The government of Sudan signs an agreement with the rebels in the south pledging to end Africa's longest-running civil war, but conflict soon escalates in Darfur in western Sudan.
THE government of Sudan and the rebel forces of southern Sudan, represented by the Sudanese Peoples Liberation Movement (SPLM), signed a memorandum of understanding on November 19 before the United Nations Security Council, pledging to end the longest-running civil war on the African continent. The two sides have been observing a ceasefire since the middle of 2004. Khartoum had virtually ceded autonomy to the southern regions. Both sides have so far adhered to the terms of the agreement signed in June this year. The head of the SPLM, John Garang, has taken over the administration in the south.
The agreement calls for a coalition government, an integrated army and shared revenues from oil, which Sudan has begun to produce in large quantities. After six years, the south will also be given the opportunity to decide its future, through a referendum.
Unfortunately for the long-suffering Sudanese people, even before the ink was dry on the agreement, the festering trouble in Darfur in western Sudan turned into a bloody conflict. The government insists that the Darfur rebels timed their uprising to extract the same kind of concessions that their southern counterparts won.
The Darfur rebels, who came into the international limelight only recently, felt excluded from the talks, especially as they involved the sharing of wealth and resources. The southern rebels claimed that the oil- producing areas of Abyei, Blue Nile and the Nuba mountains were under their control. These areas straddle the Darfur region.
The peace agreement was signed in Nairobi in the presence of the U.N. Secretary-General and U.N. Security Council ambassadors. In fact, the Security Council had a formal meeting in Nairobi, the first one in 14 years outside the U.N. headquarters in New York. The United States played an active role in the Nairobi summit. The U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., John Danforth, is the current Security Council President.
The Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution promising economic and political support to the government in Sudan once peace reigns over its entire territory. Danforth said that the Security Council resolution proved that the U.N. "takes the situation in Darfur seriously". Secretary-General Kofi Annan expressed the hope that a settlement in the south would prepare the ground for a solution in Darfur.
However, there are no indications of an imminent peace pact between the government and the Darfur rebels, though talks are continuing under the auspices of the African Union (A.U.) in the Nigerian capital Abuja. Washington wanted the Security Council to take a tougher line with the Sudanese government on Darfur. However, key Security Council members such as Russia and China objected to ultimatums and threats being handed out by the Security Council against sovereign countries. Algeria and Pakistan, which are currently on the Security Council supported this position.
All the same, the international community should be more than happy that a war that killed more than two million Sudanese has come to an end. The memorandum signed between the government in Khartoum and the southern rebels in Nairobi stated: "The parties recommend themselves to finalise and conclude a comprehensive peace agreement in recognition that prompt completion of the peace process is essential for all the people of Sudan as it will help in resolving all challenges facing the country". The statement said a final comprehensive peace deal would be signed on December 31, 2004. The international community expressed the hope that the agreement would include Darfur.
AFTER the talks in Abuja, the Sudanese government agreed to allow international aid agencies free access to Darfur. Under immense pressure from the West, Khartoum made many concessions. A few days before the two sides met in Nairobi, the European Parliament passed a resolution threatening economic sanctions. (Washington has already imposed sanctions on Sudan.) The resolution blamed the Sudanese government of being "the perpetrators of systematic attacks on human rights".
Khartoum also agreed to make the Darfur region a "no fly zone". It effectively means that the Sudanese Air Force cannot use its own air space for anti-insurgency operations. The government had successfully used its airpower against the rebels. Western media reports, however, emphasised that villages and towns in the region were targeted and many innocent civilians were killed.
The "no fly zone" restriction being established on an area the size of Darfur may not be a good precedent. A "no fly zone" was declared in Iraq unilaterally by Washington and it had no legal sanctity. Khartoum has agreed to disarm "Janjaweed", the armed militia held responsible for ethnic cleansing in the Darfur region. The government had demanded that the Darfur rebel groups should be confined to bases but they have been given the privilege of informing only the international peacekeepers about their locations.
The good news, however, is that the A.U. has pledged to increase the number of peacekeepers in Darfur to more than 3,400 soldiers. Currently, there are fewer than a thousand. The government seems reconciled to the A.U. playing a more proactive role in Darfur. It realises that this is a better option than allowing former colonial powers back into Sudan in the guise of peacekeepers.
COMMents
COMMents
SHARE