While reviewing and and organizing the flood of global news and commentary centered around Sudan's historic polls, I came across some outstanding news coverage and writing by ordinary citizens and professional journalists on the ground in Sudan. Anyone who has carefully followed news and events in Sudan over the past 5-7 years (much of it dominated by the violence and exterminations which have taken place in Darfur and South Sudan, and the International Criminal Court's indictment and arrest warrant for Sudan's President)... anyone who has a deep interest in African affairs will tell you that these elections in Sudan are really important not only for this vast country but also for the many efforts and programs to establish democracy and good governance all across the African continent.
As the Obama Administration, the Sudan Troika (U.S.A., Norway, and the U.K.), and a handful of democratic governments and international organizations struggle to come to terms with what has transpired in these openly fraudulent, manipulated polls across Africa's largest country___ each day that passes while Sudan's National Election Commission withholds the election results (cooking the votes), a new scandal emerges.
U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing - April 20, 2010
(Hat Tip to Martha Bixby over at the Save Darfur Coaltion blog for the lead)
MR. CROWLEY (State Department): New topic.
QUESTION (Reporter): New topic? Sudan. When the U.S. came out – when the Obama Administration came out with its policy on Sudan, it talked about incentives and disincentives in the process. And I’m wondering – I’ve seen the statements on the elections, but I’m wondering if there are any consequences for Bashir’s government for carrying out such a marred election process.
MR. CROWLEY (State Department): Well, I think, Michelle, we have to put that in a little broader context. As the international monitoring groups have indicated, the recent elections – and the results are still pending – did not meet international standards. There are a number of reasons for that, some based on the fact that elections have not occurred in Sudan for some time and some because the government did not create the appropriate atmosphere and did not take the steps it should have taken to insure a free, fair, and competitive election. So – and we’ve expressed those concerns before the election and we have expressed those concerns since the election. That said, we also recognize that Sudan is facing vitally important decisions and referenda in the coming months that will shape, literally, its future. And we will work with the Governments of North and South Sudan to continue to press them to fulfill all of their obligations under the comprehensive peace agreement. They have to do – there are many things they have to specifically do with respect to different parts of Sudan from Darfur to Abyei to the south of Sudan. To the extent that the Government of Sudan was looking for redemption or legitimacy in what happened here, they will get none of it. But we recognize that there are specific things that we have to do in Sudan to prepare the country for the referenda early next year. There are very important things that need to be done to insure full implementation of the CPA and to, among other things, prevent Sudan from slipping back into conflict. So we will engage North and South on that basis and prod them, push them, support them as they take steps leading to the referenda next January.
End excerpt from U.S. State Department Press Briefing - April 20, 2010
So there you have it. According to the U.S. State Department spokesman, as far as Omar al Bashir and his regime getting any redemption (from alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, etc.) or legitimacy as the democratically-elected government of Sudan___ the present Khartoum regime will NOT receive official recognition from the Obama Administration , from the U.S. Congress, and especially no support from the people of the United States of America. "No respect!" "Nothin' but the sharp end of a stick!"
The National Congress Party and Bashir had a chance to finally do something right for all the people of Sudan by holding free-and-fair elections and peacefully accepting the outcome. Instead they chose to cheat, lie, and steal___ defying the wishes of millions of voters and honest citizens in Sudan yet again so that the regime could retain power and control over the country's resources (vast untapped oil reserves), land, and people. Omar Hassan Ahmad al Bashir: modern-day Pharoah of Sudan, the Land of the Blue and White Nile. The true Black Pharoahs of Sudan (the ancient kingdoms of Nubia and Kush) must be turning in their crypts just thinking about this guy. If all else fails to remove Bashir and his cabel of thugs from power and bring them to justice, there is a last resort: the curse of the pharoahs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addtion to this week's breaking news about Sudanese election officials being caught red-handed stuffing ballot boxes with falsified votes, Alex de Waal's SSRC blog "Making Sense of Sudan" has an article from Sudanese contributor Hafiz Mohammed describing in detail how the ruling National Congress Party (NCP, formerly the National Islamic Front) has been systematically buying-off candidates, voters, and votes all across North and South Sudan to the tune of hundreds of millions in Sudanese Pounds, choice government jobs, new cars and houses.
There is one very important issue which has not been raised by anyone, as I have listened to all reports from the election observers , until now , that is the buying and selling of votes and loyalty. According to my estimate this has amounted to not less than one billion US dollars over the last two years.
For the last year and in every Sudanese region, the issue of buying the loyalty of tribal and community leaders has been happening. This has not been by investing in their communities in terms of health, education and other services but instead in a crude way, by bribing them with cash or other material resources or jobs. Above all, it is cash. That has occurred not only for traditional leaders, but political parties also. The recent row about the amount given to the Umma Party, just two days before the election is one example. This amount was given in cash , and not through bank transfer or cheque and without any signature from the recipient. Until now we don’t know whether it was two million Sudanese pounds (US$ 800,000) or four million (US $1,600,000). It was a bribe for the Umma Party to participate in the election. We don’t know from where this amount was paid and what was the budget line, whether it was from the public purse or not.
In the run up to the election, people were talking about putting up your candidateship for election and then bargaining to withdraw it. If you stand down in favour of the NCP candidate, you will be paid. The price normally depends on the expected number voters who might vote for you. Tens of candidates withdraw their candidateship in favour of the NCP candidates and people were talking about the price they were paid for this.
So that's it regarding updates on the Sudan elections for today. I'll work on completing my list of links to news articles, commentary, and blog posts about these elections as promised to readers in my previous blog post on the Sudan Elections 2010. I've edited it down to only 13 pages of "must-read" stuff___ do you think that thirteen pages is a bit too much to go to print, er to go to post? Bis bald.
What is it really like to shake hands with the Devil? To be in a room together with a man who has been accused by very credible sources of launching a campaign of fear and terror against his own citizens that he has swore to serve and protect as their president? A person charged by the International Criminal Court in The Hague with war crimes and crimes against humanity___ atrocities against innocent civilians that include the order to militias and government troops to commit mass rape, torture, mutilation, and murder.
