Cities under siege

Published : Feb 23, 2007 00:00 IST

Displaced children at the Zamzam camp,15 km from Al Fashr in North Darfur, in March 2005.-NIMA ELBAGIR/REUTERS

Displaced children at the Zamzam camp,15 km from Al Fashr in North Darfur, in March 2005.-NIMA ELBAGIR/REUTERS

The world remains a largely silent witness to the conflict in Darfur where black Africans are brutally suppressed by Arab militias.

IMAGINE the slums of Mumbai: tightly packed shacks patch-worked together with scraps of old saris and woven plastic sacks; lots of children running around water taps, kicking up pools of stagnant water; donkeys and goats and dogs (braying, bleating and barking). People huddled over cooking pots, the smell of wood burning in the cool evening air that is thick with dust, smoke, chatter and prayers. Chaotic, cramped interlocked human stories, all set against the backdrop of a hand-to-mouth existence.

Now imagine all these hundreds of thousands of people held under siege by heavily armed gunmen who kill the men and rape the women should they dare to leave the undefined borders of the slum. Imagine a situation where everything of any value has been taken already by these militias, where animals are the source of wealth and most have been stolen. Imagine venturing outside the confines of the slum to graze your livestock, to search for a livelihood, or to gather grasses for your shelter - all potential mistakes payable with your life. Imagine gunfire at night and mothers talking of their children injured, or worse, dead, in the crossfire. Imagine you have been forcibly displaced here by `scorched earth' tactics; your land, home and resources burned, damaging your capacity to earn a livelihood, and your wells destroyed, preventing you from accessing water for survival. Imagine being governed by insecurity, dictated by men who travel on the back of pick-up trucks with guns. Imagine tears and heartache. Imagine Darfur.

Darfur is a region about the size of Rajasthan and Gujarat combined, on the western side of Sudan in East Africa. Sudan is Africa's largest country and is familiar to many Indians who, like the Chinese, Pakistanis, Libyans, Malaysians and Kuwaitis, have traded with it for years and who are now all swimming in the oil bonanza deluging Sudan's eastern border.

The Chinese are leading the way - you see them at the airports dressed in bright orange overalls with green rubber boots - like larger-than-life action men poised to construct, dig and drill at the call. But it is the east of the country - and Khartoum's elites in particular - that is benefiting from the investment of petrodollars earned from the largely Christian south of the country. Khartoum is currently a building site - a Dubai in the making for East Africa. Meanwhile, the south - where the oil is being drilled, remains relatively untouched by the new prosperity after its 20-year war with the north, despite two years of peace, albeit precarious, as is much of the rest of the country.

Sudan is currently not very different from Nigeria at the time when Shell Oil first went into that country to prospect for oil without the permission of local landowners and villagers, leaving a trail of environmental destruction and showing disrespect for people, cultures, land and ways of life that have existed relatively untouched for generations.

Though the ravaging of Sudan by oil companies is critical, it is the conflict in Darfur that has been played out on the international stage for the past three years. It is Darfur's marginalisation, politically and economically, triggered by the oil bonanza that led in part to an uprising in the west of the country. The uprising, coming close to the North South Peace Agreement in 2005, was swiftly put down by the government. It is being further suppressed by Arab militias known as the Janjaweed, whose bullying of the black Africans have reached a fever pitch. An estimated two million people have been displaced across the region and now live in makeshift camps; the Janjaweed are said to have killed an estimated 100,000 to 400,000 people. Villages and resources have been burned and women raped. Male children and men are targets for killing so that they do not grow up to take revenge.

The distinction between Arab and non-Arab is complicated in the region, given the inter-racial mixing over generations. `Arab' and `non-Arab' has more to do with social identity, ethnicity and sources of livelihood than with race. Victims of the conflict are mainly black Africans from the Fur, Massalit and Daju ethnic groups; both Arabs and non-Arabs have been forced to flee their homes and face insecurity. The Janjaweed have historically lived in peace with black Africans - they were welcomed to the land hundreds of years ago when the first Arabs arrived from Egypt and West Africa via Algeria. The black Africans traditionally tilled their lands, the Janjaweed were more commonly nomadic herders who grazed animals, moving across the region with the seasons. With desertification and increased droughts since the 1970s, the people in this latitudinal belt across the continent of Africa have seen increased competition over limited resources such as water, grazing pasture and fertile patches of land. Consequently, there has been an increase in localised skirmishes and conflicts, which have intensified over time. The fertile land of Darfur has witnessed this conflict too, with droughts and over-exploitation of land taking their toll in the form of declining yields.

