Will intense international pressure succeed?
The Sudanese government must restore security
And stability in the stricken Darfur region?
Najm Al-Din Karamallah*
The name of the Darfur region in western Sudan has become widely used in international forums and in all print and audio media, due to the humanitarian crisis that this region is experiencing, including killing, displacement, and rape of women and children, ethnic cleansing, and violations of human rights and dignity in the eyes and ears of the international community and the Sudanese government alike. The United Nations and the international community, including the United States and the European Union, are still waving the possibility of imposing sanctions on the Khartoum government for its failure to end the crisis that caused it. In it, with its support for the so-called Janjaweed militias, which are accused of killing, looting, raping women, and displacing hundreds of thousands of civilians in the region.
In this context, the United Nations Security Council issued Resolution No. (1556) which gives the Khartoum government one month to resolve the ongoing conflict there, stop the killings and displacement of civilians, and provide relief to those affected, as well as to sit with the rebel forces at the negotiating table, or else sanctions will be imposed on them by the Council. But the question remains here: Will increasing pressure on the Khartoum government, or threatening to impose sanctions on it, solve the existing crisis there, or will it at least discourage it from the policies it is following in this region?
To answer this question, we must, above all, look at the roots and causes of the real crisis and the factors surrounding it inside and outside Sudan, in addition to the environmental, geographical and ecological factors, as well as the political, cultural and civilizational history of the region, the population composition and its roots, and the economic pattern in the region.
The policy of imposing sanctions, or even threatening them, expresses the extent of the failure of the international organization to obtain effective and practical means to resolve regional problems and conflicts. Using the method of sanctions or implying this indicates that this organization does not have good practical means to eliminate the problems facing this world in which we live. This decision also proves the organization’s ignorance or insufficient knowledge of the roots and origin of the problem. Imposing sanctions will only increase the destruction and misery of the people of Sudan. It will not solve the roots of the crisis, but rather will increase its complexity. The Khartoum government was exploiting armed robbery gangs and Janjaweed militias to carry out acts of fraud, murder, displacement, burning of villages, and rape. Today, the international community is putting pressure on the Khartoum government. This time, it is pursuing the Janjaweed and eliminating them randomly and through hasty and sometimes fabricated trials to prove its good intentions towards the international community and not Sudanese society, which already suffers from hunger, poverty and displacement. The result will be the killing and displacement of another faction of Sudanese without penetrating the roots of the crisis and solving it.
Roots of the crisis:
The Darfur region, which is located in the far west of Sudan, with an area of about 549 thousand square kilometers and a population of more than four million people, has already been suffering for many years from a complete lack of basic components and a significant backwardness in infrastructure, such as means of transport and communications, and complete neglect by successive central governments. Given the region's difficult geographical nature, its lack of rainfall, and its exposure in the second half of the last century to successive waves of drought, there are armed looting gangs that originally specialized in looting and theft, and were formed from armed elements of outlaw Arab origins or groups that came from outside Sudan from neighboring countries. These militias used the weapons granted to them by the Khartoum government in acts of arson, killing, and genocide in all villages and tribes that practice agricultural crafts or to which resistance movements belong, and they are mostly tribes of African origin. These actions led to a humanitarian disaster unprecedented in the modern history of Sudan.
In any case, the Janjaweed do not represent the backbone of the Arab tribes in the region. Rather, they are nothing but gangs of armed robbery that the Khartoum government exploited to strike the resistance movements after they failed to confront them on the real battlefield. They resorted to weapons of rape, burning villages, and destroying the beds of women and children, as the Janjaweed militias did in full view of the regime forces that were at the scene of the event. So, the Khartoum government was essentially aiming to eliminate the resistance movements in the region, such as the Justice and Equality Movement and the Sudan Liberation Movement, which call for achieving justice, equality, and spreading democracy throughout Sudan and not in the Darfur region alone. In this context, the Darfur Liberation Front/Army changed its name to the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army, and these organizations never use the ethnic concept in their strategies and goals that they aspire to. On the contrary, they always seek to get out of the problems that existed there. From the narrow ethnic framework and concept to a broader strategy and concept that aims not to waste available energies, and to unite to confront and confront tyrannical regimes in coordination with other Sudanese opposition parties, in order to achieve development, justice and equality in all parts of Sudan. In all of their failed talks with the regime, these movements raised the issue of democracy throughout Sudan, justice, equality, and a fair distribution of wealth and power.
