sudanese consider themselves Arabs and not Black, after all they look like they would fit in at one of my family reunions. But being here has helped me understand why they consider themselves Arab.

So an Arab is defined by language and culture and not skin color.

I had previously written about how as a Black person in Africa I am often put into a local ethnic group, well that can be a good thing because it makes me less conspicuous, but it can also be dangerous depending on socio-political and historical factors.

- - -

Ethiopian tea-woman



Photo titled "Shy": She has on forehead tatoo as mark of her religion-She is Christian. Same tatoos she has on her neck, hands and as she told me also on all her body... [Taken in Khartoum, Sudan by Vit Hassan - caption also by Vit]

Sudan willing to accept compromise - UN military advisers, police and civilians to reinforce AMIS

Good news of a proposal that's gaining momentum. AP report by Alfred de Montesquiou 26 Sep 2006 - excerpt:

The UN and Sudan are discussing the deployment of UN military advisers to reinforce the AU peacekeeping mission in Darfur, officials from both sides said Tuesday.

The Sudanese government's top official on Darfur, Majzoub al-Khalifa, said in an interview with The Associated Press that Sudan was willing to accept a compromise involving UN advisers.

"There is a third way. ... Why not let the UN place its men, command expertise and materiel at the service of the AU mission,'' al-Khalifa said.

Bahaa Elkoussy, a UN spokesman in Sudan, said the two sides were negotiating over sending UN advisers "to facilitate the deployment of the AU."

"There are ongoing discussions to provide the AU force with support, pending a future decision from the UN Security Council," he told the AP.

He would not elaborate. But other UN officials in Sudan, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the talks, said the proposal was to send more than 100 UN military advisers and dozens of police and civilians to reinforce the AU mission.

Elkoussy said UN personnel were ready to be sent to Darfur in the coming weeks "as soon as there is a solid agreement with the (Sudanese) government."

The AU confirmed Tuesday it was planning to send up to 4,000 more African peacekeepers to Darfur, though it lacks the gear and the cash to schedule their deployment.

"At least 1,300 troops are immediately available. We are negotiating with our partners for the funds to send them in," said Noureddine Mezni, the AU spokesman in Sudan.

The AU has had little effect in preventing atrocities in Darfur, but Mezni said this would change under the force's new "concept of operations," which sets out more robust tasks for the peacekeepers.

EU to give AU $70m - EU is AU's top supporter

The European Commission (EC) will give the African Union 55 million euros ($70 million) to support its operations during a visit this week to the pan-African body's headquarters, an EC envoy said on Tuesday.

Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso will lead the delegation to Addis Ababa, during the Sept. 30- 0ct. 2 trip. - Reuters 26 Sep 2006.

'Sudan to approve Darfur peacekeepers'

"No soldier should go to Sudan without the permission of the Sudanese government because it's not about making war with the Sudanese people but helping them," AU head Alpha Oumar Konare said on Monday.

Konare's comments came as al-Bashir, in Sudan, lashed out at the US, saying Washington's plans to create a "new Middle East" were behind an international push to replace AU peacekeepers with UN forces in Darfur. - ndtv

Ramstein crew flies with Botswana into Darfur

Ramstein Airmen flew with a Botswana C-130 Hercules crew to the Darfur region Sept. 23 and 24 to support the African Union peacekeeping mission.

Two C-130 crewmembers from the 86th Operations Support Squadron, aerial porters from the 86th Air Mobility Squadron and a force protection specialist from the 786th Security Forces Squadron, joined the Botswana C-130 crew that transported 56 Ugandan civil police into Darfur. - U.S. Air Force

UN's Pronk suggests using the UN Charter's Chapter VIII to support the AU deployment in Darfur as a viable option

Excellent article at Aljazeera today - Darfur: U.S. confrontational approach rejected - by Ilham Kocache, Horn of Africa Researcher at GLCSS (The Great Lakes Centre for Strategic Studies, a London-based think tank, with offices in Central and East Africa). Here is a copy, in full:

This week brought a clear path forward for the Darfur conflict and humanitarian crisis. The UN Security Council's confrontational approach was dealt a near fatal blow and the Secretary-General's Special Representative for Sudan Jan Pronk outlined a five step solution for Darfur and suggested a compromise solution of a Chapter VIII approach.

