South Sudan News Agency

UN Security Council Ignores Realities of Aerial Attacks on Civilians in Darfur: Resolution 2091 (February 14, 2013) badly weakens key language prohibiting Khartoum's military flights in the region

By Eric Reeves

February 18, 2013 (SSNA) -- The retreat on the part of the United Nations Security Council in responding to Khartoum's continuous aerial military assaults on civilians in Darfur could not be clearer.  In Resolution 1591 (March 2005) the Security Council had "demanded,"

"that the Government of Sudan, in accordance with its commitments under the 8 April 2004 N’djamena Ceasefire Agreement and the 9 November 2004 Abuja Security Protocol, immediately cease conducting offensive military flights in and over the Darfur region, and invites the African Union Ceasefire Commission to share pertinent information as appropriate in this regard with the Secretary-General, the Committee, or the [UN] Panel of Experts established under paragraph 3(b)."

On February 14, 2013—eight years and 500 UN Security Council resolutions later—this was reduced to the vague and tepid "demand,"

"that the [combatant] parties to the conflict exercise restraint and cease military action of all kind, including aerial bombardments…."

Rather than note the number of aerial attacks that have occurred, and their destructiveness within the civilian population—particularly in the Jebel Marra area, but throughout Darfur—aerial bombardment was simply one among many kinds of "military action."  No mention was made of the fact that literally hundreds of aerial attacks have been conducted in violation of Resolution 1591.  In turn, this silence sends a clear message to Khartoum: "although we are obliged to say something publicly, we will not hold you accountable for these attacks, and will do as much as we can to equivocate in linking them to military actions by rebel groups."  Indeed, the language preceding mention of "aerial bombardments" was predictably equivocal, as the Resolution spoke to a new topic that focused mainly on the rebel groups:

“Expressing concern about the political and military links between non-signatory armed groups in Darfur and groups outside Darfur, and demanding that any form of direct or indirect external support for such groups ceases, and condemning any actions by any armed group aimed at forced overthrow of the Government of Sudan."

No matter that the Sudan Revolutionary Front (SRF) is now broadly representative of the marginalized populations of Darfur, Blue Nile, South Kordofan, and eastern Sudan—and is working explicitly for regime change.  The SRF comprises not only Darfuri rebel groups, but also the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army-North (South Kordofan and Blue Nile), and the Eastern Front.  Moreover, in an historic alliance, the coalition of political forces in northern Sudan known as the National Consensus Forces (NCF) signed a political agreement with the SRF in Kampala on January 5, 2013.  It commits the coalition to removing the National Islamic Front/National Congress Party regime by political and military means. 

In repudiating such broadly representative efforts by the Sudanese people to escape twenty-four years of vicious tyranny, the UN Security Council has decided that it will support Khartoum's génocidaires and the principle of "national sovereignty" rather than those who suffer and die as a result of the regime's continuing barbarism.  It is this same commitment to "national sovereignty" that has immobilized the Security Council in the face of Khartoum's continuing blockade of humanitarian relief to almost 1 million people in South Kordofan and Blue Nile.  And it is this same commitment that leads to the Security Council's looking away from more than a year and a half of relentless aerial attacks on civilians in South Kordofan and Blue Nile.  On February 17, 2013, on behalf of the SPLA-N, Yasir Arman issued a statement that speaks precisely what the UN chooses to ignore:

"The Sudanese army and their allied militia have re-started a military dry season campaign beginning February 14th up to this morning, February 17th, in a heavily populated area with internally displaced civilians at Muffa Village and the surrounding area, 21 kilometers southwest of Kurmuk.  The fighting has gone on for the last three days with heavy aerial bombardment from Sudan's air force on the displaced camps in the village that resulted in putting 8,000 civilian displaced populations on the run towards the Ethiopian and South Sudan borders.  It is to be noted seriously that the aerial and ground bombardment of the Sudanese army and their allied militia resulted in the displacement of more than 70 percent of the inhabitants of the rural Blue Nile, and as of now, nearly 200,000 from the civilian populations are refugees in Ethiopia and South Sudan."

