Darfur Quarterly Update

On a quarterly basis, Jewish World Watch provides an update on the status of the genocide in Darfur. These updates are prepared by Honey Kessler-Amado, Esq., Chair, Temple Isaiah, Jewish World Watch Committee and Member, JWW Synagogue Advisory Committee.

Darfur Update - Archives December 15, 2008 December 17, 2007 September 24, 2007 June 6, 2007 March 7, 2007 January 4, 2007 September 10, 2006 May 30, 2006 March 7, 2006 December 12, 2005

QUARTERLY UPDATE ON THE SITUATION IN DARFUR
MARCH 16, 2009

On March 4, 2009, after months of deliberations, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir, President of Sudan, for atrocities committed in Darfur. The Court, based in The Hague, issued the warrant upon the indictment of Mr. Bashir for war crimes and crimes against humanity based upon him playing an essential role in the murder, rape, torture, pillage and displacement of large numbers of civilians in Darfur.1   The judges did not charge Mr. Bashir with genocide, as the court’s chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, had requested, because the judges concluded (2 to 1) that there was not sufficient evidence of the President’s specific intent to “destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group,” the most crucial issue in determining genocide.2  In issuing the order, the three judges rejected diplomatic requests for more time for peace talks and fears that the warrant would incite a violent backlash in Sudan.  In their statement, the judges called for the cooperation of all countries –  not just the 108 that are members of the court — to bring Mr. Bashir to justice.3  
            Legally, Sudan is obliged to arrest Mr. Bashir, but his arrest seems unlikely.   Sudan is Sudan is not signatory to the Rome Statute that created the court4; thus, Sudan may feel no obligation to comply with the Court’s mandate.  Further, the United Nations peacekeepers in Sudan have no mandate to detain war-crimes suspects, and the Court itself has no police force or military to enforce its warrants.5
            The United Nations Security Council6 can postpone the prosecution against Mr. Bashir, but it has remained largely divided.  Sudan’s supporters, including the African Union and the Arab League, have called for the Security Council to suspend the indictment; France, Britain or the United States would probably use a veto to block such a move.7  Within the Security Council, Mr. Bashir’s supporters, led by Libya and China, have insisted that any official statement issued by the Council simultaneously address the potential humanitarian crisis and a possible deferral of the charges.  Western nations have blasted the idea of linking the two issues.8

Impact of the Arrest Warrant
            The arrest warrant may complicate finding a solution to the crisis in Darfur.  United Nations diplomats, the African Union, the Arab League, and some humanitarian organizations had expressed concern that the issuance of an arrest warrant for Mr. Bashir could provoke renewed violence and threaten the Comprehensive Peace Agreement between the Sudanese government and the southern part of the country which had ended the deadly civil war in southern Sudan.9  The Agreement was signed in 2005, ending the civil war in which 2.2 million people died. Mr. Bashir fought members of his own party to approve the Agreement, and that Agreement it is widely seen as critical to holding the country together.  Other diplomats have said that the peace treaty was not at risk from the Court indictment because, irrespective of Mr. Bashir, a critical number in the government want to keep the south stable to maintain access to the large oil deposits there.10
            While the arrest was being considered by the International Criminal Court, Mr. Bashir’s ruling party, the National Congress Party, had launched the Sudan People’s (Initiative) Forum to generate a national consensus around a solution for the Darfur crisis.  Last month (February 2009), the government and a major rebel group in Darfur, the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), met in Qatar and signed an agreement of “good will” to negotiate a settlement.11  One negative consequence of the arrest warrant came almost immediately: JEM announced that it was now rejecting the preliminary accord and would not negotiate with Mr. Bashir’s government.12  This response would appear to reinforce the concerns of some that the arrest warrant will undermine any internal  movements toward peace in Sudan, however fragile those movements are.13
            Alain Le Roy, the United Nations under-secretary general for peacekeeping operations, said that there might now be further delays in deploying United Nations peacekeeping troops to Darfur, where only about 64 percent of the force is in place.14 However, paradoxically, given the Sudanese government’s threats in August 2008 that there would be “serious consequences for U.N. staff and infrastructure” if the International Criminal Court charges against Mr. Bashir go forward15, Mr. Le Roy now reports that Sudan has reassured United Nations officials that it would protect peacekeeping missions.16

