Darfur Update July 18, 2007
Introduction
Four years into the conflict in Darfur, conditions continue to deteriorate for the civilian population of this war-torn region. To date, as many as 400,000 civilians have been killed. Up to 2.5 million Darfuris have been forced to leave their homes and now live in camps for internally displaced persons (IDPs) throughout Darfur, or in refugee camps in neighboring Chad and the Central African Republic. While significant political developments have taken place over the past months, the daily agony of Darfuri civilians continues unabated. Based on Sudan's behavior over the past four years, it is patently clear that unless the international community imposes a political cost for al-Bashir's intransigence, his government will continue to buy time by "accepting" initiatives and agreements only to back out of them later or erect logistic and bureaucratic hurdles that render them useless.
The start of the rainy season (June-September),[1] which severely limits mobility in an area that already suffers from some of the worst infrastructure in the world,[2] the restrictions placed on humanitarian efforts by the Government of Sudan (GoS), the myriad rebel factions, and common criminals, put Darfur at risk of a total collapse of the humanitarian assistance scheme. The United Nations estimates that, if such a breakdown occurs, up to 100,000 civilians could perish every month.[3]
Political Developments
Talking to reporters at the United Nations after returning from Sudan in late May, Jan Eliasson, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's special envoy to Darfur, was optimistic that many of the rebel factions are anxious to reach a formula to restart negotiations. "We have the beginning now of a credible political process...we are now at the stage where we will practically prepare for the negotiations," Eliasson stated. As the conflict enters its fifth year, the rebel movement has now fractured into at least nine distinct groups, as a result of infighting as well as an active wedge-driving campaign by the Sudanese government.[4] Further complicating matters, the Sudanese air force has, on more than one occasion, bombed locations where rebel leaders were due to meet in order to unify their negotiating positions.[5]
The fragmentation of the rebel groups has also significantly contributed to the growing insecurity throughout Darfur, making it increasingly difficult to determine who is in command of a specific group of combatants at any given time. "Difficulties obtaining guarantees of safe passage [have seriously] complicated humanitarian access."[6]
AU/UN hybrid force
On June 12, 2007, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, after months of obstructionism, is said to have expressed "unconditional acceptance" of the ‘Phase III' AU/UN hybrid peacekeeping force of 17,000 troops and 5,500 police. Considering that al-Bashir has "agreed" to an assortment of proposals over the years only to backtrack once international pressure has eased, it is no surprise that experts are skeptical that this latest deal will amount to much. Their concern is warranted especially in light of the fact that the U.K. and South African ambassadors to the United Nations as well as others are the ones announcing al-Bashir's "acceptance," while the president himself has only made ambiguous or contradictory statements on the issue.
Indeed, within days al-Bashir and senior Sudanese officials had begun qualifying this so-called "unconditional acceptance," stating that the force must be composed exclusively of African troops. Such a proposition is nonsensical, because Khartoum is aware-as is everybody else involved in the process-that the African Union does not have enough troops to commit to ‘Phase III' in light of its ongoing commitments in the Ivory Coast, Somalia, and other trouble spots in Africa. Days later, Sudan acquiesced to non-African troops, but only as a "last resort." On June 30, al-Bashir unequivocally told an audience in Khartoum-and others in a number of cities in Africa and the United States via videoconference-that any force deployed in Darfur will be "primarily an African force...[with only] a few non-Africans...cooks and drivers and the like." At the same time, the African Union, the United Nations and the Government of Sudan have yet to come to a definitive agreement regarding ‘command and control' as well as the day-to-day administration of the force. The GoS is demanding AU command and control, the UN insists that it play that role (the U.S. and others agree), while the AU has expressed a willingness to cede command and control to the UN while retaining control of day-to-day administration.
Additionally, it must be noted that the agreement as it stands now is lacking in certain key areas. Most importantly, it does not provide the force with a clear mandate to protect civilians or report on violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. It also does not provide a timeline for deployment, nor does it empower the force to collaborate with UN agencies or the International Criminal Court. Lastly, the agreement does not grant the force the authority to disarm rebels or the Janjaweed. A robust and effective force must contain those modest components at a minimum.[7]
Most recently, the United Kingdom has sponsored a draft Security Council resolution that would, among other things, establish UNAMID (the United Nations Mission in Darfur). If adopted the resolution would formalize the AU/UN hybrid force "accepted unconditionally" by al-Bashir in June of this year. The draft resolution states that the force would be "authorised to use all necessary means," and is to be deployed under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. On July 15, 2007, Sudanese foreign ministry spokesman Ali al-Sadiq told reporters that his government had reservations regarding the mandate of the hybrid force, and that "at the current stage [it does] not accept it."[8]
The United States' Plan B
Earlier this year, President Bush stated that he had grown impatient with Sudanese obfuscation and evasion as it pursued its genocide; he demanded prompt action by al-Bashir to end the slaughter, admit UN peacekeepers to Darfur, and cease the obstruction of humanitarian aid. Bush again warned that the U.S. would impose unilateral targeted economic sanctions on the Sudan and work for the same globally in the UN Security Council. On May 29, 2007, President Bush announced the implementation of said sanctions against Sudan.[9]
The "Plan B" sanctions, as they are commonly referred to, target 31 companies owned, controlled or affiliated with the Sudanese government. They also sanction Ahmad Muhammad Harun, Sudan's state minister for humanitarian affairs, Awad Ibn Auf, director of Sudan's Military Intelligence Office, and Khalil Ibrahim of the Justice and Equality (JEM) rebel movement. Plan B has been described by a significant number of economic and political observers alike as "too little too late," "ineffectual," and not having "a lot of bite." Time will tell if these new unilateral sanctions can achieve their stated objectives of helping bring an end to the genocide in Darfur. There is, however, a consensus in policy circles that multi-lateral sanctions would undoubtedly be more effective, but will require the cooperation of Sudan's biggest economic partners, like China, Russia, and India, who have so far been reluctant to sanction Khartoum.
