A good friend and a friend of Africa sent me this link today. If you can find a moment to watch this short film, you will leave the screen with a little more pep in your step.
Enjoy!
Congo Symphony Orchestra and Its musicians
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Saturday, March 07, 2009
Home in South Bend but Darfur still has my attention...
And it should have yours too.
The International Criminal Court issued a warrant of arrest for the president of Sudan on crimes against humanity for the widespread or systematic murders, rapes, and forced displacement of civilians. He is also charged with several counts of war crimes which involve the deliberate targeting of civilians and unarmed individuals in a time of war. He was not indicted for genocide because the courts were not convinced that all the above violence was done with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.
The court found that the targeted civilians - belonging largely to the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa groups – were perceived by the government to be close to the organised armed groups waging war against the Government of Sudan in Darfur and therefore legitimate targets to subdue the uprising. However any actions against unarmed civilians is deemed a war crime by nature and a crime against humanity when it is committed in a widespread or systematic fashion as we have seen in Sudan.
The above is the general background to the recent events since I left Sudan on January 10th.
Today, the government of Sudan has decided to fight back and is using a very dangerous but thus far effective game that deserves your attention because the US, UK, and France are going to have to make a decision on their response to this issue with or without the support of the UN. Barack Obama spoke of the need for an inclusive approach to conflicts in the world. Well, here is tangible test that the Obama administration seems ill prepared to take on. The two other permanent members of the UN Security Council (Russia and China) and the African Union leadership are at odds with the US position that President Omar El Bashir must be brought before a court of law.
Obama has prioritized domestic problems and has thus far failed to appoint senior staff in the US Department of State on African affairs to help address the Sudan issue with the required focus and energy.
Problem: Sudan has decided to revoke the licenses and expel the largest humanitarian organizations operating in Darfur in response to the indictment of its president. The removal of these NGOs will likely lead to the severe reduction of medical, food, education, and shelter assistance to the displaced populations in Darfur. But Article 16 of the ICC Rome Statute allows for the UN Security Council to defer (postpone) any action on the warrant of arrest indefinitely. And the Sudan government is suggesting that if the world really cares so much for the fate of the displaced Darfurians, then it will agree to defer the arrest warrant, and the government will allow NGOs to continue to operate and save the lives of these people. It is not making any promises mind you.
You can read more about the politics of this decision in this new york times article:
UN Security Council is deadlocked
The International Criminal Court issued a warrant of arrest for the president of Sudan on crimes against humanity for the widespread or systematic murders, rapes, and forced displacement of civilians. He is also charged with several counts of war crimes which involve the deliberate targeting of civilians and unarmed individuals in a time of war. He was not indicted for genocide because the courts were not convinced that all the above violence was done with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.The court found that the targeted civilians - belonging largely to the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa groups – were perceived by the government to be close to the organised armed groups waging war against the Government of Sudan in Darfur and therefore legitimate targets to subdue the uprising. However any actions against unarmed civilians is deemed a war crime by nature and a crime against humanity when it is committed in a widespread or systematic fashion as we have seen in Sudan.
The above is the general background to the recent events since I left Sudan on January 10th.
Today, the government of Sudan has decided to fight back and is using a very dangerous but thus far effective game that deserves your attention because the US, UK, and France are going to have to make a decision on their response to this issue with or without the support of the UN. Barack Obama spoke of the need for an inclusive approach to conflicts in the world. Well, here is tangible test that the Obama administration seems ill prepared to take on. The two other permanent members of the UN Security Council (Russia and China) and the African Union leadership are at odds with the US position that President Omar El Bashir must be brought before a court of law.
Obama has prioritized domestic problems and has thus far failed to appoint senior staff in the US Department of State on African affairs to help address the Sudan issue with the required focus and energy.
Problem: Sudan has decided to revoke the licenses and expel the largest humanitarian organizations operating in Darfur in response to the indictment of its president. The removal of these NGOs will likely lead to the severe reduction of medical, food, education, and shelter assistance to the displaced populations in Darfur. But Article 16 of the ICC Rome Statute allows for the UN Security Council to defer (postpone) any action on the warrant of arrest indefinitely. And the Sudan government is suggesting that if the world really cares so much for the fate of the displaced Darfurians, then it will agree to defer the arrest warrant, and the government will allow NGOs to continue to operate and save the lives of these people. It is not making any promises mind you.
You can read more about the politics of this decision in this new york times article:
UN Security Council is deadlocked
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Here is what it is boiling down to. Sudan has always wanted to dictate who is on the ground providing humanitarian assistance and to whom but was too politically weak. Now they have the ability to force the hand of the international community to defer the indictment indefinitely before they are willing to allow some of the groups to operate on their soil. Once they get their way, they will just keep asking for more and will likely dictate where the assistance can be delivered. The government is losing is control over large areas of Darfur, but it is able to periodically regain some control by offering money, assistance, or both to local or regional leaders in exchange for their loyalty. It is quite common for groups to receive pressure to operate in a specific region and to be accompanied by a government official to underscore that the government is to thank for their assistance.
Politics has always been an integral part of humanitarian assistance. I do recall the US accepting Canadian and Mexican assistance during Katrina but refusing Cuban and Venzuelan assistance. Is this any different? Yes, of course it is. But the idea of playing politcal favorites with relief assistance is contrary to humanitarian principles. It is just plain wrong. I am not saying that humanitarian assistance should be delivered blindly. Political manipulation is a constant danger and relief agencies need to be political savy enough to know when they are being played. But in the end, when there are people in need, they deserve to be helped.
Nubian knights are doing their part. And the politicians in Washington, Paris, London, Bejing, and Moscow need to do their job. There is so much confusion about the position of the west vis-a-vis Sudan that Sudan is targeting all things Western. Give the Sudanese government a more tangible political adversary, counterpart, punching bag, and allow us to do our work.
Call your congressional representative. Let them know that a clear US policy on Sudan is needed, so that Nubian Knights can back to the task of saving and improving lives without the entanglements of political uncertaintly.
Maybe we will be spared more quotes like this one:
“They are spoiling, they are sabotaging, they are doing a lot of very bad activities incompatible with their humanitarian mandate,” Mr. Abdalhaleem (the Sudanese ambassador to the United Nations) said. He said the Sudanese government, local groups and those organizations allowed to stay would be able to fill the gap created by the expulsions.