A leader who orders the bombing, shooting, and burning of innocent civilians in their villages using Chinese and Russian-built aircraft and munitions purchased with the revenues earned from precious oil reserves stolen from under the very feet of the same people being killed and driven from their lands. What do you do as a journalist or a ‘special envoy’ after shaking hands with a person like this___ wash your hands with bleach afterwards or will just a little soap and water do the trick?
BBC World News correspondent and program host Zeinab Badawi* had a chance to do just that___ to shake hands with a devil and stare evil directly in the face during her exclusive interview with Sudan’s President Lt. General Omar Hassan Ahmed al-Bashir. The popular BBC News interview program HARDTalk has been on the road in Africa this month, airing a 3-part series from the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.
Zeinab Badawi, born in the Sudan but raised and educated in England traveled to Khartoum recently to interview the Sudanese president Omar Hassan al-Bashir. It is the first interview granted to a Western news network since the ICC issued a warrant for his arrest on March 4, 2009. Check your local listings to view the half hour interview or watch the full interview at the HARDTalk and BBC News website (see links below). International viewers can watch the program on May 14th at the following times GMT: 0930, 1530, 2030 and 2230 hours.
Here are a few excerpts from the BBC HARDTalk interview with Sudan’s president: Sources: BBC News and Reuters
BASHIR on the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the warrant for his arrest:
"The ICC ruling is fundamentally null and void," said Bashir. "For us the ICC's ruling is a political one," he added, saying of the ICC charges against him: "This is all lies."
"We do not recognise the court," he stated. "We refuse to negotiate with them, and we will not hand over anyone."
The ICC has issued arrest warrants for two senior Sudanese officials who Khartoum has refused to send to The Hague to stand trial."I challenge anybody to bring me evidence that proves the Sudanese armed forces attacked and killed citizens in Darfur," Bashir said.
Note: Toward the end of the interview President al-Bashir stated that if all the armies of the world stood before the gates of Khartoum, that he would not yield to the court. My analysis: We’ll see about that soon enough. *****
BASHIR on the war against rebel groups and the killing of innocent civilians:
"I assume full responsibility for what has happened to my citizens," Bashir said. "However, what has been reported to have happened in Darfur did not actually take place. What happened in Darfur was an insurgency.
"The state has the responsibility to fight the rebels. Any state in the world and any responsible government would fight those who raise arms against it."
“We have never fought against our citizens; we have never killed our citizens.” *****
BASHIR on UN estimates of casualties and refugees caused by the fighting in the Darfur region and Western media coverage of the conflict:
The UN estimates 300,000 people have died in Darfur's six-year conflict and millions more have been displaced.
But President Bashir said figures for casualties in Darfur were "less than one tenth of what has been reported".
"Any talk about crimes committed inside Darfur is a hostile and organised media propaganda to tarnish the reputation of the government and is a part of the declared war against our government," he added.
Note: I still cannot figure out why Omar al-Bahsir has not expelled all Western journalists and media crews from the country if he is so worried about ‘spies’ and ‘enemies of the state’. Does the President of Sudan need the Western news media in order to stay in power? Does the international news media help him execute his war against Sudan’s so-called enemies: the various rebel groups, the African tribes of Darfur and the African people of southern Sudan? *****
BASHIR on U.S. President Barack Obama, the U.S. Special Envoy to Sudan Scott Gration, and the new administration in Washington D.C.:
Sorry, I forgot exactly what he said but it was somewhat cautious, meaning he didn’t lash out with his normal condemnations of the U.S. You must either watch the HARDTalk program segment or view the online video to find out what was said. *****
Note*: Short Bio on BBC News presenter and program host Zeinab Badawi Zeinab Badawi, born 1959 in Sudan, is a graduate of Oxford University (politics, philosophy, and economics) and has a post-graduate degree in Middle East Studies from London University. She has worked in broadcasting for over two decades, worked as a co-anchor with Jon Snow at the UK’s Channel 4 News (1989-1998), and joined BBC 4 World News Today in 2005 as a presenter (anchor).
The BBC News HARDTalk interview reminded me of a story by Channel 4 News International Editor Lindsey Hilsum when she interviewed Omar al-Bashir shortly after his ascent to power following the 1989 coup d’état in Sudan (one of several in Sudan since independence). It was an interview that in terms echoes Hannah Arendts famous ‘Report on The Banality of Evil’ according to the New York Times columnist Robert Mackey (see his report at The New York Times below).
Excerpt from ‘The cartoon-watching, indicted war criminal’ by Lindsey Hilsum Channel 4 News (UK), April 3, 2009
As we arrived for our interview (1989), about 50 reporters and camera crews were trying to muscle in. The new head of protocol, faced with a horde of badly behaved journalists, decided that the whole thing was off and tried to throw us all out.
We were about to lose our exclusive. Eventually, everyone agreed to back off apart from one particularly pushy and obnoxious reporter, on whom, I confess, I used physical force. I kicked him so hard he limped away. We were ushered into the presence of the new Big Man.
Except he wasn’t a Big Man. He was a small man. I don’t mean physically, but in terms of character. He had no presence, no charisma, no charm, no magnetism.
He spoke mainly in banalities, promising to bring peace and democracy. After about 20 minutes, he indicated the interview was over by standing up, walking across the room, sitting down in front of the TV, and turning on the cartoons.
That was it. The new president of Sudan was watching Tom and Jerry. (Or whatever it was). Our audience was over.
When I interviewed al-Bashir again last year (2008), he seemed exactly the same - a dull, small man who sucked energy from the room. Not a monster, a figure of stature, a person to be reckoned with or to fear. In our interview he simply denied everything. It was like interviewing a blank wall.
