|
International Criminal Court Calls for the Arrest
Of Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir for Genocide
The Omar al-Bashir
indictment: the ICC and the Darfur crisis—A
decade after 120 states met in Rome in July 1998 to
approve a treaty creating the
International Criminal Court (ICC), its prosecutor
has moved the court to the centre of world attention.
The decision of its prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo on 14
July 2008 to charge Sudan's President Omar Hassan al-Bashir
with genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes
is a transformative event for the ICC and for the
intractable Darfur war. If The Hague-based ICC's
pre-trial chamber confirms the prosecutor's charges, it
will mark the court's first indictment of a head of
state and its first genocide indictment (see Alex de
Waal, "Sudan
and the International Criminal Court: a guide to the
controversy", 14 July 2008).
In a
speech on 5 June 2008 to the United Nations Security
Council,
Luis Moreno-Ocampo implicated the Khartoum regime
for the Darfur atrocities that the UN estimates has
claimed 300,000 lives. Still, the prosecutor has caught
some observers and analysts of the court off-guard by
seeking an ICC warrant for al-Bashir's arrest. Many
human-rights activists have regarded Moreno-Ocampo as
too cautious in his approach to states and a far cry
from Carla Del Ponte, the crusading
former prosecutor of the
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former
Yugoslavia who forcefully criticised UN inaction in
pressing Serbia and Croatia to arrest fugitives.
Disappointment centred on Moreno-Ocampo's decision not
to carry out investigations inside Darfur, on his
initial reluctance to criticise Khartoum's
non-compliance, and on his 2007 charges against two
Sudanese suspects that did not target officials in al-Bashir's
inner circle. . . .
President Omar al-Bashir
may never be brought into custody to face trial at the
ICC. Still, prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo's decision to
seek a warrant for his arrest may have far reaching
significance if it exposes and reverses the world's
weakness in confronting Darfur's genocide in real time.—OpenDemocracy
* * * *
*
Sudan and the International Criminal Court: a guide to
the controversy—Around the world, human-rights
campaigners are expecting a bold step from Moreno-Ocampo
which they can hail as the single most important blow
for justice and human rights for many years. They argue
that such an action by the chief prosecutor will signal
that there is no impunity for crimes, even for a head of
state, and demonstrate that the international community
will stand up for the human rights of victims, whatever
the consequences - and thus irrevocably change the world
for the better. Moreover, by giving hope and solidarity
to the victims of unspeakable crimes in Darfur, these
campaigners contend that the indictment of al-Bashir
will be a huge step towards realising human dignity,
democracy and peace. . . . The UN Security Council could
in principle intervene and, using its powers under
Article 16 of the Rome statute, defer any
prosecution for a year. At present this seems
improbable. The prosecutor has checkmated the two
countries most opposed to the ICC. The US, which refuses
to support the court on principle, has determined that
the crimes in Darfur constituted genocide, and both
presidential candidates have committed themselves to a
tough line on Sudan. China is unlikely to want to
endanger its standing in the world with less than four
weeks to go to the Olympic games. . . .
The challenge to the United Nations and the
international community will be as profound as to Omar
al-Bashir. Sudan's status as a pariah state will be
confirmed while al-Bashir's defiant stand would be no
more than his habit of nineteen years. But for the
international community - respectful of the rule of law
and supportive of the ICC, but also committed to the
CPA and the national elections, and supporting two
huge peacekeeping and civilian-protection missions - the
dilemmas are acute.—OpenDemocracy
* *
* * *
 |
Arabs reject
"unbalanced" ICC request against Sudanese President—Sunday
20 July 2008—Arab
foreign minister rejected today the "unbalanced request"
of arrest warrant by the Prosecutor of the International
Criminal Court (ICC) against the Sudanese president over
genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in
Darfur.