At a press conference following his Security Council appearance, Pronk suggestion that using the UN Charter's Chapter VIII to support the African Union (AU) deployment in Darfur was a viable option.

"Chapter VIII is a possibility," Pronk said, "whereby there is another force (which acts) on behalf of the United Nations which has been requested by the Security Council and fully financed by the UN."

He stressed that AMIS, the AU force, could continue to be led by the AU with AU peacekeepers, and that he believed the Government of Sudan was willing to accept this solution. Pronk, however, stressed the caveat that the force must be more effective than if it is now.

Contrary to the continued calls by some governments for the UN to act unilaterally against Sudan, AU Commission Chairperson Alpha Konare was quoted in the Sudan Tribune as contradicting this view.

"That means this has to be done with the Sudanese government's approval and we have clearly said that even if the UN was to come, the bulk of the troops would be AU forces, the command would be African and the AU political leadership will be there," Konare said, after the AU extended presence of its Darfur units until the end of the year.

He also contradicted certain members of the Security Council, which have consistently placed the blame solely on the Government of Sudan. According to Konare, the current instability in Darfur is more the direct result of fighting between the rebel movements themselves than between the rebels and the Government of Sudan.

As discussed in last week's article, Darfur Crisis: Shared Responsibility (Sudan Tribune Comments 18 September 2006) the primary solution is the restoration of the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA). Pronk, in supporting that position, outlined a five step program to get the DPA into "intensive care" before it dies.

The first step is to "get everyone on board."

"Abdul Wahid's group," Pronk said, explaining one of the core problems of the DPA, "are out of the agreement and we need to bring them on board."

This is vital to the DPA because Abdul Wahid's group, which mostly represents Furs, is a significant portion of the population. He stressed that Abdul Wahid's group maintained the original ceasefire and has not resumed fighting and that peace will not be possible without their cooperation.

He concluded the description of the first step by stating bluntly, "they must be brought on board."

Pronk called for establishing a truce as the second step. He stressed that the approach used at the peace talks caused the rebel movements to split into different, uncontrollable factions.

"They were told: First sign, then talk. That further split the rebel movements," he reported to the Security Council. According to Pronk, this led the National Redemption Front to break the ceasefire in July and contribute to the current escalating events in Darfur.

He stressed it was "an outright violation of the DPA", and that a truce was needed to bring the DPA out of its coma. Pronk said, "Mini Minawi can play a role, maybe, in mediating between his present and his former allies in order to finally get peace on the ground."

Reforming the non-functioning Ceasefire Commission (CFC) was identified as the third step.

"It simply does not function," Pronk said. "It has been hijacked by the signatories, it is not well chaired, non-signatories have been excluded, and the United Nations has been silenced."

He urged the CFC to start addressing the violations of the DPA. In addition, he envisions a renewed and authoritative CFC that is fully representative of all parties.

"In the southern Sudan," he recalled, "the CJMC is one of the most important pillars of the CPA. If it were taken out, the CPA would be paralyzed. That is exactly the present state of the DPA, so the third condition is to start addressing the violations of the DPA through a renewed, fully representative, but authoritative CFC."

The SRSG called for improving the DPA as the fourth step. According to Pronk, many people of Darfur have lost faith in the DPA and a new round of consultations should be started.

"We must talk, add, improve and give an opportunity to those who feel excluded and form at least one third of the population of Darfur. We must get their interests guaranteed, on paper as well as in reality," he said, stressing that the new talks can not be seen as reopening the peace negotiations.

Finally, Pronk called for all parties to get off the collision course of confrontation and work on rebuilding trust and respect.

"Secretary-General Kofi Anan has clearly said that "without the consent of the Sudanese Government, the transition will not be possible", reported Pronk, directly contradicting the position of unilateral action. "However, getting the consent of the Government requires consultations. A transition to a United Nations force has to be made attractive to the Sudanese leadership in order to get its support. That also requires trust, confidence-building and time. It requires that those in favor of a transition and those against it should refrain from the present collision course."

Clearly, SRSG Pronk recognizes by stressing his last point that the hostile rhetoric by certain members of the Security Council have continued the crisis in Darfur and raise suspicions by the Government of Sudan. Once again -- as this author stated after the DPA was signed, in July, and now -- the quickest solution to the Darfur humanitarian crisis is a robust AU peacekeeping force.