When I compare the two interviews (BBC News HARDtalk May 2009 vs. Channel 4 News October 2008) I get this eerie feeling that I’ve seen and heard all of this before. Even the way that the Sudanese president dressed for each respective interview, a European-style sport jacket with no tie and an open shirt collar, was the same. Have a look at the Channel 4 News October 2008 report and compare President Omar al-Bashir’s answers to questions posed by Lindsey Hilsum to similar questions asked by Zeinab Badawi of the BBC News:
Channel 4 News interview with President Omar al-Bashir Khartoum, Sudan - October 17, 2008
Excerpts from the Channel 4 News interview with Sudan’s president:
LH: It's not just a question of peace but of justice. These allegations of genocide, war crimes against humanity, war crimes - the prosecutor quotes recorded and written and words of yours calling for forces to take no prisoners, and for a scorched earth campaign..
Bashir: These allegations are not correct. Everything is fabricated and made up. Anything saying that we ordered killing people is untrue. The sources used by the ICC prosecutor are all hostile; they are from the rebels who revolted against the state.
LH: You say the sources are rebel groups, but the atrocities are well documented. I've been there, I've seen the burnt villages, the women who have been raped, the thousands living in terror in the camps.
Bashir: It's true that many people are living in camps. After the rebels were defeated in the field, many entered the displaced people's camps. They are managing the camps, and they direct the people who meet visitors and dictate what they should say.
It's very normal for people to be displaced from areas of operations and to flee. The question is where did these people move to? They moved into places where there are Sudanese armed forces, police and security because they were sure that they would find safety there.
Is it rational for people to flee and look for security in the very place where they find the same forces that were carrying out mass murder and rape? When these people went to Nyala, El Fasher and Geneina, there were no humanitarian organisations or African Union or UN, rather there were Sudan Armed forces and police.
LH: There wasn't much protection for people in Kalma attacked by Sudanese forces in August. There's not much protection for women who run gauntlet of janjaweed whenever they go to look for firewood...
Bashir: When it comes to mass rape, there is no document or evidence, just accusations. Anything which claims these things are documented is untrue.
But if we are talking about Kalma, in Kalma there were arms inside the camp. The crime of murder was committed inside the camp. We agreed that the operation would be made in collaboration between government forces and UNAMID, but at the last moment the UNAMID mentioned that they had received orders not to be involved.
They knew when the forces moved because the informatiom had leaked. A number of citizens confronted the forces. Behind them, there were armed men and the shooting started from inside the camp. Some soliders when shot at, automatically retaliated and casualties occurred…
LH: I'm interested that you deny that there's been mass rape. Because this is something that not just the rebels are saying.
What we see is the UN, the Ministry of Health people, we see women turning up with evidence of rape at healthcare facilities. We see children with this. And they all tell the same story, that it's usually janjaweed, sometimes government of Sudan troops. Are you really denying this, are you really saying that women of Sudan are lying?
Bashir: The women inside the camps are under the influence of the rebels and some are even relatives of the rebels. That's why they make these claims.
Now there are scientific methods that can reveal who are the fathers of these children which are born. We are fully convinced that no rape took place. It might have happened at an individual level, but this is a normal crime that can happen in any country in the world. Mass rape does not exist.
LH: So you're going to take DNA of the janjaweed...?
Bashir: You can bring any accused, and take his DNA.
LH: They don't know who did it, individual, Just know the janjaweed[sic]
Bashir: These are all false allegations. It's not in the culture of the Darfurians. The Darfurian society does not have rape. It's not in the tradition.
LH: Do you have no pity?
Bashir: No-one has more compassion for their people than we do in Sudan. We have been fighting rebels and in any country where people raise arms against the government, they are to be fought.
In fact, people who fight now are classified as terrorists even those who are resisting foreign occupation like in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and so on.
If we had no mercy, those displaced people wouldn't have come to the government areas. They wouldn't have been received and cared for until the humanitarian organisations arrived.
End Excerpts____
The responses by Sudan’s president to the interviewers’ questions are an act, well coached and well rehearsed to show the international viewing audience that the President of Sudan, Lt. General Omar Hassan Ahmed al-Bashir, is a peace-loving and caring man, a good leader of all Sudanese people and a devout Muslim. This gentle man wouldn’t hurt a fly let alone be guilty of the alleged crimes and atrocities contained in the ICC indictment and arrest warrant, the UN Security Council reports, and various other investigations by organizations such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the U.S. government and the European Union.
Looks like all those hours sitting before the television watching Tom & Jerry cartoons and The Roadrunner may have really paid-off for President Omar Hassan al-Bashir. He certainly knows how to handle journalists and appearances in the Western and international news media, that’s for sure. His many supporters back in Khartoum and elsewhere around the globe just eat this stuff up.
Who is going to tell the Sudanese president that all of that violence he has been watching in cartoons is just for entertainment, that what has been happening to his country for more than two decades is for real and that he is one of the main perpetrators of the death and destruction? Who will finally relieve President Omar Hassan Ahmed al-Bashir from his nightmares and state of denial, and when will they finally do it? I wonder, I really do wonder how this story will end.
Al Jazeera News – English War crimes suspect heads Sudan post 05/08/09 Indicted war criminal Hamed Harun, former State Minsiter for Humanitarian Affairs, is appointed as new governor of oil-rich Kordofan State (southern Sudan) US envoy urges stronger Sudan ties 04/03/09 Profile on US Special Envoy for Sudan Scott Gration before first visit to Khartoum
Mark Fiore’s Animated Cartoon Website Mark Fiore’s Channel at YouTube.com Mark Fiore is a political cartoonist who according to the Wall Street Journal is “the guru of the form”. He works and publishes his animations from some undisclosed location in San Francisco. Mark’s animations are a regular feature at Salon.com and other online magazines and newspapers in the U.S.A. Sudan’s President Omar Hassan al-Bashir just loves this guy.
