Within the next few days the Obama Administration will unveil its policy towards Sudan. When the congressional hearings were held in July, the advocates for the situation in Darfur were not pleased. One of the proposed actions was to remove Sudan from the State Department’s list of countries that sponsor terrorism.
Having contacts with the Sudanese government is not a bad idea. It is a good way to make contact, but to refer to offering incentives to a government as akin to giving a child cookies is bad PR. It gives the impression that the person advocating such a strategy is being naïve, but there have been several events since the US Congress held its hearings that should impact whatever decisions the White House makes.
In recent weeks, there has been a military offensive in north Darfur. This operation, which has been conducted by the Sudanese military, is just such an operation one party would conduct before peace talks. Meanwhile, in the south, several parties with the exception of the ruling NCP and their allies met to plan the upcoming presidential elections that are scheduled to be held in April 2010. These elections are to proceed a vote for Southern Independence in 2011.
According to reports, an advisor to President Al-Bashir referred to the situation in Darfur as a conflict between farmers and herdsmen before being transformed into a conflict by other actors. It is interesting that the charges of slavery were not discussed by the delegation from the African Union or the Sudanese government. In the same meeting the advisor blamed Chad, France, and Israel, for aggravating the crisis which has been ongoing since 2003. It is true that there was currently a lull in the fighting until earlier this month, however.
Another tactic that Khartoum is using is conducting a proxy war against the south. The NCP had used the LRA, a Ugandan militia, and the Lou Nuer tribe in a proxy war designed to maintain its influence in the south. The security situation in the south is so dire that if a declaration of independence is made, that not only will Civil War be reignited within Sudan, but GOSS may not adequately protect its own citizens.
What will the US do? Or better yet, what should the US do? The US needs to enforce the CPA strictly. Khartoum seems to believe that there is some wiggle room. As long as they think that is the case the better the chance for renewed conflict. Sudan should stay on the State Sponsor of Terrorism list not only for the tribal conflict, but for supplying the LRA as it moves from the Congo into Sudan, the Central African Republic, and according to recent reports, possibly to Chad.
The Pentagon has been providing some assistance to the army of GOSS. This probably will continue just to hedge bets. Ukraine and Kenya have been providing assistance to the south as well. Offering Financial Aid such as what has occurred in Zimbabwe could be a good first step, but a step that could be more respected than what has been suggested, which can be seen as carte blanche.