Such aerial attacks are now a constant, and extend well back in time.  In December 2010 Khartoum bombed Kiir Adem (Northern Bahr el-Ghazal)—shortly before the Southern self-determination referendum (January 9, 2011); Khartoum denied the attack, but an Associated Press journalist present at the time confirmed the bombing.  In November 2011—five months after it had begun its bombing campaign in South Kordofan, Khartoum's military forces bombed the Yida refugee camp in Unity State, South Sudan.  Khartoum again baldly denied the attack, but it was confirmed by a UN team on the ground, as well as by reporters for the BBC and Reuters who were present during the actual bombing attack. UN cowardice and disingenuousness, however, leave Khartoum's UN ambassador unembarrassed as he makes the most absurd claims.  Following the bombing of the Yida refugee camp,

"The Sudanese UN ambassador, Dafalla Haj Osman vehemently denied that SAF carried out any bombings inside their southern neighbour’s territories. "There is no aerial bombardment; we did not exercise any kind of military activity outside our borders," he told reporters following the UNSC session on Sudan.  Asked about confirmation from the BBC and Reuters correspondents at the scene, the Sudanese envoy suggested that the two are 'biased media' outlets that are favouring rebels." (Sudan Tribune, November 11, 2011)

In surveying the civilian destruction and suffering in Blue Nile and South Kordofan, one must conclude that the "Responsibility to Protect," embodied in the Outcome Document unanimously adopted by the General Assembly (September 2005) and subsequently by the Security Council itself, has no legal or moral force:

"The international community, through the United Nations, also has the responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means, in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter, to help protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. In this context, we are prepared to take collective action, in a timely and decisive manner, through the Security Council, in accordance with the Charter, including Chapter VII, on a case-by-case basis and in cooperation with relevant regional organizations as appropriate, should peaceful means be inadequate and national authorities manifestly fail to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity." (International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect)

Darfur has now entered its second decade of enduring "genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity."

Following passage of Resolution 2091 Khartoum's Permanent Representative to the UN Daffa Alla Alhag Ali Osman indulged in characteristic, which is to say obscene mendacity:

"[Daffa Alla] further denied that Sudan uses technical assistance for military purposes, describing the statement [concerning aerial bombardment] as a 'fallacious' claim, saying Sudan used its air capacities only 'for peaceful and civilian purposes.'" (Reuters and Sudan Tribune, February 14, 2013)

In fact, there have been altogether more than 700 hundred confirmed aerial attacks on civilians in Darfur since the beginning of the conflict—more than 500 since UN Security Council Resolution 1591 was passed in March 2005 (a detailed spreadsheet, with specific incidents, casualties, sources of confirmation, as well as a broader analysis are available at: www.sudanbombing.org).

In Darfur the rebel forces have no aircraft of any kind.  The more than 500 hundred attacks by the Khartoum's Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) since March 2005 have been carried out overwhelmingly by highly inaccurate and inherently indiscriminate Antonovs (retrofitted cargo planes from which crude barrel bombs are rolled out the cargo bay).

Dismayingly, Khartoum is on the verge of completing a deal with Ukraine to purchase five more of these Antonovs (Reuters [Khartoum], February 13, 2013).  Moreover, reliable sources in South Sudan report that Khartoum continues to use Antonovs to ferry supplies to the increasingly vicious Murle militia force of David Yau Yau in Jonglei State (South Sudan).  Yau Yau's forces were responsible for the February 8, 2013 attack on Walgar (Jonglei), in which some 120 people were killed, more than 100 of them civilians, including women and children.  Yau Yau's forces were reportedly wearing the uniforms of Khartoum's Sudan Armed Forces (SAF).  A UN investigative team has presumably filed its field report from Walgar, but we may be sure that it will not likely be made public.  Nor will it place blame where it belongs for supplying the arms, ammunition, and equipment that allow Yau Yau's forces to remain so potent in an area where re-supply of any sort is extremely difficult. Khartoum's arming of the rebel forces is a flagrant violation of international law and a clear attempt to destabilize the South by exacerbating ethnic tensions.

