|
After a decade of civil war in Sudan, with more than two million
dead, a tentative peace treaty has been signed. Though still not
including Darfur in the West, the Northern ruling state has made
sufficient concessions to the South for a cease fire to take place.
Those living in the North, which seized power in a coup in 1989, speak
Arabic and live by Islamic law. It is the imposition of this on the
English speaking, mostly Christian Southern State that caused the civil
war in the first place. The President has now agreed that Islamic Law
will not be applied in the South.
The conflict in Darfur, perversely, is Muslim against Muslim. The
government of Sudan is responsible for “ethnic cleansing” and crimes
against humanity in Darfur, one of the world’s poorest and most
inaccessible regions, on Sudan's western border with Chad. The Sudanese
government, and the Arab “Janjaweed” militias it arms and supports,
have committed numerous attacks on the civilian populations of the
African Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa ethnic groups. Government forces
oversaw and directly participated in massacres, summary executions of
civilians-including women and children—burning of towns and villages,
and the forcible depopulation of wide swathes of land long inhabited by
the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa. The Janjaweed militias, although Muslim
like the African groups they attack, have destroyed mosques, killed
Muslim religious leaders, and desecrated Qu'rans belonging to their
enemies.
The government and its Janjaweed allies have killed thousands of Fur,
Masalit, and Zaghawa, often in cold blood, raped women and destroyed
villages, food stocks and other supplies essential to the civilian
population. They have driven more than one million civilians, mostly
farmers, into camps and settlements in Darfur where they live on the
very edge of survival, hostage to Janjaweed abuses. More than 110,000
others have fled to neighbouring Chad but the vast majority of war
victims remain trapped in Darfur. This has been ethnic cleansing on a
large and dreadful scale yet no Western government, nor the UN, chose to
intervene until recently when the UN put 1,000 African Union troops in
the area.
This conflict has historical roots but escalated in February 2003, when
two rebel groups, the Sudan Liberation Army/Movement (SLA/M) and the
Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), drawn from members of the Fur,
Masalit, and Zaghawa ethnic groups, demanded an end to chronic economic
marginalisation and sought power-sharing within the Arab-ruled Sudanese
State. They also sought government action to end the abuses of their
rivals, Arab pastoralists who were driven onto African farmlands by
drought and desertification—and who had a nomadic tradition of armed
militias. The government has responded to this armed and political
threat by targeting the civilian populations from which the rebels were
drawn. It brazenly engaged in ethnic manipulation by organising a
military and political partnership with some Arab nomads comprising the
Janjaweed; armed, trained, and organised them; and provided effective
impunity for all crimes committed.
The government-Janjaweed attacks are frequently supported by the
Sudanese air force. Many assaults have decimated small farming
communities, with death tolls sometimes approaching one hundred people.
Most are unrecorded. The destruction of villages, farmland and food
stocks means that many thousand more people will die from starvation and
disease within a short time.
The international community, which so far has been slow to exert
pressure on the Sudanese government to halt the ethnic cleansing and end
the associated crimes against humanity it has carried out, must act now.
The UN Security Council, in particular, should take urgent measures to
ensure the protection of civilians, provide for the unrestricted
delivery of humanitarian assistance.
One would hope that British money, via the Department for International
Development, has not been going to the government in Sudan, who quite
clearly are not concerned with preserving life amongst their most
desperate population. However, one's hope would be misplaced. The UK has
been a lead donor in the Sudan since independence. After the end of
normal bilateral aid relations with the current Government of Sudan (GoS)
in 1991, it has contributed some £200 million toward a humanitarian
programme. In 2002, the UK - along with the US and Norway - strengthened
its engagement in Sudan, particularly around fresh hopes for the peace
process with the South.
Why is money being given to a country that is spending its own money,
and probably ours too, on arms and planes to continue its atrocities
against minorities within its borders? Why have we contributed £200
million over the last 14 years and where has it gone?
The DfID intends to increase its programme in Sudan considerably now the
peace agreement is reached. Initially, the majority of the resources
will continue to go towards humanitarian needs, but with a greater
emphasis towards longer-term development. The DfID states that work on
implementation of the peace agreement will require early funding but
they will gradually increase the amount they can put towards the
longer-term objectives of improved governance and policies. In addition,
they expect to pay a share of the costs of debt relief.
The DfID does recognise that the situation in Darfur is of grave
concern. Although a cease fire was agreed last April it has not been
honoured. The UN estimates that over 1.2m people have been displaced
within Darfur, and a further 180,000 have fled to Eastern Chad. There
are disturbing reports of continuing attacks by rebels and the Janjaweed
militia, prompting the international community to repeatedly call for
both sides to fully respect the cease-fire and begin political talks.
Urgent action is required by the international community.
The DfID says "The first priority is to achieve regional security
and deliver humanitarian aid to the affected population. The UK is fully
committed to resolving the Darfur crisis. The Secretary of State has led
the UK engagement in talks with the Government of Sudan, the UN and the
donor community. Darfur was discussed yesterday at the EU General
Affairs and External Relations Council and a draft UN Security Council
Resolution is under discussion.
"Having allocated £62.5m since September 2003, the UK is second
largest bilateral donor to Darfur after the USA, but more funds are
urgently needed, and the UK is lobbying donors to do more."
So where has that £62.5 million gone in 18 months? Has the Sudanese
government allowed the people of Darfur to benefit? No. During that time
aid workers were severely hampered from getting aid to the Darfur
displaced people by the continued attacks from the government backed
troops. Our money still pours into Darfur yet thousands of people are
starving and aid does not get through. Our money also pours into
Northern Sudan, where they can afford to equip their army to massacre
their civilians. We may just as well throw the money down the drain, in
fact it would be preferable.
The DfID has, at the very least, an obligation to the people in Britain
to show exactly what our money is spent on and how it is distributed,
not just in Sudan but everywhere that supposedly benefits from foreign
aid.
|