The Arab League’s
22 foreign ministers decided in a resolution adopted on
Saturday to show "solidarity with the Republic of Sudan
in the face of any schemes aimed at undermining its
sovereignty, unity and stability and not to accept the
unbalanced position of the Prosecutor of the
International Criminal Court at the request contained in
a case submitted to the ICC (pre-trial Chamber)."
|
The Arab minister further said they adopt this position
to emphasis on their rejection to any "attempts meaning
to politicize the principles of international justice or
to use it to erode State sovereignty, unity, security,
stability and national symbols."—SudanTribune
* *
* * *
Dear Rudy,
Now that the U.N.
is proposing to arrest President Bashir—please take note
that Bashir and the Sudanese government have called an
emergency meeting with foreign ministers of the "Arab
League"—and have excluded any Black member of the
African Union from participating.
Only the White Arab
nations that are behind the genocide in Sudan, because
they want the Oil of the tribal blacks and want free
house labor (slaves) are now being called on to save
their good Pogo nigger. This includes White Arab Moamar
Khadafi and other rapists who taught their self-hating
Pogo Nigger offspring that they are Arabs—not blacks.
If the White Arabs
were not condoning these atrocities, they would not be
happening.
Of course when the
U.N. contacted me for my deposition on Wednesday
(because I have actually known Bashir), you can imagine
what I told them for 50 pages.
Naima
Bint Harith
(Known in America as Kola Boof)
12 July 2008
* * *
* *
Greetings
The ICC should do its work, period.
If we are part of the international system we must accept its laws. If
we think they are in need for reform based on African customary law
principles, then we must make those arguments, which Prof Dani Nabudere
does tomorrow in Nairobi at his international conference on African
restorative justice, based on field research in Uganda, South Sudan and
neighboring countries. The international specter of Africans defending
Bashir is a disgrace to humanity and proves their argument that we are
unable to defend our own interests. B.F.Bankie (17 August 2008)
* * *
* *
* * *
* *
The State of the
African Nation
The pending issue
of the Writ by the ICC, for the arrest of President
Bashir of Sudan, is already impacting on internal
developments in Sudan and showcases internationally the
current state of Afro-Arab relations
The background
historical synopsis is that all of Africa was originally
inhabited by Black Africans, producing its own
civilizations in Ethiopia, Sudan, Kush, Egypt and
elsewhere. Later a people entered north-east Africa
called Arabs and conquered the Black African Egyptian
civilization, making it a white Arab civilization. This
happened a thousand years ago. Arab penetration into
north east Africa has reached the current zone of
conflict in Sudan – south Sudan, Darfur, Nuba, etc.
In order to keep in
check African nationalism, the British and Egyptians,
the departing colonialists in Sudan, handed power on
self-government in 1956 to a coloured/mixed-race
minority, who are Arabised and Islamised, living in the
center of the country, around Khartoum. Since the
Khartoum Islamists are a minority, they can only retain
power over the majority, who happen to be black ( the
marginalized ), by force. This resulted in genocide,
bombings, rape as a weapon on a massive scale in south
Sudan. With the signing of the Comprehensive Peace
Agreement (CPA) in 2005, between Khartoum and Juba,
Khartoum implements the same policies in Darfur, to
quell rising expectations and demands from Darfurians.
Why was the long
war in south Sudan, starting in 1956, ending in 2005,
with a break of some ten years in between, unknown? It
was the outcome of that war, starting with the Anyan-yah
fight in 1956, which created the conditions for the
marginalized in Sudan to obtain a better dispensation,
and to halt Arab expansion into Uganda, the Great Lakes,
etc. The answer to this question provides the key to
unravelling the conspiracy that has seen Africans the
victim of Arab expansion projects in the Sahel, in the
unity movement and internationally.
The Sudan Peoples
Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) kept quiet, either due
to international pressure or due to the reticence of
southern Sudanese to complain (some two to three million
lost their lives in south Sudan ), for to complain was
seen as cowardice. South Sudan was never entirely
pacified by invaders, be they Arab, Turk, or British. It
has been a theatre of Afro-Arab contention and slavery
over a millennium.
Reasons given for
the absence of information in the past are international
conspiracy, reticence, limited access to international
media, few researchers visited the south, poverty in the
south, and Khartoum stifling news of the south by all
means.
