Tuesday 14 August 2007.
August 13, 2007 (KHARTOUM) — An obscure mostly Arab Darfur rebel group said on Monday it had kidnapped 12 Sudanese soldiers and challenged the government to stop mobilising militias to counter the four-year-old revolt in western Sudan.
The Democratic Popular Front Army (DPFA) said in a statement sent to Reuters that among the captured was officer Ali Mohamed. By way of proof they offered his military I.D. number, 44206.
"This is the first time we have captured government soldiers," DPFA Secretary-General Osama Mohamed al-Hassan told Reuters.
"We have been marginalised by the government. The government took advantage of our sons and paid them and gave them arms and used them to fight against others," he said.
He was referring to the Popular Defence Forces, mobilised by the government to quell revolts in Darfur and during decades of civil war in the south.
"We want them to stop the PDF, to leave people to live their lives and be able to farm and feed their cattle and eat and live in peace," he said, adding the group would continue to fight the government.
Darfur experts called the DPFA stance significant.
"This group is vitally important because it represents a young generation of Darfurian Arabs who refuse to die for a government 1,000 miles away that has always neglected all Darfurians — Arab and non-Arabs," said Julie Flint, co-author of a book on Darfur, who has met the group’s leader.
"The vast majority of Darfur’s Arabs have refused to take sides so far. They may be beginning to come off the fence."
The group said its members came from mostly Arab tribes — the Rizeigat, Habbaniya, Terjem, Beni Halba, Taasha — and the non-Arab Fellata tribe. They are mostly based in West and South Darfur states but had some people in the north too.
DEVELOPMENT NEEDS
The DPFA statement said the attack on Sudanese forces occurred in Soja in Wadi Saleh, in the southern area of West Darfur state, on Saturday.
"Our forces captured eight military vehicles as well as a large amount of weapons and ammunition and are controlling the area," said the statement, which included a British telephone number, an Egyptian number and a thuraya satellite phone number.
A Sudanese army spokesman dismissed the report as false.
"This is lie. There’s no basis to the news," he said.
Mostly non-Arab rebels took up arms in early 2003 accusing the central government of marginalising the remote, arid west. Khartoum mobilised mostly Arab militias to stem the revolt.
A Sudanese analyst who declined to be named said Arab tribes felt they had been largely ignored in peace talks with the government.
"They have development needs too, and feel they are being labelled the bad guys," the analyst said.
Sudan expert Alex De Waal said the government may be worried by this development.
"It’s very significant. Without the Arab militia the government cannot remain in Darfur." But he cautioned not all Arab tribes in Darfur were now anti-government.
One Arab commander, Abu Surrah, was at U.N.-African Union mediated meeting in Tanzania earlier this month as he had allied himself with other mostly non-Arab rebel groups.
Rebel commanders and groups there agreed on a common platform ahead of peace talks due to begin within three months.
But Flint said this attack showed the mediators had not fully understood which groups were key for talks:
"The fact that this group was not invited to the Arusha talks shows how little those organizing the peace process know about where the real power lies in the rebel movements."
(Reuters)
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Monday, August 13, 2007
Darfur Arab tribes sign truce after clashes kill 140
Monday 13 August 2007.
August 12, 2007 (KHARTOUM) — Rival Darfur Arab tribes have signed a truce after more than 140 people died in clashes, an official and tribal leaders said on Sunday.
"It’s an agreement to cease hostilities," Mohamed Ahmed Hassan, a Terjem tribal leader, told Reuters of the deal his tribe signed with the Rizeigat on Saturday.
"If the Rizeigat adhere to and respect the agreement, the Terjem will not violate it," he said.
Both are Arab tribes in South Darfur state. Fighting has continued on and off for months between them, but a reconciliation deal signed in February fell apart in July.
Ali Hassan, a Rizeigat tribal leader, said his group was committed to the truce. "We are going around trying to explain it to our people," he said.
Most of the casualties of the fighting were Terjem.
"Around 145 of our people were killed between July 30 and August 8," said Mohammed Ahmed Hassan, adding that 40 people with serious injuries were still in hospital in Nyala, the capital of South Darfur State.
"We have buried them in mass graves," he added. He said the Rizeigat had superior firepower.
South Darfur’s Labour Minister Abdul Rahman al-Zein has previously said three Rizeigat were killed in the clashes.
Each tribe blamed the other for starting the fighting.
The Terjem are a sedentary farming tribe while the Rizeigat are nomadic cattle herders. The latest problems began as the Rizeigat moved north in their seasonal migration, passing close to Terjem territory. The Terjem say the cattle eat their crops.
"The Terjem tell them you cannot pass through here," said Zein. "The government will deploy forces in the trouble spots to ensure compliance."
Ali Hassan declined to comment on the numbers killed.
Fighting over land and resources had been going on in Darfur for decades, before the region’s revolt broke out in early 2003. The conflict has led to a proliferation of weapons, making tribal clashes even deadlier.
International experts estimate 200,000 people have been killed and 2.5 million driven from their homes in the fighting in Darfur, where mostly non-Arab rebels took up arms in early 2003, accusing Khartoum of neglecting their arid region.
Khartoum says only 9,000 people have died in the violence.
(Reuters)
August 12, 2007 (KHARTOUM) — Rival Darfur Arab tribes have signed a truce after more than 140 people died in clashes, an official and tribal leaders said on Sunday.
"It’s an agreement to cease hostilities," Mohamed Ahmed Hassan, a Terjem tribal leader, told Reuters of the deal his tribe signed with the Rizeigat on Saturday.
"If the Rizeigat adhere to and respect the agreement, the Terjem will not violate it," he said.
Both are Arab tribes in South Darfur state. Fighting has continued on and off for months between them, but a reconciliation deal signed in February fell apart in July.
Ali Hassan, a Rizeigat tribal leader, said his group was committed to the truce. "We are going around trying to explain it to our people," he said.
Most of the casualties of the fighting were Terjem.
"Around 145 of our people were killed between July 30 and August 8," said Mohammed Ahmed Hassan, adding that 40 people with serious injuries were still in hospital in Nyala, the capital of South Darfur State.
"We have buried them in mass graves," he added. He said the Rizeigat had superior firepower.
South Darfur’s Labour Minister Abdul Rahman al-Zein has previously said three Rizeigat were killed in the clashes.
Each tribe blamed the other for starting the fighting.
The Terjem are a sedentary farming tribe while the Rizeigat are nomadic cattle herders. The latest problems began as the Rizeigat moved north in their seasonal migration, passing close to Terjem territory. The Terjem say the cattle eat their crops.
"The Terjem tell them you cannot pass through here," said Zein. "The government will deploy forces in the trouble spots to ensure compliance."
Ali Hassan declined to comment on the numbers killed.
Fighting over land and resources had been going on in Darfur for decades, before the region’s revolt broke out in early 2003. The conflict has led to a proliferation of weapons, making tribal clashes even deadlier.
International experts estimate 200,000 people have been killed and 2.5 million driven from their homes in the fighting in Darfur, where mostly non-Arab rebels took up arms in early 2003, accusing Khartoum of neglecting their arid region.
Khartoum says only 9,000 people have died in the violence.
(Reuters)
Sunday, August 12, 2007
ANALYSIS-Cash needed to save south Sudan peace deal
10 Aug 2007 14:28:46 GMT
Source: Reuters
By Opheera McDoom
KHARTOUM, Aug 10 (Reuters) - Donors have been too slow in delivering funds to develop south Sudan after a landmark peace deal and need to adopt a unified approach to deal with multiple conflicts in Africa's largest country, observers say.
Sudan signed a north-south peace deal in 2005 to end Africa's longest civil war, but the agreement was overshadowed as a revolt in its western Darfur region sparked the world's largest aid operation, diverting donor focus and cash.
"Donor governments, which promised billions of dollars to help with the reconstruction of the south need to make those resources available to ensure that hundreds of thousands of returning Sudanese ... gain greater access to water, medical assistance, education," advocacy group Refugees International said in a report.
It singled out a World Bank-led mechanism called the Multi Donor Trust Fund (MTDF) as being too slow in giving money to the semi-autonomous south Sudan government to develop the war-torn south, one of the poorest areas in the world.
"Half a billion dollars...was committed to the World Bank administered MDTF, a mechanism that has thus far proved to be woefully inefficient, with only about $80 million disbursed to date," it added.
This week south Sudan said it would begin to demobilise some 25,000 soldiers but that support packages including seeds and tools were not guaranteed for them because of United Nations funding delays.
"The money is available," said David Gressly, the top humanitarian official in Sudan. "However, our policy is not to release funds, until the national framework has been agreed."
He acknowledged a new way to deliver cash rapidly to support urgent development was needed to add to the MDTF.
"We do need a new mechanism to fund early recovery projects. We have indeed proposed such a mechanism, and are seeking donor support for it."
FEAR OF FRESH CONFLICT
In Sudan's north-south war, 2 million were killed and at least 4 million fled their homes.
Sudan remains awash with small arms and many worry those who do not see a peace dividend could take up arms again.
State minister of foreign affairs Ali Karti said the international community was to blame for delays in implementing the north-south deal.
"The international community is failing and is unable to meet their obligation," he said. "This is something that we cannot do alone."
Jan Pronk, former head of the U.N. mission in Sudan entrusted with monitoring implementation of the deal, said there was almost no international attention on the north-south problem as negotiations continue on Darfur.
The United Nations last month authorised 26,000 U.N. and African Union troops and police to deploy to Darfur, where experts estimate 200,000 have died and 2.5 million driven from their homes in more than four years of conflict.
A July 9 deadline by which north and south armies were to deploy to each side of the north-south border was missed with no comment from anyone, Pronk said.
"It's as if people didn't care," he said. "They think there are two problems but it is one problem. It is a problem of unity and peace which is in Sudan as a whole."
Rebels from Sudan's outlying regions, south, east and west, all complain of neglect by the Khartoum government, dominated by central Nilotic tribes since independence.
Pronk said democratic elections by 2009, as envisaged by the north-south deal, was the only way forward for Sudan. It also gave southerners the right to vote on secession by 2011.
"They (donors) need to put a lot of pressure on the two parties to have the elections," he said, warning if key elements of the north-south deal were not implemented, the south could separate.
Source: Reuters
By Opheera McDoom
KHARTOUM, Aug 10 (Reuters) - Donors have been too slow in delivering funds to develop south Sudan after a landmark peace deal and need to adopt a unified approach to deal with multiple conflicts in Africa's largest country, observers say.
Sudan signed a north-south peace deal in 2005 to end Africa's longest civil war, but the agreement was overshadowed as a revolt in its western Darfur region sparked the world's largest aid operation, diverting donor focus and cash.
"Donor governments, which promised billions of dollars to help with the reconstruction of the south need to make those resources available to ensure that hundreds of thousands of returning Sudanese ... gain greater access to water, medical assistance, education," advocacy group Refugees International said in a report.
It singled out a World Bank-led mechanism called the Multi Donor Trust Fund (MTDF) as being too slow in giving money to the semi-autonomous south Sudan government to develop the war-torn south, one of the poorest areas in the world.
"Half a billion dollars...was committed to the World Bank administered MDTF, a mechanism that has thus far proved to be woefully inefficient, with only about $80 million disbursed to date," it added.
This week south Sudan said it would begin to demobilise some 25,000 soldiers but that support packages including seeds and tools were not guaranteed for them because of United Nations funding delays.
"The money is available," said David Gressly, the top humanitarian official in Sudan. "However, our policy is not to release funds, until the national framework has been agreed."
He acknowledged a new way to deliver cash rapidly to support urgent development was needed to add to the MDTF.
"We do need a new mechanism to fund early recovery projects. We have indeed proposed such a mechanism, and are seeking donor support for it."
FEAR OF FRESH CONFLICT
In Sudan's north-south war, 2 million were killed and at least 4 million fled their homes.
Sudan remains awash with small arms and many worry those who do not see a peace dividend could take up arms again.
State minister of foreign affairs Ali Karti said the international community was to blame for delays in implementing the north-south deal.
"The international community is failing and is unable to meet their obligation," he said. "This is something that we cannot do alone."
Jan Pronk, former head of the U.N. mission in Sudan entrusted with monitoring implementation of the deal, said there was almost no international attention on the north-south problem as negotiations continue on Darfur.
The United Nations last month authorised 26,000 U.N. and African Union troops and police to deploy to Darfur, where experts estimate 200,000 have died and 2.5 million driven from their homes in more than four years of conflict.
A July 9 deadline by which north and south armies were to deploy to each side of the north-south border was missed with no comment from anyone, Pronk said.
"It's as if people didn't care," he said. "They think there are two problems but it is one problem. It is a problem of unity and peace which is in Sudan as a whole."
Rebels from Sudan's outlying regions, south, east and west, all complain of neglect by the Khartoum government, dominated by central Nilotic tribes since independence.
Pronk said democratic elections by 2009, as envisaged by the north-south deal, was the only way forward for Sudan. It also gave southerners the right to vote on secession by 2011.
"They (donors) need to put a lot of pressure on the two parties to have the elections," he said, warning if key elements of the north-south deal were not implemented, the south could separate.
Friday, August 10, 2007
Sudan, rebels resume heavy fighting in Darfur
Friday 10 August 2007.
August 9, 2007 (KHARTOUM) — Heavy fighting in southern Darfur has killed scores of rebels and government forces over the past week, and the Sudanese air force has bombed several villages, rebels and international observers in Darfur reported Thursday.
The clashes began Aug. 1 when a coalition of rebels, including members of the Justice and Equality Movement, captured the strategic town of Adila, where Sudanese troops were stationed to protect the only railway linking Darfur to Sudan’s capital, Khartoum, rebels said.
The Sudanese army and its allied janjaweed militias "were summarily defeated, leaving behind heavy weapons and ammunition," JEM said in a statement. The group said the offensive was led by Abdelazziz Ushar, a Darfur field commander previously fighting a separate rebellion in eastern Sudan.
A senior international observer in Darfur said Thursday that Sudanese forces had recaptured Adila, located near South Darfur’s border with the neighboring region of Khordofan, but reported clashes were ongoing.
"It seems over 100 (Sudanese) soldiers or janjaweed have been killed," the official told The Associated Press on the telephone. At least 10 rebels were killed and 15 injured, he said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.
Rebels said they launched the offensive because the janjaweed were burning villages in the area.
The African Union mission in Darfur confirmed there had been heavy fighting, but said it had no further details.
"The zone around Adila is a no-go area for us," said A.U. spokesman Noureddine Mezni.
Rebels and international observers said the fighters seized more than 50 government vehicles and some heavy armament during the offensive.
Meanwhile, Sudan’s air force bombed at least four villages in the area this week, observers and rebels said, but there were no reports of casualties because many of the civilians have fled.
One of JEM’s leaders said his group shot down a government MIG-29 fighter jet on Wednesday that was participating in the bombings, a claim denied by the government and disputed by other rebels.
Abdullahi el-Tom told AP the aircraft’s wreckage had been found 2.8 miles south of Adila, but the pilot had not been located.
Rebels from a faction of the Sudan Liberation Movement fighting alongside JEM told international observers the jet crashed because of a mechanical problem.
Army spokesman Gen. Osman Mohamed al-Agbash denied that rebels had downed a government jet, but indicated the military had faced heavy fighting in Adila.
