The humanitarian crisis in Darfur, seen in the light of international politics

dublin | rights, freedoms and repression | opinion/analysis Monday September 27, 2004 07:07 by Astrid Essed astridessed at hotmail dot com Florijn 444 020-6954282

Humanitarian crisis in Darfur

Seen in the light of the in februari 2003 restarted conflict in Darfur, by which by the military conduct of the governmental troops and the Janjaweed-militia's 50.000 civilians were killed and 1 million were expelled, the sending of UN-Peacetroops is of the greatest importance

The humanitarian crisis in Darfur, seen in the light of international politics.

In contrary to the political analyses, made by the general European and American political and media-circles, the in february 2003 restarted conflict in Darfur, which has resulted in the present humanitarian crisis, isn't rooted in religious, but in etno-economical causes.
This in contrary with the situation in South-Sudan, where the conflict has an evident religious character.


A Background:

Since the independence of Sudan in 1954 there has been a civil war between the islamic North and the largerly christian and animistic South by which regular islamic government troops together with paramilitarian troops [PDF] and militia's [muraleen] were fighting against the largerly christian Sudanese Liberation Army [SPLA], mostly supported by irregular South-Sudanese factions, which have also internal conflicts.
In this conflict which was only interrupted by a short peace-period between 1972-1973 and is still continuing in the South of Sudan, governmental troops and their supporting militia's as well as the christian and animistic troops make themselves guilty of numerous and largescale human rights violations agianst the local civilian population like expulsion, arbitrarily killing, execution and raping, which has caused more than 100.000 civilian victims.

Although it testifies of a common western example of simplification, to consider the religious struggle between North and South Sudan also as an etnical conflict, which makes no sense since the Sudanese population, which consists of 39 percent of Arabs and 61 percent of Africans, is moslim for more then 70 percent, yet there is a complicating factor in this.
Since the independence of Sudan the leading politicians in the central governments are mostly of Arab descent, which is also for a part reflected in the etnic composition of the government-army, with as a consequence, that the etnical component in the conflict plays a role also, although far less than the religious one.
A second aspect of the conflict is economical, due to the presence of large oil-supplies in the Southern regio.
As a consequence several international oil-companies employed for security-reasons regular government-troops or private-militia's which were responsible for the expulsion or arbitrarily killing of a great number of civilians, who lived in the southern oil-areas.


B Conflict in Darfur:

As already has been commented, the present conflict in Darfur [the Western part of Sudan] isn't based on religious grounds, since practically the whole population is muslim, but has its roots in economical-etnic origins.

1 Background:

Although the present conflict in Darfur has been developed into an etnic conflict between the troops of the Sudanese Arab-originated government and the Arab Janjaweed militia's at the one side and the black resistance-organisations at the other side, it is important to notify that before this conflict the African and Arab communities in Darfur lived together in peace.
The present conflict in Darfur, which stemmed from the early eighties of the former century and was intensified by a period of extreme dryness, was being based on a conflict between mostly sedentary African farmers in Darfur and Arab nomads, coming from the North.
Not only the different economical lifesyle between the two groups played thereby a role, but also the fact, that the Arab nomads wanted to take possession of the grounds of the local farmers.
In the nineties the conflict was further escalated when by attacks of a fresh group of Arab nomads from the North of Sudan hundreds of Darfurian civilians were killed, especially the Fur, Zaghawa and Massalit [the most important black communities in Darfur], which also lead to the destruction of their houses and the robbing of their cattle.
The present Sudanese government, which came into power after a military coup in 1989, further intensified the etnic conflict not only by applying an ''arabisation'' policy by which the Arab nomads enjoyed a political preference-position, but also by recruiting private-militia out of the Arab nomads to restore order in the area.
Those militia from which the present Janjaweed were originated made themselves guilty of serious human rights violations cq war-crimes against the black civilian population.
In a reaction to this two resistance-organisations were formed out of the black civilian population, namely the SPA and JEM.



2 Peace-Treaty

In the same period under international political pressure in september 2002 a peace-treaty was closed between the Sudanese government and the since 1954 existing resistance-organisation the SPLA regarding the struggle between the Nortg and South.
However it was violated soon again, especially because of the attacks of villages by militias which were loyal to the government by which a great number of villagers were killed, especially in the oil-provinces [in the Upper-Nile, the South of Sudan]

3 Darfur:

Also in Darfur [in the Western part of Sudan] the conflict was being intensified in februari 2003, when the resistance-organisations SPA and the JEM attacked the government-troops and the militia's.
The government-troops and the militia responded with attacks which were mostly not directed against the resistance-organisations, but against the black civilian-population by which serious violations of human rights and war-crimes were committed.
For example numerous villages were being bombed by the governmental Air Force and Janjaweed militias were responsible for serious war-cimes like torturing, raping and the committing of genocide against the black civilian population by which untill now more than 10.000 civilians were killed and more then 1 million civilians were expelled from Darfur or fled to the neighbouring country Chad.
Also journalists and members of medical-humanitarian organisations were being threatened and intimidated and at several occasions the delivery of medicins and other necessary supplies for the civilian population were being held up.
However it must be notified, that not only the governmental troops and the Arab militia, but also the black resistance organisations SPA and JEM were guilty of war-crimes agianst the civilian population like arbitrarily killing, torture and rape.

