Sudan: At War with its People

Help Raise Issues Related to Darfur and Sudan in the Presidential Campaign

by Bill Andress, Sudan Advocacy Action Forum

After four years, the conflict in Darfur, an area about the size of Texas, has resulted in the deaths of an estimated 400,000 to 500,000 people and the forced removal of about 2.5 million from their homes into refugee camps in neighboring countries or squalid internal displacement camps inside Sudan, most near the larger towns and cities of Darfur. The victims are Sudanese. The perpetrators are Sudanese.

In 2003, rebels from indigenous African tribes in Darfur attacked government military installations, hoping to correct the ills caused by many years of neglect by the central government. Rather than limit its response to the rebel combatants, the government of Sudan, in concert with the Janjaweed militia, adopted a scorched-earth policy against the civilian population. The actions of the government of Sudan and its Janjaweed allies appropriately have been labeled genocide by the United States.

U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour's November 2006 report of events in a refugee camp in West Darfur illustrates the situation:

“7,000 people fled the area [of the attacks]. Several witnesses described seeing cold-blooded killings of children when the attackers ransacked villages, including a woman whose four-year-old was pulled from her grasp and shot dead.  Another group of three children (five, seven and nine years-old) were running in line. The five-year old fell down and was shot dead.  One of the attackers reportedly told a boy who pleaded with him: ‘If I let you go then you will grow up.’ The boy was then shot, the report said.”

The current phase of the genocide involves violence directed at the populations within camps for displaced persons.  Men are being gunned down, children clubbed and burned to death and women gang-raped. This is the latest chapter in a continuing history of genocide in Sudan.  How can we understand such brutality, such disregard for human life and such depravity? Who are those who use genocide as strategy?

History of the conflict

Sudan gained independence in 1956. Control of the country has been in the hands of a small group of members of Arabic tribes living along the Nile River near Khartoum. Under their reign, Sudan has been at war with itself for all but 10 years. The last period of peace ended in 1982.  Since then, about 2.75 million Sudanese citizens have been killed directly or through engineered starvation, dehydration and disease. Almost a quarter of the population have been driven from their homes and denied a means of survival. On average about 10,000 Sudanese per month die from the government’s genocidal strategy.

Power and wealth always have been concentrated in these few Arabic tribes who control the nation. Sudan is controlled by a few well-educated, intellectually capable, radically committed men who are members of the National Congress Party. They rule through military dictatorship. Regardless of their ethnic, religious or cultural identity, population groups on the periphery of power remain marginalized, largely destitute and lacking development.

Sudan's President Omar al Bashir has been in power since 1989. Because of his ongoing deadly human-rights abuses in Darfur, he has for two years running been acknowledged the World’s Worst Dictator by Parade Magazine. Lust for power, greed, racism, culture and religious zealotry all are part of the motivation for Bashir and his genocidaires in Khartoum. 

What can the nations of the world do?

Responses fall into three categories: 

• Diplomatic (political negotiations)
• Economic (sanctions and other pressure)
• Military

Roger Winter, former special representative on Sudan to the Secretary of State, testified before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa that in the seventeen years since they came to power by an illegal coup, these Sudanese leaders have consistently defied the international community and won. Winter identified the key to moving the leaders of Sudan as posing a credible threat to their power and wealth. 

What are the nations doing? The African Union has a military force operating in Darfur with the task of performing peacekeeping operations related to the conflict. About 7,000 strong, the force is too small, inadequately equipped and does not have a strong mandate to protect the civilian population — nor is there a peace to monitor. The force is largely ineffective and not a credible threat to their power and wealth.

What are we doing? The United Nations has passed eight resolutions condemning the violence in Darfur, none of which has stopped the genocide. The U.N. is limited by the self-interest of its component nations.  For example, China is the dominant trading partner with Sudan and buys the great bulk of the oil extracted in Sudan; Russia is a primary supplier of weapons to the Government of Sudan. As permanent members of the Security Council, both Russia and China have veto power. Although the Security Council approved sending a force of about 22,000 troops into Darfur, the United Nations seems unwilling to dispatch such a force without the approval of the Government of Sudan — not a credible threat to their power and wealth.

What are we doing? European nations seem willing to be observers.  Professor Eric Reeves stated it well:

“Rhetorical performance is robust in some quarters, but, despite Europe’s diplomatic, economic, and military power—and its own experience with genocide over the last century—there is no indication that Europe is considering any commensurate action…we are learning, yet again, that some genocides matter more than others. And, from the perspective of Europe, Darfur just doesn’t measure up.” (The New Republic (online), October 27, 2006) 

Not a credible threat to their power and wealth.

What are we doing? The United States has done more than any other nation or entity.  We have given humanitarian aid to save the people of Sudan, sponsored forceful resolutions in the United Nations, and prohibited U.S. companies from doing business with Sudan. Sudan is listed on the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and other churches have joined in the efforts to provide humanitarian aid. Citizens are urging university, church and state retirement programs to divest from foreign companies doing business with Sudan that supports the violence. All are important steps. But just as important is what we have not done. We have not denied companies doing business with the government of Sudan access to our capital markets and not prevented Sudanese leaders who are complicit in genocide from coming to this country. We are not willing to commit U.S. military forces to Darfur to stop the genocide. We, along with the rest of the world, have not posed a credible threat to the power and wealth of the leaders Sudan.

What then can WE do? “Nothing” is not an answer for Christians. Jesus tells us quite clearly that what we do for our brothers and sisters is what we do for Him. With equal clarity, He tells us that neglecting our brothers and sisters is the same as neglecting Him.  It will not do for us to say, “I knew about the genocide in Sudan, but I decided not to get involved.”

And so we pray. And give to Presbyterian Disaster Assistance and other groups providing humanitarian aid. We participate in groups such as the Sudan Advocacy Action Forum. We consider our own investments.

Remembering that the idea is to provide a credible threat to the wealth and power of the Sudanese leadership, another step is before us. We must bring the genocide to the forefront of the presidential race. 

When presidential candidates of any party visit your area, go to the meetings and ask questions — not about policy, but about action!  If the candidates do not visit your area, write to them. Write letters to the editor, encouraging others to pose such questions.

Ask questions like:

• Over the past 17 years, the controlling party in Sudan has ignored international concern about its inhumane internal actions except when the leaders have feared loss of power and wealth.  What specific economic measures will you use to stop the genocide in Darfur?
• Both the U.S. Congress and the President have labeled the conflict in Darfur genocide.  That determination, which certainly is accurate, imposes a responsibility to protect the victims.  How will you protect the threatened citizens of Darfur? 
• The State Department lists Sudan as a state sponsor of terrorism. What specific measures will you take to put an end to terrorism in Darfur sponsored by the Government of Sudan?

Persist. Don’t accept “policy” answers. Demand “action” answers. The media will report these events and the candidate’s response. The genocidaires in Sudan will listen. If we become involved and push for action, we can help create a credible threat to their power and wealth that may lead to peace for the people of Darfur.