"JEM wants to tell the international community that the army has used air bombing in (the) recapturing of Adila," the Sudan Media Center, a news services deemed close to the government, quoted al-Agbash as saying. There was no comment on military casualties.
Military flights are banned over Darfur by several U.N. resolutions and peace agreements, and Sudanese authorities routinely deny conducting air raids.
Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir visited Darfur last month and said the region was largely pacified. But the U.N. mission in Sudan said there have been clashes between rebels and the government in northern Darfur in recent days.
The heavy fighting in Adila came as the U.N. and A.U. sponsored a Darfur rebel conference in Arusha, Tanzania, to relaunch talks with the government after a May 2006 peace agreement between Khartoum and one rebel faction last year proved largely ineffective.
JEM’s el-Tom confirmed that rebel delegates attended last week’s conference and were willing to negotiate a peace agreement with Khartoum.
"But for the moment we have no cease-fire," he said. "Fighting will go on until we agree on something with Khartoum."
More than 200,000 people have died in Darfur since ethnic African rebels took up arms against the Arab-dominated central government, accusing it of discrimination. Khartoum is accused of retaliating by unleashing janjaweed militias, which are blamed for the worst atrocities against civilians in a conflict that has displaced more than 2.5 million people.
The government denies the charges but resisted for months a push for U.N. peacekeepers to replace the 7,000-strong A.U. force in Darfur. A July Security Council resolution provides for a "hybrid force" of 26,000 U.N. and A.U. troops to deploy in Darfur under a compromise deal that could see the peacekeepers in the region by the end of the year.
(AP)
August 9, 2007 (KHARTOUM) — Heavy fighting in southern Darfur has killed scores of rebels and government forces over the past week, and the Sudanese air force has bombed several villages, rebels and international observers in Darfur reported Thursday.
The clashes began Aug. 1 when a coalition of rebels, including members of the Justice and Equality Movement, captured the strategic town of Adila, where Sudanese troops were stationed to protect the only railway linking Darfur to Sudan’s capital, Khartoum, rebels said.
The Sudanese army and its allied janjaweed militias "were summarily defeated, leaving behind heavy weapons and ammunition," JEM said in a statement. The group said the offensive was led by Abdelazziz Ushar, a Darfur field commander previously fighting a separate rebellion in eastern Sudan.
A senior international observer in Darfur said Thursday that Sudanese forces had recaptured Adila, located near South Darfur’s border with the neighboring region of Khordofan, but reported clashes were ongoing.
"It seems over 100 (Sudanese) soldiers or janjaweed have been killed," the official told The Associated Press on the telephone. At least 10 rebels were killed and 15 injured, he said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.
Rebels said they launched the offensive because the janjaweed were burning villages in the area.
The African Union mission in Darfur confirmed there had been heavy fighting, but said it had no further details.
"The zone around Adila is a no-go area for us," said A.U. spokesman Noureddine Mezni.
Rebels and international observers said the fighters seized more than 50 government vehicles and some heavy armament during the offensive.
Meanwhile, Sudan’s air force bombed at least four villages in the area this week, observers and rebels said, but there were no reports of casualties because many of the civilians have fled.
One of JEM’s leaders said his group shot down a government MIG-29 fighter jet on Wednesday that was participating in the bombings, a claim denied by the government and disputed by other rebels.
Abdullahi el-Tom told AP the aircraft’s wreckage had been found 2.8 miles south of Adila, but the pilot had not been located.
Rebels from a faction of the Sudan Liberation Movement fighting alongside JEM told international observers the jet crashed because of a mechanical problem.
Army spokesman Gen. Osman Mohamed al-Agbash denied that rebels had downed a government jet, but indicated the military had faced heavy fighting in Adila.
"JEM wants to tell the international community that the army has used air bombing in (the) recapturing of Adila," the Sudan Media Center, a news services deemed close to the government, quoted al-Agbash as saying. There was no comment on military casualties.
Military flights are banned over Darfur by several U.N. resolutions and peace agreements, and Sudanese authorities routinely deny conducting air raids.
Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir visited Darfur last month and said the region was largely pacified. But the U.N. mission in Sudan said there have been clashes between rebels and the government in northern Darfur in recent days.
The heavy fighting in Adila came as the U.N. and A.U. sponsored a Darfur rebel conference in Arusha, Tanzania, to relaunch talks with the government after a May 2006 peace agreement between Khartoum and one rebel faction last year proved largely ineffective.
JEM’s el-Tom confirmed that rebel delegates attended last week’s conference and were willing to negotiate a peace agreement with Khartoum.
"But for the moment we have no cease-fire," he said. "Fighting will go on until we agree on something with Khartoum."
More than 200,000 people have died in Darfur since ethnic African rebels took up arms against the Arab-dominated central government, accusing it of discrimination. Khartoum is accused of retaliating by unleashing janjaweed militias, which are blamed for the worst atrocities against civilians in a conflict that has displaced more than 2.5 million people.
The government denies the charges but resisted for months a push for U.N. peacekeepers to replace the 7,000-strong A.U. force in Darfur. A July Security Council resolution provides for a "hybrid force" of 26,000 U.N. and A.U. troops to deploy in Darfur under a compromise deal that could see the peacekeepers in the region by the end of the year.
(AP)
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
Darfur Rebels Say They Shot Down Government Plane
By REUTERS
Filed at 6:15 a.m. ET
KHARTOUM (Reuters) - Darfur rebel commanders said on Wednesday they had shot down a government MiG 29 plane they say was bombing civilian villages in their areas in Sudan's Darfur region.
"We have downed a plane - MiG 29 around 4.5 km south of Adila yesterday around 5 p.m. (10 a.m. EDT)," commander Adel Aziz el-Nur Ashr from the Darfur rebel Justice and Equality and Movement (JEM) told Reuters by telephone.
Adila is in the far east of South Darfur state. Last week the government accused JEM of attacking the government controlled town.
JEM said the government attacked their areas around Adila ahead of a U.N.-African Union mediated meeting of rebel factions in Tanzania to renew the peace process.
"We are looking for the pilot," said Ashr. "We have the body of the plane."
Neither the United Nations, nor the AU, which is monitoring a shaky ceasefire in Sudan's arid west, could immediately confirm the report.
Sudan's army spokesman was not immediately available to comment.
The rebels have brought down government Antonov planes and helicopters over the more than four years of conflict in Darfur.
A U.N. report said the government had been bombing in Darfur until the end of June, which would violate U.N. Security Council resolutions banning offensive flying.
Filed at 6:15 a.m. ET
KHARTOUM (Reuters) - Darfur rebel commanders said on Wednesday they had shot down a government MiG 29 plane they say was bombing civilian villages in their areas in Sudan's Darfur region.
"We have downed a plane - MiG 29 around 4.5 km south of Adila yesterday around 5 p.m. (10 a.m. EDT)," commander Adel Aziz el-Nur Ashr from the Darfur rebel Justice and Equality and Movement (JEM) told Reuters by telephone.
Adila is in the far east of South Darfur state. Last week the government accused JEM of attacking the government controlled town.
JEM said the government attacked their areas around Adila ahead of a U.N.-African Union mediated meeting of rebel factions in Tanzania to renew the peace process.
"We are looking for the pilot," said Ashr. "We have the body of the plane."
Neither the United Nations, nor the AU, which is monitoring a shaky ceasefire in Sudan's arid west, could immediately confirm the report.
Sudan's army spokesman was not immediately available to comment.
The rebels have brought down government Antonov planes and helicopters over the more than four years of conflict in Darfur.
A U.N. report said the government had been bombing in Darfur until the end of June, which would violate U.N. Security Council resolutions banning offensive flying.
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Sudan unhappy at some Darfur rebel demands
By Opheera McDoom
Tue Aug 7, 1:29 PM ET
Sudan's government is not enthusiastic about some elements of a joint Darfur rebel negotiating platform agreed during U.N. and African Union mediated talks, U.N. Darfur envoy Jan Eliasson said on Tuesday.
Eliasson and his AU counterpart Salim Ahmed Salim, in an effort to reignite peace efforts, brought many Darfur commanders and groups together for unity talks in Arusha early this week.
They emerged from the meeting in Tanzania with a common platform, including agreement on land issues, power and wealth-sharing ahead of proposed talks with the government.
But Eliasson told reporters after meeting Foreign Ministry officials in Khartoum: "Not all of the points of course are met with great enthusiasm, but it is a basis."
Khartoum says a Darfur peace deal it signed with one of three rebel negotiating factions in May 2006 should not be reopened to address the concerns of rebels, who have since split into more than a dozen factions.
"The government does not want to have a renegotiation of the DPA (Darfur Peace Agreement) so this is a matter we will discuss both with the government and with the non-signatories -- how will we finalize the final agenda," Eliasson added.
He said the U.N.-AU team would to try to bring government and rebel positions together in the coming weeks to reach a final agenda for talks, due to begin in about two months.
Senior Foreign Ministry official Mutrif Siddig said the government welcomed the Arusha talks, but was disappointed not all the factions were present and that the original timeline, which had envisaged peace talks beginning by August, was lost.
LEGITIMACY
International experts estimate 200,000 people have died and 2.5 million have been driven from their homes during more than four years of rape, murder, disease and looting in Darfur, violence Washington calls genocide.
European governments are reluctant to use the term, which Khartoum rejects. Sudan puts the death toll at 9,000.
The International Criminal Court in The Hague has issued arrest warrants on war crimes charges against a government minister and a militia leader.
On Tuesday ICC Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo said Khartoum must hand over the suspects.
"Sudan cannot be a pariah country. They know it is important. The government needs legitimacy, so they will respect the law," Moreno-Ocampo told Reuters in Australia.
Sudan says the ICC has no authority in Darfur.
After months of talks, threats and negotiations, the government finally agreed to a joint U.N.-AU 26,000-strong peacekeeping force in Darfur, but said most of the troops should come from Africa.
But Zambia said on Tuesday the continent could not muster enough soldiers to complete the mission and international troops would have to be found from other areas.
"We don't have the means," Foreign Minister Mundia Sikatana told Reuters during a meeting in Malaysia. "Immediately Africa has no capacity to deal with the situation in Darfur."
Andrew Natsios, U.S. special envoy on Sudan, concurred. "We are going to try to recruit from Africa but it is very clear from already talking to African leaders and military that there are not enough African troops that are trained in peacekeeping operations to make up this force."
"I think there is an understanding from the Sudanese government that we are going to have to go outside of Africa. This is a sensitive issue," he told reporters.
The United Nations says the joint force must deploy alongside a renewed political process, as they must have a peace to keep.
REBEL ABSENCES
Analysts said the Arusha meeting's chance of success was hampered by the absence of some important rebel figures, but nonetheless succeeded in boosting unity which has been a major hindrance to talks with the government.
Among those who did not attend was Suleiman Jamous, the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) humanitarian coordinator who is seen by experts as key to any lasting peace.
He has been hospitalised outside Darfur and risks arrest if he returns. On Tuesday the government said it would lift that threat if the international community guaranteed he would not rejoin armed groups in Darfur.
Eliasson said a seat at any future talks was also available for Darfur SLA leader and founder Abdel Wahed Mohamed el-Nur, who refuses any talks until an oil-for-food program and no-fly zone is in place in Sudan's remote west.
Nur has few troops on the ground but commands huge popular support among Darfur's largest tribe, the Fur.
(Additional reporting by Clarence Fernandez in Malaysia, Rob Taylor in Australia and Sue Pleming in Washington)
Tue Aug 7, 1:29 PM ET
Sudan's government is not enthusiastic about some elements of a joint Darfur rebel negotiating platform agreed during U.N. and African Union mediated talks, U.N. Darfur envoy Jan Eliasson said on Tuesday.
Eliasson and his AU counterpart Salim Ahmed Salim, in an effort to reignite peace efforts, brought many Darfur commanders and groups together for unity talks in Arusha early this week.
They emerged from the meeting in Tanzania with a common platform, including agreement on land issues, power and wealth-sharing ahead of proposed talks with the government.
But Eliasson told reporters after meeting Foreign Ministry officials in Khartoum: "Not all of the points of course are met with great enthusiasm, but it is a basis."
Khartoum says a Darfur peace deal it signed with one of three rebel negotiating factions in May 2006 should not be reopened to address the concerns of rebels, who have since split into more than a dozen factions.
"The government does not want to have a renegotiation of the DPA (Darfur Peace Agreement) so this is a matter we will discuss both with the government and with the non-signatories -- how will we finalize the final agenda," Eliasson added.
He said the U.N.-AU team would to try to bring government and rebel positions together in the coming weeks to reach a final agenda for talks, due to begin in about two months.
Senior Foreign Ministry official Mutrif Siddig said the government welcomed the Arusha talks, but was disappointed not all the factions were present and that the original timeline, which had envisaged peace talks beginning by August, was lost.
LEGITIMACY
International experts estimate 200,000 people have died and 2.5 million have been driven from their homes during more than four years of rape, murder, disease and looting in Darfur, violence Washington calls genocide.
European governments are reluctant to use the term, which Khartoum rejects. Sudan puts the death toll at 9,000.
The International Criminal Court in The Hague has issued arrest warrants on war crimes charges against a government minister and a militia leader.
On Tuesday ICC Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo said Khartoum must hand over the suspects.
"Sudan cannot be a pariah country. They know it is important. The government needs legitimacy, so they will respect the law," Moreno-Ocampo told Reuters in Australia.
Sudan says the ICC has no authority in Darfur.
After months of talks, threats and negotiations, the government finally agreed to a joint U.N.-AU 26,000-strong peacekeeping force in Darfur, but said most of the troops should come from Africa.
But Zambia said on Tuesday the continent could not muster enough soldiers to complete the mission and international troops would have to be found from other areas.
"We don't have the means," Foreign Minister Mundia Sikatana told Reuters during a meeting in Malaysia. "Immediately Africa has no capacity to deal with the situation in Darfur."
Andrew Natsios, U.S. special envoy on Sudan, concurred. "We are going to try to recruit from Africa but it is very clear from already talking to African leaders and military that there are not enough African troops that are trained in peacekeeping operations to make up this force."
"I think there is an understanding from the Sudanese government that we are going to have to go outside of Africa. This is a sensitive issue," he told reporters.
The United Nations says the joint force must deploy alongside a renewed political process, as they must have a peace to keep.
REBEL ABSENCES
Analysts said the Arusha meeting's chance of success was hampered by the absence of some important rebel figures, but nonetheless succeeded in boosting unity which has been a major hindrance to talks with the government.
Among those who did not attend was Suleiman Jamous, the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) humanitarian coordinator who is seen by experts as key to any lasting peace.
He has been hospitalised outside Darfur and risks arrest if he returns. On Tuesday the government said it would lift that threat if the international community guaranteed he would not rejoin armed groups in Darfur.
Eliasson said a seat at any future talks was also available for Darfur SLA leader and founder Abdel Wahed Mohamed el-Nur, who refuses any talks until an oil-for-food program and no-fly zone is in place in Sudan's remote west.
Nur has few troops on the ground but commands huge popular support among Darfur's largest tribe, the Fur.
(Additional reporting by Clarence Fernandez in Malaysia, Rob Taylor in Australia and Sue Pleming in Washington)
Monday, August 6, 2007
FACTBOX-Major players at Darfur peace talks
Aug 6 (Reuters) - Darfur rebel factions meeting in Tanzania have reached a common negotiating position and want final peace talks with the Sudanese government within months, international mediators said on Monday.
