No announcement yet.

Rebels reject Darfur deal, Sudan breaks apart

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Darfur faces rationing crisis as food appeal runs short of money

    The world food programme, which feeds more than 3 million people in Darfur and a further 3 million in the south and east of Sudan, has cut back its food supplies because it is running out of money.

    Donor countries have given only £167m of the £397m it needs for its budget. In what the WFP executive director, James Morris, called "one of the hardest decisions" of his life, he ordered that rations be halved from May.

    With Darfur entering its "hunger season", when the rains fall but there are no harvests, the WFP has only two months' worth of stocks, which must last until September. Food cuts are already in effect across Darfur. People who have lost their homes and often family members too will now receive just 1,050 kilocalories in food a day - half the minimum recommended daily allowance......



    • #17
      Sudan denies violation of Darfur truce:

      KHARTOUM (Reuters) - Sudan on Monday denied Darfur rebel reports that its troops had attacked their camps, breaking a ceasefire and a peace deal signed this month to end the conflict which has killed tens of thousands.

      The peace deal was signed under intense global pressure on May 5 between the government and one main rebel faction. But two other rebel factions refused to sign, saying the deal was unfair. Thousands of Darfuris have demonstrated against the deal.

      On Sunday the faction which signed the deal belonging to Minni Arcua Minnawi, said the government and its allied militia had attacked its bases in Dar es Salaam in North Darfur.

      "We the armed forces did not attack any areas, not Dar es Salaam or anywhere," said the armed forces spokesman's office in Khartoum. "There are many empty accusations flying around but none of them are true."

      The African Union said Arab militias, known as Janjaweed, had been massing in both North and South Darfur states and had exchanged fire with its soldiers. But they could not confirm any government attacks on rebels.

      Clashes have continued unabated despite the peace deal between militias and rebels. Smaller clashes between rebel factions also continue. But the government, which the United Nations says armed the Janjaweed to fight the rebels, denies it is using the militias.

      "The armed forces do not need to use militias. If we are attacked we have the right to defend ourselves and will do so," said the army official, who declined to be named.

      The Janjaweed stand accused of a widespread campaign of rape, looting and killing which drove two million Darfuris from their homes to miserable camps across the vast desert region.

      The government admits arming some tribes to fight the rebels in early 2003 but denies any links to the Janjaweed, calling them outlaws.

      On Monday Minnawi's faction said the government was using Antonov planes as air cover for large troop movements in North Darfur state in preparation for an attack. The areas of control are not clearly marked so both the government and the rebels claim some areas as theirs.

      "They flew Antonov planes for two hours this morning," said al-Tayyib Khamis, a spokesman for Minnawi's Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) faction. "They are trying to get as much territory as possible before the U.N. troops come in," he added.

      The cash-strapped African Union force has asked for a U.N. transition in Darfur. The force has been unable to stop attacks on civilians even when present and those in the refugee camps have attacked them out of frustration.

      Sudan prior to the peace deal had refused a U.N. force and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is sending top diplomat Lakhdar Brahimi for high-level talks in Khartoum on Tuesday hoping to secure a breakthrough.



      • #18
        UN seeks to persuade Sudan to accept peacekeepers


        • #19
          Sudan has not agreed to allow U.N. troops into Darfur, the foreign minister said on Thursday adding Khartoum wanted more discussions involving the United Nations and the African Union before allowing any such move.

          The statement came after three days of talks with high-level United Nations diplomats in Khartoum who had hoped to persuade Sudan to allow an assessment team into Darfur to prepare for a U.N. peacekeeping mission there......

          Sudan says wants further talks on UN mission


          • #20
            Khartoum, 05/27 - The Sudanese government has agreed to receive a joint assessment team to be formed by the United Nations and the African Union to evaluate requirements for a possible deployment of UN peacekeeping forces in Sudan`s western Darfur region, a special UN envoy announced on Thursday.

            "In the coming days, this joint mission of the UN and the AU will start with detailed and wide-ranging consultations in Khartoum," Lakhdar Brahimi, special envoy of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, told reporters following a meeting with Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir.

            The team will also travel to Darfur to assess the additional needs of the AU peacekeeping force, which must be immediately strengthened to enable the force to monitor the implementation of Darfur peace agreement signed between Khartoum and a main Darfur rebel faction on May 5, Brahimi said.

            He added that the joint team would undertake an assessment of all the requirements for a possible transition of the peacekeeping mission in Darfur from the AU to the UN....

            Continue reading..... Sudan to let in international assessment team


            • #21
              The following are the major points of the final communiqué issued at the end of the first Joint Meeting of the National Congress (NCP) and Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) Monday evening :

              Salient points of the first meeting of Sudan NCP-SPLM final communiqué


              • #22
                KHARTOUM (Reuters) - Sudan's two ruling parties are divided over sending U.N. forces to its violent Darfur region despite three days of direct talks aimed at tackling the thorniest issues facing the war-torn country.

