| |
|
|
 |
How to go about the Darfur Conflict
Ssuna Allan Ambrose
28 Aug 2007
In Darfur, the mistakes in Iraq and Somalia must be avoided.
As i go to press, the four year old Darfur conflict has so far claimed an alarming estimated 200000 lives, displaced over 2 million and left thousands especially women and children under daily fear of being killed, raped or both! The Janjaweed-Khartoum backed militia continues to terrorize the blacks in the south while an ideal international political and diplomatic or military solution to the problem still looks uncertain to date.
A conflict that started as a rebellion by southerners against Khartoum for economic neglect, now increasingly looks set to leave the south in an even worse off situation. When and if the conflict finally ends, a lot of resources will without any doubt be required to do reconstruction.
Early this week on Monday, the US, China, Egypt, and an Arab delegation were joined by newly appointed French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner for a Conference seeking a solution for the 4 year Darfur conflict. At first glance, i was happy to learn that French President Sarkozy –only 5 weeks into office, is taking a more active and leading role in international efforts to end the conflict especially as the usual suspects’ image in international diplomacy (the US and Britain) has been badly damaged over the past few years. But more notable at the conference, were the absentees. The African Union (around which according to me, any “peace keeping” plans must revolve); declined to attend, Chad, Sudan itself and the numerous rebel group representatives were not invited!!
Actually, this conference reminded me of the 1884 Berlin Conference in which major European powers (France, Germany, the UK, Belgium and Portugal led by Chancellor Bismarck met to decide the fate of Africa in what came to be known as the “gluttonous” and selfish partition of Africa. In similar fashion no African country was represented. How history repeats itself!
Without taking away any credit from the efforts made by the international community to find a solution to the dehumanizing Darfur conflict, we should not be blind to the enormous wealth of history that must inform our current search for solutions to same or similar conflicts in the world’s hot spots. This means that there is need to avoid any temptation of making hasty decisions on how to intervene in Darfur so that the already appalling situation does not descend into a nightmarish parody of untamable anarchy as was the case in neighbouring Somalia in the 1990s or the current situation in Iraq. This would be a breeding ground for worse off terrorism that can end up spilling to neighbouring countries.
Referring to “lessons in foreign intervention” by Paddy Ashdown – former International Community’s High Representative in Bosnia – Herzegovina, the failure to bring on board Iraq’s neighbors like Iran and Syria - countries with a great stake in the security of Iraq, has rendered the Iraq conflict more complicated than earlier imagined. And as many of us would rightly confirm, ordinary Iraqis are now worse off than they were under the dictatorship of Saddam and his henchmen. At least then, those loyal to Saddam were assured of security but in today’s Iraq, a roadside or market place bomb, knows no intended target. Such is the risk we stand in the case of Darfur if decisions reached without bringing onboard all warring parties are implemented.
Therefore in Darfur, the mistakes in Iraq and Somalia must be avoided. All efforts must be made to bring in all conflicting parties i.e. Khartoum government, rebel groups’ representatives (like from the Sudan Liberation Movement, the Justice Equity Movement, the Janjaweed etc), the African Union and more notable, the neighbors especially Chad which lives in the risk of the Darfur conflict spilling onto its land.
Then there is the question of a UN versus an African Union “peacekeeping” force. The US is threatening more sanctions against the government in Khartoum over the latter’s continued reluctance to honour its promises of allowing 19,000 UN troops to join the 7,000 African Union force already on ground. Sanctions most of the time, work to the detriment of ordinary people. Ordinary citizens whether in the Khartoum government or from the troubled south, do not deserve to suffer. But also, there is growing skepticism about the US’s efforts in pushing for a UN force in Darfur. Once beaten twice shy.
Currently there are many issues more than the fingers of one hand, which are not going Bush’s way and one of them is his role as Commander in Chief of what we have grown up to know as the international police especially when it comes to Islamic and oil rich countries like Sudan. Sudan is currently the third biggest oil producer on the continent and there is growing suspicion that the US’s interest in the region is actually not love for peace and human rights but economic interests. The belief is that Bush has woken up to the reality that China’s economic dominance in this oil rich region needs to be counteracted. So there you have your Super powers in their mad dash for wealth in the name of keeping peace on one side and non meddling in local politics on the other.
This is the reason i strongly believe in a reinforced AU force as opposed to the UN force in Darfur. Africa for Africa through Collaboration. If the UN and Bush really care more about bringing peace to Darfur, then they should use their resources (both finance and military equipment) to strengthen the AU force already on the ground. With more logistics the AU will be able to send in more forces to avert the situation. The AU is to me, better placed to sort out the mess once provided with logistical support and in the process it will protect - yes protect Sudan’s resources of oil that will with no doubt be needed to fund reconstruction of Darfur. The international community can also use pressure against Khartoum from without.
Otherwise, the UN and the US can still exploit the UN Charter (chapter 6 and 7) to implement their “peace keeping” program whether the conflicting parties want it or not but this will be done at the risk of experiencing another failure of the international community like the case in Somalia in the 90’s.
Lastly, i think Germany and France have a better bargaining power at the moment and a better image in negotiating international peace than Washington. That is the reason i was particularly impressed by Mr. Sarkozy’s move to take centre stage in the international community’s efforts to find a solution to the Darfur conflict although the members at the conference were not representative of all stake holders.
|
|
|
|
|