The African Union and United Nations called the Darfur meeting in Arusha, Tanzania to form a rebel consensus after a May 2006 peace deal was signed only by a faction of the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) led by Minni Arcua Minnawi.
Another SLA faction led by founder Abdel Wahed Mohamed el-Nur and the Justice and Equality Movement headed by Khalil Ibrahim did not sign, despite intense international pressure.
The lack of support by other rebels undermined the agreement within days. The rebels have split into more than a dozen factions.
Minnawi became special assistant to Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, but has lost much ground in Darfur and some question whether all his forces there remain loyal to him. Many of his allies have broken away to form their own factions.
Minnawi's forces have been accused of attacking, threatening and killing African Union peacekeepers in his areas in South Darfur as well as in AU head quarters in North Darfur.
The major factions have loose alliances and are in constant negotiations to form new coalitions.
Here are the major players:
* SLA - Abdel Wahed Mohamed el-Nur - Nur has few troops left based in western Jabel Marra. But from Darfur's largest Fur tribe, he commands huge popular support especially in the camps housing more than 2 million people driven from their homes during the fighting. Nur, who is in France, refused to attend the Arusha talks.
* JEM - Khalil Ibrahim - Dogged by splits and with claims by JEM's military leadership that it has overthrown Ibrahim, which he denies, observers say JEM is not a significant power on the ground but is included to avoid the group acting as a spoiler. Ibrahim has been sanctioned by the United States for hindering the peace process. His group was represented at Arusha.
* Jar el-Neby and Suleiman Marajan - Based in North Darfur, these two are important figures with many troops in Darfur. They had wanted a commanders' unity conference before Arusha but decided to attend the meeting.
* SLA-Unity - Abdallah Yehia. Commanders include Ahmed Kubur in Darfur. SLA-Unity loosely encompasses other prominent SLA rebels including Sherif Harir. Yehia said Unity field commanders would not attend Arusha unless SLA Humanitarian Coordinator Suleiman Jamous was released.
* United Front for Liberation and Development - Khamis Abdallah. SLA figure Abdallah, who represented the UFLD at Arusha, and four other smaller factions formed a new umbrella group in Eritrea last month. Each faction alone counts for little on the ground, analysts say, but by virtue of the unification earned a seat at talks.
* Suleiman Jamous - The elderly Jamous has been virtually imprisoned in a U.N. hospital in Kordofan, a region neighbouring Darfur, for 13 months. All agree he is influential and respected among Darfuris and all rebel factions. Khartoum says if he leaves the U.N. building he will be arrested. Eleven prominent activists, including South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu, wrote to Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir to request his release. Jamous, the SLA humanitarian coordinator, was the liaison between rebels and the world's largest aid operation in Darfur until the United Nations airlifted him to Kordofan for medical treatment last year.
The African Union and United Nations called the Darfur meeting in Arusha, Tanzania to form a rebel consensus after a May 2006 peace deal was signed only by a faction of the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) led by Minni Arcua Minnawi.
Another SLA faction led by founder Abdel Wahed Mohamed el-Nur and the Justice and Equality Movement headed by Khalil Ibrahim did not sign, despite intense international pressure.
The lack of support by other rebels undermined the agreement within days. The rebels have split into more than a dozen factions.
Minnawi became special assistant to Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, but has lost much ground in Darfur and some question whether all his forces there remain loyal to him. Many of his allies have broken away to form their own factions.
Minnawi's forces have been accused of attacking, threatening and killing African Union peacekeepers in his areas in South Darfur as well as in AU head quarters in North Darfur.
The major factions have loose alliances and are in constant negotiations to form new coalitions.
Here are the major players:
* SLA - Abdel Wahed Mohamed el-Nur - Nur has few troops left based in western Jabel Marra. But from Darfur's largest Fur tribe, he commands huge popular support especially in the camps housing more than 2 million people driven from their homes during the fighting. Nur, who is in France, refused to attend the Arusha talks.
* JEM - Khalil Ibrahim - Dogged by splits and with claims by JEM's military leadership that it has overthrown Ibrahim, which he denies, observers say JEM is not a significant power on the ground but is included to avoid the group acting as a spoiler. Ibrahim has been sanctioned by the United States for hindering the peace process. His group was represented at Arusha.
* Jar el-Neby and Suleiman Marajan - Based in North Darfur, these two are important figures with many troops in Darfur. They had wanted a commanders' unity conference before Arusha but decided to attend the meeting.
* SLA-Unity - Abdallah Yehia. Commanders include Ahmed Kubur in Darfur. SLA-Unity loosely encompasses other prominent SLA rebels including Sherif Harir. Yehia said Unity field commanders would not attend Arusha unless SLA Humanitarian Coordinator Suleiman Jamous was released.
* United Front for Liberation and Development - Khamis Abdallah. SLA figure Abdallah, who represented the UFLD at Arusha, and four other smaller factions formed a new umbrella group in Eritrea last month. Each faction alone counts for little on the ground, analysts say, but by virtue of the unification earned a seat at talks.
* Suleiman Jamous - The elderly Jamous has been virtually imprisoned in a U.N. hospital in Kordofan, a region neighbouring Darfur, for 13 months. All agree he is influential and respected among Darfuris and all rebel factions. Khartoum says if he leaves the U.N. building he will be arrested. Eleven prominent activists, including South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu, wrote to Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir to request his release. Jamous, the SLA humanitarian coordinator, was the liaison between rebels and the world's largest aid operation in Darfur until the United Nations airlifted him to Kordofan for medical treatment last year.
North-south Sudan armies differ over oil areas
By Skye Wheeler
JUBA, Sudan, Aug 6 (Reuters) - A South Sudanese army official said on Monday that North Sudanese troops still in the south's vital oil areas were now "occupation forces" since they had not left the region as agreed under a 2005 peace deal.
He said his own southern forces had almost finished withdrawing from areas they had to leave under the accord.
The January 2005 deal created separate north and south armies, joint units for main towns and the sensitive oil areas and required both armies to redeploy either side of the 1956 north-south border by July 9, 2007.
But the northern Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) missed the redeployment deadline, and a senior U.N. official said most of the forces still in the south remained in the oil fields, where Sudan pumps some 500,000 barrels per day of crude.
Kuol Diem Kuol, spokesman for the southern Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA), said:
"We are not happy. The SPLA is waiting for the orders from the southern Sudan security council on how to handle this issue of occupation forces."
Kuol said some 16,600 northern troops remained in the south's two largest oil-producing states and the still contested oil-rich Abyei area, which under the deal can choose whether to join the south or stay in the north by 2011.
"(They) are staying illegally in a territory that they're not supposed to be in," said Kuol.
The SPLA also missed the deadline to withdraw from two transitional areas, Southern Blue Nile and South Kordofan. The SPLA had said that was because the joint units, supposed to take over after their withdrawal, were not yet functioning.
But Kuol on Monday said that the SPLA were moving out of the two areas as per the peace deal.
"All the SPLA soldiers have withdrawn out of Blue Nile, except for a company of 120 soldiers," said Kuol.
He explained these soldiers were guarding tanks, anti-aircraft weapons and heavy artillery that cannot be transported into south Sudan because of heavy rains.
"Once it is dry we will move them into the south," said Kuol.
Similarly all of the SPLA's troops are currently moving out of South Kordofan State said Kuol, with less than 300 remaining to guard heavy artillery.
The two areas were now under the control of the joint north-south units, known as Joint Integrated Units (JIUs) but Kuol said there were some concerns that they were not yet able to deal with an uneasy security situation in South Kordofan.
"The militias are still active ... are not yet disarmed,. The whole population is not yet disarmed," said Kuol. "(It is) very dangerous".
"They are not trained together, they are not the JIU envisaged by the peace agreement," said Kuol about the units.
Last year 150 people were killed during clashes between the north and south armies in the southern town of Malakal, fighting sparked by northern-aligned militias.
The discovery of oil in south Sudan during the years of war further inflamed the conflict in which 2 million people died and some 4 million were displaced.
JUBA, Sudan, Aug 6 (Reuters) - A South Sudanese army official said on Monday that North Sudanese troops still in the south's vital oil areas were now "occupation forces" since they had not left the region as agreed under a 2005 peace deal.
He said his own southern forces had almost finished withdrawing from areas they had to leave under the accord.
The January 2005 deal created separate north and south armies, joint units for main towns and the sensitive oil areas and required both armies to redeploy either side of the 1956 north-south border by July 9, 2007.
But the northern Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) missed the redeployment deadline, and a senior U.N. official said most of the forces still in the south remained in the oil fields, where Sudan pumps some 500,000 barrels per day of crude.
Kuol Diem Kuol, spokesman for the southern Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA), said:
"We are not happy. The SPLA is waiting for the orders from the southern Sudan security council on how to handle this issue of occupation forces."
Kuol said some 16,600 northern troops remained in the south's two largest oil-producing states and the still contested oil-rich Abyei area, which under the deal can choose whether to join the south or stay in the north by 2011.
"(They) are staying illegally in a territory that they're not supposed to be in," said Kuol.
The SPLA also missed the deadline to withdraw from two transitional areas, Southern Blue Nile and South Kordofan. The SPLA had said that was because the joint units, supposed to take over after their withdrawal, were not yet functioning.
But Kuol on Monday said that the SPLA were moving out of the two areas as per the peace deal.
"All the SPLA soldiers have withdrawn out of Blue Nile, except for a company of 120 soldiers," said Kuol.
He explained these soldiers were guarding tanks, anti-aircraft weapons and heavy artillery that cannot be transported into south Sudan because of heavy rains.
"Once it is dry we will move them into the south," said Kuol.
Similarly all of the SPLA's troops are currently moving out of South Kordofan State said Kuol, with less than 300 remaining to guard heavy artillery.
The two areas were now under the control of the joint north-south units, known as Joint Integrated Units (JIUs) but Kuol said there were some concerns that they were not yet able to deal with an uneasy security situation in South Kordofan.
"The militias are still active ... are not yet disarmed,. The whole population is not yet disarmed," said Kuol. "(It is) very dangerous".
"They are not trained together, they are not the JIU envisaged by the peace agreement," said Kuol about the units.
Last year 150 people were killed during clashes between the north and south armies in the southern town of Malakal, fighting sparked by northern-aligned militias.
The discovery of oil in south Sudan during the years of war further inflamed the conflict in which 2 million people died and some 4 million were displaced.
INTERVIEW-Rebel disorganisation delays east Sudan peace deal
By Jack Kimball
ASMARA, Aug 6 (Reuters) - Squabbling among east Sudanese rebels and disorganisation in their ranks are hampering implementation of a deal that ended a decade long insurgency, a former rebel leader said on Monday.
The Eastern Front took up arms against Khartoum in the 1990s, accusing it of neglect in an echo of the grievances expressed by insurgents in Sudan's west and south.
A peace deal mediated by neighbouring Eritrea ended the low-level revolt in October but internal divisions within the group, disputes over posts and lack of political structure have helped cause delays.
"The most important point is that when we started creating the Eastern Front, we didn't finish the hierarchy, the institutions and the political programme," said Amna Dirar, a senior Eastern Front official.
Since the deal, the Front has met in Eritrea -- which has hosted Sudanese opposition figures for years -- hoping to work out divisions over the allocation of positions.
"Self interest has also delayed the implementation of the agreement," Amna told Reuters by telephone. She said the Front planned to leave the Eritrean capital in mid-August.
The former rebels comprise the non-Arab Beja and the pure Arab Rashaidiya tribes.
A power-sharing clause in the peace deal gave the Front one junior minister in Khartoum, an assistant to the president, an adviser to the president and a number of parliamentary seats.
While government posts were decided based on an ethnic quota, divisions arose when fixing positions within the Front.
"Lacking any clear ideology or political agenda, the first fall-back position is ethnic or tribal loyalties ... it creates conflict," said an Asmara-based analyst.
The east is home to the nation's largest gold mine and Sudan's only port. Sudan's oil pipeline runs there, carrying 500,000 barrels per day of crude.
But it has one of the highest malnutrition rates in the country and has little development.
During the conflict, eastern rebels allied themselves with former southern rebels and those from Darfur. But after insurgents elsewhere signed peace deals with Khartoum, the eastern rebels found themselves in a weaker negotiating position.
ASMARA, Aug 6 (Reuters) - Squabbling among east Sudanese rebels and disorganisation in their ranks are hampering implementation of a deal that ended a decade long insurgency, a former rebel leader said on Monday.
The Eastern Front took up arms against Khartoum in the 1990s, accusing it of neglect in an echo of the grievances expressed by insurgents in Sudan's west and south.
A peace deal mediated by neighbouring Eritrea ended the low-level revolt in October but internal divisions within the group, disputes over posts and lack of political structure have helped cause delays.
"The most important point is that when we started creating the Eastern Front, we didn't finish the hierarchy, the institutions and the political programme," said Amna Dirar, a senior Eastern Front official.
Since the deal, the Front has met in Eritrea -- which has hosted Sudanese opposition figures for years -- hoping to work out divisions over the allocation of positions.
"Self interest has also delayed the implementation of the agreement," Amna told Reuters by telephone. She said the Front planned to leave the Eritrean capital in mid-August.
The former rebels comprise the non-Arab Beja and the pure Arab Rashaidiya tribes.
A power-sharing clause in the peace deal gave the Front one junior minister in Khartoum, an assistant to the president, an adviser to the president and a number of parliamentary seats.
While government posts were decided based on an ethnic quota, divisions arose when fixing positions within the Front.
"Lacking any clear ideology or political agenda, the first fall-back position is ethnic or tribal loyalties ... it creates conflict," said an Asmara-based analyst.
The east is home to the nation's largest gold mine and Sudan's only port. Sudan's oil pipeline runs there, carrying 500,000 barrels per day of crude.
But it has one of the highest malnutrition rates in the country and has little development.
During the conflict, eastern rebels allied themselves with former southern rebels and those from Darfur. But after insurgents elsewhere signed peace deals with Khartoum, the eastern rebels found themselves in a weaker negotiating position.
Darfur war crimes suspect has free rein despite ICC warrants
Monday 6 August 2007.
August 6, 2007 (AL-FASHER) — For a man accused of masterminding massacres, Ahmad Harun seems quite comfortable in the place he allegedly helped destroy.
Ahmed Mohamed Haroun
He strolls around the grassy compound belonging to the local governor in Sudan’s deeply troubled Darfur region, embracing Arab tribal leaders, soldiers and officials who have come to hear the president.
Harun, a tall 42-year-old with high cheekbones and almond-shaped eyes, was in charge of the region’s security during the height of the violent attacks on farm villages that caused millions to flee their homes in 2003 and 2004. He allegedly recruited, funded and armed local militias to root out rebels who had attacked the Sudanese army, sweeping away their villages, families and the intricate fabric of Darfur’s identity along the way.
He publicly relished his command, telling an open meeting of hundreds of officials, tribesmen and soldiers in West Darfur in July 2003 that he had been given "the power and authority to kill or forgive whoever in Darfur."
The rebels are like fish, Harun told a Sudanese committee that was investigating alleged war crimes in 2004, and "the villages are like water to fish." The objective, he suggested, was to eliminate the water.