The Writ issue
process has started and Khartoum’s first line of defence
is Arabia. The war in south Sudan was never discussed by
the OAU/AU due to Arab pressure. It was seen as a matter
for the Arab League, the forum for the formulation of
the Arab policy with the outside world, in this instance
– Africa. The African Union will continue the former
policy of complying with Arabia’s interests in Africa,
at the expense of African lives, in this instance in
Darfur, whereas formerly it was in south Sudan.
It would be a
mistake to underestimate Khartoum’s ability to survive.
It defends an age old system of oppression of weaker
groups. It defends Arab interests in the area and it
defends the post colonial status quo put in place by the
Condominium –Europe (Britain) and Arabia (Egypt ).
Sudanese diplomacy understands African nationalism
better than the rulers of the neo-colonies in Africa.
The Sudanese Permanent Representative to the United
Nations in New York was an attentive participant of the
1994 proceedings of the 7th Pan-African
Congress in Kampala. The Sudanese delegation to the
Congress was the second largest, after the Ugandans.
Arabia has long understood that to rule Africans you
divided Africa from its Diasporas (in the west—in the
Americas, Caribbean, etc. and in the east—Arabia, North
Africa, the Gulf, etc. ). When the OAU became the AU,
one of the reasons for the change was supposedly to
integrate the Diaspora. This did not happen due to Arab
interference, with the Diaspora being named as the
so-called 6th region of the AU, with no
voting powers and no capacity to participate as an equal
partner. There is also a plan to create a United States
of Africa, to perpetuate Arab domination of Africans ad
infinitum.
In the coming
period the actions of the SPLM may be misunderstood,
thus creating suspicion, by those who might otherwise be
in solidarity. The CPA was signed by the National
Congress Party (NCP) of Bashir and the SPLM. All other
leading parties in Sudan denied it, stating that they
were not consulted. If the NCP loses power in Khartoum
the CPA would be rendered useless and the north/south
war could restart. If Bashir was to be arrested, would
the successor leader of the NCP be able to implement the
CPA? Pronk, the former UNDP representative in Khartoum
who was expelled, described the Writ issue as
juridically understandable, but politically unwise.
Reaction to the
Writ issue saw Khartoum immediately stop landing rights
in Khartoum to UN planes, which undertake humanitarian
work in Darfur. In Juba there was a proposal to form a
Crisis Committee to handle any eventuality. As usual
Khartoum will opportunistically maximize any benefits
arising from the crisis.
Last week Dudley
Thompson became the Chair the Honorary Board of the
Sudan Sensitization Peace Project (SSPP)—see two
attachments. The Honorary Board is constituted by Garba
Diallo, Dorothy Lewis, Kwesi Prah, and Dani Nabudere. A
North American Chapter of SSPP is in process of
formation. There is a European Chapter. Last year SSPP
undertook a mission to West Africa. It seeks to provide
answers and a way forward out of the Sudan crisis, which
solutions have application throughout the Borderlands,
from the Red Sea to the Atlantic Ocean, which are
illustrated by the situation in Mauritania and the
rising expectations throughout the Sahel. Again the
realities of this area are unknown or largely ignored by
Africans. They contain duplications of the internal
contradictions found in Sudan, but on a smaller scale.
South Sudan has few
expectations from Africans.
From Nkrumah to
present Africans have chosen to ignore the earlier Arab
colonialism, and base their analysis on only one side of
the coin, European colonialism. This had unfortunate
ramifications. For instance South Sudan has failed to
develop meaningful relations with African America,
rather developing ties with the white/Right. Africans
need to engage the Sudan crisis, to ensure responsible
action by their governments. They should cease to be
spectators at their own funeral and become actors in
their destiny.
Source: Circular No. 1 (20
July 2008; Juba, South Sudan)
* *
* * *
Sudan set up rights abuse courts
Cairo—Sudan has agreed to set up special courts to try alleged human
rights abuses in Darfur which will be monitored by international bodies
including the UN, an Arab League official said on Wednesday.
"They agreed to establish special courts," Hisham Yussef, chief of staff
for Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa said.
"They also agreed that the Arab League, the UN and the African Union
would follow (the trials) but also ensure that laws in Sudan cover all
the aspects required under international law."
