You are on page 1of 14

Matt Stauner Political Science 260 Fall 2010

The U.N. and the Civil War and Crisis in Darfur

When the League of Nations failed to prevent the second World War, it was obvious that the structure to prevent wars and promote peaceful relations between states needed fixing. And so, the United Nations (U.N.) was born. On the first of January in 1942, the Declaration by United Nations was signed by 26 of the Allied nations working together to stop the Axis of Evil. After many conferences and meetings to create the U.N., the charter was finally ratified by the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council on October 24, 1945 with 51 nations representing the first General Assembly on January 10, 1946. There are currently 192 member states of the United Nations. The United Nations is comprised of many different specialty organizations so that actions by the U.N. may run more smoothly and efficiently. One of the most prominent and important groups of the United Nations is the U.N. Security Council. Consisting of five permanent members and ten nonpermanent members who are elected for two-year terms, the U.N. Security Council, or U.N.S.C., is responsible for all peacekeeping and military operations. The five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council are: People's Republic of China France Russian Federation United Kingdom United States

The permanent members have a lot of say in what gets resolved in the U.N.S.C., mostly because of

their power to veto. Each permanent member has the power to veto a resolution. Even if the required number of votes to pass a resolution are there (nine in this case), if one permanent member decides to veto, the resolution fails. The power to veto allows the permanent members of the U.N.S.C. to have much more sway in the decisions made and the actions carried out. While not quite as responsible for what happens within the United Nations Security Council, the non-permanent members are an important aspect to the council and shine a light on how particular states within particular regions feel about the world's current issues. Every year, five of the ten nonpermanent members are swapped out for a new batch of elected states. Currently, the ten nonpermanent members of the U.N.S.C. are: Austria Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Gabon Japan Lebanon Mexico Nigeria Turkey Uganda

These nations have an important role in deciding the fate of resolutions on the table. Nine yeses out of the 15 member states are required to pass a resolution. In March of 2003, in western Sudan, in a region called Darfur, fighting broke out between the Sudanese government forces and rebel groups such as the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM). To escape the conflict, refugees fled to Chad for protection. By September of the same year, the refugee count in Chad had reached 65,000 and the United Nations had estimated that 500,000 were in need of humanitarian Aid. It is a widely accepted view that the crisis in Darfur is mainly a conflict between the north and south regions of Sudan, the north being occupied mostly by Arabs, and the south being occupied mostly by Africans. Dr. Francis M. Deng, in his book titled War of Visions Conflict of Identities in the Sudan, says

the north's identification with Arabism is the result of a process in which races and religions were ranked, with Arabs and Muslims respected as free, superior and a race of slave masters, while Negroes and heathens were viewed as legitimate targets of slavery, if they were not in fact already slaves. It is because of the blatant conflict between races that the President of Sudan, Omar al-Bashir, has been accused of committing genocide, among a number of other war crimes. Al-Bashir vehemently denies the accusations, and though the International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued a warrant for his arrest, he refuses to give himself up with the support of nations like Egypt, Qatar, and Lybia refusing to turn him over. Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir has been accused of supplying weapons and funds to the Janjaweed, an armed militia of nomads who are notorious for their heinous crimes of torture, rape, and murder. By September of 2004, just a year and a half since the conflict began, the United States predicted that the acts carried out by al-Bashir's government and the Janjaweed forces had left 1.2 million black Africans homeless. China didn't agree that acts of genocide were carried out and threatened to veto the U.S.'s resolution to investigate the situation further, more closely, and with added diligence. (Washington Post) Unclear of the intent of President al-Bashir and the Sudanese government, the International Criminal Court was unable to prosecute. In April 2007, the ICC gathered enough facts to prosecute Ahmed Haroun, Minister of State for the Interior, and Ali Kushayb, a leader of the Janjaweed for their war crimes, though Sudan refused to hand their men over. President al-Bashir had come to power in 1989 after he had led a group of army officers to overthrow who they viewed as an unstable leader of their country. Four years later, he appointed himself as President. As a result, a large portion of the people in Darfur became marginalized and by 2002, the rebel group Sudan Liberation Movement (originally Darfur Liberation Front) was formed. The group was split into two when there were disagreements on a peace treaty. The Sudan Liberation Movement is one of the two major rebel forces fighting to survive in the violent region of Darfur. The other notable rebel group is the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM). The group was