None of this figures in the quarterly updates provide by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who in his October 2012 report mentions only a single bombing attack (§16: July 8, 2012 south of Tawila, North Darfur).  And yet dozens of aerial bombing attacks against civilians have been reported by eyewitnesses during the period covered by Ban's report.  The UN Secretary-General has essentially ignored the relentless and well-reported bombing of civilians in Darfur and thus egregious violations of the "demand" made by UN Security Council Resolution 1591.  Moreover, there is nothing in Ban's report about the campaign of annihilation that animates Khartoum's relentless bombing campaigns in Blue Nile and the Nuba Mountains: it is as if there were no connection between what is occurring in Darfur and these regions.  And nothing about Khartoum's violation of the airspace of South Sudan to supply a renegade military force that is without a political agenda and trades almost exclusively on ethnic grievances that Yau Yau has deliberately inflamed.

Of course in the case of Darfur Ban has precious little data provided to him by UNAMID: the force is completely intimidated by Khartoum's SAF and its militia allies, and has access only to those few regions of Darfur that Khartoum's Military Intelligence designates.  This most certainly does not include Jebel Marra, especially eastern Jebel Marra, where the bombing has been most intense.  But the implicit suggestion that mentioning only a single aerial attack does justice to the relentless terror, destruction, and displacement experienced by many tens of thousands of human beings is a measure of Ban's character as well as UNAMID's dismal performance.

The UN's New Fig-leaf: A reconstituted "Panel of Experts" for Darfur

At least partially in response to the outrageous disparity between what is occurring and what is being reported within the UN system, Resolution 2091 also "renews" the mandate of the so-called "UN Panel of Experts on Darfur."  But this is little more than a fig-leaf, if we are to judge by the most recent efforts of this politically eviscerated Panel.  The highly authoritative Africa Confidential reported last April:

"A seismic diplomatic row is rumbling at United Nations headquarters in New York over the circulation of a damning report by former UN experts pointing to the supply of Chinese-made ammunition to the Sudan government for use against civilians in Darfur. The row exposes fresh divisions on Sudan at the UN Security Council and disarray in Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s office. It may also unpick Beijing’s careful diplomacy as it seeks to realign its relations between Sudan and South Sudan.

"The report, which is circulating clandestinely at UN headquarters, was written by three of the original members of the UN’s Panel of Experts, which monitors violations of the UN arms embargo in Darfur. It argues that the Darfur crisis, far from winding down as Khartoum and some press reports suggest, is worsening, with new incidents of ethnic cleansing, arms deliveries and aerial bombing. Africa Confidential has obtained two separate reports on Darfur, one commissioned by Ban’s Under-Secretary for Political Affairs, B. Lynn Pascoe, which is highly conservative in its findings, and a more forthright, detailed unofficial version by the three specialists who resigned from Pascoe’s appointed Panel on Darfur in 2011.

"Weapons experts Mike Lewis (Britain) and Claudio Gramizzi (Italy), and Darfur and Chad specialist Jérôme Tubiana (France) resigned, Africa Confidential has learned, after Pascoe's department declined to take seriously their complaints about the standards of competence and neutrality on the Panel. The trio have now sent their own report – with lengthy annexes – to the Security Council. This unofficial report details Sudan army ammunition found in Darfur that appeared to be Chinese-made. Some may have been made in the Sudan Technical Centre, a Sudanese military company in Khartoum. The findings upset China, which says the report is not an official document and should not be given a hearing. Diplomats from the United States and Britain are nonetheless backing the report in private."

("UN clash over Beijing bullets claim: UN experts' reports differ over Darfur arms violations," Africa Confidential 13th April 2012)

China is used to throwing its weight around at the UN, especially when it finds itself the target of criticism, which it clearly was in the reporting of the original Panel of Experts.  As a consequence, Under-secretary Pascoe and Secretary-General Ban ensured that the make-up of the new Panel of Experts would be completely unthreatening because completely incompetent in the tasks demanded.  I offer a detailed, side-by-side comparison of the weak "official report" that the UN has chosen to accept and the extraordinarily detailed and authoritative report by Mike Lewis (UK), Claudio Gramizzi (Italy), and Darfur specialist Jérôme Tubiana (France), the report that created such an angry response from China because it was so compelling in its findings.