And yet, on this day three years later, Harun glides unhindered and unapologetic through the parched remains of Darfur. In fact, he is the minister of state for humanitarian affairs in charge of caring for the very people he is accused of displacing. That he holds such a post says much about the limits of international power to cope with a festering crisis.
In May, the Hague-based International Criminal Court charged him and a pro-government militia leader, Ali Mohammed Ali Abdalrahman, better known as Ali Kushayb, with war crimes and crimes against humanity. But Sudan has rejected the arrest warrants, saying that the country is not a signatory to the court and that the charges against Harun are false.
Instead of being put behind bars, as the court asked, Harun still has the power to decide who lives and dies in Darfur. And without Sudan’s cooperation, there is almost nothing the court can do to bring him to justice.
"It is absolutely unacceptable," complained chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, whose team carefully built the case against Harun through interviews with refugees, tribal leaders, colleagues and enemies.
"Harun has to be removed from office, arrested and sent to the court," Moreno-Ocampo said in an interview. "Allowing him to be the humanitarian minister is like putting the fox in front of the chickens."
The trouble, experts say, is that asking the government to hand him over is asking it to indict itself. And charging those with the true responsibility for Darfur means targeting the only ones able to guarantee peace: the president and vice president.
"Harun has been interrogated about the allegations, and there is no case," said Interior Minister Zubeir Bashir Taha, a senior Cabinet minister who also oversees Darfur. "The evidence does not stand scrutiny, and whether it does or not, it is a matter for Sudan to decide and act upon. The prosecutor has no jurisdiction here. He is an intruder."
Further, Moreno-Ocampo’s desire for swift justice competes with the aims of other U.N. bodies trying to bring peace to Darfur. The Security Council can demand that Khartoum make the arrests or face sanctions, but it is also trying to gain the government’s acceptance of a 26,000-strong peacekeeping force for Darfur as well as its cooperation in peace talks.
So the court must rely on the government of Sudan to surrender Harun unless the Security Council were to order U.N. officials to arrest him — a move likely to get U.N. peacekeepers and aid workers tossed out of the country.
The choice does not have to be between peace or justice. The two are intertwined — but perhaps the most effective tool is time, Moreno-Ocampo says. He has translated the indictment into Arabic, in a booklet to take with him on his rounds of neighboring countries, explaining the court and drumming up support to keep an eye on Harun. Sooner or later, Moreno-Ocampo says, circumstances will change or Harun will make a misstep.
"This is normal, this is the process, it will take time," he says. "I don’t know if it will take months or years, but Harun’s destiny is the court."
That’s not Harun’s view. Clad in a khaki safari suit that keeps him cool in the 100-degree Darfur heat, Harun wears his knowledge of the court’s impotence like armor.
"Who gave the ICC this right?" he asks. "It is a matter of politics. It is not an issue of justice."
He denies the allegations that he worked with the militias known as janjaweed to attack villages, and says that he will never go to The Hague to answer the charges. "We are not signatories" to the court, and neither is the United States, he says.
"When you sign, we are going to follow. You go first," he says with a high-pitched guffaw.
Harun faces 42 counts of individual criminal responsibility, including murder, rape, persecution and forcible transfer of population. Militia leader Ali Kushayb, who is accused of participating in the attacks and killing civilians, is charged with 50 counts.
Moreno-Ocampo deliberately chose the two to illuminate how, he believes, the government worked hand in hand with militias to commit massive crimes against civilians not involved in the conflict.
Although the court must rely on Sudan to hand the men over, if either sets foot outside the country, any police officer or Interpol official can nab him. Harun was getting medical treatment in Jordan when the court first named him as a key suspect, causing him to flee home.
Although Harun maintains a high profile at home, the indictment has had an effect. When he addressed a crowd soon after the indictments, a whispered chant rippled through the audience: "Janjaweed, janjaweed." He avoids reporters. But he laughs and jokes with tribal leaders who have come to see the president on a government show tour of Darfur. Many of the leaders have been government allies; some of them are testing the winds.
One Arab tribal chief gives a tight smile when asked whether Harun is really innocent, as he claims. The leader shakes his head, then looks around and lowers his voice. "It is not as he says, and everyone knows what he has done. He will be sacrificed, if he hasn’t been already. He knows he may have little time." One Khartoum insider predicts he will have an "accident" within a year.
For Harun, the time for talking about the international court is up. Instead, he says he wants to talk about the government’s humanitarian work in Darfur.
"The situation in general, based on humanitarian indicators, is good," he says. "There is full humanitarian access, the fast-track systems are functioning." When asked whether he feels a special responsibility for the people in the camps, a slow smile spreads over his face.
"They are our people," he says with a grand gesture toward the ruined land, "and we are taking care of them."
(LA Times)
August 6, 2007 (AL-FASHER) — For a man accused of masterminding massacres, Ahmad Harun seems quite comfortable in the place he allegedly helped destroy.
Ahmed Mohamed Haroun
He strolls around the grassy compound belonging to the local governor in Sudan’s deeply troubled Darfur region, embracing Arab tribal leaders, soldiers and officials who have come to hear the president.
Harun, a tall 42-year-old with high cheekbones and almond-shaped eyes, was in charge of the region’s security during the height of the violent attacks on farm villages that caused millions to flee their homes in 2003 and 2004. He allegedly recruited, funded and armed local militias to root out rebels who had attacked the Sudanese army, sweeping away their villages, families and the intricate fabric of Darfur’s identity along the way.
He publicly relished his command, telling an open meeting of hundreds of officials, tribesmen and soldiers in West Darfur in July 2003 that he had been given "the power and authority to kill or forgive whoever in Darfur."
The rebels are like fish, Harun told a Sudanese committee that was investigating alleged war crimes in 2004, and "the villages are like water to fish." The objective, he suggested, was to eliminate the water.
And yet, on this day three years later, Harun glides unhindered and unapologetic through the parched remains of Darfur. In fact, he is the minister of state for humanitarian affairs in charge of caring for the very people he is accused of displacing. That he holds such a post says much about the limits of international power to cope with a festering crisis.
In May, the Hague-based International Criminal Court charged him and a pro-government militia leader, Ali Mohammed Ali Abdalrahman, better known as Ali Kushayb, with war crimes and crimes against humanity. But Sudan has rejected the arrest warrants, saying that the country is not a signatory to the court and that the charges against Harun are false.
Instead of being put behind bars, as the court asked, Harun still has the power to decide who lives and dies in Darfur. And without Sudan’s cooperation, there is almost nothing the court can do to bring him to justice.
"It is absolutely unacceptable," complained chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, whose team carefully built the case against Harun through interviews with refugees, tribal leaders, colleagues and enemies.
"Harun has to be removed from office, arrested and sent to the court," Moreno-Ocampo said in an interview. "Allowing him to be the humanitarian minister is like putting the fox in front of the chickens."
The trouble, experts say, is that asking the government to hand him over is asking it to indict itself. And charging those with the true responsibility for Darfur means targeting the only ones able to guarantee peace: the president and vice president.
"Harun has been interrogated about the allegations, and there is no case," said Interior Minister Zubeir Bashir Taha, a senior Cabinet minister who also oversees Darfur. "The evidence does not stand scrutiny, and whether it does or not, it is a matter for Sudan to decide and act upon. The prosecutor has no jurisdiction here. He is an intruder."
Further, Moreno-Ocampo’s desire for swift justice competes with the aims of other U.N. bodies trying to bring peace to Darfur. The Security Council can demand that Khartoum make the arrests or face sanctions, but it is also trying to gain the government’s acceptance of a 26,000-strong peacekeeping force for Darfur as well as its cooperation in peace talks.
So the court must rely on the government of Sudan to surrender Harun unless the Security Council were to order U.N. officials to arrest him — a move likely to get U.N. peacekeepers and aid workers tossed out of the country.
The choice does not have to be between peace or justice. The two are intertwined — but perhaps the most effective tool is time, Moreno-Ocampo says. He has translated the indictment into Arabic, in a booklet to take with him on his rounds of neighboring countries, explaining the court and drumming up support to keep an eye on Harun. Sooner or later, Moreno-Ocampo says, circumstances will change or Harun will make a misstep.
"This is normal, this is the process, it will take time," he says. "I don’t know if it will take months or years, but Harun’s destiny is the court."
That’s not Harun’s view. Clad in a khaki safari suit that keeps him cool in the 100-degree Darfur heat, Harun wears his knowledge of the court’s impotence like armor.
"Who gave the ICC this right?" he asks. "It is a matter of politics. It is not an issue of justice."
He denies the allegations that he worked with the militias known as janjaweed to attack villages, and says that he will never go to The Hague to answer the charges. "We are not signatories" to the court, and neither is the United States, he says.
"When you sign, we are going to follow. You go first," he says with a high-pitched guffaw.
Harun faces 42 counts of individual criminal responsibility, including murder, rape, persecution and forcible transfer of population. Militia leader Ali Kushayb, who is accused of participating in the attacks and killing civilians, is charged with 50 counts.
Moreno-Ocampo deliberately chose the two to illuminate how, he believes, the government worked hand in hand with militias to commit massive crimes against civilians not involved in the conflict.
Although the court must rely on Sudan to hand the men over, if either sets foot outside the country, any police officer or Interpol official can nab him. Harun was getting medical treatment in Jordan when the court first named him as a key suspect, causing him to flee home.
Although Harun maintains a high profile at home, the indictment has had an effect. When he addressed a crowd soon after the indictments, a whispered chant rippled through the audience: "Janjaweed, janjaweed." He avoids reporters. But he laughs and jokes with tribal leaders who have come to see the president on a government show tour of Darfur. Many of the leaders have been government allies; some of them are testing the winds.
One Arab tribal chief gives a tight smile when asked whether Harun is really innocent, as he claims. The leader shakes his head, then looks around and lowers his voice. "It is not as he says, and everyone knows what he has done. He will be sacrificed, if he hasn’t been already. He knows he may have little time." One Khartoum insider predicts he will have an "accident" within a year.
For Harun, the time for talking about the international court is up. Instead, he says he wants to talk about the government’s humanitarian work in Darfur.
"The situation in general, based on humanitarian indicators, is good," he says. "There is full humanitarian access, the fast-track systems are functioning." When asked whether he feels a special responsibility for the people in the camps, a slow smile spreads over his face.
"They are our people," he says with a grand gesture toward the ruined land, "and we are taking care of them."
(LA Times)
TEXT: Conclusions of Darfur rebels’ consultations in Arusha
Monday 6 August 2007.
August 6, 2007 (ARUSHA, Tanzania) — Below the full text of the Chairmen’s Conclusions from the Arusha consultations issued by the AU-UN- special envoy for Darfur on Monday at the end of the three day meeting for Darfur rebel groups.
At the invitation of the AU and the UN Special envoys for Darfur, Dr. Salim Ahmed Salim and Mr. Jan Eliasson, leading personalities of the Darfur Movements held consultations in Ngurdoto, Arusha Tanzania, from 3 to 6 August 2007. The regional countries Chad, Egypt, Eritrea and Libya also participated in the meeting. Several Field Commanders were also present.
The Arusha meeting aimed at creating an enabling environment for the non-signatories to meet and consult amongst themselves, with other participants and the Special Envoys in order to facilitate the preparations for the negotiations.
The discussions focussed on the following issue: (a) Need for a common negotiation platform of the Movements for the resumed talks.; (b) Criteria and level of participation in the final negotiations; (c) Agenda and venue for the renewed talks (d) inclusions of the concerns of IDPs refugees, tribal leaders, women and other civil society groups and (e) Security and humanitarian matters.
The meeting stressed that the conflict in Darfur can have no military solution and that a political solution is of utmost urgency.
The Representatives of Darfur Movements present:
I. Reaffirmed their commitment to the Road-Map of the Special Envoys for reenergising the political process;
II. Expressed their commitment and readiness to fully participate in the forthcoming negotiations under the leadership of the AU/UN in partnership with regional actors, and with the support of the support of the international community.
III. Presented a common platform on power sharing, wealth sharing, security arrangements, land/hawakeer and humanitarian issues, for the final negotiations. The also recommended that final talks should be held between 2-3 moths from now in countries of the regional initiatives or in any other country that the mediation considers suitable in terms of environment and facilities, to ensure the success of the negotiations.
IV. Decided to keep open the possibility for those who were invited but did not participated in the Arusha Consultations, to join their common platform, in order to have an inclusive representation of the movements in the final negotiations;
V. Reiterated their readiness to respect a complete cessation of hostilities provided that all other Parties make similar commitments;
VI. Expressed their commitment to allow free access to humanitarian aid agencies, to refrain from any act of hostilities against the personnel and the assets of African Mission in the Sudan (AMIS), as well as against humanitarian organisations in Darfur.
VII. Welcomed the adoption of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1769 on 31 July 2007, which authorised the deployment of the Hybrid Operation and expressed support for the ongoing political process. They also pledged their full co-operation for the implementation of the Hybrid Operation, bearing in mind that it would contribute to ending violence and insecurity on the ground.
VIII. Urged the Special envoy to continue and finalize their consultations with IDPs, refugees, traditional leaders and civil society organisations, including women’s groups in an effort to develop a mechanism to channel their views and positions into-the final negotiations.
The Special envoys welcomed their common positions as an important development in the preparations for the negotiations. They also commended the representatives of the movements.
With respect to the issues relating to negotiations, inter alia, venue, timing and cessation of hostilities, the Special Envoys will consult the Government of the Sudan and other stakeholders, bearing in mind the views expressed by the representatives pf the movements.
During the Consultations, the representatives of the movements expressed their concern over the situation of Mr. Suleiman Jamous. The Special Envoy recalled that they had taken up this issue on several occasions with the Government of the Sudan. They expressed their intention to pursue the matter in view of the role of Mr. Jamous can play in the political process.
The participants expressed gratitude and appreciation to the Government and People of the United Republic of Tanzania for hosting the meeting and for the generous hospitality extended to the participants.
Ngurdoto, Arusha, 6 August 2007.
August 6, 2007 (ARUSHA, Tanzania) — Below the full text of the Chairmen’s Conclusions from the Arusha consultations issued by the AU-UN- special envoy for Darfur on Monday at the end of the three day meeting for Darfur rebel groups.
At the invitation of the AU and the UN Special envoys for Darfur, Dr. Salim Ahmed Salim and Mr. Jan Eliasson, leading personalities of the Darfur Movements held consultations in Ngurdoto, Arusha Tanzania, from 3 to 6 August 2007. The regional countries Chad, Egypt, Eritrea and Libya also participated in the meeting. Several Field Commanders were also present.
The Arusha meeting aimed at creating an enabling environment for the non-signatories to meet and consult amongst themselves, with other participants and the Special Envoys in order to facilitate the preparations for the negotiations.
The discussions focussed on the following issue: (a) Need for a common negotiation platform of the Movements for the resumed talks.; (b) Criteria and level of participation in the final negotiations; (c) Agenda and venue for the renewed talks (d) inclusions of the concerns of IDPs refugees, tribal leaders, women and other civil society groups and (e) Security and humanitarian matters.
The meeting stressed that the conflict in Darfur can have no military solution and that a political solution is of utmost urgency.