Responses in Sudan
            Within minutes of the Court’s announcement, thousands of people gathered in central Khartoum, the Sudanese capital, denouncing the decision and waving national flags and posters of Mr. Bashir’s face.17   “Today, one could have been excused if you thought the rally was a rock concert or a gathering of ardent fans of a soccer team all out for one goal, victory. In this case, the one goal is that President Bashir must never be tried by the ICC.  The president opened his speech by saying that ‘Sudan is strong, this day Sudan is happy.’  To chants by the crowd, ...  the president danced to traditional songs amid drumming as the crowd waved their walking sticks in the air.”18
            Within days of the arrest, Mr. Bashir traveled to Darfur to show the world that he has a large following.  Indeed, his arrival in the Darfurian town of El Fasher was greeted by welcoming Darfurians lined up with their horses and camels. (The welcome was organized by a local governor, Osman Mohammed Yousif Kibir, who runs the town of El Fasher, whose main source of income are the aid agencies serving the millions displaced Darfurians.)19
            Sudanese officials reacted swiftly, ordering at least thirteen Western aid groups that provide assistance for millions of people to shut down their operations and leave.  British charity Oxfam said that the government had revoked its license to operate, a decision the group said could affect more than 600,000 people.  The Dutch section of Doctors Without Borders, which provides health care in one of the world’s biggest camps for displaced people, in South Darfur, was also ordered to leave the country.20  Mr. Bashir claimed that the aid organizations he ordered to leave had provided false evidence to the Court.21  Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem, the Sudanese ambassador to the United Nations, said Sudan had compiled a dossier thick with evidence that the aid agencies being shuttered had abetted the Court’s work. He did not make this evidence public or link specific evidence to particular organizations, but said that aid groups had used their private aircraft to fly potential witnesses against the president from Darfur to Europe.  Several Western ambassadors and the aid agencies have rejected the accusations against them.22
            As an example of how an expulsion of an aid organization (an “N.G.O.” – a non-governmental organization) is accomplished, the head of Medecins Sans Frontieres (the French section of Doctors Without Borders) serving in Sudan, Reshma Adatia, was summoned by Sudanese officials and told that the permit allowing Medecins Sans Frontieres to work in the country had expired and that the staff must leave immediately.  Once the order was given, Ms. Adatia was escorted to the agency’s offices and an inventory of equipment was made. The equipment was seized and the organization received no record of what was taken. (The Sudanese government, through a statement from the foreign ministry, asserts that no equipment was seized.)23
            According to the International Crisis Group, the political response of the Sudanese government to the indictment will be determined primarily by the National Congress Party.  In response to the indictment, the National Congress Party has refused to recognize the Court’s jurisdiction, mobilizing Arab, Islamic, and African countries against the Court by pitching the indictment as a Western instrument of regime change24 – as “a neocolonial plot to undermine Sudan’s sovereignty.”25
            Though refusing to recognize the legitimacy of the indictment and arrest warrant, the government has begun acting to shore up domestic support for Mr. Bashir.  Within days of the arrest warrant, the government released one of its most vociferous critics.   The government offered no explanation for its decision to release opposition critic, Hassan al-Turabi, only two months after his arrest.  (For years Mr. Turabi had led the country’s hard-line government alongside Mr. Bashir, but later broke with him and became one of his harshest critics.)  Analysts say that Mr. Turabi’s release was probably aimed at resolving some of the nation’s internal political divisions given the threat of arrest now facing Mr. Bashir.26  Still, the decision to release Mr. Turabi came as a surprise because he was initially arrested after he spoke out in favor of the International Criminal Court, suggesting publicly that Mr. Bashir turn himself over for prosecution. After his release, Mr. Turabi spoke to a throng of his supporters and reiterated his call for Mr. Bashir to submit to international justice.  He said, “We must accept all international policies, especially if they address justice.”27  Mr. Turabi, whose political party has long been linked to the Islamist Justice and Equality Movement, also criticized the Sudanese government’s decision to expel aid agencies in response to the indictment.28