What we are about to see, then, is the nominal renewal of mandate for the UN Panel of Experts on Darfur, but for a Panel that will in all likelihood be a reincarnation of the incompetent and politically pliable last Panel.  Moreover, Resolution 2091 makes no explicit reiteration of the mandate of the UN Panel of Experts to monitor aerial military flights in Darfur. That more recent Panel was notable among other things for its laziness and lack of ambition: time on the ground in Darfur was minimal, and members of the Panel offered virtually no push-back when Khartoum denied them access, even as such access has been guaranteed by Khartoum in yet another (dishonored) agreement.

We should also be troubled by the recent assessment from UN Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in the Sudan, Mashood Adebayo Baderin, who claims that here has been "some significant progress towards the promotion and protection of human rights by the Government [of Sudan]" (Geneva, February 15, 2013). This is utterly preposterous, a gross misrepresentation that expediently ignores what has been reported by every single credible human rights group and news organization over many years.  Baderin offers not a shred of evidence that justifies such a claim because of course there is none: praise is meant simply as a gesture to Khartoum to ensure future access to the country (during his first mission to Sudan, Baderin was denied entry to Darfur). 

Baderin was sufficiently honest to point out a basic violation of the Doha Document for Peace in Darfur (DDPD), a farce the UN and the rest of the international community pretend is a viable arrangement for peace despite a complete lack of support among Darfuri civil society and consequential rebel groups:

"Darfur war crimes are being tried by ordinary courts, said on Sunday [February 10, 2013] UN expert on human rights in Sudan Mashood Adebayo Baderin who expressed concern over the lack of special courts. In accordance with the Doha Document for Peace in Darfur (DDPD), a Special Court for Darfur will be established to try gross violations of human rights and serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in Darfur, since February 2003." (Sudan Tribune, February 10, 2013)

This ensures that no justice will be rendered and impunity will continue to prevail for Khartoum's militias and proxies in the region (see below).  There is no good news for Darfur from the UN; on the contrary, having given the illusion of doing something meaningful, the UN—the Secretariat, the Security Council, and the Human Rights Council—are likely to turn away from the worsening military and humanitarian situation in Darfur at precisely the wrong time.

Current realities:

I recently offered a lengthy overview of humanitarian conditions in Darfur (February 10, 2013, at http://www.sudanreeves.org/?p=3790).  In just the intervening week, the reports from Radio Dabanga, Agence France-Presse, and the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) make clear there has been yet further acceleration of the violence and threats to all humanitarian relief efforts:

§  Critical humanitarian aid delivery continues to be blocked by Khartoum using various means:

• Aid delivery is in jeopardy for an estimated 100,000 people affected by violence in Sudan's Darfur region unless authorities grant better access, the United Nations warned on Thursday. One humanitarian agency has said the number of displaced people is the largest in recent years in Darfur, where a decade of civil war has been compounded by inter-Arab violence, banditry and tribal fighting.

But the true extent of the problem is unclear because UN workers have had only limited access to the affected area of Jebel Amir, the UN humanitarian agency OCHA said in its weekly bulletin. Foreign aid workers, diplomats and journalists routinely face restrictions on their movement in Sudan's far west. "The UN has informed the Sudanese authorities that it will not be able to continue providing food and other relief unless the relevant UN officials in North Darfur are permitted to travel to the area to register those in need of assistance and to carry out a comprehensive assessment," OCHA said. (Agence France-Presse [Khartoum], February 14, 2013)

§  Some relief organizations have quietly withdrawn from various camps; others have been re-directed by Khartoum from humanitarian work to "resettlement" of displaced persons; many camps are bereft of critical food and medical supplies:

• Nine West Darfur camps dire conditions after agencies left: sources

Residents of nine displaced camps near El-Geneina, West Darfur, are facing dire conditions after humanitarian agencies left the sites months ago, sheikhs, leaders and activists told Radio Dabanga on Thursday [February 14, 2013]. UNAMID has reportedly halted its night patrols around the camps since the beginning of January, the sources said.