C International criticism:

1 The UN-Security Council Resolutions

It is evident, that this horrendous governmental political and military conduct has led to grave international condemnation from as well European, American, African and Arabic politicians, which led to the acceptance of he UN-Councilresolution dd 30-7, which summoned the Sudanese government to the dismantlement of the Janjaweed-militias within a month.
In the case of not implementing this resolution by the Sudanese government, the consequences would be economical sanctions concerning Sudan.
This was followed by the recently accepted second UN-Councilresolution, which was proposed by the USA by which was threatened with an oil-embargo when the Sudanese government failed to end the atrocities in Darfur.
Before analysing the second Councilresolution, taken in seprtember, it is interesting to refer to the political attitude of the Atrab League as well in regard with the humanitarian crisis in Darfur as regarding the first accepted first UN-Councilresolution:

2 Arab-League Conference

Several weeks after the acceptance of the first Security-Council resolution a conference of the Arab League took place, which was dedicated as well to the humanitarian situation in Darfur as to the contents of the referred Security Council-resolution.
Although there was an evident condemnation of the human rights violations cq war-crimes in Darfur,
[which was also confirmed in an earlier statement of the Arab League] also as well as military intervention as economical sanctions were condemned.
Also in the final statement there was an implicite defense of the Sudanese government, which according to the Arab League had to be given more time to dismantle the Janjaweed-militias.

Economical sanctions and military intervention:

Concerning their rejection of economical sanctions I totally agree with the point of view of the Arab League, that such measures are at the cost of the weak socio-economical groups in Sudan, especially seen in the light of the threatening or already ruling famine.
Moreover the recently ended UN-santions against Iraq, which have led to the death of more than 1 million Iraqi children have teached according my opinion, that economical sanctions against any country are unacceptable according to humanitarian standards.
Also I agree with the argument agianst military intervention, which yet apart of the apparent violation of the principle of sovereignity, is causing yet a greater humanitarian disaster, due to a great number of civilian victims and a still greater flow of refugees.

However the third argument by the League, which is aimed to give the Sudanese government more time to dismantle the Janjaweed-miltia's, doesn't make only any sense, but also testifies of a great lack of humanity regadarding the black civilian population in Darfur.

A number of recent reports and visits of human rights and help-organisations to Darfur have learnt that the Sudanese government has hardly taken any measures to dismantle the Janjaweed-mililtia's, which as a direct consequence that the human rights violations and war-crimes have continued.
Therefore it is of the greatest importance, that the Arab League not only is condemning the human-rights-violations, but also is supporting any peaceful initiative which protects the black civilian population in Darfur.

3 UN-Security-resolutions:

I'm also very critical regarding the two accepted UN-Security Resolutions concerning Darfur dd july and september.
In the first resolution not only a plea was held for economical sanctions, which is at the cost of the already impoverished Sudanese civilian-population, moreover the Sudanese goverment were given a month to dismantle the Janjaweed-militia's, which testified of an irresponsible risk with the lives of the black civilians in Darfur, since it was commonly known that the Sudanese government itself supported those Janjaweed militias.
As has been mentioned before, in the past two months after taken the first Security-Council-resolution the human rights violations and war-crimes went on.
As a consequence of this, a second resolution was accepted in which the Sudanese government was summoned again to end the atrocities in Darfur with the consequence of an oil-embargo when the resolution isn't executed.
Not only this is a renewed plea for an ecomical boycot at the cost of the impoverished Sudanese population, still worse is the fact that the UN despite of the contining human rights violations, which have been recently reported by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights Louise Arbour, don't take any effort for an effective protection of the black civilian population in Darfur by sending UN-peacetroops to Darfur.

In that respect it is of the greatest importance that the Security Council is giving full support to the initiative of the Rwandese government, which has sent already 150 soldiers to Darfur, to sent a well-equipped UN-Peace-force to Darfur to protect the black civilian population against further attacks of governemtal-troops and Janjaweed-militia's.
When the UN-Council fails to take this initiative, it is as well politically and morally co-responsible for all in Darfur committed war-crimes.


Astrid Essed
Florijn 444
1102 BA Amsterdam
The Netherlands