Follow Us:

Darfur (Part II): Reactions to US Announcement, Sudanese reactions and other updates

31 May 2007

Dear all,

Please find below information related the International Criminal Court's (ICC) investigation in Darfur and more reactions to the recent announcement by the US government on sanctions against Sudan, among other updates:

A. REACTIONS TO US ANNOUNCEMENT: Local and international media reacted to Bush’s announcement on new sanctions against Sudan for its role in Darfur. The sanctions target government-run companies involved in the Sudanese's oil industry, and three individuals, including a rebel leader called Ahmad Muhammad Harun -former Minister of State of Sudan for Humanitarian Affairs – named in the ICC arrest warrants for the perpetration of human rights abuses in Darfur.

(1) Enough Project, by John Prendergast, Colin Thomas-Jensen And Julia Spiegel state that “President Bush’s announcement today that his administration will begin implementing a set of punitive measures– its oft-threatened “plan b” – against the Sudanese government could have marked a real turning point in US policy to end what the President calls genocide.”

(2) The New York Sun states that “Washington's announcement yesterday that it would launch a new sanctions drive against Sudan exposed a new but distinct difference between President Bush's impatience with rogue regimes (…)” and highlights the timing of Mr. Bush's statement on Sudan, as it was delivered just as UN SG Mr. Ban Ki Moon “was seeking to reach a new agreement with President Al-Bashir of Sudan to deploy 20,000 UN-led troops in Darfur.”

(3) In an article by Nick Donovan, Head of Research and Policy at the Aegis Trust, published by The Times (London) it is stated that “the Darfur crisis is not insoluble. (…)” Adding that “The International Criminal Court (ICC) recently issued arrest warrants for Haroun. But he was not alone. He reported to the minister of the interior,” among other high level officials, and that “the ICC indictments and trials will reveal these men as involved in nothing less than a criminal conspiracy to commit mass murder.”

(4) AFP reports that, according to a US official “the goal of the sanctions is to force Sudan to allow the full deployment of a UN peacekeeping force; disarm the janjaweed militias; and let humanitarian aid reach the region, which is roughly the size of France.”

B. SUDANESE REACTION TO US ANNOUNCEMENT: The Sudanese government bitterly reacted to the recently-announced sanctions by the US. Khartoum described the measures as “unfair and untimely” and urged “the rest of the world to ignore them.”

C. INTERVIEW: “A Call to Action in Darfur” it’s an interview with John Prendergast (a former Clinton Administration Official) from International Crisis Group and coauthor of a new book “The Mission to End Genocide in Darfur and beyond”. In this interview, he states that in order to get a real peace deal in Darfur, “we need a much more focused diplomatic effort to bring the parties back to the table.” Among the measures he suggests: the UN- AU hybrid force has to be deployed; targeted sanctions, asset freezes; the US sharing intelligence with the International Criminal Court to help speed up indictments of some senior officials and rebels.”

D. STATEMENTS ON DARFUR: By US- Deputy Secretary of State John D. Negroponte and President Bush.

Please take note of the Coalition's policy on situations before the ICC (below), which explicitly states that the CICC will not take a position on potential or pending situations before the court. The Coalition, however, will continue to provide the most up-to-date information about the ICC.

Regards,

Mariana Rodriguez Pareja
Spanish Information Coordinator/ Latin America Analyst
CICC
*********************************************************************

A. REACTIONS TO US ANNOUNCEMENT

1. Enough Project by John Prendergast, Colin Thomas-Jensen and Julia Spiegel,
“Shooting blanks at Sudan” – May 29, 2007 (link not available)
“President Bush’s announcement today that his administration will begin implementing a set of punitive measures– its oft-threatened 'plan b' – against the Sudanese government could have marked a real turning point in US policy to end what the President Calls genocide. Unfortunately, it doesn't. (...)
As for targeting the individuals most culpable for atrocities, the current US Plan will impose sanctions on two senior government officials and one rebel leader. The more senior regime officials who masterminded crimes against humanity in Darfur can breathe easy. They have yet to pay a cost for those crimes. Enough chronicled who these officials are in an earlier statement, 'we know their names.' The US should also "support for the ICC indictment process: the US should provide information and declassified intelligence to the International Criminal Court to help accelerate the process of building indictments against senior officials in the regime for their role in orchestrating mass atrocities in Darfur. The US has the most such intelligence and should come to agreement with the ICC about what information to share.”