In addition, the distribution of grains has stopped for two months and the camps' residents are now "receiving only lentils, sugar and salt." Health centers are "lacking medicines," the sources continued, explaining that medical organizations left the camps six months ago before the ministry of health took responsibility for running the establishments. Representatives of the following camps spoke with Radio Dabanga: Kirendink 1 and 2, Ardamata, Dorety, Riyadh, El-Sultan, Abuzer, Alhujaj and Jamiaat Zalingei. (Radio Dabanga [el-Geneina], February 14, 2013)

§  Increasing displacement of civilians inevitably adds to the crushing burden facing relief organizations:

• Tens of thousands of people flee fighting in Darfur in massive new displacement

Tens of thousands of people who have fled fighting in the largest displacement in western Sudan's restive region of Darfur in recent years, face a severe shortage of clean water and sanitation services, Oxfam warned Thursday [February 14, 2013]. The international agency has called for increased access for humanitarian aid agencies in the El Sireaf, Garra Zawia and Kebkabiya areas of North Darfur following the fighting around Jebel Amir in January. "Tensions in the El Sireaf area are still high and have the potential to spread more widely. We are worried that there will be more displacement and we are already struggling to meet the needs of those who have already been forced to flee their homes," El Fateh Osman, Oxfam's Sudan Country Director, said. "We need key roads to be opened and for the authorities to allow for a full assessment of what the humanitarian needs are," it said. 

According to the UN, the displacement from Jebel Amir area in the past weeks has been more than the number displaced through all of 2012. "People are really in a panic and very fearful of more violence. Those who have been able to flee are not sure when they will return to their home areas, many of which have been destroyed in the fighting," Oxfam's Humanitarian Coordinator for North Darfur, Hamouda Kanu, said. "They have inadequate shelter for this colder time of year and are forced to defecate in the open. This could lead to the spread of disease," he added….

An estimated 60,000 people have been displaced from surrounding villages to El Seraif town. Oxfam and [and it national Sudanese humanitarian partner] are attempting to send materials to construct 200 latrines in El Sireaf together with two technical experts but called on government authorities to improve access for humanitarian groups that so far has been limited.

Oxfam said the road linking Kebkabiya to El Sireaf town must be immediately opened to allow for bulky aid supplies to be transported to the area in order to help prevent the humanitarian situation there from worsening. The agency also warned that the areas affected by the new surge in fighting may also experience food shortages. Farmers were preparing for a good harvest this year but many crops in the area were burned in the conflict. Last year’s poor harvests in North Darfur have left people vulnerable. "The world has moved on from this entrenched conflict and humanitarian work is already severely under-funded. We are struggling to meet already existing needs even as more are pushed into crisis," Osman said. "This conflict in Darfur is now 10 years old and we need to see a renewed effort to bring about stability and peace in this devastated area." (PANA [Dar Es Saalam], February 15, 2013)

• Mornei camp in West Darfur facing water crisis

Displaced residents of Mornei camp in West Darfur are facing an acute drinking water crisis, due to the lack of fuel to operate the water stations in the camp. One of the camp's sheiks told Radio Dabanga on Sunday, 10 February, that the camp is facing a water crisis due to the lack of fuel to operate the water stations in the camp. The sheikh added the water stations have not been operating for five consecutive days due to the lack of fuel. He claims that the responsible humanitarian organization has stopped providing fuel to the camp due to the fact that UNICEF suspended its fuel support. (Radio Dabanga [Mornei Camp], 11 February 2013)

§  Zam Zam camp (just outside el-Fasher, headquarters for UNAMID) has been particularly distressed in recent months:

• North Darfur camp closed for one week due to "constant attacks"