The move follows a request by International Criminal Court chief
prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo to have Sudanese President Omar al-Beshir
charged with war crimes including genocide in the war-ravaged region of
Darfur. If Sudan holds viable trials of those accused of crimes in
Darfur, the ICC automatically drops its charges.
Source:
www.iol.co.za
July 23 2008
* *
* * *
Fall Out from the Writ Issue
It is now possible to evaluate the repercussions
from the announcement by the International Criminal Court (ICC) of its
intentions to seek to issue a Writ against the President of Sudan, Omar
Hassan Al Bashir and others. After the news was released Khartoum
immediate reaction was the issue of threats of dire consequences for
Darfur, the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), etc. The landing
rights for UN flights into Khartoum were suspended with humanitarian
consequences. This was followed by Khartoum’s lobbying of their Arab
constituency, which saw the Arab League offer alternative solutions,
such as the handing over to the ICC of the two indicted Sudanese.
Khartoum sent teams as emissaries, to the Arab Heads of state, seeking
their support. The African Union belatedly issued a statement
questioning the wisdom and effectiveness of the issue of a Writ on the
Sudan Head of State.
Meanwhile in Sudan a vast public rally of support
took place in Khartoum presided over by Bashir. Political parties
declared their allegiance to the Sudan state, coming out to defend its
President, the territorial integrity and national sovereignty. This
position was taken by the Sudan Peoples Liberation Movement (SPLM),
subject to conditions. It is worth explaining why the SPLM took the
position it did. The SPLM would want Khartoum to adhere to its
undertakings, where they have prevaricated in the past—
peacekeepers/mixed force deployment and the pursuit
of peace in Darfur, implementation of the CPA—demarcation of boundaries,
wealth sharing, etc. Bashir now states he will do these things. He was
recently in Darfur promising development, street lighting, etc. He has
pardoned those Darfuri involved in the recent Justice and Equality (JEM)
attack on Omdurman
It is said that Bashir and others of the National
Congress Party (NCP) are to be indicted by the ICC. These would include
his top associates, including the Minister of Justice. A list of some 50
people is said to exist. The ICC Writ issue will hamper Bashir’s travel
in future. It will eliminate him as a Presidential candidate in the 2009
national elections in Sudan. It is widely believed that the SPLM will
win these elections. Whether NCP will field a Presidential candidate and
who that candidate might be – remains unclear. The NCP is in a dilemma
as to its political future. The SPLM is now in a position to choose with
whom it will form an alliance, if any, for the 2009 elections.
As a result of the Writ issue a Crisis Committee
has been formed to handle the fall-out. This is chaired by the President
of the SPLM and Vice-President of Southern Sudan, HE Salva Kiir Mayardit.
He is to ensure that the Committee undertakes diplomatic and legal
actions to counteract the ICC Writ as it effects the sovereignty of
Sudan,where Kiir has a share According to the presidential decree, the
panel has to coordinate its efforts with the African Union, the Arab
League and the Movement of Non-Aligned countries. In addition, the
Committee has to study the legal aspects of the charges leveled by the
ICC Prosecutor against the Sudanese president and to find a compromise
with the International Community to avoid negative effects on the signed
peace accords.
At this point in time the balance of power in Sudan
makes the position of the SPLM decisive. One can say that Salva Kiir is
currently holding Sudan together. .
Bankie, Bankie,
Juba, South Sudab, 25 July 2008
* *
* * *
|
Sudan Rallies Behind
Leader Reviled Abroad—In the past few weeks, one sworn
political enemy after another has closed ranks behind him. A
result has been a swift and radical reordering of the
fractious political universe in Sudan, driven in part by
national pride but also by deep-seated fears that the nation
could tumble into Somalia-like chaos if Mr. Bashir were
removed as president.
[Right: Sadiq al-Mahdi, in Khartoum, Sudan, on Sunday, now
supports the man who ousted him from power, Omar Hassan al-Bashir.]