Impact on the Darfur Refugees
            Within two days of the indictment and arrest warrant, aid groups had already suspended most deliveries to Sudan, including Darfur, the region that is home to the conflict which has led to the war crimes charges against Mr. Bashir.  The effect was felt almost immediately in Darfur’s refugee camps.  For example, the International Rescue Committee (“I.R.C.”) said it was forced to close medical clinics in three camps, leaving more than 200,000 without medical assistance. Michael Kocher, the I.R.C.’s vice president of international programs, said the agency was appealing the government’s decision, as were the other groups.29   Two branches of the expelled Medecins Sans Frontieres served some 450,000 people.30
             “Our biggest worry is about the humanitarian situation — some 50 to 70 percent of the humanitarian assistance has stopped,” said Philippe Conraud, of Action Against Hunger.31  The estimate is that approximately one million Darfurians are in immediate danger after the expulsion of NGOs from the region.  In Darfur, a lot of illnesses are water-related; diarrhea and skin diseases are common. Aid agencies, especially the medical ones, provide washing and sanitation services in areas badly hit by diseases.32  (One of the most disturbing facts about Darfur is that it lies within Africa’s meningitis belt that stretches from Senegal and to Sudan.  This means that in Darfur, if two cases of meningitis are discovered at any refugee camp or town, an emergency is declared and all camp or town residents must be vaccinated. The bad news is that shortly before the aid agencies were expelled, meningitis had been declared at some camps.33)
            Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem, the Sudanese ambassador to the United Nations, said that the Sudanese government, local groups and those organizations allowed to stay would be able to fill the gap created by the expulsions. Diplomats and officials dispute the idea that Sudan would be able to fill the gap, noting that the agencies being shut down delivered some 40 percent of the aid in Darfur.34  The Sudanese Ambassador to Kenya, Majok Guandong, insisted that the expelled agencies represented only 15 per cent of those working in Sudan. He said, “Those who would like to help Darfur IDPs and refugees can direct their humanitarian assistance through the remaining 71 NGOs working in Darfur of which 14 are American, 13 are British and eight are French.”35
            The expelled agencies do not fund their programs from their own resources.  Rather, they distribute what they receive from United Nations agencies such as the World Food Program, the World Health Organization, Unicef (United Nations Children’s Fund) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.36  United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and President Barack Obama condemned the expulsions.37

Impact on Individuals
            Within days following the indictment by the Court, three workers from Medecins Sans Frontieres (Belgian arm) and two Sudanese workers were seized.  The two Sudanese were quickly released, but the three foreign workers, a Canadian nurse (Laura Archer), an Italian doctor (Mauro D’Ascanio), and a French coordinator (Raphael Meonier), were held for over a week, until Friday, March 13, 2009.38         

Responses in the Region
            This is the first time the International Criminal Court has sought detention of a sitting head of state.39  Within two days, representatives of Iran and Syria, as well the militant groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, arrived in Khartoum to express solidarity with Mr. Bashir and to denounce the court’s decision. The delegation included high-ranking officials, like the speakers of the Iranian and Syrian Parliaments.40
            Kenya is also against the arrest warrant and has said that it will not assist the Court with arresting Mr. Bashir.  Kenya’s Foreign Affairs minister Moses Wetang’ula said that  Kenya backed the African Union’s opposition to the indictment.41  Some in Africa expressed concern that the Court has focused its attention on Africa, believing there to be an anti-Africa bias.  Apparently the thirteen indictments handed down by the Court since its establishment in 2002 have been against Africans.42  Still, several African countries, including Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Nigeria, cooperated with bringing Charles Taylor, former president of Liberia, to trial in The Hague for war crimes.43 
            Jean Ping, a high-ranking African Union official, echoing the concern for the stability of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement which ended the civil war with the south in Sudan said, “We support the fight against impunity. But … the need for justice should not override the need for peace.”44  His comment echoes those many African and Arab states which have rejected the prosecution of Mr. Bashir as counterproductive to peace efforts.45  Their comments invite the question of whether there can be sustained peace without justice.

Updated by Honey Kessler Amado
for Jewish World Watch