Displaced living in Zam Zam near El-Fasher in North Darfur are complaining the camp has been closed for one week due to constant attacks by pro-government militias and Central Reserve Forces (known as Abu Tira). Assaults began on 5 February at the camp when Abu Tira forces reportedly looted eight shops and fired random shots in the air in and outside the camp. Sources told Radio Dabanga they believed the incursion was in retaliation of the murder of two of their forces by "unknown gunmen" at a water station earlier that day. (Radio Dabanga [Zam Zam Camp], February 13, 2013)

• Tawila residents North Darfur complain about lack of medicine

Citizens from Tawila locality, North Darfur, have complained about scarcity and lack of medicine due to the restrictions imposed by government authorities on bringing medicine from El Fasher. Besides, the citizens complained about the deterioration of health services in the region. A number of patients from Tawila complained to Radio Dabanga about the scarcity and lack of medicine in addition to the poor health services being offered in the region. They revealed that the locality's only health center, which is managed by Doctors Without Borders, receives more than 300 patients a day. It was added that the center's staff informed patients that the authorities only allows them to bring medicine from El Fasher once every three months and that the medicine runs out in less than a month. (Radio Dabanga [Tawila], February 10, 2013)

§  In what me be the greatest threat to any peaceful resolution of the Darfur conflict, the lands of displaced African farmers continue to be appropriated by Arab groups from Darfur, but also Chad, Niger, and most ominously, Mali:

• Herders "settling" in displaced home-villages, West Darfur

[By “herders” Radio Dabanga typically refers to nomadic Arab groups, often heavily armed and part of the pro-regime militias—ER]:

Displaced living in different El-Geneina camps, West Darfur's capital, are claiming that new herders' groups have recently began settling in their home-villages and are threatening farmers to "voluntarily hand over their lands or die." The areas, where the civilians lived before fleeing to camps, include Mujamra, Teriya, Mara, Kajan Kising, Habila and Kanary, they told Radio Dabanga on Friday. They are all located south of El-Geneina. A camp's leader denounced the threats by the herders, calling them "unethical and irresponsible." He appealed to the new comers to "resort to the voice of reason and dialogue" with the lands' owners instead of using riffles. The leader called on state authorities to address the problem "before it turns into a disaster." (Radio Dabanga [el-Geneina], February 15, 2013)

• Mali militants on 200 vehicles arrive in Kutum, North Darfur: sources

Multiple sources assert that 200 Land Cruisers with Islamist militants from Mali fleeing the hostilities in their country have arrived in Kutum, North Darfur, in the past 10 days. They told Radio Dabanga on Monday the groups are stationed in three different areas around Kutum, adding they are "inciting a state of fear and terror" among citizens. The first group can be found just one kilometer north of camp Kassab for displaced, the second in Jebel Mari, seven or eight kilometers northeast of Kutum, and the third in Sijana, about 10 kilometers north of Kutum, sources affirm. Upon arriving in Kutum, the militants' vehicles were covered with thick green tarps and they were carrying heavy artillery, eyewitnesses pointed out. Some of the alleged Malian militants have "long beards, wear outfits resembling those found in Western Sahara and black shawls." Witnesses added a number of them speak French and most do not speak Arabic. These groups go shopping at the Kutum market on a daily basis and use sign language to purchase goods, considering they do not speak the local language. They were last seen at the market on Monday and eyewitnesses claim they use Francs (savah), a currency mostly used in western African countries, while others use US dollars.

Displaced living in Kassab told Radio Dabanga they do not feel safe to leave the camp to collect firewood or to fetch water due to the presence of militants from Mali nearby.

Civilians are urging local and federal authorities to expel these groups from Sudan and keep them away from the country. They further urged the UN and international organizations to intervene. (Radio Dabanga [Kutum], February 11, 2013)

§  Fires have been a constant in camps for displaced persons, a great many of them of suspicious origin:

