Darfur-- Genocide with a yawn?
UNITED NATIONS Ñ DarfurÕs unfolding humanitarian tragedy has all the hallmarks of AfricaÕs latest lamentable crisis and the telltale signs of desultory diplomacy. Though international relief agencies present the case with breathless anguish, and the international community appears deeply concerned, the situation on the ground has gone from bad to worse.
Secretary of State Colin Powell reactivated flagging interest in the crisis by calling the Khartoum regimeÕs actions in the Darfur region genocide and urging the UN Security Council to take immediate action to stop them. Secretary Powell not only raised the rhetorical ante but has implicitly invoked the 1948 Genocide Convention. The U.S. Congress earlier passed a resolution declaring genocide in Darfur. President George W. Bush later implored ÒWe urge the international community to work with us to prevent and suppress acts of genocide.Ó Now UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has called for swift Security Council action on an American-sponsored resolution.
Since earlier in the year, the Bush Administration has taken the diplomatic lead in pressuring the SudanÕs Islamic rulers to stop the killing in the western Darfur region. While Sudan has sadly been known for the longtime persecution of its Christian minority in the south, this inter-Islamic violence pits Arab Sudanese against black African farmers. A million people Ñ mostly women and children-- have been forced off their lands by regime sponsored Arab militia Ñ Janjaweed. Riding on camels and horses, the morbidly quaint militia track down, harass and kill opponents. The displaced refugees flee to neighboring Chad.
To add a cruel twist, the respected German newspaper Die Welt reported that teams of Syrian military chemical weapons units had tested various toxins against civilians in Darfur earlier this year.
During the summer there were high profile political missions including Secretary Colin Powell, Secretary General Kofi Annan and a host of European ministers followed by a tepid Security Council resolution which allowed the Sudan regime a month to clean up its act or else. The Or Else has since passed with little more than a sheepish shrug by many diplomats who remain Òdeeply concernedÓ about the unfolding crisis.
United Nations relief agencies stated that a minimum of 10,000 people are dying each month from the violence and related disease. Though the relief agencies perform yeoman service to relieve the suffering and to treat the symptoms of SudanÕs policies, the political problems have yet to be solved.
Sudan is one quarter the size of the continental USA and the pitifully small and unarmed observer teams from the African Union are about as likely able to protect people as a unarmed deputy sheriff in Maine will stop well-armed militants in Maryland; help is usually hundreds of miles away through trackless regions.
Through the Security Council has hinted at tough sanctions on Sudan this in itself borders on a cruel joke Ñ sanctions on what? Put bluntly Sudan is not exactly a major trading state, exporter or what could be charitably described as a player on the international scene. Would an embargo really be little more than window dressing? Serious leverage here is clearly lacking in a setting evoking Joseph ConradÕs Heart of Darkness.
The Security Council has discussed the issue a number of times but the political calculus appears that the PeopleÕs Republic of China Ñ with its veto power-- and Pakistan are not going to let any serious and meaningful resolution pass save for a fig leaf at the very best.
Interestingly China remains SudanÕs major trading partner with Saudi Arabia as a distant second. Beijing moreover is the major player in SudanÕs lucrative petroleum sector.
So what could sanctions do? Perhaps ban Khartoum from making an Olympic Bid? Until not long ago Khartoum the capital sported gallows in public places, should we say, for guidance towards good behavior. Others argue for a weapons embargo Ñ yes, but weaponry from SudanÕs long association as a former Soviet client state has given the regime enough of the type of small arms necessary for the type of civilian repression it does so well. An Oil embargo Ñ yes, but the countryÕs small domestic needs are handled from its own petroleum industry while oil exports go to Mainland China.
KhartoumÕs Islamic regime is getting away with murder; this African genocide is treated by many with little more than a yawn.
John J. Metzler is a U.N. correspondent covering diplomatic and defense
issues. He writes weekly for World Tribune.com.  |