The Representatives of Darfur Movements present:
I. Reaffirmed their commitment to the Road-Map of the Special Envoys for reenergising the political process;
II. Expressed their commitment and readiness to fully participate in the forthcoming negotiations under the leadership of the AU/UN in partnership with regional actors, and with the support of the support of the international community.
III. Presented a common platform on power sharing, wealth sharing, security arrangements, land/hawakeer and humanitarian issues, for the final negotiations. The also recommended that final talks should be held between 2-3 moths from now in countries of the regional initiatives or in any other country that the mediation considers suitable in terms of environment and facilities, to ensure the success of the negotiations.
IV. Decided to keep open the possibility for those who were invited but did not participated in the Arusha Consultations, to join their common platform, in order to have an inclusive representation of the movements in the final negotiations;
V. Reiterated their readiness to respect a complete cessation of hostilities provided that all other Parties make similar commitments;
VI. Expressed their commitment to allow free access to humanitarian aid agencies, to refrain from any act of hostilities against the personnel and the assets of African Mission in the Sudan (AMIS), as well as against humanitarian organisations in Darfur.
VII. Welcomed the adoption of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1769 on 31 July 2007, which authorised the deployment of the Hybrid Operation and expressed support for the ongoing political process. They also pledged their full co-operation for the implementation of the Hybrid Operation, bearing in mind that it would contribute to ending violence and insecurity on the ground.
VIII. Urged the Special envoy to continue and finalize their consultations with IDPs, refugees, traditional leaders and civil society organisations, including women’s groups in an effort to develop a mechanism to channel their views and positions into-the final negotiations.
The Special envoys welcomed their common positions as an important development in the preparations for the negotiations. They also commended the representatives of the movements.
With respect to the issues relating to negotiations, inter alia, venue, timing and cessation of hostilities, the Special Envoys will consult the Government of the Sudan and other stakeholders, bearing in mind the views expressed by the representatives pf the movements.
During the Consultations, the representatives of the movements expressed their concern over the situation of Mr. Suleiman Jamous. The Special Envoy recalled that they had taken up this issue on several occasions with the Government of the Sudan. They expressed their intention to pursue the matter in view of the role of Mr. Jamous can play in the political process.
The participants expressed gratitude and appreciation to the Government and People of the United Republic of Tanzania for hosting the meeting and for the generous hospitality extended to the participants.
Ngurdoto, Arusha, 6 August 2007.
Darfur's rebel groups reach deal
Most of Darfur's rebel groups have agreed on a common position and want "final" talks with Sudan's government within two or three months.
The eight factions have been in talks since Friday to end their divisions - seen as a major factor in the failure to end the four-year conflict.
However, one of the key rebel leaders boycotted the meeting in Tanzania.
The agreement follows last week's decision to send 26,000 UN and African Union peacekeepers to Darfur.
The factions had reached a "common platform on power-sharing, wealth-sharing, security arrangements, land and humanitarian issues, for the final negotiations", they said in a statement.
BBC East Africa correspondent Karen Allen says details of the platforms are being presented in a confidential document, which will now be taken to Khartoum to set an agenda for revived peace talks.
Optimism
Special UN envoy to Darfur Jan Eliasson told the BBC the agreement was an important step forward.
"One of the main problems we have had to reach negotiations has been the split and the splintering among the rebel movement," he said, adding that he was on his way to the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, for discussions with the government.
International Crisis Group analyst Hannah Stogdon told Reuters news agency that it depended on who would represent the rebels in talks with the government.
HAVE YOUR SAY
All I need to see is the joint AU and UN forces in Darfur protecting the people
Kulang, Juba, Sudan
"If they can agree on that publicly, that is a good sign."
Rebel leader Ahmed Hussein said the deal would "pave the way for a meaningful and positive new political process to solve the root causes of the conflict in Darfur".
The talks in Arusha were due to end on Sunday but were extended by a day.
One of the key rebel leaders, Abdul Wahid Mohammad Ahmed al-Nur, of the major faction of the Sudan Liberation Movement, boycotted the talks, saying a ceasefire should be agreed before political talks.
Common denominator
The African Union special envoy to Darfur, Salim Ahmed Salim, told the BBC that Mr Nur should take the current opportunity to put aside his differences and join the peace process.
"We are now at the pre-negotiation level, and we hope that the negotiations will begin within the period of two months."
KEY REBEL PLAYERS
SLM: Minni Minnawi's faction signed 2006 peace deal
SLM: Abdul Wahid Mohammad Ahmed al-Nur's faction rejected peace deal
Jem: Khalil Ibrahim, one of the first rebel groups, rejected deal
Rebel negotiator: Suleiman Jamous
SLM Unity: Abdallah Yehia
UFLD: recently formed umbrella group including SLM commanders
Other breakaway SLM commanders: Mahjoub Hussein, Jar el-Neby and Suleiman Marajan
There are estimated to be more than 13 rebel factions in Darfur
"It is not seen as logical to have the government of Sudan negotiating with 10 or 15 difference factions, so we have encouraged all the participants at the Arusha meeting to... find a minimum common denominator among themselves," he said.
At least 200,000 people are believed to have died and more than two million have been left homeless since 2003.
Sudan's government and pro-government Arab Janjaweed militias are accused of war crimes against the region's black African population, although the UN has stopped short of calling it genocide.
The talks follow last week's UN Security Council resolution to send 26,000 peacekeepers to Darfur.
Though the fighters in Arusha have welcomed the announcement that more peacekeepers will be deployed, they know that a political solution is the only way forward, says BBC Africa analyst David Bamford.
After months of wrangling, Sudan agreed to the UN resolution after it was watered down.
(BBC)
The eight factions have been in talks since Friday to end their divisions - seen as a major factor in the failure to end the four-year conflict.
However, one of the key rebel leaders boycotted the meeting in Tanzania.
The agreement follows last week's decision to send 26,000 UN and African Union peacekeepers to Darfur.
The factions had reached a "common platform on power-sharing, wealth-sharing, security arrangements, land and humanitarian issues, for the final negotiations", they said in a statement.
BBC East Africa correspondent Karen Allen says details of the platforms are being presented in a confidential document, which will now be taken to Khartoum to set an agenda for revived peace talks.
Optimism
Special UN envoy to Darfur Jan Eliasson told the BBC the agreement was an important step forward.
"One of the main problems we have had to reach negotiations has been the split and the splintering among the rebel movement," he said, adding that he was on his way to the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, for discussions with the government.
International Crisis Group analyst Hannah Stogdon told Reuters news agency that it depended on who would represent the rebels in talks with the government.
HAVE YOUR SAY
All I need to see is the joint AU and UN forces in Darfur protecting the people
Kulang, Juba, Sudan
"If they can agree on that publicly, that is a good sign."
Rebel leader Ahmed Hussein said the deal would "pave the way for a meaningful and positive new political process to solve the root causes of the conflict in Darfur".
The talks in Arusha were due to end on Sunday but were extended by a day.
One of the key rebel leaders, Abdul Wahid Mohammad Ahmed al-Nur, of the major faction of the Sudan Liberation Movement, boycotted the talks, saying a ceasefire should be agreed before political talks.
Common denominator
The African Union special envoy to Darfur, Salim Ahmed Salim, told the BBC that Mr Nur should take the current opportunity to put aside his differences and join the peace process.
"We are now at the pre-negotiation level, and we hope that the negotiations will begin within the period of two months."
KEY REBEL PLAYERS
SLM: Minni Minnawi's faction signed 2006 peace deal
SLM: Abdul Wahid Mohammad Ahmed al-Nur's faction rejected peace deal
Jem: Khalil Ibrahim, one of the first rebel groups, rejected deal
Rebel negotiator: Suleiman Jamous
SLM Unity: Abdallah Yehia
UFLD: recently formed umbrella group including SLM commanders
Other breakaway SLM commanders: Mahjoub Hussein, Jar el-Neby and Suleiman Marajan
There are estimated to be more than 13 rebel factions in Darfur
"It is not seen as logical to have the government of Sudan negotiating with 10 or 15 difference factions, so we have encouraged all the participants at the Arusha meeting to... find a minimum common denominator among themselves," he said.
At least 200,000 people are believed to have died and more than two million have been left homeless since 2003.
Sudan's government and pro-government Arab Janjaweed militias are accused of war crimes against the region's black African population, although the UN has stopped short of calling it genocide.
The talks follow last week's UN Security Council resolution to send 26,000 peacekeepers to Darfur.
Though the fighters in Arusha have welcomed the announcement that more peacekeepers will be deployed, they know that a political solution is the only way forward, says BBC Africa analyst David Bamford.
After months of wrangling, Sudan agreed to the UN resolution after it was watered down.
(BBC)
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Sudan would consider releasing Darfur rebel Jamous
Thursday 2 August 2007.
August 1, 2007 (KHARTOUM) — Sudan said on Wednesday it would consider releasing elderly Darfur rebel Suleiman Jamous, who could be vital to a peace process after the United Nations approved a big peacekeeping force for the region.
Suleiman Jamous (J.T)
Jamous, the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) humanitarian coordinator, has been virtually imprisoned for 13 months in the South Kordofan region bordering Darfur. Khartoum has branded him a terrorist.
Foreign Minister Lam Akol said the question of Jamous had never been brought up by envoys from the United Nations and African Union, although U.S. envoy Andrew Natsios mentioned Jamous a couple of months ago but never referred to him again.
Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ali al-Sadig said Sudan’s government assumed the United States had lost interest.
"We are ready to consider the situation," he said. "We are ready to talk on the issue of Jamous."
The U.S. embassy and African Union were not immediately available to comment. The U.N. mission declined comment.
The United Nations Security Council on Tuesday approved a 26,000 strong force to try to quell violence in Darfur.
Analysts say Jamous is crucial to uniting the military and political leadership of splintered Darfur rebel groups ahead of peace talks with the government.
Diplomats are trying to get a deal between at least a dozen factions at a meeting in Tanzania from Aug. 3 to 5.
Akol said the government was prepared to help the rebels unite, but had not heard a request to release Jamous from U.N. envoy Jan Eliasson or AU envoy Salim Ahmed Salim.
"We never heard from the special envoys...that there was somebody somewhere that was central to the peace process," the minister said.
Jamous, the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) humanitarian coordinator, was the main liaison between the world’s largest aid operation and rebels in Darfur, keeping looting of aid convoys down and humanitarian workers safe.
Last year the United Nations removed Jamous from Darfur to a U.N. hospital in South Kordofan without informing the government. The government warned if he left the hospital he would be arrested.
On Tuesday, 11 prominent international activists sent a letter to Sudan’s President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, appealing for the release of Jamous. The rebel urgently needs a stomach biopsy which cannot be performed in South Kordofan.
(Reuters)
August 1, 2007 (KHARTOUM) — Sudan said on Wednesday it would consider releasing elderly Darfur rebel Suleiman Jamous, who could be vital to a peace process after the United Nations approved a big peacekeeping force for the region.
Suleiman Jamous (J.T)
Jamous, the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) humanitarian coordinator, has been virtually imprisoned for 13 months in the South Kordofan region bordering Darfur. Khartoum has branded him a terrorist.
Foreign Minister Lam Akol said the question of Jamous had never been brought up by envoys from the United Nations and African Union, although U.S. envoy Andrew Natsios mentioned Jamous a couple of months ago but never referred to him again.
Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ali al-Sadig said Sudan’s government assumed the United States had lost interest.
"We are ready to consider the situation," he said. "We are ready to talk on the issue of Jamous."
The U.S. embassy and African Union were not immediately available to comment. The U.N. mission declined comment.
The United Nations Security Council on Tuesday approved a 26,000 strong force to try to quell violence in Darfur.
Analysts say Jamous is crucial to uniting the military and political leadership of splintered Darfur rebel groups ahead of peace talks with the government.
Diplomats are trying to get a deal between at least a dozen factions at a meeting in Tanzania from Aug. 3 to 5.
Akol said the government was prepared to help the rebels unite, but had not heard a request to release Jamous from U.N. envoy Jan Eliasson or AU envoy Salim Ahmed Salim.
"We never heard from the special envoys...that there was somebody somewhere that was central to the peace process," the minister said.
Jamous, the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) humanitarian coordinator, was the main liaison between the world’s largest aid operation and rebels in Darfur, keeping looting of aid convoys down and humanitarian workers safe.
Last year the United Nations removed Jamous from Darfur to a U.N. hospital in South Kordofan without informing the government. The government warned if he left the hospital he would be arrested.
On Tuesday, 11 prominent international activists sent a letter to Sudan’s President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, appealing for the release of Jamous. The rebel urgently needs a stomach biopsy which cannot be performed in South Kordofan.
(Reuters)
Wednesday, August 1, 2007
Sudan 'will support Darfur force'
Sudan will co-operate with UN and African Union peacekeepers in Darfur, Sudan's UN ambassador said after the UN Security Council backed a joint force.
The mandate for the 26,000-strong force was watered down to appease critics and it will only be able to protect civilians deemed to be under threat.
The new UN-AU mission head welcomed the move but urged a political solution "as there needs to be a peace to keep".
The warring factions in the four-year conflict are due to meet on Friday.
We will be committed, we will be faithful and honest to our obligations
Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem Mohamad
Sudan's UN ambassador
Since rebel groups rose up against the Khartoum government's rule in 2003, at least 200,000 people are thought to have died in the region and more than 2m have fled their homes.
Sudan's government and pro-government Arab militias are accused of war crimes against the region's black African population, although the UN has stopped short of calling it genocide.
'Without prejudice'
Darfur's rebel groups have long sought UN peacekeepers and have hailed the resolution
"We very much welcome the UN troops in Darfur any time, without any condition," Sudan Liberation Army commander Abu Jamal Khalil Ali told the BBC.
READ THE RESOLUTION
Most computers will open this document automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader
Abu Elgasim, field commander for a different SLA faction, also welcomed the UN resolution.
The first peacekeeping troops are due to begin arriving in October.
"We will be committed, we will be faithful and honest to our obligations," Sudan's ambassador to the UN Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem Mohamad told the BBC.
However, he also warned that the resolution was not a "blank cheque" for the peacekeepers.
The resolution says they can use force "to protect civilians without prejudice to the responsibility of the government of Sudan".
Head of the UN-AU hybrid mission Rodolphe Adada told the BBC the force would be one of "two legs for finding peace in Darfur".
"I'm sure it will be one of the main tools for forwarding peace in Darfur, but it's only a peace operation, you need to have peace to keep," he told the BBC's Network Africa programme.
"This is why the political meeting is of the essence."
The mission, to be known as Unamid - the United Nations African Union Mission in Darfur - is expected to cost up to $2bn (£1.1bn) a year and will be world's largest peacekeeping force.
Mr Adada said the force will mainly be drawn from African countries, a move also hoped to appease Sudan's initial antagonism to the force.
But the resolution says the UN has overall command of the force.
'Disappointed'
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon described the mission as "historic and unprecedented".
Humanitarian workers hope the new force will provide security for them to be deliver aid to civilians.
"It is very clear that the humanitarian situation in Darfur is deteriorating, so we're hopeful that we can get back to a situation where we can just get on with our work," Sarah Smith from aid agency Goal told the BBC.
Jonathan Pearce, from the UK's Disasters Emergency Committee, said the peacekeeping force could make a "tremendous impact".
But Democrat Russ Feingold, who chairs the US Senate foreign relations sub-committee on Africa, said: "I am very disappointed that the resolution's co-sponsors have succumbed to pressure from the Sudanese government."