This conflict is also about the `scramble for Africa'. The great post-colonial carving up of the continent and the consequences of `divide and rule' are also playing out in the region. Darfur was an independent sultanate until 1917, when it was incorporated into the Egyptian-Anglo-ruled Sudan. The northernmost zone of Sudanese Darfur crosses into the neighbouring country of Chad and is home to the Zhaghawa tribe, whose people spill over into the Central Afrique Republique. There are accusations that the current conflict arises out of this tribe's desire to carve out a Zhaghawa Land from out of the three countries created somewhat arbitrarily by the colonialists.

The central belt of Darfur is occupied by the Fur tribe (largely sedentary farmers), the largest of the many non-Arab ethnic groups. Over the years, armed raids on rich agricultural areas and conflicts between groups and nomadic herders have become a survival strategy. The nomadic Zhaghawas and Arab groups moved southwards and fought with the Fur people following the massive drought of the 1980s. The skirmishes grew into large-scale tribal conflicts. The drought-stricken nomads were forced to change their traditional grazing patterns and routes across Sudan as the droughts intensified. Animals died, and this also intensified the nomads' bid for the fertile central belt, challenging sedentary tribes for land.

The black Africans in turn accuse the Arab Janjaweed of mobilising themselves across the Sahelian countries, from the west to the east of the continent, to take control of the most fertile land in the area. (The Janjaweed are known to have carried out their attacks across into Chad; the accusation that they have mobilised themselves from Niger, Mali and Mauritania is less substantiated.) The majority of Arabs are, in fact, not involved in the conflict; the Janjaweed are made up of militias from across the Chad-Sudan border. Describing the militias as `Arab' only supports the international fear machine that demonises Arabs and Muslims. Darfur is also a Muslim-against-Muslim war, between Janjaweed-Arab Muslims and black Muslims.

This conflict is a complex mix of a fight for dwindling productive soil and declining natural resources, coupled with a complicated struggle for power - loosely defined along complicated mixed ethnic lines, with political complexities thrown in.

On the international stage, the economic developments in Khartoum and the conflict in Darfur are seen in some quarters as part of the Arabisation of Africa,, or a consequence of its Islamisation, rather than of growing capitalism and the region's emergence as a hub for international trade. There is no doubt that Sudan, and Darfur in particular, is being used to play out in microcosm the Bush-Blair War on Terror. By declaring crimes in Darfur `a genocide', the United States wins back moral points for the mess it has created with its War on Terror elsewhere in the world. It wins moral points against China and India. However, all of this point-scoring does not negate the fact that crimes against humanity are being committed in the region or that Sudan is home to mujahideen training camps and is a player in the potential implosion of the Horn of Africa with Somalia and Ethiopia also emerging as battlegrounds.

The United Nations and Amnesty International have both described the Darfur violence as crimes against humanity, rather than as genocide. This is probably more accurate, given the ethnic complexities of the region. What is happening in Darfur cannot be ignored because of this wider international political manoeuvring.

A Darfur Peace Agreement was signed in Abuja in May 2006. Ironically, it caused more upheaval because some of the many factions did not come on board. The influx of internally displaced people to the camps continued as a result. The sustained, constant arrival of men, women and children over three years is itself a challenge, placing non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in a position where they are constantly putting out the fire. The security situation is constantly changing and the picture is complicated, particularly for the outsider. The political situation is also fluid with new factions appearing and in-fighting, which is widespread, worsening in many areas.

NGOs have come in to ease the humanitarian crisis, transforming the camps over time into small towns, in some cases with provision of water and sanitation facilities. The provision of basic services has not only reduced the threat of public health risks, but provided dignity to the people who have been forced to make the camps their homes. However, a number of NGOs were told to leave when they discussed the crimes against humanity or hinted at the Khartoum government's complicity in the militia's reign of terror. Others have fallen out of favour with the rather paranoid Sudanese government for even broaching advocacy as a solution. Field workers have been subjected to rising insecurity with attacks on their resources. As the conflict intensifies, staff are at greater risk of being caught in the crossfire. The environment is becoming ever more insecure. Only a few agencies such as Oxfam GB, Action Contre la Faim (Action Against Hunger) and the U.N.'s World Food Programme hold the fort in camps that are still considered accessible. NGOs have had to scale back their operations over time in a number of camps. The U.N. has estimated that the NGOs have covered only 60 per cent of the affected people in the region, with large numbers of people remaining inaccessible.