This is the ideal time for the Government of National Unity to demonstrate to the world that this was not a war of Arabs against non-Arabs. This is the time for the Government of National Unity to work closely with SRSG Pronk and initiate his five step program. It is time for the Government of National Unity to demonstrate that Africans - North Africans and Sub-Saharan Africans, regardless of their ethnic or religious background -- will solve African issues, without outside political rhetoric."

Ilham Kocache may be reached at Ilham.kocache@glcss.org

Darfur damned by western pity (Brendan O'Neill)

Excerpt from Guardian's CiF by Brendan O'Neill Darfur: damned by western pity:

"The people of Darfur and Sudan, like the people of Bosnia before them, are likely to pay a heavy price indeed for the patronage of their latte-drinking "friends" in the west."

I say, kudos to Brendan for speaking up with such an unfashionable viewpoint. I doubt those who disagree with Brendan's article will understand what he is getting at. Even if they do, whether they realise it or not, they are supporting the insurgents aiming for regime change and, in turn, helping to prolong the conflict.

Well meaning but misinformed people are manipulated by others with self serving agendas. Who would they like to see in place of the current regime? Doubt if they know the answer to that question. Before any of them get mad at Brendan, I'd like them to ask themselves why they (and the people they agree with on Darfur) have not supported the African peacekeepers in Darfur who've been doing a great job under appalling conditions. The insurgents want UN troops fighting onside and have been spinning the media to discredit and denigrate African troops in Darfur.

See Jonathan Steele's article in the Guardian 19 Sep 2006: "Sorry George Clooney, but the last thing Darfur needs is western troops: The rebels, not Khartoum, scuppered this year's peace deal - the solution has to be an expanded African Union force." [via POTP]

Bashir imposes travel restrictions on US officials in Sudan

Sudan's Bashir accuses US of meddling in Darfur (ST Sep 25, 2006):

The Sudanese leader, just back from an overseas trip to gather support from nonaligned nations and attend the UN General Assembly in New York, said Sudanese officials were unfairly scrutinized by US Homeland Security during the visit.

In response, no American official in Sudan would be allowed to travel more than 25 kilometers away from the presidential palace in Khartoum without a special permit, al-Bashir said. "The measure is effective as of Monday," he said.

From Reuters/Aljazeera

"Any American official who comes to Sudan, we will stamp his passport for only 25km from the presidential palace," he [Bashir] said. "Even if they apologise and lift theirs, we will not lift ours."

Heh. Nah nah na na nah. Maybe Mr Bashir isn't aware that after 9/11, most visitors to the US feel unfairly scrutinized by US Homeland Security. Strange how he doesn't impose travel restrictions on the rebels. It irks me that JEM et al are free to swan in and out of Europe, the US and Sudan.

Did Reuters get it wrong? Today, China's Xinhua says this:

President Omar al-Bashir also said the removal of this measure would depend on the amelioration of the bilateral ties, according to the report.

"Any American official visiting Sudan will have his passport stamped and his movement restricted at a limit of 25 kilometers," al-Bashir said, adding that this measure would not be removed unless relations between Sudan and the United States are improved.

President Omar al-Bashir, Sudan - coup in 1989

Sep 22 2006 BBC report - Coup leaders' addiction to power - tells us the tide turned in the 1980s, when Latin American governments agreed not to recognise leaders who came to power by military means.

Ely Ould Mohammed Vall, Mauritania - coup in 2005
Francois Bozize, Central African Republic - coup in 2003
Gen Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan - coup in 1999
President Yahya Jammeh, The Gambia - coup in 1994
President Omar al-Bashir, Sudan - coup in 1989
Blaise Campaore, Burkina Faso - coup in 1987
President Lansana Conte, Guinea - coup in 1984
Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, Libya - coup in 1969

Let's not support "rebels" who use violence to get what they want. Peacekeepers serving in war zones deserve to be supported, appreciated and respected. African Union peacekeepers in Darfur need all the support and help they can get.

Are all Darfurian civilians rebels? When trying to install security in Darfur, how can one tell the difference between a rebel and a civilian, a bandit and a civilian, a terrorist and a civilian, a janjaweed and a civilian? The Sudanese government is accused of "indiscriminate" attacks and bombings of Darfur villages. Where do the rebels, bandits and janjaweed eat, sleep and live? How do they make a living? Where are the families of these people? News reports tell us the Sudanese government backs the militias, but never say or even look into who funds the so-called rebels. So many questions.