Brand
03-Feb-07, 14:01
A major hurdle cleared in Addis Ababa
From Khartoum Monitor, 02/03/07
Let us Speak Out
ALFRED TABAN
The defeat of Sudan in its claim for the African Union (AU) chairmanship was a victory for common sense. A major disaster has been averted. If Sudan had been elected, then Darfur could have become ungovernable.
The rebels of Darfur warned that the AU troops there would have become their targets. Indeed Sudan was and is still unfit to lead this body. The government in Khartoum is the main cause of the crisis in Darfur. It’s marginalisation of Darfur is the root cause of the misery and anger in Darfur. The AU is in Darfur to try to observe a ceasefire between the government and the Darfurian rebels. If Sudan had assumed the chairmanship of AU then technically its troops in Darfur would be under the command of Field Marshall President Omar Hassan al-Bashir. Hence Sudan would become a referee in the match in which it is a player. That game would not be a game at all. It would be a walk over for one side, the government one.
While Sudan’s failure to capture the chairmanship of the AU is a victory for all peace loving peoples, the situation in Darfur still remains precarious. The bombings in Darfur go on unabated. The humanitarian crisis is getting worse as less and less food can get in and more and more relief workers and NGOs move out due to the deteriorating security situation.
Under President Bashir, President Kufuor or any leader the AU troops in Darfur will not be able to perform their task. Even if it is given resources by the United Nations and NATO, the AU will not deliver. The body needs to be turned into a robust force. It needs a new mandate, to be able to protect itself, civilian population and take on those who violate the ceasefire.
Even if the Sudanese government was to allow UN troops in, although that now looks very unlikely, taken into consideration, the government’s rebuff of the new UN Secretary General Mr. Moon, the UN would still need a strong mandate to interfere.
The government in Khartoum would like to crush the resistance of the people and rebels of Darfur and force them to accept a weak peace agreement. Unless it is confronted by the international community and a united rebel group in Darfur, the government will not engage in serious dialogue.
The Darfur crisis, like the dispute in South Sudan and Eastern Sudan will be resolved through dialogue. But it is often the case that it is when the government in Khartoum is in trouble in the political and military fields, that it reacts to calls for genuine dialogue.
From Khartoum Monitor, 02/03/07
Let us Speak Out
ALFRED TABAN
The defeat of Sudan in its claim for the African Union (AU) chairmanship was a victory for common sense. A major disaster has been averted. If Sudan had been elected, then Darfur could have become ungovernable.
The rebels of Darfur warned that the AU troops there would have become their targets. Indeed Sudan was and is still unfit to lead this body. The government in Khartoum is the main cause of the crisis in Darfur. It’s marginalisation of Darfur is the root cause of the misery and anger in Darfur. The AU is in Darfur to try to observe a ceasefire between the government and the Darfurian rebels. If Sudan had assumed the chairmanship of AU then technically its troops in Darfur would be under the command of Field Marshall President Omar Hassan al-Bashir. Hence Sudan would become a referee in the match in which it is a player. That game would not be a game at all. It would be a walk over for one side, the government one.
While Sudan’s failure to capture the chairmanship of the AU is a victory for all peace loving peoples, the situation in Darfur still remains precarious. The bombings in Darfur go on unabated. The humanitarian crisis is getting worse as less and less food can get in and more and more relief workers and NGOs move out due to the deteriorating security situation.
Under President Bashir, President Kufuor or any leader the AU troops in Darfur will not be able to perform their task. Even if it is given resources by the United Nations and NATO, the AU will not deliver. The body needs to be turned into a robust force. It needs a new mandate, to be able to protect itself, civilian population and take on those who violate the ceasefire.
Even if the Sudanese government was to allow UN troops in, although that now looks very unlikely, taken into consideration, the government’s rebuff of the new UN Secretary General Mr. Moon, the UN would still need a strong mandate to interfere.
The government in Khartoum would like to crush the resistance of the people and rebels of Darfur and force them to accept a weak peace agreement. Unless it is confronted by the international community and a united rebel group in Darfur, the government will not engage in serious dialogue.
The Darfur crisis, like the dispute in South Sudan and Eastern Sudan will be resolved through dialogue. But it is often the case that it is when the government in Khartoum is in trouble in the political and military fields, that it reacts to calls for genuine dialogue.