formed in 2000 by Khalil Ibrahim, an author of of the Black Book, which describes the inequality in Sudan and neighboring regions. JEM merged with the Sudan Liberation Movement in 2006 to form the Alliance of Revolutionary Forces of West Sudan. Since there are differing opinions on peacekeeping operations between the rebel forces, the groups decided to approach that aspect of the crisis as separate groups. The documentary Darfur Now, made in 2007 follows the stories of six individuals in their search for answers in a conflict so full of bloodshed and violence. The film draws lines where they are necessary, showing relationships between peace-seeking groups or individuals and rebel forces living in fear, some looking for a chance for revenge. The film outlines the journeys of some very important and noteworthy people to the crisis in Darfur. The star of the film, though focusing on a number of different people, is American actor Don Cheadle. Famous for his role in the film Hotel Rwanda, a film depicting the genocide in Rwanda, Cheadle is a tireless activist in his free time. Darfur Now shows Don Cheadle utilizing his status as a celebrity to advance his and many's cause of ending the crisis in Darfur. In the film, he teams with fellow superstar George Clooney to encourage world leaders to take action on the situation in Darfur and take an active role in the search for peace in the battle-torn region. A month after the film was released, Cheadle and Clooney were awarded with the Summit Peace Award for all of their hard work in their search for a peaceful Sudan. Cheadle's concern is well-stated in a book that he co-authored titled Not on Our Watch. To us, Darfur has been Rwanda in slow motion. Perhaps 400,000 have died during three and a half years of slaughter, over two and a quarter million have been rendered homeless, and, in a particularly gruesome subplot, thousands of women have been systematically raped. During 2006, the genocide began to metastasize, spreading across the border into Chad, where Chadian villagers (and Darfurian refugees) have been butchered and even more women raped by marauding militias supported by the Sudanese government. In the film, Don Cheadle and George Clooney meet with founder of the Sudan Divestment Task

Force Adam Sterling in introducing a peace of legislation to place emphasis on the humanitarian aid needed in Darfur to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. The Sudan Divestment Task Force is now a part of the Genocide Intervention Network, a non-profit group dedicated to ending and preventing genocide. Their efforts are mostly put toward the crisis in Darfur. The group is centered around pushing a peaceful means of negotiations and making sure that the peacekeeping operations currently in progress are running as effectively as they need to be. The Genocide Intervention Network is one example of the many non-governmental groups centered on ending genocide in Sudan. These groups are essential in increasing public awareness of the situation. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the man behind the prosecution of Sudanese President al-Bashir, leader of the Janjaweed Ali Kushayb, and former Minister of State for Humanitarian Affairs in Sudan Ahmed Haroun, is also featured in the film. A native to Argentina and a prosecutor of the mass killings there, Moreno-Ocampo is experienced and has a good grasp on what genocide means and where to draw the line when it comes to civil disputes. Though the warrants for the arrest of the previously mentioned individuals have been issued, the International Criminal Court has to respect the sovereignty of Sudan and basically must rely on the Sudanese courts to try the individuals for their war crimes and crimes against humanity. The documentary is able to get an up-close look at the situation in Darfur, gathering commentary from members of the Sudanese Liberation Army, particularly a young woman by the name of Hejewa Adam. Adam lost her son in a brutal act of violence brought about by the Janjaweed forces. She is a prime example of the suffering people in Darfur who have lost loved ones because of raids and pillages performed by the Janjaweed and Sudanese military. The film follows Hejewa Adam on her search for revenge on the people that took her son away from her. The Sudanese Liberation Army, split in two because of differing views on accomplishing their goals in Darfur, is the primary rebel force in the region. Some have taken giant leaps of faith in hopes of a peaceful agreement while others like Hejewa Adam hold vengeance in their heart.