According to updated reports from the New York Times, The Lede blog at the New York Times, and reports from Israel’s Haaretz Newspaper ‘the Israelis done it!’ The Pentagon and the White House have yet to (officially) comment on the incident but Israel’s outgoing president Ehud Olmert has more-or-less confirmed that it was the IAF in a speech he gave on Thursday (source: Haaretz Newspaper):
Outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert hinted on Thursday at Israel's suspected role in an air-strike that reportedly hit a convoy of arms smugglers as it drove through Sudan toward Egypt in January. "We operate everywhere where we can hit terror infrastructure - in close places, in places further away, everywhere where we can hit terror infrastructure, we hit them and we hit them in a way that increases deterrence," said Olmert, speaking at a conference in Herzliya.
End excerpt___
Time Magazine (TIME.com) has one of the best updated reports that I have read on the raid over Sudan. According to Time.com sources this is what really happened:
Israeli fighter-bombers, backed by unmanned drones, were responsible for a mid-January attack on a 23-truck convoy in the Sudanese desert carrying arms to Hamas militants, two highly-placed Israeli security sources revealed to TIME. The attack was a warning to Iran and other adversaries, showing Israel's intelligence capability and its willingness to mount operations far beyond its borders in order to defend itself from gathering threats.
The sources revealed exclusive details about the bold air attack on what they said was an Iranian weapons convoy, which had been transporting rockets and explosives destined for Gaza during the Israeli assault on the small Palestinian territory. They denied earlier news reports that U.S. aircraft had been involved in the attack on the arms convoy as it crossed at night through the Sudanese desert heading for Egypt's poorly guarded border. "The Americans were notified that Israel was going to conduct an air operation in Sudan, but they were not involved," a source said. He denied prior claims by a U.S. television network that a ship and a second convoy were destroyed. "There was only one raid, and it was a major operation," he said, adding that "dozens of aircraft" were used.
F-16 fighter-bombers carried out two runs on the convoy, while F-15 fighter planes circled overhead as a precaution in case hostile aircraft were scrambled from Khartoum or a nearby country. After the first bombing run, drones mounted with high-resolution cameras passed over the burning trucks. The video showed that the convoy had only been partially damaged, so the Israelis ordered a second pass with the F-16s. During the 1,750-mile (2800 km) journey to Sudan and back, the Israeli aircraft refueled in midair over the Red Sea.
The bombing raid came after an intelligence tip-off. In early January, at the height of Israel's assault on Gaza, Israel's foreign intelligence agency Mossad was told by an informant that Iran was planning a major delivery of 120 tons of arms and explosives to Gaza, including anti-tank rockets and Fajir rockets with a 25 mile range and a 45 kg warhead. With little time to plan the operation, naval vessels and helicopters were rushed to the Red Sea in case Israel had to rescue a downed pilot, and the plan was rushed through. "The Israelis had less than a week to pull this all together," a source said.
The Iranian shipment was bound for Port Sudan. From there, according to the security sources, the Iranians had organized a smuggler's convoy of 23 trucks that would take the weapons across Egypt's southern border and up into the Sinai. Hamas would then take charge of the weapons and smuggle them into Gaza through the tunnels unscathed by Israeli bombardments.
It was a route used occasionally by Hamas, but never before on such a large scale, sources said. "This was the first time that the Iranians had tried to send Hamas a shipment this big via Sudan — and it is probably the last," he said. Several Iranians were killed in the raid, along with Sudanese smugglers and drivers, the source claimed. "No doubt the Iranians are checking back to see who might have leaked this to the Israelis," he said.
End excerpt___
American government officials who asked to remain anonymous spoke with The New York Times earlier this week about the air raid in Sudan. Here is how the New York Times describes the incident:
Israeli warplanes bombed a convoy of trucks in Sudan in January that was believed to be carrying arms to be smuggled into Gaza, according to American officials.
Israeli officials refused to confirm or deny the attack, but intelligence analysts noted that the strike was consistent with other measures Israel had taken to secure its borders.
American officials said the airstrike took place as Israel sought to stop the flow of weapons to Gaza during the weeks it was fighting a war with Hamas there.
Two American officials who are privy to classified intelligence assessments said that Iran had been involved in the effort to smuggle weapons to Gaza. They also noted that there had been intelligence reports that an operative with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps had gone to Sudan to coordinate the effort.
But one former official said that the exact provenance of the arms that were being smuggled via Sudan was unclear.
Although the airstrike was carried out two months ago, it was not publicized until Sudanese officials said Thursday that a convoy of trucks in the remote eastern part of Sudan was bombed by what they called “American fighters,” killing dozens. The strikes were first reported on several Internet-based news sites, including CBSNews.com.
End excerpt____
AFRICOM, the new U.S. Africa Command (based in Germany), issued the following statement via their spokesman Vince Crawley (source: The New York Times)
Vince Crawley, a spokesman for the United States Africa Command, said American forces had not bombed Sudan. “The U.S. military has not conducted any airstrikes, fired any missiles or undertaken any combat operations in or around Sudan since October 2008, when U.S. Africa Command formally became responsible for U.S. military action in Africa,” he said.
The American officials who described the Israeli role declined to be identified because they were discussing classified information and were not authorized to speak for the Obama administration. One American military official said the January strike was one of a series of Israeli attacks against arms shipments bound for Gaza.
End excerpt____
If it is true that Iran sent operatives to Sudan to facilitate the smuggling of short-range missiles and sophisticated armor-piercing munitions to Hamas in Gaza, then Sudan’s President Omar Hassan al-Bashir and his regime have a helluva lot more to worry about than an ICC arrest warrant for his war crimes against the people of Darfur.
Why didn’t Sudan’s air force and navy detect and engage (intercept) the squadrons consisting of numerous Israeli fighters and bombers entering Sudan airspace. Was it cowardice (most likely) or did the Sudanese military simply not see these aircraft on their sophisticated new defense radar systems? What about the hundreds of Chinese and Russian military advisors running around the country, they must have seen something? Non? Nichts?