A potential U.S./China/France nexus[10]
Nicolas Sarkozy's presidency has marked a proactive shift in France's policy vis-à-vis Africa, and especially with regard to the crisis in Darfur. Bernard Kouchner,[11] Sarkozy's newly appointed foreign minister, has stated repeatedly that bringing an end to the bloody conflict in Darfur is at the top of his agenda. Matching his rhetoric with political initiative, Kouchner visited both Khartoum and N'Djamena in June, and was trying to convince other regional and international actors that a humanitarian corridor stretching from eastern Chad into Darfur could present a temporary solution to the humanitarian dimension of the crisis, until a political solution is crafted and agreed upon by all parties to the conflict. Most recently, the French foreign minister has deemphasized the idea of the humanitarian corridor, which has been riddled with logistical complications, and has since advocated for "an operation to secure the areas of Chad most affected by the Darfur crisis."[12]
By enacting "Plan B" unilateral sanctions in May, the U.S. has renewed its commitment to resolving the crisis in Darfur; France has also illustrated that it is placing Darfur high on its agenda. China, arguably the actor with the most influence to wield on the Sudanese government, has begun to apply some pressure on Khartoum-albeit quietly and oftentimes ambiguously-to end its intransigence and bring peace to Darfur.[13]
France also hosted foreign ministers from what has been termed an "enlarged contact group" of 12 nations that included the United States, Egypt, a number of European countries, and China, as well as representatives from the United Nations. Notable delegations that were missing from the meeting that took place on June 25 were those of Sudan, South Africa, Chad, and the African Union. Sudan was reportedly not invited to the conference, Chad did not attend for unspecified reasons, and the South African and AU delegations boycotted the meeting, because it was supposedly "detracting from the AU's own initiatives." The conference provided the United States, France, and China with a great opportunity to establish a "troika"[14] which can put pressure on Sudan to end its murderous campaign. Instead the meeting yielded little more than a commitment to "support peacekeeping efforts and a political process to stop the violence." It is, however, still not too late for a concerted effort by the U.S., France, and China to take action that can bring about the beginning of the end of the genocide in Darfur.
Divestment
The global movement to divest from Sudan continues to grow in the United States and internationally. Taking a page from the book of the successful anti-apartheid divestment campaign of the 1980s, activists have initiated divestment drives at the portfolio, university, city, provincial, and national levels. In the U.S. alone, 19 states have adopted divestment policies (Texas, Hawaii and Rhode Island being the most recent); another 18 have initiated similar action. Over 50 North American universities have adopted divestment policies from Sudan and a further 46 have active campaigns to do the same. Additionally, eight U.S. cities have divested from Sudan. Australia, Canada, Ireland, Italy, South Africa, Germany and the United Kingdom are at various stages of initiating divestment campaigns.[15]
Worsening Humanitarian Crisis
Millions of people have been driven from their homes since the onset of Khartoum's genocidal campaign in Darfur, and the numbers continue to grow at an alarming pace. "Nearly 140,000 people have been identified as newly displaced since the beginning of the year, with at least 10,000 on the move in May," UN spokesman George Somerwill told reporters in early June.[16]
Only a few days prior to that statement, nearly 1,500 civilians, mostly women and children, walked for ten days covering the distance of 125 miles from their village of Dafak in South Darfur to the relative safety of the Central African Republic. They reported to representatives of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) that their village was repeatedly attacked by Janjaweed over a six day period, starting on May 12. They also stated that the village suffered aerial strikes and was completely destroyed. "There were more air attacks as they were fleeing," said one UNHCR monitor who interviewed some of the refugees.[17]
In fact, the situation is currently so dire that there is no more room for new arrivals in most camps. With the exception of the Zam Zam IDP camp in al-Fasher-still able to absorb another 3,000 individuals-all other camps in or near Nyala and al-Fasher (capitals of South and North Darfur, respectively) have now reached a saturation point. Compounding the problem is a new and alarming trend of gunmen entering IDP camps to loot and harass civilians as well as aid workers.[18]
On July 13, 2007, U.S. special envoy for Darfur, Andrew Natsios, told reporters following his most recent visit to Darfur that "after a halt in the bombing between the beginning of February and the end of April in 2007, the Sudanese government has resumed bombing in Darfur."[19] The bombings focused on civilian targets in the Jabal Marra area, a stronghold of Abdul Wahid al-Nour's faction of the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army (SLM/A-AW).