With a United Nations estimate of 2.9 million people displaced because of the crisis in Darfur, it is obvious that a resolution to the conflict is way past due. Darfur Now follows a recently displaced civilian and sheikh of a camp of 47,000 more. His name is Sheikh Ahmed Mohammed Abaka. The film follows the difficult decisions he and his council make to ensure the safety of their fellow citizens displaced from their home. After Luis Moreno-Ocampo and the International Criminal Court convicted President al-Bashir for his crimes, he did everything he could do to remove outside aid programs, and as a result, the displacement camps saw less resources to survive and created a harsher condition of living for them. One aid program, a branch from the United Nations, the World Food Program is a leader in supplying food to those in need. Darfur Now follows Pablo Recalde, leader of the program in western Darfur. It depicts the dangers involved in transporting food to the displacement camps and what the process involves in improving the quality of life for so many who suffer. In 2007, the program spent nearly $700 billion to provide people in Sudan and Darfur with the necessary nutrients to survive. The World Food Program reaches tens of millions of people in need each year. After years of fighting and failed peace agreements, the International Criminal Court was able to gather enough evidence to charge President al-Bashir with five counts of crimes against humanity including: murder, extermination, forcible transfer, torture, and rape. He was also charged with two counts of war crimes for pillaging and intentionally directing attacks against civilians and on March 4, 2009, a warrant was issued for his arrest. Al-Bashir refuses to give himself up, strongly denying the charges against him. In February of 2010, JEM and al-Bashir's Sudan signed a ceasefire agreement, though there have already been attacks and raids on villages since then, and so, the violence continues. The death count, as stated by the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters in a January 2010 article in The Lancet, is somewhere between 178,258 and 461,520. These results come with 95% certainty and are more than double the results that the same research center found just 5 years earlier in March of 2005. It has become increasingly difficult to portray an accurate depiction of the

current situation because of the stance President al-Bashir has taken with media sources by censoring them. With the expulsion of many aid programs in Sudan as well, it is not easy to gather information on the crisis. The United Nations Security Council, containing 15 members (five permanent and ten nonpermanent), holds a spectrum of different views and stances on the crisis in Darfur. The five permanent members of the council seemingly lead the non-permanent members and allow them to make their own decisions, who will then most often take a similar approach to that of one of the permanent five. With the crisis in Darfur, there seem to be three main approaches to the solution, with nations like the United States and the United Kingdom, and the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation, in general agreement on how to carry out a successful operation in restoring peace to Sudan and the region of Darfur. The United States is skeptical of the Sudanese government's intentions with the removal of humanitarian aid in the country. The United States history with President al-Bashir is not pleasant. AlBashir has close ties with leader of the National Islamic Front, Hassan al-Turabi, who had granted Osama Bin Laden access to Sudan to carry out his operations as a leader of al-Qaeda. The U.S. is extremely critical of the actions of the Sudanese government and hopes they will handle their human rights affairs swiftly if they will not allow outside aid. The United States are very hopeful that the crisis will come to a peaceful close and will continue to work for safety for the civilians of Sudan or resort to military action if peaceful negotiations are unsuccessful. The People's Republic of China has a much different position on the crisis in Darfur than that of the United States. Though China is very hopeful for a peaceful end to the conflict, they are absolutely opposed to any military action if peaceful negotiations do not work. They agree with the peacekeeping missions the United Nations are operating, but feel as though much emphasis should be placed on respecting the sovereignty of Sudan. China believes that Sudan's internal affairs are theirs and theirs alone. They feel similarly about the war criminals that are being prosecuted by the International

Criminal Court. Though they believe that these criminals should be tried and punished for the crimes they committed, they would like to see the criminals tried in Sudanese court, but not outside of the Sudanese region. The People's Republic of China's stance on Sudan's oil production could be biased, as they have a trade agreement, but they oppose the threatened sanctions on their oil which were brought upon by a resolution put forward by the the Security Council. China argues that sanctions on Sudan's top export would be devastating to Sudan's economy and will only hinder the possibility of peace in the region. China doesn't foresee a quick end to the conflict, but hopes that through peacekeeping missions, the region of Darfur will see peace. France's take on resolving the conflict in Darfur is quite a bit different than the positions stated by the United States and the People's Republic of China. France believes that solving the crisis should be done in a very cautious and careful manner. They are opposed to any military action as they believe it would be an unnecessary and drastic move. France believes that an effective means to ending the civil war in Sudan would be to offer extra monetary support. By supplying Sudan an its civilians monetary support, the internal issues of Sudan would be more easily tackled allowing for an easier transition to a peaceful agreement between the Sudanese government and the rebel forces seeking vengeance. The Russian Federation believes that the end goal of solving the crisis in Darfur is not only a peaceful arrangement, but also defining Sudan's political structure and development within the state itself. Russia agrees with the People's Republic of China on the view that Sudan should handle its own criminal affairs, but acknowledges that much outside encouragement is necessary to see that through. They do not believe that changing the political structure should be forced, but will help Sudan shift to a government not clouded in corruption. They are not in favor of sanctions being placed on Sudan's resources. The United Kingdom, much like the United States, has come to the conclusion that some military action may need to be enforced. The United Kingdom views the crisis as genocide and

