Global Insight Perspective

Significance

The Sudanese government’s call for the African peacekeeping body to leave Khartoum, and its renewed military push, signify the collapse of the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) and the failure of the international community to restore security to Darfur.

Implications

The Sudanese government, boosted by divisions at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), is moving to impose its military solution to the conflict. The UNSC last week passed a resolution authorising the deployment of a muscular international force to Darfur, although Russia, China, and Qatar abstained.

Outlook

The cautious optimism surrounding the DPA has given way to renewed concerns of a worrying pattern of violence in Darfur.

The African Union: Powerless to Protect

The May 2006 DPA, also known as the Abuja (Nigeria) peace deal, was brokered by the African Union (AU) and signed by a faction within the Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM) Darfur rebel group led by Mani Arko Minawi. It was hailed as a step towards resolving the destruction and humanitarian crisis that has enveloped the region since 2003 (see Sudan: 5 May 2006: Darfur Peace Deal Elusive Despite Intense Pressure on Sudanese Rebels). However, a rival SLM faction led by Abdul Wahid Nur, who commands support among members of his Fur tribe, and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), refused to endorse the peace deal. They argued that the wealth- and power-sharing concessions within the DPA fell short of their demands for autonomy and political representation, and also accused the AU of assuming the role of arbiter in Abuja. The AU’s reputation as an honest broker was subsequently compromised in the eyes of rival rebel factions, as attacks against the peacekeepers assumed greater frequency. Last month, two Rwandan peacekeepers were killed and four wounded when escorting a fuel convoy from El Nahud to El Fasher, in an attack that underscored the body’s inability to protect itself let alone safeguard the interests of Darfurians, fuelling international calls for the deployment of a more muscular international force.

The UNSC last week finally authorised the deployment of over 17,000 international peacekeepers to Darfur, although Russia, China, and Qatar abstained from the vote. The Sudanese regime, boosted by divisions within the international community as well as the AU’s failings, has said that its forces will assume the lead in imposing security, launching a new military push against ”renegade” Darfur rebel factions. The latest military offensive concentrates on northern Darfur, a stronghold of rebel factions opposed to the peace deal. Sudanese Foreign Ministry spokesman Jamal Ibrahim told the Reuters news agency: "We are asking them to leave since they indicated that they will not be able to continue their mission…We feel that they have no right to transfer their assignment to another party—we are the ones who decide whether we continue with the AU or not…This is a final decision." The government has withstood international pressure to allow international troops to assume peacekeeping operations, saying that this would erode national sovereignty. Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir has also issued ominous warnings that Darfur will become a “graveyard” for foreign troops.

Failure of International Peacekeeping?

The apparent move to impose a military solution to the prolonged crisis and the international community’s failure to formulate a united and binding response signifies the breakdown of the AU’s Sudan experiment, and imposes an almost insurmountable obstacle in the path of UN peacekeepers. With its attentions focused on shoring up the fragile peace in Lebanon, the UN lacks the appetite for a deployment that would potentially pit UN soldiers against hostile Sudanese forces. Although Sudan has explained its opposition to the international deployment within the historic context of Sudan’s colonial past, its stance has more to do with an ongoing International Criminal Court (ICC) investigation that has already implicated senior ruling party officials, regional governors, security chiefs, and members of the infamous Popular Defence Forces (PDF) in Darfur’s atrocities. The spectacle of dishevelled former Liberian strongman Charles Taylor facing war crimes charges at The Hague (Netherlands) is enough of a deterrent for Bashir.

Outlook and Implications

The AU told Agence France-Presse (AFP) that it had not been informed of Sudan’s decision. Hence, the government has underlined its ability and willingness to bypass the African body. The peacekeepers’ withdrawal will remove the last remaining restraint on the Sudanese government, allowing it to push its military agenda with impunity. Meanwhile, the international community remains divided on how best to respond to a crisis that looks set to assume an even more worrying dimension. The Darfur peacekeeping mission and the fragile DPA appear be unravelling under the weight of Sudanese government belligerence and international inconsistency. The prospects for Darfur’s stricken popular look increasingly grim.

Raul Dary

24 Hartwell Ave.
Lexington, MA 02421, USA
Tel: 781.301.9314
Cel: 857.222.0556
Fax: 781.301.9416
raul.dary@globalinsight.com

www.globalinsight.com and www.wmrc.com