Mission unaccomplished

The AU gives up on Darfur while the US steps up its pressure on Khartoum to consent to the arrival of UN peace-keeping troops, writes Gamal Nkrumah

---

Click to view caption

Sudan has been overwhelmed with floods as the banks of the River Nile burst and downpours created a humanitarian catastrophe

On Monday, the African Union (AU) officially declared that it was pulling its troops out of the war-torn westernmost Sudanese province of Darfur. "The AU Peace and Security Council met today in Addis Ababa and decided to reaffirm that its mandate will end on 30 September in Darfur," the head of the AU mission in Sudan, Baba Gana Kingibe, former Nigerian foreign minister, told reporters in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa. The cash-strapped pan-African body's 7,000 peace-keeping troops in Darfur are clearly incapable of stopping the upsurge in violence in recent weeks.

The Sudanese government, which in any case gave an ultimatum to the AU peace- keeping mission to leave Darfur, has launched an offensive to try and regain full control of the province as vast as the size of France. Sudan has deployed an estimated 15,000 government troops and has mobilised the support of sympathetic militiamen -- both from the Arabised tribes of Darfur and indigenous non-Arab ethnic groups. Contrary to popular opinion, the conflict in Darfur is not between Arab and so-called African or non-Arab tribes. Some Arab tribes of Darfur are fighting alongside armed opposition groups demanding greater autonomy for the poverty-stricken and underdeveloped region.

Many members of the Arab Baggara and Rezeigat tribes support the armed opposition groups, for example. On the other hand, two northern Arab tribes, the Jaileyin -- President Al-Beshir's tribe -- and the Shaiqiya -- of the highly influential Second Vice-President Ali Othman Mohamed Taha -- fully back the government. Meanwhile, non-Arab ethnic groups of Darfur have mixed political loyalties, though the vast majority back the armed opposition groups. The leader of the Sudanese Liberation Army (SLA), Minni Arko Minnawi, tentatively agreed to sign the Darfur peace agreement brokered by the African Union (AU) in the Nigerian capital Abuja in May.

The leader of a splinter SLA faction, Abdul-Wahed Mohamed Ahmed Al-Nour, refused to sign the peace deal. A third opposition group, the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), also rejected the peace deal. "We reject the deal because it is unjust and we are fighting for lasting peace and justice," SLA Al-Nour told Al-Ahram Weekly.

The two groups, JEM and the SLA (Al-Nour faction), have come together under an umbrella grouping of armed Darfur opposition groups called the National Redemption Front (NRF). The NRF has considerable support among the various non- Arab ethnic groups of Darfur, and is especially popular in the camps of displaced people in Darfur. The displaced are especially concerned about the recent deployment of Sudanese government forces in Darfur.

The other critical issue of international concern is that the Sudanese government is protecting men like Moussa Hilal, the notorious Janjaweed leader who is wanted at the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity. The Janjaweed have resumed attacks in various parts of Darfur.

The government's Popular Defence Forces -- an Islamist militia under the Sudanese government jurisdiction, and a force to be reckoned with -- is on the move. The escalation in fighting, especially with the planned withdrawal of AU peace-keeping troops, has aggravated the humanitarian situation. Natural factors have also complicated matters. The rains this year have been plentiful with convoys of relief supplies blocked by flooding in many parts of the country.

The Sudanese government does not believe that it should be the business of aid agencies to delve into questions of democratisation and political reform. Khartoum, in spite of the series of catastrophic humanitarian emergencies that have confronted it, is extremely suspicious of the aid industry. The ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in Darfur, however, raises the question of whether international intervention -- or rather the lack of it -- serves a useful purpose.

It has become clear that the Darfur crisis requires global coordination. Rarely has there been a greater need for joint local-international community action. Be that as it may, the "international community" must mean more than simply the United States. Indeed, very often the term itself in Sudan has become a euphemism for Washington and other Western powers.

Presently, Khartoum is playing on divisions and rivalries in the international community, and especially in the UN Security Council. China and Russia -- both permanent members of the UN Security Council -- and Qatar -- currently the only Arab member state on the council -- were the three countries that abstained on a Security Council resolution that called for some 20,000 UN troops to take over from the AU Council. China is the main importer of Sudanese oil and is unwilling to accept the deployment of UN troops without Sudanese government consent.

It is precisely for this consent that Washington dispatched US assistant secretary of state for African Affairs Jendayi Fraser to Khartoum last week. The visit was something of an eye-opener, showing how Khartoum is determined to have its way. For starters, Fraser was kept waiting for three days before being granted an audience with Sudanese President Omar Hassan Al-Beshir. Fraser's wait was accurately interpreted as a snub.

Russia, meanwhile, is supportive of Sudan. It criticised the UN resolution that called for UN troops to replace the AU. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned that the resolution was drawn up without "proper consultations", the real objective being "regime change". The Sudanese authorities complain that the aim of the US is to topple the government. "Unfortunately, this resolution was taken in haste without continued consultation with the government of Sudan, while we and China at the Security Council had hoped for continued consultations," Lavrov said in Addis Ababa.

The US has been at pains to explain that it will not go ahead with plans to send international peace-keeping troops to Sudan without the authorisation of Khartoum. The outcome of the political tug-of-war between Washington and Khartoum will undoubtedly unfold in the coming few weeks. The question looms as to how many in Darfur will suffer or expire between now and when an accommodation is made and peace-keepers can be deployed in the war- torn area.