Spiegel Online International (Germany) Al-Bashir Arrest Warrant: Qatari Emir Warns of 'Chaos' in Sudan 03/28/09 Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine interviews the Emir of Qatar re: Sudan’s President al-Bashir and the ICC arrest warrant before the Arab League Summit in Doha
Al Jazeera News – English Jets 'bombed convoy in Sudan' 03/27/09 Note: the words “U.S. Jets” was dropped from the original headline of March 26th and the story has been updated (edited) Al Jazeera News Channel at YouTube (video) Note: see Al Jazeera MOBILE BULLETIN (video) - 0535GMT - 27 March 09
CBS News World Watch blog U.S. Accused Of Killing 39 In Sudan Strike by Dan Raviv 03/25/09 Note: this blog post at CBS News was the original breaking news story about the alleged U.S./Israeli air raid on the arms convoy in Sudan
The New York Times (USA) The Lede (the New York Times news blog) The Sudan Airstrike Mystery by Robert Mackey 03/26/09
It makes one wonder what exactly was being discussed this week in Cairo during the meeting between Egypt’s President Mubarak and Sudan’s President al-Bashir, the ICC arrest warrant or UFO’s dropping bombs over Sudan?
This is the kind of 'unconfirmed facts reporting' that can cause more violence to break out in a land that is already on the brink. I’d be interested in learning how the Sudanese state-run press and TV/radio news media is playing up the incident. Anybody out there have information about those reports?
The Pentagon via a spokesman for the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) was quick to refute the Al Jazeera report from March 26th, denying any involvement of U.S. aircraft or forces in the incident. This was followed by statements from Ambassador Mary Yates, the Deputy to the Commander of AFRICOM (General William E. Ward), in her meeting on Wednesday with African Union Commission Chairman Jean Ping and the AU Peace and Security Commissioner Ramtane Ramamra. Ambassador Yates made clear to the AU heads that there is no U.S. military role (at the moment) involving the ICC arrest warrant for Sudan President Omar Hassan al-Bashir (VOA News).
So again, everybody should back up a bit and make sure that we have the facts right about serious matters like this before we publish to our blogs, news websites, or whatever. That goes for blog authors and budding citizen journalists, and the journalists, anchors, and editors over at Al Jazeera and other mainstream news organizations. We don’t need to throw any more fuel on the fire that is already burning red hot around the National Congress Party (NCP) in Khartoum. Because at the end of the day, dancing in the streets wearing native headresses and brandishing spears and swords won't help you Omar Hassan al-Bashir.
As I bring my work at Jewels in the Jungle to a close this year, I never thought that I would be writing about the crisis in Darfur again. Ashamedly I belong to the millions of people around the world that have practically given up on a peaceful resolution to the crisis in Sudan’s western province. When I first started this blog back in 2004, peace in Sudan and the atrocities against innocent civilians in Darfur were themes that I tried to address again and again. But Darfur was too complex for many of us bloggers who at that time had little knowledge of the background to the long-running wars and atrocities that have plagued this African country since its independence in 1956. It was a subject better left to the experts, scholars, diplomats, and foreign correspondents of the world, many who have devoted their professional careers and lives to the study and resolution of such conflicts.
Two things happened last week that compelled me to want to speak out once again.
First, the International Criminal Court’s prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo submitted his long-awaited criminal indictment against the President of Sudan, Omar Hassan Ahmed al-Bashir, requesting a warrant from the court’s judges for Bashir’s arrest. Of course such a request caused all Hell to break loose from the UN headquarters in New York City to the African Union and Arab League headquarters on the other side of the globe, as world leaders responded publicly in (feigned) shock to an indictment that they all knew was coming.
When the ICC Prosecutor’s indictment was read in public carried by news networks around the world, the people in the IDP camps of Darfur and Chad sent up cheers and hoots of joy that perhaps finally something was being done on their behalf to relieve the misery and suffering they have endured for over 5 years now. I certainly cheered while watching Mr. Moreno-Ocampo read the indictment summary at his press conference, backed by a black African female member of his very competent legal staff. The symbolism of that black & white duo in the press conference was very powerful and not lost on those of us who are even somewhat familiar with the complex ethnic and racial background to this abominable crisis.
I can imagine that the ICC prosecutor’s office is seeking international support for his move against al-Bashir and I want to say hear and now that I support this move by the honorable Mr. Moreno-Ocampo 150%. As a matter of fact I consider his action to be heroic in a world that has become increasingly cynical and downright despondent over the situation in Darfur and Abyei and all of the Sudan.
A second thing that occurred last week to help motivate me to write once again about this important subject is that my friend the editor-in-chief of the African Loft asked me to contribute to an online debate about the ICC indictment against the Sudanese president. The debate has only a dozen or so comments to date but it is quite civil and hopefully informative for all participants, and we have been joined by the Sudanese blogger Kizzie (I Have No Tribe, I’m Sudanese), a colleague and friend of the very popular blogger Drima of The Sudanese Thinker and editor for Sudan news at Global Voices Online. The debate at African Loft includes an interesting and civil exchange of opposing views on the ICC indictment between the honorable Mr. Oscar Blayton (a Washington DC area attorney) and “moi” (BRE).
So as I have stated the crisis in Darfur and the ICC indictment against Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir is very serious business, indeed. As I have always wished that this blog be a place of learning and sharing of ideas and opinions I shall waste no more of your valuable time with my own words. Below is a roundup of select news articles and reports about the ICC charges, the fallout over these charges against a standing head of state, and where all of this may be heading not only for the people of Darfur and all of Sudan, but for the whole damn(ed) world.
Jewels in the Jungle Global News Roundup for July 21, 2008 The International Criminal Court vs. Africa’s Top Dictator and Mass Murderer: Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmed Al Bashir
The Sudan Tribune The Accused One’s Profile by Ahmed Elzobier – 07/21/08 Note: this is one of the best ever editorials I have read at this independent Sudan-in-exile (Paris, I think) news site. Here is an excerpt from the witty Mr. Elzobier:
The accused one’s profile: “He is kind and generous, a true Sudanese coming from a poor family”, says one of his government officials. However, we also know that human nature is not innately cruel and only rare sociopaths can participate in atrocities without suffering lasting emotional harm as psychiatrist Robert Lifton noted.