The Sudanese
government, joined by many of its onetime foes who see the
court’s looming arrest warrant as a mortal threat to the
country, is scrambling to determine exactly how much it
needs to concede to survive. |
 |
One previously unthinkable proposal
being discussed is whether the government should arrest two men accused
of orchestrating the campaign of rape, murder and pillage in Darfur that
has left about 300,000 dead and scattered 2.5 million people from
villages reduced to circles of ash.
The two men, Ahmad Harun, the
former interior minister, and Ali Kushayb, a militia leader, face arrest
warrants issued by the international court for crimes against humanity.
But the government has refused to turn them over. Sudanese officials say
they hope that putting the two men on trial in Sudan might persuade the
United Nations Security Council to exercise its power to suspend the
case against Mr. Bashir. “Everything short of the presidency is on the
table,” said Sudan’s foreign minister, Deng Alor.
Although the West has been
relentlessly focused on Darfur, here in Sudan, most people view the
crisis as simply a continuation of a long chain of internal conflicts
between an autocratic government and the deeply impoverished people on
the periphery. The deadliest of these conflicts, between the north and
south, raged for decades, killing 2.2 million people — many more than
the lives lost in Darfur — and threatened to split the country along
religious lines.
NYTimes
* *
* * *
African Leaders at the African Union
Betray
the Africans Currently under Genocide in Darfur
Arab League Says Sudan Agrees to
Investigate Darfur War Crimes
… The African Union (AU) yesterday
asked the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to invoke article 16 of
the Rome Statute and suspend any indictment of Sudan’s head of state.
But the request got a cool reception from some members of the UNSC. The
French Ambassador to the UN Jean-Maurice Ripert said that the UNSC
‘should not interfere with the process of law in terms of letting the
International Criminal Court (ICC) do its work’.
…Asked to comment on the African
and Arab bloc at the UN requests to suspend the indictment, the French
diplomat said he respects AU decisions but scathingly dismissed any
imminent decision on the matter.
‘They can do whatever they wish. It
is a free country. As soon as they find a country to do it we will look
into it’, Ripert said.
The United States envoy at the UN
Zalmay Khalilzad said that he does not expect UNSC action on suspension
‘in the foreseeable future‘ and added ‘there should be no impunity’.
Another US official echoed
Khalilzad’s remarks—‘We strongly support holding accountable those who
are responsible for genocide in Darfur’, Richead Grenell, spokesman for
the US Mission to the United Nations, told The Associated Press on
Monday.
It is widely expected that China
and Russia would back such a step but neither have tabled a formal
resolution.
But Russia’s UN ambassador Vitaly
Churkin told reporters on Monday that his country would not initiate
such a resolution saying other countries are better suited to push it.
Source: extracts from page 8 of
the Juba Post, 24-28 July 2008, Southern Sudan
* *
* * *
Sudan Rebels Criticize African Union
Opposition to ICC Warrant
…the Darfur rebel Justice and
Equality Movement (JEM) accused the African Union of bias after it urged
the United Nations Security Council to suspend a proposed arrest warrant
against President Bashir.
The rebels reportedly said they
would no longer recognize African Union efforts to mediate a peace
process aimed at resolving the Darfur crisis.
|
Since Ocampo announced the Bashir Writ
many of us have been repelled by the obnoxious behaviour of
our kith and kin in the leadership of the AU. Just as his
regime did in South Sudan, Bashir has used genocide, aerial
bombardment and rape as weapons of war in Darfur. JEM are
right to expect Africans to rise to their defence in Darfur.
Rather what we witness is Africans defending the perpetrator
of crimes against humanity. Yet again the AU has failed us.
Apparently Europeans are more concerned about saving African
lives. |
Source: extract from page 8 of the
Juba Post 24-28 July 2008, Juba, Southern Sudan * *
* * *
How Many Have Died for Kibaki and Sudan’s Bashir
by Ngor Arol Garang
President Omar El Bashir has
been carrying out a systematic genocide in the Darfur area of Sudan
since his expansionist war in the South ended in disaster four years
ago. Media reports indicate that over 300,000 civilians have been
killed and another two million persons rendered homeless. He is the
kind of leader that under normal circumstances would not be
recognized by any country in Africa let alone the world. Yet,
President Bashir is a proud member of the prestigious African Union
(AU) with a hope and a real possibility of chairing the Union one
day. What a world.