2. The New York Sun.”Bush plan for Sudan in conflict with ban”- May 29, 2007
http://www.nysun.com/article/55443
“Washington's announcement yesterday that it would launch a new sanctions drive against Sudan exposed a new but distinct difference between President Bush's impatience with rogue regimes - such as those in Khartoum and Damascus - and the deliberate backroom diplomacy advocated by secretary-general ban.
Mr. Ban has been criticized by some UN Traditionalists as being too close to the Bush administration, but the rift that emerged yesterday demonstrated that the united nation’s approach to world affairs differs on key issues not only with America, but also with America’s main security council allies, Britain and France.
The timing of Mr. Bush's statement on Sudan yesterday, delivered just as Mr. Ban was seeking to reach a new agreement with President al-Bashir of Sudan to deploy 20,000 UN.-led troops in Darfur, took the secretary-general by surprise. "He was taken aback," an aide to Mr. Ban, speaking on condition of anonymity, said.
"The people of Darfur are crying out for help, and they deserve it," Mr. Bush said yesterday. Also yesterday, the treasury department announced an asset freeze on two high-ranking members of the Sudanese government and one rebel leader.
All three were indicted by the international criminal court on war crime charges related to their roles in the conflict in Darfur.”

3. The Times (London) “At last, a way to stop the grotesque cruelty in Sudan” byline: Nick Donovan- May 29, 2007 Http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article1857045.ece
“Faced with a rebellion in Darfur in 2003, the Sudanese government resorted to its favored strategy of "counter-insurgency by genocide". Khartoum appointed Ahmed Haroun, the "Eichmann of Africa," to take charge. As head of the Darfur security desk, he coordinated a spider's web of security services, police, military and militia units.
Fond of citing Mao’s dictum that "the people are like water and the army is like fish", Haroun directed attack after attack not on the rebels but against the civilians of the fur, mislaid and zaghawa tribes. The pattern became routine.” (…)
“Haroun personally recruited, paid and armed the militia: witnesses saw him delivering planeloads of weapons and boxes of cash. The international criminal court (ICC) recently issued arrest warrants for Haroun. But he was not alone. He reported to the minister of the interior (and current Defence minister) Abdelrahman Mohamed Hussein, and through him to the President, omar al-Bashir, vice-President tama and the head of security, Saleh Ghosh. He liaised with the Sudanese military and security forces. He gave orders to the governors of Darfur to recruit more janjawid. Eventually the ICC indictments and trials will reveal these men as involved in nothing less than a criminal conspiracy to commit mass murder. So far they have killed between 200,000 and 450,000 people.
The Sudanese government has been resisting the imposition of UN peacekeepers for four years now. Estimates of the numbers of troops needed range from 21,000 to 44,000: presently the African union has only 5,000 troops on the ground confined to barracks at night and lacking the mandate to protect civilians. In august 2006 UN resolution 1706 invited Sudanese consent for a force of 20,000 UN peacekeepers.
After all, where is Ahmed Haroun now? After his role in Darfur, President al-Bashir promoted him to minister of humanitarian affairs. Thus one of the architects of the killings is now responsible for coordinating the rescue efforts for the survivors. This is a grotesque joke. The Sudanese government is laughing at the world. The time for oil sanctions has come.”