The rhetoric: The media in Sudan is all about representing one opinion and one voice. A Cold War era propaganda machine, not really concerned about objectivity or neutrality, or finding the truth. It is only about serving the ruling political party’s objectives, and dissenting voices are anathema. Since the news was leaked last Thursday it has unleashed its propaganda strategy in its fullest form and everything seems to be at stake:
“We are targeted, our sovereignty has been violated. The president is a symbol of the country and this is a conspiracy against Sudan. This is similar to what happened in Iraq. Our judicial system is fair and just and this is a political and not a legal accusation. This has never happened before. This happens to us because we believe in Islam. Because they know the National Congress Party (NCP) is going to win the election. Because of our successes and economic progress.”
The role of China and Russia in the Darfur crisis AND the bloody twenty year long civil war that ravaged southern Sudan is no state secret. As a result of their staunch economic, military, and diplomatic support for the Khartoum regime the governments of China and Russia have come into even sharper focus this month. On the heals of the ICC Prosecutor’s charges against President Omar al-Bashir the million dollar question at the United Nations Security Council over the next weeks will be: “What will China and Russia do if the ICC indictment and warrant for arrest gets kicked back to us?”
That’s enough for today. I will add more to this post as the plot against Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir thickens over the next days and weeks. Look for updates to this post on a regular basis.
I’ve been preparing in my spare time follow-on posts to my last post “Age of the Dragon: German press on China’s conquest of the schwarze Kontinent”. Like many concerned people around the world the news reports on the deteriorating crisis in Sudan’s Darfur region, eastern Chad, and the violence now spreading across the Central African Republic is both alarming and disheartening. The Chad and CAR (Central African Republic) situation has been worsening for many, many months but major international TV news networks have only recently decided to give the stories more airtime. Some key international newspapers and online journalists have done a much better job of reporting on Chad and the CAR over the past year than the TV news giants. Sudan, Chad, and the Central African Republic have all made it into the Top 10 of the 2007 Foreign Policy Failed States Index with the Khartoum regime of Omar Hassan al-Bashir taking the Nr. 1 spot for two years running. This is a region of Africa that is in serious crisis and millions of innocent civilians, particularly women and children are under tremendous pressure trying to just survive from day-to-day.
Something I read today over at Global Voices Online really drove home for me how misguided and callous some people can be about the suffering and misery of others, particularly if they are black Africans. It was a roundup post about the Chinese blogger community reactions to calls from individuals and Darfur activist groups for a threatened boycott of the upcoming Olympic Games 2008 in Beijing. Jacky, a contributing editor/writer at GVO was good enough to translate summaries of the Chinese-language posts and comments for English-language readers. I also wanted to comment on that post but decided it may be better to highlight it here at Jewels.
Note that the last entry written in Chinese is from an anonymous commenter who addresses the situation on the ground in Darfur and suggests that the Beijing government can and should do more to help alleviate the suffering of people in Sudan. Not a single other person addressed the issues of China’s support for the Khartoum regime and complicity in the atrocities taking place in Darfur including the spreading violence to Chad and the CAR. This is the type of mentality and denial that the world is up against re: China in Africa not only from the Beijing government and business community but it appears also from some “free-thinking” prosperous members of modern Chinese society. Paul Josef Goebels couldn’t have done a better job at mass brainwashing a whole society if he were alive today.
So, if (some) Chinese citizens feel that the PRC is unfairly being singled out as a supporter and provocateur of mass murder in Sudan, Chad, and now in the Central African Republic I think that it deserves some “special investigation”. Here is the latest from the biased, corrupt, double-standard, incompetent “Western media” on a region in deep crisis and the China Factor.
Dateline: Paris, June 25, 2007 An(other) International Conference on Darfur Yields Mixed Results
France’s newly elected president, Nicolas Sarkozy, along with his freshly appointed foreign minister Bernard Kouchner (a founder of Médecins sans Frontières) called an international conference on the Crisis in Darfur this week. Heck why not, nothing else seems to be working to resolve the conflicts and disagreements between the warring parties in Sudan. There has been plenty of media fanfare around this conference because its one of the first times that representatives from the U.S.A. the European Union, China, the Arab League, and the United Nations (representatives from 18 countries attended) have sat around the same table privately discussing ideas and joint strategies that could bring a halt to the horrible violence against innocent civilians trapped in Darfur and eastern Chad. The African Union is upset with ‘France and the West’ because they say the conference will be counter-productive to their own efforts and of course the Government of Sudan is ‘warily eyeing the conference’. Just two days after the conclusion of this conference what do we have to show for it? More promises to act quickly on this widening crisis which has entered its fourth year and counting.
Let’s face facts: the humanitarian crisis in Darfur, Sudan is very complicated and is getting more complicated and dangerous by the day. To make matters worse there are credible rumors of civil war that could flare up again between the south and north of Sudan coming from ‘reliable sources’ on the ground in southern Sudan. Why is this happening? The regime in Khartoum is simply not living up to its agreements with the government in the south on a number of points ranging from the agreed sharing of oil export revenues to fully withdrawing government troops from at least 3 southern states. At the center of the economic, political, and military support that props up the Khartoum regime are the governments of the People’s Republic of China, Russia, and key member governments of the Arab League. Let’s not leave out the various European, Middle Eastern and Asian companies conducting a very profitable business with the Khartoum regime and Khartoum’s business community.
To get a better idea about what’s happening today in Chad have a look at the excellent Washington Post Interactive multimedia special feature by Travis Fox, Crisis in Darfur Expands. The report with eyewitness testimony from several victims of the violence is shocking but also very informative. There has been plenty of recent news coverage about the lawlessness and atrocities being committed against innocent men, women and children in northern Central African Republic too. Some of the best reporting on the CAR can be found at the BBC, Washington Post, Amnesty International, MSF, IPS, the New York Times and Topix. The U.K. Channel 4 News has just aired a very disturbing news report about French military operations against an (alleged) rebel-held village in northern CAR “France’s African War?”