                Khartoum's northern-dominated government has rejected a U.N. takeover from struggling African Union (AU) soldiers monitoring a shaky truce in the remote west. The AU said on Monday one soldier was killed and five more wounded in two attacks on its troops in Darfur last week.

                Veteran U.N. troubleshooter Lakhdar Brahimi last week secured a guarantee that a joint U.N.-AU team could begin work within days to plan for a possible takeover, the first step toward transition. But on Monday the government was still divided over U.N. troops in Darfur.....

                Continue reading..... Sudan ruling parties differ over UN Darfur force


                • #23
                  KHARTOUM, Sudan (Reuters) -- Two Darfur rebel groups have refused to sign a peace deal to end the three-year-old conflict in Sudan's remote west before a deadline set by the African Union passed.

                  The African Union has raised the specter of U.N. sanctions against Abdel Wahed Mohammed al-Nur of the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) and the rebel Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) if they failed to sign ahead of the May 31 deadline.....

                  Continue reading..... Rebels refuse to sign Darfur pact


                  • #24
                    UN might withdraw aid workers from Darfur - official

                    The United Nations will withdraw its aid workers from the troubled Darfur region of Sudan unless their security is ensured soon, U.N. emergency relief coordinator Jan Egeland said on Wednesday.....



                    • #25
                      ICRC warns of worsening crisis in Darfur

                      The Swiss-run International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) says it is increasingly concerned about deteriorating conditions in Sudan's Darfur region.

                      Presenting the ICRC's annual report in Geneva on Thursday, president Jakob Kellenberger said the humanitarian and security situation was "critical", with hundreds of thousands of people affected.

                      "Since the beginning of the year the security environment in Darfur has become more difficult, even for us. We have had many more security incidents than in the two years previously," he said.

                      The ICRC has made Sudan its priority country for the third year running, with SFr128 million ($105 million) earmarked for operations this year. But Kellenberger said there were areas where the organisation's staff no longer had access.....



                      • #26
                        KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) - The chairman of the African Union expressed "deep regret'' Thursday that two rebel groups rejected the peace agreement for Sudan's Darfur region and said those who do not sign on could face sanctions.

                        The AU, which has a peacekeeping force in Darfur and has mediated in the three-year-old conflict, held another session of talks Thursday with the holdout factions that have refused to sign the May 5 peace agreement between the Sudanese government and the main rebel group, the Sudan Liberation Army.

                        The AU urged the groups to sign the accord, "failing which it would consider measures, including sanctions, to be applied against the leadership and members of the concerned groups,'' Chairman Alpha Oumar Konare said in a statement.....

                        Continue reading..... Rebel groups holding out on Darfur deal


                        • #27
                          Darfur rebel faction rejects AU role

                          A dissident faction of Darfur's largest rebel group has called on the UN to take over mediation of the conflict in western Sudan from the African Union (AU).

                          The Sudan Liberation Army faction, led by Abdel Wahed Mohamed al-Nur, said it had rejected the whole peace accord - agreed by the main SLA leadership and Sudan in May - after the AU failed to meet its demands.

                          "The AU has absolutely and miserably failed in its efforts to mediate the fighting in Darfur," said Nouri Abdalla, an adviser to al-Nur.

                          "It is time it hands over the whole Darfur mediation file to the United Nations."

                          The demand is unlikely to be met as the UN has backed the AU sponsored agreement......



                          • #28
                            Analysis: Duped about Darfur

                            This was never the simple morality tale it was made out to be - and that is the tragedy:

                            Thousands of Americans who wear green wristbands and demand military intervention to stop Sudan's Arab government from perpetrating genocide against black tribes in Darfur must be perplexed by recent developments.

                            Without such intervention, Sudan's government last month agreed in April to a peace accord pledging to disarm Arab janjaweed militias and resettle displaced civilians. By contrast, Darfur's black rebels, who are touted by the wristband crowd as freedom fighters, rejected the deal because it did not give them full regional control. Put simply, the rebels were willing to let genocide continue against their own people rather than compromise their demand for power.

                            International mediators were shamefaced. They had presented the plan as take it or leave it, to compel Khartoum's acceptance. But now the ostensible representatives of the victims were balking. Embarrassed American officials were forced to ask Sudan for further concessions beyond the ultimatum that it had already accepted.

                            Fortunately, Khartoum again acquiesced. But two of Darfur's three main rebel groups still rejected peace. Frustrated American negotiators accentuated the positive — the strongest rebel group did sign — and expressed hope that the dissenters would soon join.

                            But that hope was crushed last week in late May when the rebels viciously turned on each other. As The New York Times reported, "The rebels have unleashed a tide of violence against the very civilians they once joined forces to protect."

                            Seemingly bizarre, this rejection of peace by factions claiming to seek it is actually revelatory. It helps explain why violence originally broke out in Darfur, how the Save Darfur movement unintentionally poured fuel on the fire, and what can be done to stanch genocidal violence in Sudan and elsewhere.