This ongoing emergency, with limited funding and limited advocacy (as compared to disasters such as the tsunami), is also a challenge to NGOs trying to sustain the camps.

In December, the situation deteriorated again with the U.N. pulling out its workers. Gereida - the largest emergency camp in the world housing 130,000 men, women and children - pulled out its entire nationally relocated and international staff. Staff compounds were attacked by yet another new faction, said to be made up of all the factions that did not sign up to the Abuja Peace Deal.

Everyone in the numerous camps - the cities under siege - of Darfur has a story to tell. Some have been here for three years, others arrived more recently; memories of the horrors experienced are painfully fresh for everyone. The people now living in camps once lived in spacious homes, which are now just fond memories. Everyone has experienced the terror unleashed by the militia who sweep through villages on horseback or, more recently, on land-cruisers. Often, these vehicles are stolen from the NGOs that work in the camps of Darfur. The Janjaweed have pillaged homes, raped women, stolen possessions and destroyed and killed innocent people with impunity, pushing them into an existence of fear and poverty in the camps.

Maryam in the Abu Shouk camp in North Darfur stands framed against piles of solid waste at the edge of the roadside; her loud beaming voice is silenced when asked about her journey here with 50,000 other men, women and children. She tells her story only with her eyes, mime and sign language; her fingers draw up to form a shooting gun, then they turn to form legs running, on and on. Her hands then sweep up together to form a prayer and come charging down and part to signify the end - an abrupt and unwanted story with a tragic end. She repeats the same sequence over again. Finally, she raises her finger to her mouth to signal her own silence.

This silent, eerily unspoken story could be repeated thousands of times; because this is what the Janjaweed militias have repeated, and continue to repeat across Darfur. Whole villages are burned down, resources taken and people killed; and the camps themselves are not left untouched as sacrosanct humanitarian spaces. The threat of the Janjaweed's approach displaces families in nearby villages. Whole swathes of North Darfur are now beyond reach - `no-go areas' for people eager to return to cut the crops standing on their land and for NGOs keen to help victims of the conflict.

Indeed, like Maryam the world too is a silent witness as this ongoing emergency perpetuates itself like a recurring nightmare. Darfur is a vicious cycle of fear, displacement, death, rape, threats, and more fear.

Indians have been doing what they do best with the Sudanese - trading - and not just in goods. Sudan's love for India and Indian products is evident. Dabur oil, soaps and other toiletries are favourites; and everyone discusses the sweet scent of sandalwood, which is a much-desired wood and perfume. Thursday and Saturday nights are Bollywood movie nights on television; Hindi music and films are incredibly popular for their family tales and romanticism. The Sudanese will recite beautifully crafted Hindi songs without understanding a single word.

In the past three years, India's trade with Sudan has increased by 100 per cent. India is the sixth largest exporter of goods to Sudan after Saudi Arabia, China, the United Arab Emirates, Germany and the United Kingdom. TCIL, ITI Limited, RITES, Konkan Railways, IRCON, Kirloskar Brothers, Kalpataru Power, Mohan Exports, Angelique International, Larsen & Toubro, the Tatas and Maruti Udyog Limited all want a slice of the African pie. Pharmaceutical companies are exploring possibilities of installing manufacturing units in Sudan.

With its own growing economic and political prowess, as well as the strategic need to secure oil sources, India has been smart enough to invest in the search for oil in Sudan and elsewhere.

Indeed, economic relations witnessed a historic turn after the Government of India (GOI) decided to invest $750 million in the oil sector of this country, with ONGC Videsh Limited (OVL) acquiring 25 per cent of the shares of Sudan's biggest oil consortium, Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company. This stake was previously owned by the Canadian Talisman Energy Company, which came under pressure from human rights groups to withdraw. OVL has the largest Indian investment in Sudan - about $2 billion - which is fetching good returns not only by way of revenue but also crude supplies. BHEL won the largest power contract, worth $457 million, to set up a 500-MW power plant and a transmission network in Sudan.

In short, India and India's economic might, and even its softer cultural pull, is important here. This means India's leverage for political diplomacy is also great; a leverage which India has not thus far exploited for the people of Darfur.

Meena Bhandari is a development worker based in Africa.

Sign in to Unlock member-only benefits!
  • Bookmark stories to read later.
  • Comment on stories to start conversations.
  • Subscribe to our newsletters.
  • Get notified about discounts and offers to our products.
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide to our community guidelines for posting your comment