Dateline: Washington, D.C. May 28, 2007 France gets 'Rackleyed'
Dr. Edward B. Rackley has written an excellent background article about France’s relationships with its former colonies in sub-Saharan Africa. Dr. Rackley provides a clarification of ‘Francafrique’, a corrupt system of policies and practices between former French government administrations, French companies, and African leaders. Rackley explains how this policy may change under the new political leadership of French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner. In his May 28th article for 3 Quarks Daily Edward Rackley writes (excerpts):
Could France’s new odd couple—Sarkozy and Kouchner—spell the end of French privilege for Africa’s most venal? by Edward B. Rackley
In the 1960s, post-colonial Africa was the most hopeful place on the planet. Post-partum exuberance in Europe’s former colonies was infectious and abundant. Yet fate has not been kind to sub-Saharan Africa. From Namibia to Guinea to Somalia, the path of most sub-Saharan nations has traced an arc of intimate complicity with the predatory appetites of their former colonial masters. Nowhere has this neo-colonial continuation of anti-development and enrichment by and for the few been more evident than in France’s former colonies.
The nature of governance in these ex-colonies attests to the abiding power of the self-serving instinct and immediate gain, over and against the long-term goal of national progress. Such is the confounding irony of Africa’s entire post-colonial era in nations previously occupied by France, Britain, Portugal and Belgium alike: why is the colonial, predatory model of governance so faithfully re-enacted by ruling African elites? It’s as if all that negative conditioning only succeeded in instilling a predatory instinct in the new ruling class. Why are Mandela-style visions for collective prosperity not more common, given the shared experience of subjugation and occupation across the continent?
Two to Tango
Colonialism’s direct rule in Africa was subjugation globalized. African independence in the early 1960s opened the door to fresh national possibilities. New African leaders claimed to reject the culture and values of the former occupier but happily overtook their infrastructure, education systems and administrative apparatus. “Authenticity” campaigns were launched in many countries; western attire and Christian names were banned in an effort to restore the indigenous to its rightful pride of place. Private companies held by former colonials were nationalized and dispersed among the new political elites, the results of which were just as disastrous as Mugabe’s land re-distribution schemes in Zimbabwe. Yet genuinely radical or “clean slate” beginnings, in affairs of the state as in art, are illusory.
During the cold war, western foreign policy in post-colonial Africa sought political stability, access to raw materials, and a common front against the Soviet threat. Military hardware and training for elite presidential guards was a common form of international assistance, a quid pro quo in exchange for access to resources and for remaining faithful to western capitalism. African leaders were not pressed on human rights, “good governance” or controlling corruption as they are today. The massacres of Idi Amin were insignificant compared to the Soviet threat.
Shortly after the fall of the Berlin wall, western strategies towards Africa shifted as the need for quid pro quo camaraderie faded. The US gradually disengaged. Multiple internecine wars arose to topple African dictators, newly vulnerable without superpower protection. The UN struggled to contain the violence in Somalia, Liberia, Congo-Kinshasa, Congo-Brazzaville, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Burundi, Angola, and more recently Ivory Coast and Sudan. Peace deals were brokered, mostly on the cheap, resulting in a new crop of leaders.
As Africa imploded in the 1990’s, France in particular found itself on the receiving end of a massive outpouring of illegal immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers. This influx continues at a massive pace regularly making headlines in the international media. For Sarkozy and other EU leaders, the “African disaster” and the ongoing human exodus towards Europe constitutes a social, economic and political crisis and hot potato, engaging and enraging all sides of the domestic political spectrum.
Update June 28th: TIME Europe Magazine has just published an excellent article about French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner and his work preparing for the international conference on Darfur held this week in Paris. Read "Diplomat without Borders" by Vivienne Walt.
ENDE
Dateline: New York, May 16, 2007 Francafrique gets slammed at the WSJ
Buried in the lengthy but informative article above by Edward Rackley is a link to another great article about France’s dubious post-colonial relationships with key Francophone African countries. The piece was written by David Gauthier-Villars for the Wall Street Journal on May 16th. France Watcher has a full reprint of the article in case you don’t have a paid subscription to read the archived version at the WSJ. Here is an excerpt from Villar’s piece to help whet your appetite and interest:
CONTINENTAL SHIFT Colonial-Era Ties to Africa Face a Reckoning in France By DAVID GAUTHIER-VILLARS The Wall Street Journal - May 16, 2007 On the evening of March 4, 10 French paratroopers reached Birao, Central African Republic, and dropped near an airstrip captured by rebel militia. The paratroopers ambushed the rebels, killing several and reclaiming the airport for the government.
In France, neither the public nor parliament was informed of the attack for three weeks. Coordinating the mission was the "Cellule Africaine," a three-person office nestled behind the Elysée, France's presidential palace. This wasn't the first time the office has been involved in the Central African Republic's internal affairs: In 1979, France toppled the former colony's self-proclaimed emperor and reinstalled his predecessor.
For the past half-century, the secretive and powerful "African Cell" has overseen France's strategic interests in Africa, holding sway over a wide swath of former French colonies. Acting as a general command, the Cell uses France's military as a hammer to install leaders it deems friendly to French interests. In return, these countries give French industries first crack at their oil and other natural resources. Sidestepping traditional diplomatic channels, the Cell reports only to one person: the President.
But with France's new President Nicolas Sarkozy preparing to assume office later today, the African Cell's days may be numbered. There are accusations the French military bears some responsibility for the genocide of 800,000 Tutsis in Rwanda in 1994, charges the government strenuously denies. There's fierce debate over the French military's continuing presence in the Ivory Coast, where soldiers were dispatched in 2002 when rebels threatened to overthrow President Laurent Gbagbo.The Cell's close ties to oil giant Elf Aquitaine, where top executives were jailed on corruption charges, were a source of embarrassment. And a former Cell chief is now facing charges related to arms trafficking to Angola.
