Those who limit the conflict in Darfur to its traditional tribal character are mistaken

Those who limit the conflict in Darfur to its traditional tribal character are mistaken

- Quoted from Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper -

Whoever confines the conflict in the Darfur region to its traditional tribal character is wrong, and whoever denies this character is wrong. Whoever dates the beginnings of the crisis with the Salvation Government’s seizure of power is wrong, and whoever ignores the role of this government’s policies and transgressions in exacerbating the conflict and turning it into a bloody human tragedy that established the world and has not yet stopped it is wrong. Tribal conflicts in Sudan have gone beyond their traditional nature, and have transformed from a mere dispute over deteriorating natural resources, into a legitimate aspiration towards real participation in power and in political and administrative decision-making, and towards a fair sharing of wealth, especially since these tribes live in the centers of production of this wealth. This is the case of the crisis in Darfur, where, despite its specificity and geographical scope, it is an extension of the general national crisis that has been extending since the dawn of independence, and which has been exacerbated and complicated by deficient and wrong treatments at the hands of the social forces that formed the civil and military regimes that have been in power over the past decades. But the policies and violations of the Salvation Government exacerbated the crisis and turned it into an international humanitarian tragedy!

The tribal conflict in Darfur is old, but the Darfur tribes did not lack awareness and wisdom in dealing with and resolving these conflicts. During the period from 1957 until today, more than twenty tribal reconciliation conferences were held in Darfur. These conferences summarized the problems in:

* Respecting the historical right of tribes over their hawakirs;

* Agreeing on determining the route of a western stage (west of Jebel Marra) and an eastern stage, with a precise and definitive determination of the fixed natural landmarks for all stages and timetables;

* Adherence to the customs that tribes have agreed to settle their disputes with and tribal customs regarding hosting or renting to another tribe or clan.

* The risks of creating new administrative entities without taking into account the conflict over land ownership;

* The dangers of dividing and fragmenting native administrations opposed to the central authority and the imposition of loyal native administrations;

* The risks of not taking into account tribal customs in the obligation to pay blood money and compensation;

* The dangers of discrimination between tribes in the collection or distribution of weapons;

* The dangers of the spread of armed groups that possess weapons superior to those of the regular forces, and that members of the regular forces participate with their tribes in tribal fighting and drawing up military plans;

* The dangers of the spread of weapons brought back by what the Salvation Government calls “Mujahideen” from fighting in the south as spoils or livestock, and their use in tribal conflicts;

* The dangers of pledging allegiance to salvation in the name of the tribe;

* The weakness of the influence of the native administration in the face of the influence of tribal ties and their educated and intellectual leaders, and its inability to the point of paralysis and fear of containing the armed conflict;

* Some intellectuals exploit tribal affiliation to achieve their aspirations for positions of power.

* Conflicts in neighboring countries, the intermingling of tribes, the flow of weapons, the support of the tribes of neighboring countries, leniency in granting Sudanese citizenship...etc.

Participants in these conferences always come up with sound recommendations, but these recommendations remain just ink on paper without implementation!! As usual, conferences under the Salvation Authority turned into political and media spectacle. If the authority had implemented part of the recommendations of those conferences, the security, political and social situation in Darfur would not have deteriorated to this degree. But the Salvation regime is not concerned with the suffering of the people of Darfur. Rather, the situation has worsened as a result of the practices of the Salvation rulers and governors who wanted to exploit historical tribal differences to achieve political gains for the benefit of the ruling party. They reward the loyal tribes by granting them governors or governorates in administrative areas and hawakirs for other tribes...etc. The result now is that the region is witnessing a real civil war that raises slogans of political, social and economic grievances represented by the region’s lack of development projects, weak education and health services, and the exclusion of The people of Darfur are in positions of responsibility even in their own homes, and recently they have pursued a policy of ethnic cleansing through Janjaweed gangs and under direct guidance from the pillars of the regime.