4. Agence France Presse “Bush slaps new sanctions on Sudan, seeks UN action”- May 29, 2007 (link not available)
“US President George w. Bush on Tuesday tightened us sanctions on Sudan over "genocide" in Darfur and pushed for a tough new UN Security Council resolution to punish the government in Khartoum.
“The people of Darfur are crying out for help, and they deserve it," he said. "I promise this to the people of Darfur: the United States will not avert our eyes from a crisis that challenges the conscience of the world." China, a veto-wielding permanent council member and one of Sudan's main allies, criticized the sanctions even be-fore Bush unveiled them. But Britain welcomed the plan, while France proposed a humanitarian corridor through neighboring Chad to get aid to Darfur.
In Khartoum, Presidential adviser mazjub al-khalifa told reporters that the decision "highlights the hostile intentions and points to the fact that the United States does not want peace in Darfur." The goal of the sanctions is to force Sudan to allow the full deployment of a UN peacekeeping force; disarm the janjaweed militias; and let humanitarian aid reach the region, which is roughly the size of France, we officials say.
The stricter sanctions will bar another 31 companies, including oil exporters, from us trade and financial dealings, and take aim at two top Sudanese government officials, the treasury department said in a statement.
The two officials were identified as Ahmed Haroun, state minister for humanitarian affairs -- who has been accused of war crimes by the international criminal court in The Hague -- and Awad Ibn auf, head of Sudan's military intelligence and security.”

Related links:
1. National public radio “US Develops strategy to deal with Sudan”- 29 May 2007
(Link not available)
2. National public radio (NPR) “Nigeria’s new President, central African republic inquiry and Darfur sanctions”- May 29, 2007
3. San Francisco Chronicle “Sudan sanctions called inadequate: Experts say Bush's plan to help Darfur needs U.N. Backing”- May 29, 2007
Http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/05/30/mngs1q3mdj1.dtl
4. CFR “US Implements Darfur ‘plan b’ “– May 29, 2007
Http://www.cfr.org/publication/13465/us_implements_Darfur_plan_b.html?breadcrumb=/
5. Angola press “US imposes new sanctions against Sudan”- May 30, 2007
http://www.angolapress-angop.ao/noticia-e.asp?id=535053

B. SUDANESE REACTION TO US ANNOUNCEMENT:

1. Associated press world stream “Sudan: new us economic sanctions over Darfur are unfair and untimely”- May 29, 2007
“The Sudanese government Tuesday bitterly criticized new US Economic sanctions that Washington says are aimed at pressuring Khartoum to halt the bloodshed in Darfur, describing the measures as "unfair and untimely" and urging the rest of the world to ignore them.
US President George w. Bush announced that the united states was enforcing sanctions that bar 31 Sudanese companies owned or controlled by Sudan's government from the US Banking system. The new sanctions would also prevent three Sudanese individuals from conducting business with US Companies or banks.
"We believe this decision is unfair and untimely," Sudan's foreign ministry spokesman Ali Sadiq told the associated press.
Bush said the sanctions were decided because Sudan has resisted United Nations efforts to send a large U.N. Peace-keeping mission to Darfur, where more than 200,000 people have died and 2.5 million have fled their homes in four years of fighting between Sudanese forces and local rebels.
"These American measures come at a time when Sudan is actively discussing peace in Darfur and working on the hybrid force," of U.N. And au peacekeepers, Sadiq said. "We invite the international community to ignore and condemn these sanctions."
Sadiq also warned that the US Move would "give the wrong signal" to rebel groups fighting in Darfur. ( …) The sanctions would only "lead to lots of tension," (Arab League Secretary General Amr) Moussa said. (…)
Harun, the cabinet minister, declined to comment because he is not authorized to talk to the media since the inter-national criminal court in The Hague issued an arrest warrant against him earlier this month on charges of 51 counts of crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur.”

Related article:

1. PR “Sudan: new us economic sanctions over Darfur are unfair and untimely”- May 29, 2007 Http://www.pr-inside.com/print137741.htm

C. INTERVIEW

“A call to action in Darfur”-Interview Q&A John Prendergast-
Some excerpts:
“There is no end in sight to the killings and expulsions in Darfur-that afflicted western part of Sudan where more than 200,000 people have died and 2.5 million have been pushed out of their homes in a brutal, complicated conflict. The Bush administration has declared the killings” genocide, but the US and international efforts to rein in the violence have, so far, failed. The government in Khartoum is seen as the central driver of the violence. Sudan recently agreed to allow 3,000 United Nations peacekeepers into Darfur to bolster an existing force of African union soldiers that has been unable to stop four years of war. But few observers believe that the moves mark a decisive turn in ending an ongoing humanitarian disaster. (…)
What should be done?
Three "p's": peacemaking, protection, and punishment. We need a much more focused diplomatic effort to bring the parties back to the table to get a real peace deal in Darfur. The US has to lead. Second, this UN-African Union hybrid force has to be deployed. You punish perpetrators. That means targeted sanctions, asset freezes, the US Sharing intelligence with the international criminal court to help speed up indictments of some senior officials and rebels.”