Humanitarian groups under increased pressure
While many of the key actors involved were making self-congratulatory statements for having secured a Sudanese "agreement" on ‘Phase III' of the hybrid force, other significant developments in Darfur received little to no coverage. On June 16, British aid agency Oxfam said that it was permanently withdrawing its entire staff from Gereida in South Darfur. Over 120,000 people who have been driven from their homes now live in or near Gereida, making it the highest concentration of IDPs in Darfur. The decision to pull out comes after relief workers from Oxfam and two other humanitarian agencies were assaulted in December of last year. One aid worker was raped and the others were severely beaten and forced to undergo mock executions. Although Gereida and its environs are controlled by the forces of former rebel leader Minni Minnawi, Oxfam and the other humanitarian groups-despite numerous requests-say that no efforts have been made to find or punish those responsible.
Oxfam, until announcing its withdrawal, had been supplying water, sanitation, healthcare and vocational education to virtually all IDPs in the Gereida area. The International Committee of the Red Cross will provide water for those refugees, but no arrangements have been made for the provision of the other services.[20]
Similarly, the UN World Food Programme (WFP) has temporarily suspended its operations in the Biltine district in eastern Chad after two of the organization's aid workers were attacked. WFP provides food to three UN-administered camps that house as many as 56,000 Darfuri refugees along the district's border with Sudan. As with the Gereida attack, the assailants have not been identified.
The situation is no different in North Darfur. United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) spokesperson, Radhia Achouri, told reporters during a press conference in late May that an unnamed NGO had to temporarily suspend its food deliveries in the Dar Zaghawa area of North Darfur due to heavy aerial bombardment and the large number of banditry and carjackings incidents in the area. "If the situation does not improve, the NGO's suspension of activities could also affect the populations of Kutum Rural [also in North Darfur], thus leaving 165,000 people without food assistance at the beginning of the hungry season," she added.[21] On June 2, three UN vehicles, out of a convoy of six, were hijacked some 40 kilometers north of al-Fasher in North Darfur. The victims reported that all 25 of them were kidnapped, but released unharmed after a few hours; they did not get any of their equipment back.[22] Others were not as lucky; 34 humanitarian aid workers have been killed since 2004 and dozens more have been seriously injured.[23]
The attacks highlighted above are by no means isolated incidents. In the first five months of this year alone, 67 vehicles belonging to humanitarian organizations have been hijacked, ambushed, or looted,[24] and "gunmen [have] broke[n] into six humanitarian compounds."[25] Such attacks have not been limited to civilians and unarmed aid workers either. On May 25 Egyptian Lt. Colonel Ehab Nazih, serving under the Light Support Package of the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS), was robbed and killed by unidentified gunmen in his home in al-Fasher.[26] These and similar incidents have contributed to a 16 percent decline in the number of aid workers in the 12 months leading up to April 2007.[27]
Making matters worse is the fact that aid groups in Darfur cannot speak freely about the humanitarian situation as they experience it in the field. According to a Reuters/AlertNet poll released on May 24, four-fifths of individual workers and two-thirds of relief agencies said that they were not free to talk about killings, rapes, abductions and other serious violations. Some groups even refused to participate in the poll altogether. "Speaking about touchy issues might result in restrictions and an order to leave the country which we do not want to risk, considering many people depend upon our support," said an aid agency spokesperson on condition of anonymity.[28]
Positive developments
However, not all news coming out of Darfur is bad; some moderate gains have been made, primarily due to the diligence of aid workers and Darfuris in the field. The UN estimates that humanitarian organizations had no access to 566,000 Darfuri civilians in early June 2007. Only four months earlier, in February 2007, that number stood at 900,000.[29] This is in part attributable to the Sudanese government's decision to do away with regulations that prevented aid workers who leave the Sudan from reentering for a six-month period. Regardless, this is quite an achievement considering the continually deteriorating security conditions throughout Darfur.
In an unrelated positive development, the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) announced on June 11 that it has concluded an agreement with former rebel leader and current Senior Assistant to the President of the Republic Minni Minnawi's forces-the SLM/A-MM (Sudan Liberation Movement/Army-Minni Minnawi faction) to identify and demobilize child soldiers within that force. UNICEF estimates that there are at least 7,000 child soldiers, fighting or serving in auxiliary roles under the command of the various factions throughout Darfur. The positive developments described here, in both the humanitarian and political spheres, are encouraging but this is by no means a time for complacency, especially when considering that humanitarian access to large swaths of Darfur is shrinking.[30]
* * *
The Darfur Update is published by the Save Darfur Coalition. It is updated periodically and is current as of the date in the header. The Darfur Update is available online at www.SaveDarfur.org, via e-mail subscription and in print.
The Save Darfur Coalition raises public awareness about the ongoing genocide in Darfur and mobilizes a unified response to the atrocities that threaten the lives of people throughout the Darfur region. It is an alliance of more than 180 faith-based, advocacy and humanitarian organizations. The coalition's member organizations represent 130 million people of all ages, races, religions and political affiliations united together to help the people of Darfur.