believes that the Sudanese government and the Janjaweed militia need to be met with military force. Human life is precious, and it is critical to do whatever possible to ensure that no more lives are lost because of these crimes against humanity. They believe that the Janjaweed and their allies will not stop unless they are approached by military action. Though peaceful relations are preferred, they are pessimistic that it can be solved peacefully and will take whatever action necessary to ensure peace in Sudan and the Darfur region. Austria, one of the ten non-permanent members of the United Nations Security Council takes a similar approach to the United States. They believe that military action is necessary in the solution to the conflict. They are very concerned with the future of the economy of Sudan and hope that through peaceful relations between the tribes in the region, Sudan's economy may develop. They believe that currently, China and Russia have too much power in Sudan. If outside military forces were to intervene, the people of Sudan would be obligated to work peacefully. Bosnia and Herzegovina went through a similar situation as to what is happening in Darfur. Due to ethnic unrest, armed conflict broke out and resulted in the genocide and killing of thousands of people. They can relate to Sudan and the conflict they are experiencing, and because of the relation, suggest that the government of Sudan be comprised of leaders of the different ethnic groups. They believe that much humanitarian aid is needed to provide safety to civilians. Bosnia and Herzegovina are concerned for the advancement of the country and would like to see more aid and internal attempts at peace. Lebanon, another non-permanent member state, believes that humanitarian aid is only hurting the situation. They believe that a peaceful Sudan must come from negotiations between the involved parties. Only then can they reach some sort of agreement, whether that means unity or separation of the nation. Lebanon believes that the sovereignty of Sudan must be respected and that a result of the conflict be decided by the two sides. Lebanon does not agree with the prosecution of President alBashir by the International Criminal Court.

Mexico stands by their opinion that the conflict brought about by President al-Bashir and his forces is unacceptable. They believe that some military presence is necessary to control the fighting in Sudan. The conflict cannot be solved by United Nations missions alone. Sudan needs to be encouraged by other nations to follow through with negotiations for peace. They also have a very negative opinion of President al-Bashir and would like to see him removed immediately. Only then will there be peace and a healthy start for a growing Sudan. The nation of Nigeria believes that the United Nations Security Council should not be hasty with its decisions to get more involved. The institutions and programs already in place to help the people in Darfur are excellent programs that just need to be restrengthened. They believe that while military action is not necessary, something should be done to ensure that government forces and the Sudan military are acting responsibly and not committing heinous violence and sex crimes. They suggest sending support to Sudan to train the Sudanese troops to be more disciplined so that the conflict may be resolved through reconciliation and peaceful resolutions between sides of the warring state. The Democratic state of Turkey believes that there can be a peaceful end to the crisis in Darfur, but acknowledges that the Security Council's involvement is necessary to see it through. They have not opposed military action if peaceful arrangements are lackluster. They believe that existing efforts should be stronger and will help in any way they can with the peace talks between the Sudanese government and the rebel forces. Turkey has stated that they will help financially to get Sudan back on its feet in the hopes that it will spar growth in its economy. Brazil feels that there needs to be a peaceful resolution to the conflict and that military action should be avoided. They believe that there needs to be a global effort to resolve the crisis along with the current United Nations missions in place. They are opposed to sanctions on Sudan's resources as it would only have negative effects, especially on the civilians who are not a violent aspect of the conflict. They are concerned that it will turn into a situation similar to that in Rwanda and that there