D. STATEMENTS

1. Deputy secretary of state john d. Negroponte holds a state department news briefing on Sudan sanctions – May 29, 2007
http://www.state.gov/s/d/2007/85716.htm
“Negroponte: good morning.
I'm accompanied this morning by special envoy for Sudan Andrew Natsios and the director of the treasury department's office of foreign assets control, Mr. Adam Szubin, who will offer you more information on the President's announcement this morning on the new sanctions on Sudan.
I will make a brief statement and then my colleagues will answer your questions.
At the holocaust museum on April 18th, the President said that the united states would impose further sanctions if the Sudanese government did not allow the full deployment of a united nations peacekeeping force and begin living up to its commitments to end the humanitarian crisis and killing in Darfur.
President Bashir has failed on all counts. The genocide that has taken the lives of hundreds of thousands of people and displaced an estimated 2.5 million continues.
The Sudanese government has failed to implement its obligations under the Darfur peace agreement of May 2006.
Specifically, it has failed to disarm the janjaweed militias, and in concert with them it has continued to launch aerial and ground attacks on rebels and civilians. It has failed to provide the people of Darfur with the political and economic opportunities they deserve, and it continues to obstruct the flow of humanitarian aid.
None of this is acceptable to the United States, and we think that none of it is acceptable to the world community.
Negroponte: we therefore are consulting closely with the member states of the United Nations Security Council, with United Nations secretary general ban, and other nations who can raise the pressure on Khartoum for an immediate change in policy.
At the United Nations, we will work with the United Kingdom and other members of the Security Council on a chapter 7 sanctions resolution to expand the embargo against the government of Sudan and impose a binding ban on military flights over Darfur.
We will also work to strengthen financial sanctions against Sudan. We will seek to widen the criteria for designation of individuals and entities for sanctions under United Nations Security Council resolution 1591.”

2. Statement by the US President on Darfur
Washington, (the white house, 29 May)
“Good morning. For too long, the people of Darfur have suffered at the hands of a government that is complicit in the bombing, murder, and rape of innocent civilians. My administration has called these actions by their rightful name: genocide. The world has a responsibility to help put an end to it.
Last month I announced that the United States was prepared to take new steps if the government of Sudan did not allow the full deployment of a U.N. Peacekeeping force; if the government did not begin living up to its many commitments that the United States would act. I made clear that the time for promises was over, and that President Bashir had to do something to end the suffering.
I held off implementing these steps because the United Nations believed that President Bashir could meet his obligations to stop the killing, and would meet his obligations to stop the killing. Unfortunately, he hasn’t met those obligations. President Bashir’s actions over the past few weeks follow a long pattern of promising cooperation while finding new methods for obstruction. (…)
The result is that the dire security situation on the ground in Darfur has not changed. And so today, at my instruction, the United States has taken the steps I announced in April. First, the department of treasury is tightening US Economic sanctions on Sudan. With this new effort, the United States will more aggressively enforce existing sanctions against Sudan’s government.
Thank you very much.”

CICC's policy on the referral and prosecution of situations before the
ICC:

The Coalition for the ICC is not an organ of the court. The CICC is an independent NGO movement dedicated to the establishment of the International criminal court as a fair, effective, and independent International organization. The Coalition will continue to provide the most up-to-date information about the ICC and to help coordinate global Action to effectively implement the Rome statute of the ICC. The Coalition will also endeavor to respond to basic queries and to raise Awareness about the ICC's trigger mechanisms and procedures, as they Develop. The Coalition as a whole, and its secretariat, do not endorse or promote specific investigations or prosecutions or take a position on Situations before the ICC. However, individual CICC members May endorse
Referrals, provide legal and other support on investigations, or develop Partnerships with local and other organizations in the course of their Efforts.

Communications to the ICC can be sent to:
ICC
P.O. box 19519
2500 cm the Hague
The Netherlands