He (Bashir) is today in power
because Africa no longer has strong and active leaders like former
South African President Nelson Mandela and Tanzania’s Nyerere who
would not have supported Bashir to remain in power whilst Darfur is
burning.
The atrocities Bashir’s regime
has meted out on its people would have been enough for an African
military force to invade Sudan and ship its leaders out to the Hague
for crimes against humanity, let alone genocide and murder as
charged by the ICC. The Human catastrophe that Bashir has engineered
and managed in Darfur and South Sudan are enough to send him to the
Hague to stand trial for war crimes against humanity. Bashir has
killed more people than Idi Amin in Uganda, the Americans in
Afghanistan and Iraq and Serbians in Serbia. If the Americans have
invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, Bashir, like his predecessors Idi Amin
and Saddam Hussein, has turned his guns on the helpless and unarmed
civilian soft targets. The more reason he qualifies to head for the
Hague Tribunal. I don’t understand genuine reasons why the
situation gets more pathetic when it is brought to African leaders.
This is the man who has defied all international counseling when it
comes to Darfur.
He has even killed AU and UN
Peacekeeping forces there. He has ordered his soldiers to bomb and
burn villages without provocation. He has used unnecessary force to
quell imaginary rebellion. And when the International Court of
Justice finally indicts him, African ‘leaders’ are the first ones to
condemn the court for indicting this murderer, saying it would
discourage peace efforts in Darfur. Why continue allowing Bashir to
play with the lives of innocent civilians in Darfur?
How many more innocent Africans
must be murdered by Bashir before we wake up to the human tragedy ?
How many more women and
children must be raped, maimed, and murdered in the deserts of
Darfur before this continent stirs ? Why leave our innocent
civilians to die day and night like chicken affected by bird flu,
while the world is watching Bashir killing them with full impunity ?
If Iraq, Kosovo and Afghanistan drew much attention of the world to
bring them peace and human freedom, why not Darfur ? African leaders
must think twice before vowing to support Bashir.
The author can be reached on
ngoraguot@yahoo.com
Source: The
Citizen, page 3 (3rd August 2008, Khartoum and Juba,
South Sudan)
* *
* * *
Britain and France Will Support
Freezing Indictment of Sudan President
The British and French
governments will back efforts in the UN to stall the issuance of an
arrest warrant for Sudan President Omar Hassan Al-Bashir, the
Guardian reported today.The newspaper said that officials from both
capitals informed human rights activists that they have taken this
stance to protect the peace process in Darfur and Southern Sudan.
The human rights advocates said
that Britain and France will join the Arab League, African Union,
China and Russia in backing a resolution by the UN General Assembly
this month requesting a deferral of the charges against Al-Bashir.
Both UK and France are members
of the Hague based court and have been the main advocates of
referring the Darfur case to the ICC. The Prosecutor of the
International Criminal Court (ICC) Luis Moreno-Ocampo announced in
mid-July that he had requested an arrest warrant for Al-Bashir.
Ocampo filed 10 charges: three counts of genocide, five of crimes
against humanity and two of murder and accused Al-Bashir of master
minding a campaign to get rid of the African tribes in Darfur : Fur,
Masaslit and Zaghawa.
Following that the AU, Arab
League, Non-Aligned (NAM) and the Organisation of Islamic Conference
(OIC) called for invoking Article 16 which allows the UN Security
Council (UNSC) to suspend the ICC Prosecutor in any case for a
period 12 that can be renewed indefinitely.
Libya and South Africa sought
to force a suspension in the UNAMID extension resolution last July
but failed to get the required number of votes and instead accepted
a watered down paragraph taking note of the AU concern on the ICC
move to seek an arrest warrant for Al-Bashir.
Foreign Office Minister for
Africa Mark Malloch speaking to the Guardian defended his
government’s position.
‘It is precisely because we
respect the ICC that we do not want to bargain away [its authority].
This is not about handing a defeat to the court in its early life.
But Khartoum has interpreted the indictment against Bashir as a
measure that pits Sudan against the Western world’ Malloch said.
