Towards Sanctions
Abdulwahab Badrakhan Al-Hayat 2004/09/20
There are two major problems; first is that the Sudan government gave no impression of seriously dealing with Darfur. Second is that United States, which is behind the international mobilization against Sudan, has no credibility but only a hidden agenda… Between these two, and amidst a worrisome humanitarian and security condition in Darfur, and on the backdrop of the Rwanda guilt complex, it was possible to push the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to take a first step towards imposing sanctions on Sudan.
A few months went by and still Khartoum could not achieve a major breakthrough. It rejected interventions and the African Union concurred. It gave assurances and was placed on the line. It asked for more time, which it still needs, but news of the militia remained dominant. Either Darfur has quickly taken the step to be a 'state within a state,' or that internal conflicts hinder government actions' effectiveness and momentum. The increasing arrests of Al Turabi's followers, want to imply this; they were even accused of carrying out a plan of the Israeli Mossad. If Turabi and his supporters have this much influence, it is better to deal with them differently to drag them into solving the crisis rather than antagonizing them to aggravate it.
The Khartoum government is supposed to be neutral between the two sides engaged in the bloody conflict in Darfur. However, since the international spotlights turned on it, the Khartoum government's performance has indicated that it is incapable of candor in its stance. Does this mean that it committed mistakes in managing the crisis, and how long would it take to correct these mistakes? Is the problem in the individuals assigned with the Darfur file, and how long will it take to change those individuals in a country with a revolution-rich history? Is there an international conspiracy, specifically an American one? Is Khartoum aware of the elements and objectives of this conspiracy, and what is stopping it from declaring what it knows, or are conspiracies, only discussed when they are illusionary; "internal" to be precise?
There are many questions, the most important of which is what is really happening in Darfur? Why is the world's information is limited to reports of delegations and envoys from abroad. It is very strange for Khartoum to not care about being the source of the exact news about a region that is still Sudanese. It does not matter if the news is negative or otherwise, as long as the Sudanese government is required to deal with the facts. In the absence of such an obsession for Khartoum, the Security Council can only rely on the content of these reports to issue its verdict. The Sudanese representative may be right in saying that since the resolution is laying the ground for sanctions, it is unfair. However, his government did not arm him with what can ease the international community's worry, or what refutes the accusation of not fulfilling its promises, nor with a reassurance of its seriousness to the point of embarrassing the American Congress and the Security Council.
There is no doubt that the Americans are tampering with the file in the midst of the election campaign. In addition, undoubtedly, referring to "procedures that will influence the oil sector" does fulfill the targets of the persistent American conspiracy against Sudan; same as in Iraq. However, resisting this conspiracy cannot be accomplished by "Opening the gates of hell" for the Americans, but rather by respecting the interests of Sudan which require immediate efforts to reveal the differences, regardless of the existence of a Security Council resolution.
In any case, it is the responsibility of the Security Council to not only review the reports alone, and get occupied with concessions and drafting. These are only technical activities, which neither solve the resolutions' motives nor do they provide any side with the required guarantees. For example, no one can precisely define where the "insurgents" are, or if they still consider themselves in Sudan, who operates them and what promises were they given, since even the insurgents have a major role in what is supposed to be reversing the matters to their natural state in Darfur. So far, the Darfur case continues to provide all the doubts that turn it into another "Southern War" project spread in Sudan.
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
///// MEDIA JIM: Memurnikan Tanggapan Umum Melalui Penyebaran Ilmu dan Maklumat
//////////////////////////////////
Nota: Kandungan mel ini tidak menggambarkan pendirian rasmi Pertubuhan
Jamaah Islah Malaysia (JIM) melainkan yang dinyatakan sedemikian.
Berminat menjadi ahli JIM? Sila isi borang keahlian "online" di: http://www.jim.org.my/forms/borang_keahlian.htm
Langganan : Hantar E-mail kosong ke
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsub : Hantar E-mail kosong ke
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Yahoo! Groups Sponsor | |
|
|
Yahoo! Groups Links
- To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/islah-net/
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