Critics say the Cell's support of non-democratic African regimes, an artifact of France's colonial past, is preventing these nations from making progress to modernity. And Africa, once evidence of imperial grandeur, is now viewed by many French as the source of a continuing flood of poor immigrants.
NDJAMENA, Chad: When I last visited this country, in the late 1990's, watching CNN at a French-run hotel here, or for that matter in many former French colonies in the region, meant carrying a screwdriver and readjusting the television's tuner to have some choices beyond French-language fare.
Less than a decade ago, the French claim on this region was still so strong, and Africa's importance to France's view of its own place in the world correspondingly so, that the French were paranoid about expanding American influence on the continent. This went so far as to interpret the American-aided ouster of Zaire's longtime dictator, Mobutu Sese Seko, as Washington's bid to supplant France in Africa.
Amid such a climate, even CNN was regarded in Africa by the possessive French as an arm of an encroaching American empire to be held at bay.
Imagine my surprise then, arriving in Ndjamena late at night on a visit from China, when I turned on my television at the French-run Sofitel Hotel to find that the program blaring from Channel 1 was a starchy variety show in Chinese, courtesy of that country's state broadcaster CCTV.
The point here is not to lament the arrival of the Chinese in what has for so long been a pillar of the economic, military and political empire that France has labored to maintain in this part of the world. It is rather to pronounce the inevitable conclusion of its demise.
Virtually wherever one looks in French-speaking Africa today one finds evidence of a postcolonial policy in tatters, and more startling still, given the tenacity of French claims over the decades, an open sense of failure, of exhaustion and of frank resignation.
There was a time, not long ago, when virtually every car on the street in France's cloistered African client states was French, when no big deal was let without a French contractor's securing a big payday, and where the downtowns of African capitals pulsed with French businesspeople and "cooperants," or aid workers.... ……………………………….
Despite the recent oil wealth, Chad seems poorer and far more decrepit than when I first visited more than 20 years ago. Nowadays, the only French cars rolling on Ndjamena's dusty streets are battered old taxis of that vintage. All the new vehicles are Japanese.
From oil to telecommunications, all the big new investments seem to be Chinese. And to the extent there is any construction going on, as in so much of the continent today, it is Chinese companies landing the contracts.
A reminder of the French presence comes every morning with the roar of fighter jets that take off from a military base at the edge of town. Americans and Chinese seek riches, Chad gets ever more corrupt, and by appearances poorer, and puzzlingly, even to itself nowadays, France is left holding the bag, maintaining a military base that is probably the only thing that stands between this country and outright warlordism…. ………………………………
Chad, in fact, is anything but an anomaly. From next door in the Central African Republic, to Ivory Coast, once Paris's proudest showcase, France's positions in Africa have been overtaken by chaotic events and by competitors, most pointedly of late the Chinese, who recognize a good vacuum when they see one. Here and there, through the deployment of troops, France has been able to hold the line against disorder, if barely, but a country that for so long punched above its weight has proved utterly incapable of helping its African clients move forward.
How did things reach this pass? During the long tenure of Jacques Chirac, France underestimated Africans and China alike, while mistaking America as its rival in a part of the world where Washington has never had grand ambitions or even much vision.
Chirac talked down democracy on the continent as a frivolous luxury and coddled many of its most corrupt dictators, the only conditions for entree at the Élysée Palace were chummy personal ties, flattery of France and business for the clutch of big French companies that have done well for themselves on the continent by hewing close to power.
In the French world, this ruinous condominium, of French politicians who support corrupt African leaders while pushing business deals for their friends, is known as FranceAfrique, and it has cost Africa and France dearly….
Dateline: Germany, June 27, 2007 An Old Chinese Proverb about Africa(ns)
In my previous post about China in Africa I focused on an article from the highly respected German magazine Der Spiegel titled ‘The Age of the Dragon: China’s Conquest of Africa’. At the end of that feature story about Chinese business activities in sub-Saharan Africa there is a quote from a Chinese farm owner living in Zambia who describes his experiences working with the locals. The ‘old Chinese saying’ uttered to the German journalist by this former peasant-turned-entrepreneur clearly reveals a disturbing mentality held by far too many Chinese businesspeople and officials working in Africa today. Mr. Si Su, a farmer from China’s Jiangsu Province and now the proud owner of Sunlight Farm near Lusaka said:
“When the tiger is [away] in the mountains, the ape is king!”
My analysis: The Great Apes are highly intelligent and tend to work in groups. If a predator like a lion or tiger pisses them off for an extended period of time chances are that they will get together, communicate about the problem, hunt down, surround, attack, and feast collectively upon a tiger or any other threatening beast. Be careful Mr. Si Su, be careful.
Well, that’s it for today. Next article in the pipeline will be based upon the Christian Science Monitor’s latest 4-part special feature on China in Africa titled “Is China Good for Africa? - Lessons from Sudan”. What, you haven’t read it yet? It’s a must!
The original Jewels in the Jungle blogroll is in the process of being updated after an eight year run. Please stay tuned for new additions to be added soon.
This work is protected under a Creative Commons License. All orginal material on this weblog is the property of, a creation of, and is copyrighted by the author/owner.
Some rights are reserved. All drawings, photos, graphics and other digital images are copyrighted by their respective owners unless indicated otherwise. Permission must be received from the copyright holders of all images
appearing on this weblog before they are copied, distrubuted, or transmitted either electronically or in hard copies.
Africa
Sudan
Darfur
genocide
war crimes
war
justice
law
ICC
International Criminal Court
international law
global voices
Israel
Gaza
Hamas
weapons
US Military
AFRICOM
USA
Egypt
Iran
Middle East
Arab League
Doha Summit
Africa
war crimes
International Law
United Nations
governance
global voices
China
business
politics
Darfur
human rights
development economics
poverty
economics
developing world
Global Voices
Chad
France
Sarkozy
Nicolas Sarkozy
politique
Afrique