‘A great deal is at stake; not
just Darfur but the peace in Southern Sudan. We have to keep hold of
the strategic intentions of the ICC, which we share – to end
impunity and increase security in Darfur’ he added.
But Steve Crawshaw of Human
Rights Watch (HRW) rejected Mallochs’s arguments.‘Justice is not a
tradeable option. We have seen again and again that Sudan makes
empty promises. To think that Sudan is likely to act in good faith
is either naïve or cynical’ he said.
An ICC official speaking to the
Guardian said that they would meet UK Foreign Secretary David
Miliband and his French counterpart Bernard Kouchner, to outline the
ICC’s position on September 23rd.
It was not clear however if
Paris or London intend to table down a formal resolution in the UNSC
calling for a suspension or if they would simply not use their veto
power to block it. Moreover the US position on the matter remains
unclear. The Los Angeles Times said that Washington offered Khartoum
not to stand in the way of a suspension in return for concessions in
terms of the Darfur peace process and the deployment of peace
keepers.
In July the US abstained from a
resolution extending the mandate of the UN-African Union (AU) hybrid
force in Darfur (UNAMID) because of a paragraph incorporated that
spoke about the possibility of a suspension.
In explaining the abstention of
US Representative to the UN, Alejandro Wolff said his government
strongly supports UNAMID but that the ‘language added to the
resolution would send the wrong signal to the Sudanese President
Omar Hassan Al-Bashir and undermine efforts to bring him and others
to justice’.
Wolf said that the paragraph
which they objected to comes at a ‘very important time when we are
trying to eliminate the climate of impunity to deal with justice and
address crimes in Darfur by suggesting there is a way out’.
‘There is no compromise on the
issue of justice, the climate of impunity has gone on for too long
and the United States felt it was time to stand up on this point of
moral , that this permanent member of the UNSC will not compromise
on the issue of justice’ he stressed.
‘The issue before us is to make
clear to those who are guilty of criminal activity and complicit in
the horrors that befallen on the people of Darfur that there can be
no escape…anything that signals a way out or any easy way to
circumvent that we believe needs to be opposed’ the US diplomat
said.
He also said that the Us
‘disagrees’ with the AU request to block the ICC’s Prosecutors
request of an arrest warrant against the Sudan President. The issue
of invoking Article 16 of the Rome Statute comes at a very sensitive
time for the Bush Administration in an election year. It may be
politically damaging for the Republican Party to allow such a
resolution to pass the UNSC. Darfur advocacy groups including the
‘Save Darfur’ coalition in the US have already started campaigning
against any suspension.
Sudan has not ratified the Rome
Statute, but the UNSC triggered the provisions under the Statute
that enables it to refer situations in non-State parties to the
world court if it deems that it is a threat to international peace
and security.
The Juba Post, 15-18
September 2008, page 6 (Juba, South Sudan)
* *
* * *
A New Chance for Darfur—Mr.
[Ambassador Richard] Williamson, who is President Bush’s special
envoy to Sudan, wrote a tough memo to Mr. Bush this fall outlining
three particular steps the United States could take to press Sudan’s
leader, President Omar Hassan al-Bashir:
The United States could jam all
communications in Khartoum, the Sudanese capital. This would include
all telephone calls, all cellular service, all Internet access.
After two days, having demonstrated Sudan’s vulnerability, the
United States could halt the jamming.
The United States could apply
progressive pressure to Port Sudan, from which Sudan exports oil and
thus earns revenue. The first step would be to send naval vessels
near the port. The next step would be to search or turn back some
ships, and the final step would be to impose a quarantine and halt
Sudan’s oil exports.
The United States could target
Sudanese military aircraft that defy a United Nations ban on
offensive military flights in Darfur. The first step would be to
destroy a helicopter gunship on the ground at night. A tougher
approach would be to warn Sudan that unless it complies with
international demands (by handing over suspects indicted by the
International Criminal Court, for example), it will lose its air
force — and then if it does not comply, to destroy all its military
aircraft on the ground.
NYTimes
* *
* * *
If you like this presentation consider making a donation
* *
* * *
posted 22 July 2008 |