The evasion method and cat-and-mouse game practiced by the Khartoum government:
It is not true what the Khartoum government claims that the pressures directed at it are nothing but pressures on Sudan because it is a Muslim country and that these pressures are essentially against Islamic principles. This same government, several weeks ago, in its celebrations of the fifteenth anniversary of the June 30 “revolution” that came through a military coup that overthrew a democratic regime chosen by the people, was repeating in all media outlets that the rescue “revolution” had accomplished huge economic and social developments and brought Sudan from a poor and flabby state to a capable state that possessed the basic components of security and stability. But when international pressure intensified on it regarding Darfur, it came back to say, just days after those statements, through its officials, that Sudan is a poor country and does not have the basic capabilities to confront the violence in Darfur, and it must be given more time and provided with support and assistance. Instead, the Khartoum government has been repeating all the time and for many years that what is happening in Darfur is nothing but acts of armed robbery and criminals, and that there is no real opposition force in the region. The so-called resistance movements are nothing but a kind of nonsense by opponents and greedy people. However, today it is repeating to the whole world that the real problem in the region results from the rebellion led by forces that claimed that it did not exist in the first place. So where is the truth??? This method and this type of evasion does not serve the regime, the state, or the Sudanese people.
External parties and their interests in Sudan:
It is true that external parties in the Darfur crisis often deal only with the results and not the causes. It is also true that some countries (the United States) may exploit this tragedy to achieve certain political goals, but that does not mean that the crisis does not exist at all. The United States wants to kill two birds with one stone, especially since the presidential elections are approaching and the international community accuses it of interfering only in areas where it has economic or other interests. In this way, it wants to refute those accusations and confront the internal pressure exerted by black voters there to resolve the crisis, especially since most of the international media and human rights organizations see at the roots of the crisis ethnic cleansing solely because of color and race.
As for the European Union, it does not even know the roots of the crisis and does not have effective legal means to resolve it other than the humanitarian aid it may promise. Therefore, it is easy for the Khartoum government, despite its involvement in the crisis and its direct participation in causing it, to confront external accusations and easily defeat them, taking advantage of the lack of understanding and knowledge of the origin and roots of the conflict, and the lack of external parties’ possession of effective means to resolve it. The Khartoum government also benefits from the Arab pressure card, which is trying all the time to calm the international parties and persuade them not to impose sanctions on Sudan or to rush them, under the pretext that this will not solve the crisis, but may increase its complexity or cause other problems. However, the Arab side also does not have effective solutions to resolve this crisis, other than the decision issued by the League of Arab States in the emergency meeting of its foreign ministers, which opposes any foreign intervention in Sudan and that matters should be left to Sudan, the Sudanese and the African Union. Who has already sent military forces to monitor the shooting between the parties.
Resolution No. (1556) issued by the UN Security Council, which gives the Khartoum government a period of one month to resolve the crisis, is doomed to failure, because Khartoum does not possess the basic components and capabilities to implement it, especially since the fall season is approaching, which will make it difficult to fulfill these commitments. In addition, this decision implicitly gives the green light to the Khartoum government to carry out other acts of ethnic cleansing against groups called the Janjaweed, and this will further complicate the crisis.
So imposing sanctions on Sudan is not only useless, but it has other negative consequences. This type of sanctions is considered a positive thing for totalitarian regimes (the Khartoum regime), because the sanctions do not affect them directly, but rather on their people who are already oppressed by them, and thus the strength and solidity of those regimes increases as a result of this. Instead, these regimes often enjoy great sympathy from some countries or other external parties that want to achieve some political gains from this, and we have many similar experiences in the world. Without searching for effective solutions, imposing sanctions is considered futile and useless and will not solve the crisis in the first place.
Dialogue and the return of democracy are the most effective ways to resolve the crisis:
The best solution to the crisis is to put intense pressure on the Khartoum government to change its approach towards the groups that took up arms and are fighting for freedom, democracy, justice and equality, and to oblige it to sit with those groups and other organizations that call for the same demands for a frank and clear dialogue because the demands of those groups are known and understood by the regime, which are actual participation in decision-making, a fair sharing of power and wealth, and the restoration of democracy that this regime destroyed to be a basic principle for dealing between the parties. As for the so-called Janjaweed, they must be tried in a fair and impartial manner and according to true democratic principles. It is not the regime's practice to attack one group with another, because they are essentially part of the Sudanese people who have been exploited for despicable political purposes.
So the return of true democracy will be the main gateway to resolving the crisis and other problems in Sudan. Sitting around one round table may dissolve grudges and soften hearts. The Khartoum regime must also know that the strategy of hegemony, oppression, and encroachment on power without taking into account others is a failed option, no matter how long it takes. We can prove this by looking at the history of Sudan during the last half of the last century, where all attempts by tyrannical regimes to permanently suppress any movement, no matter how small, whether east, west or south, failed. Except through negotiation and consultation. The concept of power only generates power; Violence will not solve the issue.
* Sudanese writer.