needs to be much humanitarian aid in the region to bring the crisis to an end and pave a path for a healthy recovery for the country. Japan feels that there needs to be an emphasis on financial stability in Sudan. If the Sudanese government refuses to come to a conclusion peacefully, then there should be necessary punishment enacted. If President al-Bashir refuses to comply, sanctions should be placed on the country's oil production in response. If needed, Japan is not opposed to using military force to complete the job. Sudan needs to take responsibility for its actions and put effort into ending the crisis immediately. The nation of Gabon takes a similar approach to the conflict as another non-permanent member state, Nigeria. There needs to be a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Darfur. Gabon and Nigeria have agreed to work together for the betterment of Africa and focus on Sudan's development and economic stability. There needs to be a peaceful agreement between the fighting factions so that the Sudanese economy can grow, prosper, and become a global player. Uganda, neighbor of Sudan, would like to see the civil war in Darfur result in two separate nations. Uganda is a hotspot for humanitarian aid projects and peacekeeping operations. They've taken a positive stance on the Sudanese People's Liberation Movement and has acted as a safe zone for the rebel forces. Uganda has partnered with the United States in a leadership role of supplying aid to those affected by the raids of the Janjaweed and the Sudanese military. They are not opposed to military force if necessary. Of the 15 members of the current United Nations Security Council, there seems to be few major approaches to the solution of the crisis in Darfur. For the most part, the non-permanent members have taken sides with one of the permanent members, mirroring their thoughts and offering assistance in the execution and efficiency of the peacekeeping operations. It seems as if the geographical location or region the member is located holds a lot of influence over the decisions made on how to arrive at a peaceful conclusion of the brutal war. Overall, the positions that the current members of the United Nations Security Council hold are

fairly predictable. There is concern all across the board for the safety and economic well-being of Darfur, Sudan, and its peoples; however, there are many differing opinions on how to reach the end goal of peace in the region. There are obvious alliances within the Security Council concerning the proper way of attaining that goal, and it's not too surprising, either, that the alliances are made up of the countries they are. It is not surprising that the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation view the situation in the light that they do. China and Russia are two countries that are benefiting greatly from Sudan's resources, particularly it's oil production. They have the utmost respect for Sudan's sovereignty, and though the situation is obviously in dire need of a rapid solution, they oppose outside forces operating out of Sudan. Lebanon, a non-permanent state in the United Nations Security Council agrees with China and Russia's stance on respecting Sudan's sovereignty. It is also not surprising that the United States and the United Kingdom have a similar approach to answering the problem in Sudan. While a peaceful stance is always preferred, there comes a point in a conflict where military action from outside nations must be implemented. That is the view of the two countries. These two countries are extremely concerned about the human rights violations in the country and call for the immediate arrest of President al-Bashir and his cohorts. Both of these countries believe that what is going on is genocide, which is absolutely unacceptable and will do whatever they deem necessary to end it. While many countries have been supplying monetary support to Sudan for their economic growth, it is surprising that France's main focus on the crisis is on the greenback. France believes that the peacekeeping operations in place are important, even more important to peace in Sudan is supplying the nation with enough funds to solve the internal problems of Sudan's government more easily and allow for a smoother transition to a peaceful agreement between the two sides. With so many differing opinions on the matter and a variety of approaches to the solution of the civil war and crisis in Darfur, there is much hope that Sudan and its people will see peace soon. Though

many peace agreements made between the warring sides have been violated and crimes are still being committed by President al-Bashir and the Sudanese government, there is a global optimism about that believes Sudan will see a healthy transition to a peaceful state. With the help of the United Nations, concerned states, and non-governmental organizations, the situation in Sudan and Darfur is in desperate need of a solution.

Works Cited

"BBC News - Q&A: Sudan's Darfur conflict." BBC News - Home. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3496731.stm (accessed December 3, 2010). Cheadle, Don, and John Prendergast. Not on our watch: the mission to end genocide in Darfur and beyond. New York, N.Y.: Hyperion, 2007. Degomme, Dr. Olivier, and Prof. Debarati Guha-Sapir. "Patterns of Mortality Rates in Darfur Conflict." The Lancet. www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(09)61967-X/abstract (accessed December 1, 2010). Deng, Francis Mading. War of visions: conflict of identities in the Sudan. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1995. "FACTBOX - Sudan's President Omar Hassan al-Bashir | Reuters Breaking US & International News | Reuters.com. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUKL1435274220080714 (accessed December 2, 2010). Kessler, Glenn, and Colum Lynch. "U.S. Calls Killings In Sudan Genocide (washingtonpost.com)." Washington Post - Politics, National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines washingtonpost.com. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8364-2004Sep9.html (accessed December 3, 2010). ." Business & Financial News,

You might also like