The new force will not have the right to disarm the militias and it does not have the powers to pursue and arrest suspected war criminals indicted by the International Criminal Court.
Furthermore, the resolution does not threaten sanctions against Sudan if it does not comply.
The unanimous vote came after negotiations secured the support of China, which has a veto on the Security Council and strong economic interests in Sudan.
The joint African Union-UN meeting in Arusha, Tanzania, is to try later this week to establish a framework for peace talks between the Darfur rebels and Sudanese government.
One of the numerous rebel groups signed a peace deal last year but the violence has continued.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/africa/6925538.stm
The mandate for the 26,000-strong force was watered down to appease critics and it will only be able to protect civilians deemed to be under threat.
The new UN-AU mission head welcomed the move but urged a political solution "as there needs to be a peace to keep".
The warring factions in the four-year conflict are due to meet on Friday.
We will be committed, we will be faithful and honest to our obligations
Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem Mohamad
Sudan's UN ambassador
Since rebel groups rose up against the Khartoum government's rule in 2003, at least 200,000 people are thought to have died in the region and more than 2m have fled their homes.
Sudan's government and pro-government Arab militias are accused of war crimes against the region's black African population, although the UN has stopped short of calling it genocide.
'Without prejudice'
Darfur's rebel groups have long sought UN peacekeepers and have hailed the resolution
"We very much welcome the UN troops in Darfur any time, without any condition," Sudan Liberation Army commander Abu Jamal Khalil Ali told the BBC.
READ THE RESOLUTION
Most computers will open this document automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader
Abu Elgasim, field commander for a different SLA faction, also welcomed the UN resolution.
The first peacekeeping troops are due to begin arriving in October.
"We will be committed, we will be faithful and honest to our obligations," Sudan's ambassador to the UN Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem Mohamad told the BBC.
However, he also warned that the resolution was not a "blank cheque" for the peacekeepers.
The resolution says they can use force "to protect civilians without prejudice to the responsibility of the government of Sudan".
Head of the UN-AU hybrid mission Rodolphe Adada told the BBC the force would be one of "two legs for finding peace in Darfur".
"I'm sure it will be one of the main tools for forwarding peace in Darfur, but it's only a peace operation, you need to have peace to keep," he told the BBC's Network Africa programme.
"This is why the political meeting is of the essence."
The mission, to be known as Unamid - the United Nations African Union Mission in Darfur - is expected to cost up to $2bn (£1.1bn) a year and will be world's largest peacekeeping force.
Mr Adada said the force will mainly be drawn from African countries, a move also hoped to appease Sudan's initial antagonism to the force.
But the resolution says the UN has overall command of the force.
'Disappointed'
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon described the mission as "historic and unprecedented".
Humanitarian workers hope the new force will provide security for them to be deliver aid to civilians.
"It is very clear that the humanitarian situation in Darfur is deteriorating, so we're hopeful that we can get back to a situation where we can just get on with our work," Sarah Smith from aid agency Goal told the BBC.
Jonathan Pearce, from the UK's Disasters Emergency Committee, said the peacekeeping force could make a "tremendous impact".
But Democrat Russ Feingold, who chairs the US Senate foreign relations sub-committee on Africa, said: "I am very disappointed that the resolution's co-sponsors have succumbed to pressure from the Sudanese government."
The new force will not have the right to disarm the militias and it does not have the powers to pursue and arrest suspected war criminals indicted by the International Criminal Court.
Furthermore, the resolution does not threaten sanctions against Sudan if it does not comply.
The unanimous vote came after negotiations secured the support of China, which has a veto on the Security Council and strong economic interests in Sudan.
The joint African Union-UN meeting in Arusha, Tanzania, is to try later this week to establish a framework for peace talks between the Darfur rebels and Sudanese government.
One of the numerous rebel groups signed a peace deal last year but the violence has continued.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/africa/6925538.stm
Sunday, July 29, 2007
BEIJING’S MOMENT OF TRUTH ON DARFUR
Friday 27 July 2007.
For Immediate Release
WILL BEIJING SUPPORT CHAPTER 7 MANDATE ON NEW UN RESOLUTION?
July 26 — While the Government of China has been quoted in the past several days as saying the new UN Resolution on a peace support operation for Darfur is “good,” there is growing concern that China will not support a Chapter 7 mandate for the peacekeeping force.
The debate concerns the new draft of a UN Security Council resolution (proposed by Ghana, France, and the UK) to authorize deployment to Darfur of approximately 26,000 civilian police and troops. The Chapter 7 mandate would confer upon the mission enforcement authority: “all necessary means,” including military means, which would be available to police and troops, thereby providing robust rules of engagement for those who threaten civilians, humanitarians, or the force itself. Without such a mandate, the force could not actively protect civilians.
“Anything less than a clear commitment to Chapter 7 authority will weaken the force of the resolution and embolden Khartoum,” said Eric Reeves, Sudan advisor to Dream for Darfur. “We will learn a great deal about whether Beijing intends to play a helpful role, or continue with a mere façade of concern for Darfur.”
Beijing has in the past objected to Chapter 7 authority for Darfur resolutions. Currently, the Khartoum regime---both at the UN and in the regime-controlled news media---is condemning Chapter 7 authority in the current draft resolution. This is so despite the fact that President Omar al-Bashir last month assured UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon that he accepted “unconditionally” the proposed African Union/UN “hybrid force” that is the centerpiece of the current resolution.
Under increasing pressure from the international community, including mounting pressure over Beijing’s inconsistent roles as both Olympic host and supporter of the regime in Khartoum, China has taken modest but constructive steps to address the Darfur crisis and to urge Khartoum to do so as well. China has said publically that it is doing everything within its power to resolve the Darfur issue.
“The moment of truth is at hand. Right now, Beijing has a clear opportunity to demonstrate whether or not it is willing to assist those in the international community determined to protect acutely vulnerable civilians and humanitarians,” Reeves said. “Beijing’s actions going forward must be judged in the context of a present decision about Chapter 7 authority for the security force deploying to Darfur.”
For more information, contact Matt Chandler: Matt Chandler: matt@rbistrategies.com / Office: 303.832.2444,x23 / Mobile: 303.523.2855 ###
Olympic Dream for Darfur is a global advocacy campaign, run by the Dream for Darfur organization, which was established in May 2007. Our goal is to secure protection for civilians on the ground in Darfur by focusing advocacy attention on Beijing, as Olympic host, and a government with unrivaled leverage with the government in Sudan.
For Immediate Release
WILL BEIJING SUPPORT CHAPTER 7 MANDATE ON NEW UN RESOLUTION?
July 26 — While the Government of China has been quoted in the past several days as saying the new UN Resolution on a peace support operation for Darfur is “good,” there is growing concern that China will not support a Chapter 7 mandate for the peacekeeping force.
The debate concerns the new draft of a UN Security Council resolution (proposed by Ghana, France, and the UK) to authorize deployment to Darfur of approximately 26,000 civilian police and troops. The Chapter 7 mandate would confer upon the mission enforcement authority: “all necessary means,” including military means, which would be available to police and troops, thereby providing robust rules of engagement for those who threaten civilians, humanitarians, or the force itself. Without such a mandate, the force could not actively protect civilians.
“Anything less than a clear commitment to Chapter 7 authority will weaken the force of the resolution and embolden Khartoum,” said Eric Reeves, Sudan advisor to Dream for Darfur. “We will learn a great deal about whether Beijing intends to play a helpful role, or continue with a mere façade of concern for Darfur.”
Beijing has in the past objected to Chapter 7 authority for Darfur resolutions. Currently, the Khartoum regime---both at the UN and in the regime-controlled news media---is condemning Chapter 7 authority in the current draft resolution. This is so despite the fact that President Omar al-Bashir last month assured UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon that he accepted “unconditionally” the proposed African Union/UN “hybrid force” that is the centerpiece of the current resolution.
Under increasing pressure from the international community, including mounting pressure over Beijing’s inconsistent roles as both Olympic host and supporter of the regime in Khartoum, China has taken modest but constructive steps to address the Darfur crisis and to urge Khartoum to do so as well. China has said publically that it is doing everything within its power to resolve the Darfur issue.
“The moment of truth is at hand. Right now, Beijing has a clear opportunity to demonstrate whether or not it is willing to assist those in the international community determined to protect acutely vulnerable civilians and humanitarians,” Reeves said. “Beijing’s actions going forward must be judged in the context of a present decision about Chapter 7 authority for the security force deploying to Darfur.”
For more information, contact Matt Chandler: Matt Chandler: matt@rbistrategies.com / Office: 303.832.2444,x23 / Mobile: 303.523.2855 ###
Olympic Dream for Darfur is a global advocacy campaign, run by the Dream for Darfur organization, which was established in May 2007. Our goal is to secure protection for civilians on the ground in Darfur by focusing advocacy attention on Beijing, as Olympic host, and a government with unrivaled leverage with the government in Sudan.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
INTERVIEW-Darfur mediators must not forget rebels in field
KHARTOUM, July 26 (Reuters) - U.N. and African Union Darfur envoys should unite rebel field commanders to avoid infighting and chaos before any peace deal is signed to end the bloodshed, a senior rebel member said on Thursday.
Suleiman Jamous, the rebel Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) humanitarian coordinator, added rebel political leaders who lived outside Sudan's war-torn west should hurry to achieve peace and not forget the millions of civilians suffering because of the revolt.
U.N. Darfur envoy Jan Eliasson and his AU counterpart Salim Ahmed Salim hope to unite rebel factions and agree on a negotiating position and venue in a meeting in Tanzania in August. But Jamous said any deal would be worthless if field commanders were not on board.
"It is better to work towards unity for the SLA at least before ending the peace talks with any sort of agreement," he told Reuters by telephone from a U.N. hospital in South Kordofan, a region that neighbours Darfur.
"It can work simultaneously with the efforts towards the negotiating table but the unification should end before a peace deal is signed."
Dozens of field commanders control the ground in Darfur and have often expressed differences with their political leadership outside the region, who they say do not consult them enough.
During previous talks, the disconnect between the political leaders negotiating and the commanders on the ground hindered discussions on security arrangements because clashes continued.
After a peace deal signed by only one of three rebel negotiating factions last year, the rebels fragmented with infighting between signatories and non-signatories.
SUFFERING
Jamous warned this would repeat itself if there was no field unity conference.
Jar el-Neby, a senior SLA field commander, also wants U.N. and AU support for unity talks before the meeting in Tanzania.
Previous unity meetings have been spoiled as political leaders outside the region did not attend.
"We should neglect our personal agendas for the agenda of the conflict and how to solve it for the sake of the civilians suffering for our years," Jamous added.
"They need to think of the future of Darfur after the peace -- how we can keep our community together with the killing we created."
Jamous has been virtually imprisoned in the U.N. hospital for 13 months after he was rescued from Darfur in need of urgent medical treatment. Khartoum calls him a "terrorist" and says he will be arrested if he leaves the hospital.
However, he is still in telephone contact with commanders and said if were released he could help unite the field.
Jamous said any new peace talks needed to address the weaknesses of last year's deal, which included the disarmament and reintegration of the Janjaweed militias, mobilised by the government and accused of rape, murder and looting.
"Any kind of presence of armed men in undisciplined ranks is the cause of this conflict and the failure of any peace deal," he said.
He said the international community needed to guarantee the implementation of any agreement, especially dismantling the militias. A U.N.-AU joint force under discussion could play that role.
Jamous coordinated access for the world's largest humanitarian operation to hundreds of thousands in need of aid during the conflict. His work earned him the respect of many groups and kept rebel looting of aid convoys to a minimum.
Experts estimate 200,000 have been killed and 2.5 million driven from their homes since mostly non-Arab rebels took up arms accusing central government of neglect in early 2003.
Suleiman Jamous, the rebel Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) humanitarian coordinator, added rebel political leaders who lived outside Sudan's war-torn west should hurry to achieve peace and not forget the millions of civilians suffering because of the revolt.
U.N. Darfur envoy Jan Eliasson and his AU counterpart Salim Ahmed Salim hope to unite rebel factions and agree on a negotiating position and venue in a meeting in Tanzania in August. But Jamous said any deal would be worthless if field commanders were not on board.
"It is better to work towards unity for the SLA at least before ending the peace talks with any sort of agreement," he told Reuters by telephone from a U.N. hospital in South Kordofan, a region that neighbours Darfur.
"It can work simultaneously with the efforts towards the negotiating table but the unification should end before a peace deal is signed."
Dozens of field commanders control the ground in Darfur and have often expressed differences with their political leadership outside the region, who they say do not consult them enough.
During previous talks, the disconnect between the political leaders negotiating and the commanders on the ground hindered discussions on security arrangements because clashes continued.
After a peace deal signed by only one of three rebel negotiating factions last year, the rebels fragmented with infighting between signatories and non-signatories.
SUFFERING
Jamous warned this would repeat itself if there was no field unity conference.
Jar el-Neby, a senior SLA field commander, also wants U.N. and AU support for unity talks before the meeting in Tanzania.
Previous unity meetings have been spoiled as political leaders outside the region did not attend.
"We should neglect our personal agendas for the agenda of the conflict and how to solve it for the sake of the civilians suffering for our years," Jamous added.
"They need to think of the future of Darfur after the peace -- how we can keep our community together with the killing we created."
Jamous has been virtually imprisoned in the U.N. hospital for 13 months after he was rescued from Darfur in need of urgent medical treatment. Khartoum calls him a "terrorist" and says he will be arrested if he leaves the hospital.
However, he is still in telephone contact with commanders and said if were released he could help unite the field.
Jamous said any new peace talks needed to address the weaknesses of last year's deal, which included the disarmament and reintegration of the Janjaweed militias, mobilised by the government and accused of rape, murder and looting.
"Any kind of presence of armed men in undisciplined ranks is the cause of this conflict and the failure of any peace deal," he said.
He said the international community needed to guarantee the implementation of any agreement, especially dismantling the militias. A U.N.-AU joint force under discussion could play that role.
Jamous coordinated access for the world's largest humanitarian operation to hundreds of thousands in need of aid during the conflict. His work earned him the respect of many groups and kept rebel looting of aid convoys to a minimum.
Experts estimate 200,000 have been killed and 2.5 million driven from their homes since mostly non-Arab rebels took up arms accusing central government of neglect in early 2003.
Growing concern for safety of Sudan opposition leader in custody
Thursday 26 July 2007 06:55.
By Wasil Ali
July 25, 2007 (KHARTOUM) — Supporters of an opposition party in Sudan expressed concern over the well being of their top leaders arrested by security services two weeks ago amid allegations of torture.
Mubarak al-Fadil
Sudanese security services arrested Mubarak al-Fadil, leader of the Umma Reform and Renewal opposition party and his deputy over allegations of planning sabotage actions in the country.
A statement issued by Al-Fadil office slammed the government for not allowing his family and attorney to visit him in prison.
According to the statement three requests have been made to the authorities requesting permission to visit Al-Fadil but that they have received no response as of yet. Several members of the ruling National Congress Party (NCP) sought to assist Al-Fadil’s family in securing a visit but were turned down as well.
Sudan banned all media reporting on the case of 17 people accused of trying to overthrow the government.
The government issued a decree establishing a commission to investigate the allegations against Al-Fadil and the other detainees.