It is true that the development issue constitutes the backbone of the solution to the grievances of the people of the region, but it is difficult to distract or deceive the people of Darfur with development slogans and programs as a future project, as they live with the disappointment of the past and the collapse of the present, whether in the unknown fate of the money they cut from their living flesh to finance the Western Rescue Road, or the collapse of the Jebel Marra project, or the disappearance of the Savannah, Umm Ajaj, Khor Ramla, and Saqq al-Naam projects, or the cessation of the Nyala tannery, or the decline in annual and seasonal interest in controlling the waters of the creeks as a successful experiment. Developed by aid from the German state of Lower Saxony, or the cessation of mobile human and veterinary clinic campaigns, or the livestock improvement and dairy marketing project, or the disruption of schools and hospitals due to delays in disbursing salaries...etc.

The Darfur tribes, which have historical rights over the Hawakir, did not spare any area of their Hawakir as part of development projects that benefit all residents of the region, shepherds and farmers. Despite the harsh natural conditions, Darfur is still spacious enough to accommodate its people and animals. The development issue in Darfur has remained a pressing priority since the October 1964 revolution, and countless feasibility studies and files of pioneering projects have accumulated. But the missing link was and still is the political will to make decisions and mobilize human and material resources for implementation, even in the context of reconstructing existing projects and those undertaken by international organizations. This is what the Islamic Front government completely failed to do, which generously granted patrons vast commercial pastures (an area of ​​300,000 - 600,000 acres), without taking into account the vegetation and forests of hashab and acacia (the source of gum arabic), and abolishing the right of small farmers, shepherds, and producers to share in tenure and production returns. Finally, the expected negative effects of the exclusive agreement and the depletion of livestock that abound in the Darfur region.

Then there are the vast and open borders on Libya, Chad, and Central Africa, in addition to the tribal interference across those borders, which made Darfur directly affected by the ongoing and renewed conflicts in that region, and bears the burden of the fluctuations of the central government’s foreign policy.

The correct approach to resolving the Darfur crisis is to recognize that what is happening in Darfur is a real manifestation of the general crisis that Sudan is experiencing, the most prominent manifestations of which are the continued marginalization of the country’s parties, including Darfur, and that the problem is political and requires a national political solution. But the tragic and explosive situation now in the region requires the implementation of urgent and immediate measures, including:

* Liquidating the Janjaweed militias and bringing their leaders to trial, as well as investigating crimes of genocide and ethnic cleansing, determining responsibility and bringing their perpetrators to court.

* Banning military aviation in Darfur and monitoring all means of land transportation and ports of entry to prevent the entry of weapons.

* Working for the return of displaced people inside and outside the country to their original homes, protecting them and compensating them for the damages they suffered, and providing and delivering relief in the form of food, medicine, etc. to them through safe corridors and with the help of the international community.

It is clear that the Khartoum government will not comply with the implementation of these measures except under direct pressure from the international and regional community through the United Nations, the African Union, the Arab League and other organizations.

After implementing these urgent measures, it is the role of addressing the roots of the problem and its causes and providing effective solutions to it. This can only be achieved through an inclusive political conference that includes all political forces in the country, including the armed opposition forces in Darfur, and represents the people of Darfur from their various sectors, accompanying all their initiatives to resolve the conflict in the region. But the success of such a conference requires an atmosphere in which freedom and democracy prevail, and hence the necessity of abolishing all laws restricting freedoms and all exceptional laws that prevent the participants from expressing their opinions without fear or apprehension.

But the final solution to the problem can only come within the framework of addressing the general crisis in the country by agreeing on a national national project to get the country out of its crisis, a project that takes into account ethnic diversity and developmental disparities in various parts of the country, and addresses, through democracy and the participation of all, the issues of balanced development and fair participation in power and wealth resources so that we maintain a united and secure Sudan for all its residents. This alone prevents the internationalization of the situation in Darfur, and this alone makes the comprehensive democratic political solution to the nation’s crisis Sudanese in word and deed.