                            Darfur was never the simplistic morality tale purveyed by the news media and humanitarian organizations. The region's blacks, painted as long-suffering victims, actually were the oppressors less than two decades ago — denying Arab nomads access to grazing areas essential to their survival. Violence was initiated not by Arab militias but by the black rebels who in 2003 attacked police and military installations. The most extreme Islamists are not in the government but in a faction of the rebels sponsored by former Deputy Prime Minister Hassan al-Turabi, after he was expelled from the regime. Cease-fires often have been violated first by the rebels, not the government, which has pledged repeatedly to admit international peacekeepers if the rebels halt their attacks.

                            This reality has been obscured by Sudan's criminally irresponsible reaction to the rebellion: arming militias to carry out a scorched-earth counterinsurgency. These Arab forces, who already resented the black tribes over past land disputes and recent attacks, were only too happy to rape and pillage any village suspected of supporting the rebels.

                            In light of janjaweed atrocities, it is natural to romanticize the other side as freedom fighters. But Darfur's rebels do not deserve that title. They took up arms not to stop genocide — which erupted only after they rebelled — but to gain tribal domination.

                            The strongest faction, representing the minority Zaghawa tribe, signed the peace deal in hopes of legitimizing its claim to control Darfur. But that claim is vehemently opposed by rebels representing the larger Fur tribe. Such internecine disputes only recently hit the headlines, but the rebels have long wasted resources fighting each other rather than protecting their people.

                            Advocates of intervention play down rebel responsibility because it is easier to build support for stopping genocide than for becoming entangled in yet another messy civil war. But their persistent calls for intervention have actually worsened the violence.

                            The rebels, much weaker than the government, would logically have sued for peace long ago. Because of the Save Darfur movement, however, the rebels believe that the longer they provoke genocidal retaliation, the more the West will pressure Sudan to hand them control of the region. Sadly, this message was reinforced when the rebels' initial rejection of peace last month was rewarded by American officials' extracting further concessions from Khartoum.

                            The key to rescuing Darfur is to reverse these perverse incentives. Spoiler rebels should be told that the game is over, and that further resistance will no longer be rewarded but punished by the loss of posts reserved for them in the peace agreement.

                            Ultimately, if the rebels refuse, military force will be required to defeat them. But this is no job for United Nations peacekeepers. Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia show that even the United States military cannot stamp out Islamic rebels on their home turf; second-rate international troops would stand even less chance.

                            Rather, we should let Sudan's army handle any recalcitrant rebels, on condition that it eschew war crimes. This option will be distasteful to many, but Sudan has signed a peace treaty, so it deserves the right to defend its sovereignty against rebels who refuse to, so long as it observes the treaty and the laws of war.

                            Indeed, to avoid further catastrophes like Darfur, the United States should announce a policy of never intervening to help provocative rebels, diplomatically or militarily, so long as opposing armies avoid excessive retaliation. This would encourage restraint on both sides. Instead we should redirect intervention resources to support "people power" movements that pursue change peacefully, as they have done successfully over the past two decades in the Philippines, Indonesia, Serbia and elsewhere.

                            America, born in revolution, has a soft spot for rebels who claim to be freedom fighters. But to reduce genocidal violence, we must withhold support for the cynical provocations of militants who bear little resemblance to our founders.



                            • #29
                              The U.N. Security Council, visiting Sudan Monday, assured the wary government that the United Nations has no intention of taking over the country and sees Khartoum as a partner in promoting peace.

                              The government has been very reluctant to allow a U.N. peacekeeping force to take over from the 7,000-strong African Union force in conflict-wracked Darfur that has largely been unable to stop the violence there. Fears of U.N. intervention were fueled last month when a council resolution to spur planning for a handover was adopted under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which allows military action.

                              Britain's U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry, who is leading the council mission, said shortly after the delegation arrived in Khartoum that he recognized some Sudanese "took amiss" the last council resolution, which they had hoped would pay tribute to the government for signing a peace agreement with the largest rebel faction in Darfur.

                              The United Nations has become increasingly involved in Sudan since November 2003 following the eruption of the Darfur conflict. It is running a massive humanitarian operation in the vast western region as well as a 10,000-strong U.N. peacekeeping operation to monitor the January 2005 peace agreement that ended a separate 21-year civil war in southern Sudan between the government and rebels.

                              Nearly 200,000 people have been killed and more than 2 million displaced in Darfur since rebel groups made up of ethnic Africans rose up against the Arab-led Khartoum government in early 2003. The government is accused of responding by unleashing Arab militias known as the Janjaweed who have been accused of some of the worst atrocities but it denies any involvement.

                              The AU force in Darfur now has been temporarily charged with helping implement a May 25 peace deal between the Sudanese government and the main rebel group there. In March, the African Union's Peace and Security Council decided in principle to keep the AU force in Darfur until Sept. 30, when the U.N. would then take control. The transfer would require approval from the U.N. Security Council.....

                              Continue reading..... UN Security Council arrives in wary Sudan

                              3-page article


                              • #30
                                The U.S. role in Darfur, Sudan


                                Unconfigured Ad Widget