However the statement from Al-Fadil’s office claim that a member of the commission informed his attorney that he has not been formally notified by the government to proceed with the investigation.
Sudan’s announcement of thwarting the coup attempt was received with skepticism due to the vague nature of the plot.
Former Sudanese Prime Minister and leader of the opposition Umma party Sadiq al-Mahdi told Sudan Tribune that “this is the fifth time we hear from the government about an alleged coup attempt through the years that turns out to be nothing”.
Al-Mahdi noted that in each of these instances the Sudanese government talks about “incriminating evidence and stocks of weapons found but no details are provided”.
Sudanese officials made contradictory statements regarding the nature of the plot and the extent of foreign involvement.
Sudan said Al-Fadil smuggled weapons into the capital Khartoum in preparation for a coup.
But Sudan’s presidential adviser Nafi Ali Nafi admitted to reporters later that no weapons have been found in association with the alleged plot.
Initially Sudanese authorities accused Al-Fadil of being the mastermind of a sabotage plot in Khartoum and said that he sought support from Libya and the US.
But then Sudanese officials denied any foreign involvement and upgraded charges against Al-Fadil to a full blown coup attempt and said that political assassinations was part of the plot.
Al-Fadil’s supporters speaking to Sudan Tribune said they received information that Al-Fadil and the former Minister of Tourism, Abdel Jelil al-Basha were subject to torture and verbal abuse by security services.
“They [Sudan’s Security services] wanted to force a televised confession from him [Al-Fadil] but he refused so they resorted to torture which left marks on his body. This is why they have not allowed any visits” said one supporter who spoke on condition of anonymity.
However there was no independent confirmation of these allegations.
Al-Fadil was appointed as a presidential adviser for economic affairs in 2002 but was sacked after making contacts with the United States without Sudanese leader Omar al-Bashir’s consent.
(ST)
By Wasil Ali
July 25, 2007 (KHARTOUM) — Supporters of an opposition party in Sudan expressed concern over the well being of their top leaders arrested by security services two weeks ago amid allegations of torture.
Mubarak al-Fadil
Sudanese security services arrested Mubarak al-Fadil, leader of the Umma Reform and Renewal opposition party and his deputy over allegations of planning sabotage actions in the country.
A statement issued by Al-Fadil office slammed the government for not allowing his family and attorney to visit him in prison.
According to the statement three requests have been made to the authorities requesting permission to visit Al-Fadil but that they have received no response as of yet. Several members of the ruling National Congress Party (NCP) sought to assist Al-Fadil’s family in securing a visit but were turned down as well.
Sudan banned all media reporting on the case of 17 people accused of trying to overthrow the government.
The government issued a decree establishing a commission to investigate the allegations against Al-Fadil and the other detainees.
However the statement from Al-Fadil’s office claim that a member of the commission informed his attorney that he has not been formally notified by the government to proceed with the investigation.
Sudan’s announcement of thwarting the coup attempt was received with skepticism due to the vague nature of the plot.
Former Sudanese Prime Minister and leader of the opposition Umma party Sadiq al-Mahdi told Sudan Tribune that “this is the fifth time we hear from the government about an alleged coup attempt through the years that turns out to be nothing”.
Al-Mahdi noted that in each of these instances the Sudanese government talks about “incriminating evidence and stocks of weapons found but no details are provided”.
Sudanese officials made contradictory statements regarding the nature of the plot and the extent of foreign involvement.
Sudan said Al-Fadil smuggled weapons into the capital Khartoum in preparation for a coup.
But Sudan’s presidential adviser Nafi Ali Nafi admitted to reporters later that no weapons have been found in association with the alleged plot.
Initially Sudanese authorities accused Al-Fadil of being the mastermind of a sabotage plot in Khartoum and said that he sought support from Libya and the US.
But then Sudanese officials denied any foreign involvement and upgraded charges against Al-Fadil to a full blown coup attempt and said that political assassinations was part of the plot.
Al-Fadil’s supporters speaking to Sudan Tribune said they received information that Al-Fadil and the former Minister of Tourism, Abdel Jelil al-Basha were subject to torture and verbal abuse by security services.
“They [Sudan’s Security services] wanted to force a televised confession from him [Al-Fadil] but he refused so they resorted to torture which left marks on his body. This is why they have not allowed any visits” said one supporter who spoke on condition of anonymity.
However there was no independent confirmation of these allegations.
Al-Fadil was appointed as a presidential adviser for economic affairs in 2002 but was sacked after making contacts with the United States without Sudanese leader Omar al-Bashir’s consent.
(ST)
16 people killed as tribal clashes erupt in Darfur
Thursday 26 July 2007 06:15.
July 25, 2007 (AL-FASHER) — At least 16 people were killed and 20 wounded in a clash between rival Arab tribes in the war-torn Darfur region of western Sudan, local authorities said on Wednesday.
Rzigat Aballa tribesmen fell on a band of Torjum nomads in South Darfur province killing nine, the authorities told reporters, without specifying what day the clash took place.
The tribes, at odds over grazing rights and livestock raiding, have violated a February truce seven times, most dramatically in April when Rzigat tribesmen killed 62 Torjam in their villages.
Darfur came to world attention in 2003 when rebels took up arms against the government to protest at their region’s marginalisation.
The government combatted the rebellion with camel-riding Janjaweed militia, many from the Rzigat Aballa tribe, who have since been accused of atrocities and genocide.
International aid organisations are struggling to address the humanitarian crisis in Darfur, but have been impeded by the widespread violence.
"In the past two weeks, nine food convoys have been attacked by gunmen across Darfur," said Kenro Oshidari, the World Food Programme’s (WFP) Sudan representative.
"WFP staff and contractors are being stopped at gunpoint, dragged out of their vehicles and robbed with alarming frequency," he said, adding that 18 food convoys have been attacked this year, with six vehicles stolen.
Ten WFP staff have been either detained or abducted.
The attacks have prompted the United Nations to declare the road between Nyala, the capital of South Darfur, and Kass town, where fighting between Torjam and Rzigat Aballa has taken place, a "no-go" zone for staff.
WFP’s operation in Darfur feeds two million people a month.
About 200,000 people have been killed and 2.5 million displaced in the Darfur conflict, according to UN estimates. Some sources say the death toll is much higher.
(AFP)
July 25, 2007 (AL-FASHER) — At least 16 people were killed and 20 wounded in a clash between rival Arab tribes in the war-torn Darfur region of western Sudan, local authorities said on Wednesday.
Rzigat Aballa tribesmen fell on a band of Torjum nomads in South Darfur province killing nine, the authorities told reporters, without specifying what day the clash took place.
The tribes, at odds over grazing rights and livestock raiding, have violated a February truce seven times, most dramatically in April when Rzigat tribesmen killed 62 Torjam in their villages.
Darfur came to world attention in 2003 when rebels took up arms against the government to protest at their region’s marginalisation.
The government combatted the rebellion with camel-riding Janjaweed militia, many from the Rzigat Aballa tribe, who have since been accused of atrocities and genocide.
International aid organisations are struggling to address the humanitarian crisis in Darfur, but have been impeded by the widespread violence.
"In the past two weeks, nine food convoys have been attacked by gunmen across Darfur," said Kenro Oshidari, the World Food Programme’s (WFP) Sudan representative.
"WFP staff and contractors are being stopped at gunpoint, dragged out of their vehicles and robbed with alarming frequency," he said, adding that 18 food convoys have been attacked this year, with six vehicles stolen.
Ten WFP staff have been either detained or abducted.
The attacks have prompted the United Nations to declare the road between Nyala, the capital of South Darfur, and Kass town, where fighting between Torjam and Rzigat Aballa has taken place, a "no-go" zone for staff.
WFP’s operation in Darfur feeds two million people a month.
About 200,000 people have been killed and 2.5 million displaced in the Darfur conflict, according to UN estimates. Some sources say the death toll is much higher.
(AFP)
Monday, July 23, 2007
Life and Death in Darfur
By Dr. Jill John-Kall
Photo by: Bethany Morehouse
Dr. Jill John-Kall cradling a
young TB patient
Today I arrived in Mujkar, one of our remotest sites in West Darfur. I dumped my gear and went directly to the clinic where I joined one of my colleagues and his team. I always look forward to my field trips because I am extremely proud of our staff. Their hard work and dedication are the backbone of all our programs and without them, innumerable lives would be lost.
The observation room was filled with little patients. The first girl I saw was a 24 month old who was dying of malnutrition. Looking at the way she was breathing and the way she would lapse in and out of “sleep” without even the strength to close her eyes fully, a sense of foreboding slowly crept over me. I tried to reassure her mother that in the morning we could try to transfer her to the nearest hospital, which is four hours away, but in the meantime we could feed her through a naso-gastric tube. I almost believed it myself.
While I started saying a little prayer for her, we were called to see a pregnant woman whose high blood pressure led to convulsions. While we struggled to give her medicine and stabilize her, a staff member came to tell us that the little girl was crashing. My colleague ran to resuscitate her while I stayed with the pregnant woman. In a few minutes he came back, having succeeded in reviving her. Of course, I think we both knew that it was just a matter of time.
After stabilizing the pregnant woman and reassuring her family, we were asked to see a three year old boy that had fallen from a great height. Upon seeing the child, my heart froze – here was a child with a history of a fall, who was limp and “sleeping” in his mother’s arms, taking very shallow breaths. Immediately, we tried to wake the baby. I just needed to hear him cry. I pinched him cruelly while the other doctor applied sternal pressure. He continued silently mocking us. I pinched harder and asked for a needle to give him a little jab. Luckily, he started crying. We were all relieved for a few moments until we realized how shallow his breaths still were. We listened to his lungs and they were tight, lots of wheezing with very minimal air moving. I ran to the office where I had left my inhaler. We improvised making a chamber out of a small plastic medicine bag and having the baby inhale the medicine. The problem was that his heart was already racing trying to cope with the work he was putting in with each breath and if I gave him too much of the inhaler, his heart would race even further pushing him right over the edge. After giving him some antibiotics and steroids, we left him with his mother, hoping for the best. As I type this now, I am waiting for someone to come and tell us that he died. Deep in my heart, I know he won’t last long, not with the way he was breathing…
Photo by: Dr. Jill John-Kall
A baby in the therapeutic feeding center in Darfur
As I stood there in the clinic watching the little boy, I thought that I wouldn’t wish this feeling on anyone on the world, the notion that after seeing a child, you just wait for the bad news. The feeling that as you lay your hands on a child, listen to him breathe, watch his eyes and listen to his heart, you leave him in God’s hands because you know deep inside, that he will not live long. My thoughts are interrupted as the nurse comes to tell us that the little girl with malnutrition has died. The family is distraught, I weakly say to the mother “malesh, malesh-sorry, sorry.” I feel like the lowliest creature on earth. What an inadequate statement to make, “sorry, sorry.” Am I sorry that she lost her child or am I sorry that we didn’t save her? Is my “sorry” in empathy for her or is it asking forgiveness for me? As I hold the crying mother, I can feel her tears on my arms. And then we are called to see the little boy.
He is worse, trying desperately to breathe through his little lungs which are smothered with invisible invaders. I know that he too will not make it and it is unbearable. I am wrestling with my own demons. As a doctor, my hands should be healing hands. My mind should be able to come up with some answers, something to attack the vile bacteria who have invaded his body. An asthmatic myself, I have a soft spot for anyone who can’t breathe and he is no exception. I give him some more of my inhaler and silently beg him to get better. We leave him in the observation room and I head back to the office. It’s 7:15 p.m.
As I start working in the office, I look at pictures of Um Dukum, where I was about two weeks ago. If it’s possible to imagine, Um Dukum is a place even further away than Mukjar, bordering Chad and Central African Republic. I’m looking at these pictures for work but subconsciously, I’m looking at them to remind myself why I’m here in the first place. We have recently taken over a little rural hospital there and it will soon be a beautiful program. It’s currently a little shack of a hospital, give or take 20 beds with a primary health care component. We do outpatient consultations, immunizations, reproductive health, health education, nutrition surveillance and outreach work. I am in love with this little shack of a hospital. It’s amazing how many lives are saved there and how many more will be saved. Women get emergency C-sections, conflict victims get sewn together, children get measles vaccines and we even treat the common cold. This is such an important location because it not only serves the local population but it also serves the IDPs within Darfur as well as the refugees that come in from Chad and CAR in times of their internal conflicts.
This hospital is a Godsend for people in this area because referrals to the nearest hospital – another four hours away – are almost impossible. Any travelers by road are frequent victims of hijackings and theft and in the rainy season, the dirt roads become rivers of mud, impossible to cross. But even though the hospital is simple, it is a shining example of how minimal efforts can go a long way in the midst of Darfur. My mind drifts back to Mukjar. Last year referrals were much easier because the roads were safer. However, since December, more and more aid agencies have been targeted by bandits, hijackers, Janjaweed, government troops, rebels, all part and parcel of any relief team working in Darfur.
Photo by: Bethany Morehouse
An IMC staffer schooling a villager at a new clinic in West Darfur on some basic tenets of primary health care. Initiatives like this one help maintain Dr. John-Kall’s hope that she can make a difference in the lives of people struggling to stay alive in Darfur.
It’s almost 8 p.m. and I’ve just been told that the little boy has died. Inside, I am screaming curses while outside I remain calm since it was expected anyway. My eyes start to water and I can’t see the keyboard anymore. It’s hard when you lose a patient, even harder when they’re kids and today we lost two. I think about the inconsolable families, left with huge voids in their hearts. I think about those little kids who will never see tomorrow. I start questioning myself and what I thought I could ever achieve here. In the midst of this self loathing, self hating mood, the realist in me shouts “I told you so!” The cynic in me shouts “I told you so!” The optimist in me is quiet. I am uncomfortable because I worry that I am slowly losing my soul. I glance over to my pictures of Um Dukum. The optimist whispers, “You can still try.”
Dr. Jill John-Kall serves as Medical Director for International Medical Corps in Darfur, Sudan.
Photo by: Bethany Morehouse
Dr. Jill John-Kall cradling a
young TB patient
Today I arrived in Mujkar, one of our remotest sites in West Darfur. I dumped my gear and went directly to the clinic where I joined one of my colleagues and his team. I always look forward to my field trips because I am extremely proud of our staff. Their hard work and dedication are the backbone of all our programs and without them, innumerable lives would be lost.
The observation room was filled with little patients. The first girl I saw was a 24 month old who was dying of malnutrition. Looking at the way she was breathing and the way she would lapse in and out of “sleep” without even the strength to close her eyes fully, a sense of foreboding slowly crept over me. I tried to reassure her mother that in the morning we could try to transfer her to the nearest hospital, which is four hours away, but in the meantime we could feed her through a naso-gastric tube. I almost believed it myself.
While I started saying a little prayer for her, we were called to see a pregnant woman whose high blood pressure led to convulsions. While we struggled to give her medicine and stabilize her, a staff member came to tell us that the little girl was crashing. My colleague ran to resuscitate her while I stayed with the pregnant woman. In a few minutes he came back, having succeeded in reviving her. Of course, I think we both knew that it was just a matter of time.
After stabilizing the pregnant woman and reassuring her family, we were asked to see a three year old boy that had fallen from a great height. Upon seeing the child, my heart froze – here was a child with a history of a fall, who was limp and “sleeping” in his mother’s arms, taking very shallow breaths. Immediately, we tried to wake the baby. I just needed to hear him cry. I pinched him cruelly while the other doctor applied sternal pressure. He continued silently mocking us. I pinched harder and asked for a needle to give him a little jab. Luckily, he started crying. We were all relieved for a few moments until we realized how shallow his breaths still were. We listened to his lungs and they were tight, lots of wheezing with very minimal air moving. I ran to the office where I had left my inhaler. We improvised making a chamber out of a small plastic medicine bag and having the baby inhale the medicine. The problem was that his heart was already racing trying to cope with the work he was putting in with each breath and if I gave him too much of the inhaler, his heart would race even further pushing him right over the edge. After giving him some antibiotics and steroids, we left him with his mother, hoping for the best. As I type this now, I am waiting for someone to come and tell us that he died. Deep in my heart, I know he won’t last long, not with the way he was breathing…
Photo by: Dr. Jill John-Kall
A baby in the therapeutic feeding center in Darfur
As I stood there in the clinic watching the little boy, I thought that I wouldn’t wish this feeling on anyone on the world, the notion that after seeing a child, you just wait for the bad news. The feeling that as you lay your hands on a child, listen to him breathe, watch his eyes and listen to his heart, you leave him in God’s hands because you know deep inside, that he will not live long. My thoughts are interrupted as the nurse comes to tell us that the little girl with malnutrition has died. The family is distraught, I weakly say to the mother “malesh, malesh-sorry, sorry.” I feel like the lowliest creature on earth. What an inadequate statement to make, “sorry, sorry.” Am I sorry that she lost her child or am I sorry that we didn’t save her? Is my “sorry” in empathy for her or is it asking forgiveness for me? As I hold the crying mother, I can feel her tears on my arms. And then we are called to see the little boy.
He is worse, trying desperately to breathe through his little lungs which are smothered with invisible invaders. I know that he too will not make it and it is unbearable. I am wrestling with my own demons. As a doctor, my hands should be healing hands. My mind should be able to come up with some answers, something to attack the vile bacteria who have invaded his body. An asthmatic myself, I have a soft spot for anyone who can’t breathe and he is no exception. I give him some more of my inhaler and silently beg him to get better. We leave him in the observation room and I head back to the office. It’s 7:15 p.m.
As I start working in the office, I look at pictures of Um Dukum, where I was about two weeks ago. If it’s possible to imagine, Um Dukum is a place even further away than Mukjar, bordering Chad and Central African Republic. I’m looking at these pictures for work but subconsciously, I’m looking at them to remind myself why I’m here in the first place. We have recently taken over a little rural hospital there and it will soon be a beautiful program. It’s currently a little shack of a hospital, give or take 20 beds with a primary health care component. We do outpatient consultations, immunizations, reproductive health, health education, nutrition surveillance and outreach work. I am in love with this little shack of a hospital. It’s amazing how many lives are saved there and how many more will be saved. Women get emergency C-sections, conflict victims get sewn together, children get measles vaccines and we even treat the common cold. This is such an important location because it not only serves the local population but it also serves the IDPs within Darfur as well as the refugees that come in from Chad and CAR in times of their internal conflicts.
This hospital is a Godsend for people in this area because referrals to the nearest hospital – another four hours away – are almost impossible. Any travelers by road are frequent victims of hijackings and theft and in the rainy season, the dirt roads become rivers of mud, impossible to cross. But even though the hospital is simple, it is a shining example of how minimal efforts can go a long way in the midst of Darfur. My mind drifts back to Mukjar. Last year referrals were much easier because the roads were safer. However, since December, more and more aid agencies have been targeted by bandits, hijackers, Janjaweed, government troops, rebels, all part and parcel of any relief team working in Darfur.
Photo by: Bethany Morehouse
An IMC staffer schooling a villager at a new clinic in West Darfur on some basic tenets of primary health care. Initiatives like this one help maintain Dr. John-Kall’s hope that she can make a difference in the lives of people struggling to stay alive in Darfur.
It’s almost 8 p.m. and I’ve just been told that the little boy has died. Inside, I am screaming curses while outside I remain calm since it was expected anyway. My eyes start to water and I can’t see the keyboard anymore. It’s hard when you lose a patient, even harder when they’re kids and today we lost two. I think about the inconsolable families, left with huge voids in their hearts. I think about those little kids who will never see tomorrow. I start questioning myself and what I thought I could ever achieve here. In the midst of this self loathing, self hating mood, the realist in me shouts “I told you so!” The cynic in me shouts “I told you so!” The optimist in me is quiet. I am uncomfortable because I worry that I am slowly losing my soul. I glance over to my pictures of Um Dukum. The optimist whispers, “You can still try.”
Dr. Jill John-Kall serves as Medical Director for International Medical Corps in Darfur, Sudan.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
A Godsend for Darfur, or a Curse?
The New York Times
By LYDIA POLGREEN
DAKAR, Senegal
THE announcement by researchers at Boston University last week that a vast underground lake the size of Lake Erie had been discovered beneath the barren soil of northern Darfur, a blood-soaked but otherwise parched land racked by war for the past four years, was greeted by rapturous hopes. Could this, at last, bring deliverance from a cataclysmic conflict that has killed at least 200,000 people and pushed more than 2.5 million from their homes?
That hope is built upon an argument, advanced by a United Nations report released last month and an opinion article in The Washington Post by Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations secretary general, that environmental degradation and the symptoms of a warming planet are at the root of the Darfur crisis.
“There is a very strong link between land degradation, desertification and conflict in Darfur,” said the United Nations Environmental Program report, which noted that rainfall in northern Darfur has decreased by a third over the last 80 years. “Exponential population growth and related environmental stress have created the conditions for conflicts to be triggered and sustained by political, tribal or ethnic differences,” the report said, adding that Darfur “can be considered a tragic example of the social breakdown that can result from ecological collapse.”
The idea that more water — unearthed through a thousand wells sunk into the underground lake — could neatly defuse the crisis is seductive. Messy African conflicts, from Congo to Liberia, from northern Uganda to Angola, have a way of defying all efforts to solve them. Instead, they seem to become hopelessly more complex as they drag on, year after agonizing year. A scientific explanation for the problem (environmental degradation) along with a tidy technological solution (irrigation) gratifies the modern humanitarian impulse.
But the history of Sudan, a grim chronicle of civil war, famine, coups and despotism, gives ample reason to be skeptical.
“Like all resources water can be used for good or ill,” said Alex de Waal, a scholar who has studied the impact of climate variation in Sudan and who witnessed the 1984-85 famine that is often cited as the beginning of the ecological crisis gripping Darfur. “It can be a blessing or also a curse. If the government acts true to form and tries to create some sort of oasis in the desert and control who settles there, that would simply be an extension of the crisis, not a solution.”
The droughts that gripped Sudan in the 1980s, and the migrations and other social changes they forced, have doubtless played a role in the conflict by increasing competition for water and land between farmers, who tend to be non-Arab, and herders, many of whom are Arabs. But an environmental catastrophe cannot become a violent cataclysm without a powerful human hand to guide it in that direction.
“These wider environmental factors don’t have impact in and of themselves” in terms of fomenting conflict, Mr. de Waal said. “The question is how they are managed.”
In fact, while different regions and social groups suffer severely, Sudan as a whole has riches to spare, in oil, fertile soil, and even water. Indeed, history suggests that this newly discovered lake is just as likely to become a source of conflict as a solution to the bloodshed.
Successive Sudanese governments and their colonial precursors have adopted agricultural policies that have almost inevitably led to conflict. They have favored large mechanized farms and complex irrigation schemes, controlled by the government and its allies, over the small, rain-fed farms that are the backbone of the rural economy in much of Sudan.
In eastern Sudan, where a rebellion has been brewing for years, the Beja people have nursed grievances since Britain and Egypt ruled Sudan jointly during the first half of the 20th century. Under their rule, irrigation programs for commercial farming deprived the Beja of their prime grazing land.
Post-colonial governments, which in the early years had the blessing of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, took vast tracts of land in the name of agricultural development, turning farmers who worked their own land into wage laborers for the state and its allies.
Some Sudanese have even been pushed off their land entirely. In the early 1990s the Nuba people were forced into “peace villages,” where they provided a steady supply of cheap, captive labor to mechanized farms. In other areas, including parts of Darfur, intensive mechanized farming by the government and investors who were heedless to the need to protect the fertility of the land left large tracts barren.
A vast new agricultural scheme in a largely uninhabited swath of northern Darfur is more likely to fit into this destructive pattern than not, said John Prendergast, a founder of the Enough Project, an initiative of the Center for American Progress and the International Crisis Group to abolish genocide and mass atrocities.
“Climate change and the lack of rain are much less important than the land-use patterns promoted by the government of Sudan and the development policies of World Bank and I.M.F., which were focused on intensive agricultural expansion that really mined the soils and left a lot of land unusable,” said Mr. Prendergast, who has been studying Sudan for 20 years. “That was probably the principal impetus for a lot of intra-Darfur migration in the decades leading up to the conflict in Darfur.”
During those years, the government exploited tensions over water and land to achieve its own aims, putting down a rebellion among the non-Arab tribes, who rose up because they wanted a greater share of Sudan’s wealth and power. It armed tribal militias to fight the rebels, and these militias unleashed a tide of violence that ultimately would become, according to the Bush administration and many others, the 21st century’s first genocide.
A report released last year by the Coalition for International Justice on the role that oil and mechanized farming have played in human rights abuses in Sudan concluded: “The predominant root of conflict in Sudan is the instability that results from the systemic abuse of the rural (and recently urbanized) poor at the hands of the economic and political elites of central Sudan.”
In this analysis, the heart of the Darfur conflict, as in all conflicts in Sudan, is the battle for control of resources and riches, but not between farmers and herders, northerners and southerners, Christians and Muslims, or Arabs and non-Arabs.
It is a conflict between those at the center of the country, the elites who have controlled Sudan and its wealth for the past century and a half, and the desperately poor people who beg for scraps from the periphery.
Until that equation changes, many analysts argue, nothing else will.
By LYDIA POLGREEN
DAKAR, Senegal
THE announcement by researchers at Boston University last week that a vast underground lake the size of Lake Erie had been discovered beneath the barren soil of northern Darfur, a blood-soaked but otherwise parched land racked by war for the past four years, was greeted by rapturous hopes. Could this, at last, bring deliverance from a cataclysmic conflict that has killed at least 200,000 people and pushed more than 2.5 million from their homes?
That hope is built upon an argument, advanced by a United Nations report released last month and an opinion article in The Washington Post by Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations secretary general, that environmental degradation and the symptoms of a warming planet are at the root of the Darfur crisis.
“There is a very strong link between land degradation, desertification and conflict in Darfur,” said the United Nations Environmental Program report, which noted that rainfall in northern Darfur has decreased by a third over the last 80 years. “Exponential population growth and related environmental stress have created the conditions for conflicts to be triggered and sustained by political, tribal or ethnic differences,” the report said, adding that Darfur “can be considered a tragic example of the social breakdown that can result from ecological collapse.”
The idea that more water — unearthed through a thousand wells sunk into the underground lake — could neatly defuse the crisis is seductive. Messy African conflicts, from Congo to Liberia, from northern Uganda to Angola, have a way of defying all efforts to solve them. Instead, they seem to become hopelessly more complex as they drag on, year after agonizing year. A scientific explanation for the problem (environmental degradation) along with a tidy technological solution (irrigation) gratifies the modern humanitarian impulse.
But the history of Sudan, a grim chronicle of civil war, famine, coups and despotism, gives ample reason to be skeptical.
“Like all resources water can be used for good or ill,” said Alex de Waal, a scholar who has studied the impact of climate variation in Sudan and who witnessed the 1984-85 famine that is often cited as the beginning of the ecological crisis gripping Darfur. “It can be a blessing or also a curse. If the government acts true to form and tries to create some sort of oasis in the desert and control who settles there, that would simply be an extension of the crisis, not a solution.”
The droughts that gripped Sudan in the 1980s, and the migrations and other social changes they forced, have doubtless played a role in the conflict by increasing competition for water and land between farmers, who tend to be non-Arab, and herders, many of whom are Arabs. But an environmental catastrophe cannot become a violent cataclysm without a powerful human hand to guide it in that direction.
“These wider environmental factors don’t have impact in and of themselves” in terms of fomenting conflict, Mr. de Waal said. “The question is how they are managed.”
In fact, while different regions and social groups suffer severely, Sudan as a whole has riches to spare, in oil, fertile soil, and even water. Indeed, history suggests that this newly discovered lake is just as likely to become a source of conflict as a solution to the bloodshed.
Successive Sudanese governments and their colonial precursors have adopted agricultural policies that have almost inevitably led to conflict. They have favored large mechanized farms and complex irrigation schemes, controlled by the government and its allies, over the small, rain-fed farms that are the backbone of the rural economy in much of Sudan.
In eastern Sudan, where a rebellion has been brewing for years, the Beja people have nursed grievances since Britain and Egypt ruled Sudan jointly during the first half of the 20th century. Under their rule, irrigation programs for commercial farming deprived the Beja of their prime grazing land.
Post-colonial governments, which in the early years had the blessing of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, took vast tracts of land in the name of agricultural development, turning farmers who worked their own land into wage laborers for the state and its allies.
Some Sudanese have even been pushed off their land entirely. In the early 1990s the Nuba people were forced into “peace villages,” where they provided a steady supply of cheap, captive labor to mechanized farms. In other areas, including parts of Darfur, intensive mechanized farming by the government and investors who were heedless to the need to protect the fertility of the land left large tracts barren.
A vast new agricultural scheme in a largely uninhabited swath of northern Darfur is more likely to fit into this destructive pattern than not, said John Prendergast, a founder of the Enough Project, an initiative of the Center for American Progress and the International Crisis Group to abolish genocide and mass atrocities.
“Climate change and the lack of rain are much less important than the land-use patterns promoted by the government of Sudan and the development policies of World Bank and I.M.F., which were focused on intensive agricultural expansion that really mined the soils and left a lot of land unusable,” said Mr. Prendergast, who has been studying Sudan for 20 years. “That was probably the principal impetus for a lot of intra-Darfur migration in the decades leading up to the conflict in Darfur.”
During those years, the government exploited tensions over water and land to achieve its own aims, putting down a rebellion among the non-Arab tribes, who rose up because they wanted a greater share of Sudan’s wealth and power. It armed tribal militias to fight the rebels, and these militias unleashed a tide of violence that ultimately would become, according to the Bush administration and many others, the 21st century’s first genocide.
A report released last year by the Coalition for International Justice on the role that oil and mechanized farming have played in human rights abuses in Sudan concluded: “The predominant root of conflict in Sudan is the instability that results from the systemic abuse of the rural (and recently urbanized) poor at the hands of the economic and political elites of central Sudan.”
In this analysis, the heart of the Darfur conflict, as in all conflicts in Sudan, is the battle for control of resources and riches, but not between farmers and herders, northerners and southerners, Christians and Muslims, or Arabs and non-Arabs.
It is a conflict between those at the center of the country, the elites who have controlled Sudan and its wealth for the past century and a half, and the desperately poor people who beg for scraps from the periphery.
Until that equation changes, many analysts argue, nothing else will.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