• Fire destroys 25 homes in South Darfur camp, Abu Tira blamed

A fire broke out on Monday night in the Dreige camp in Nyala, South Darfur, destroying 25 homes. The displaced are blaming the Sudanese Central Reserve Forces (known as Abu Tira) for setting the area ablaze. The accusations come after a member of the Abu Tira threatened to burn the camp just hours before the fire due to a discussion with a young man in a shisha place, sources informed Radio Dabanga. Families whose homes were destroyed are living out in the open and are in "urgent need of assistance." Meanwhile, fellow camp's residents have pledged to help them rebuild their houses. Displaced say Abu Tira are responsible for much of the insecurity around the camp, noting the forces periodically fire shots in the air in the evenings. Dreige's activists stressed they cannot press charges at the police for fear of being murdered if identified by the perpetrators.  (Radio Dabanga [Dreige Camp], October 14, 2013)

§ Spillover violence from the fighting in the Jebel Amer area continues to plague ordinary citizens, even as Khartoum seems content with the status quo.  The regime has squarely aligned itself with one of the Arab groups in the conflict, the Northern Rizeigat (Abbala) 

• Series of "killings, lootings" by Abbala militias in North Darfur

Abbala militias "armed by the Sudanese government" have been carrying a series of killings and lootings in North Darfur in the past two days, multiple sources affirm. On Tuesday [February 12, 2013], they opened fire on two high school students who were collecting hay killing them on the spot, the relative of one the victims told Radio Dabanga. The victims are Bashir Hammad Gassim and Abul Qasim Mohamed Abdul Rahman, who is deaf, the source noted.

Saraf Omra: five injured

Also on Tuesday, five people were injured in a two separate incidents in Saraf Omra, local sources informed Radio Dabanga. They alleged that Abbala militiamen stormed the city's market late in the afternoon and started firing fiercely in the air. Two citizens were injured and the market was closed until Wednesday, according to eyewitnesses. About 500 citizens marched to the locality's headquarters protesting against the market's incident and demanding security. Guards responded by firing shots in the direction of the "angry" demonstrators wounding three of them, sources noted. Four out of the total five wounded victims were transferred to a hospital in Saraf Omra and the fifth was taken to a hospital in El-Geneina due to his serious injuries….

Lootings

A passengers' vehicle on Tuesday was stopped in an area called Jebel Ireinat by Abbala militias, who stripped the commuters of all of their belongings, including their money and mobile phones, sources said. The vehicle belonged to a certain Ahmad Jelab and was traveling from Saraf Omra to Al-Sref Beni Hussein. On Wednesday, Abbala tribesmen looted a total of 80 cows and 320 goats in the areas of Korguleh north and Umm Khojara, Al-Sref Beni Hussein locality, sources reported. Members of the Arab Abbala and Beni Hussein tribes firstly clashed on 5 January in Jebel 'Amer, Al-Sref Beni Hussein locality, over control of gold mines in the region. Thousands were displaced as a result and the UN stated the tribal clashes led to the biggest forced displacement in Darfur in years, estimating that about 100,000 people fled their homes.  Civilians fled mainly to the nearby towns of Al-Sref Beni Hussein, Saraf Omra, Kabkabiya and Abu Gamra. (Radio Dabanga [Seraf Omra], February 13, 2013)

§  The scale of the displacements continues to be extraordinarily great, with no end in sight:

• Abbala attacks in [West] Darfur "displace thousands" in 3 days

Attacks by Abbala militants have led to the displacement of thousands of people in the last three days in Central Darfur, sources allege, adding that three people were killed in the assaults. The three victims, who include two police officers, were killed in Umm Shalaya locality while several others were wounded. Sources speaking to Radio Dabanga on Friday from Mornei locality in West Darfur, assert that thousands of people fleeing the Abbala assaults have arrived in the area in the past three days. "Hundreds of families," composed mostly of women and children traveling by foot or on the backs of horses and donkeys have been arriving in the locality's capital, sources say. The displaced are now living in the outskirts of Mornei, without shelter or food, according to witnesses' reports.

Other families reportedly fled to Zalingei. Clashes between the Arab Abbala and Beni Hussein tribes over control of a gold mine in North Darfur in the beginning of January spilled over into other states of Darfur. Coalition groups supporting each tribe were formed and also [formerly West] Darfur has witnessed a series of attacks in the past month. In addition, sources in West Darfur informed Radio Dabanga about the "increasing" presence of militias after the tribal clashes erupted. (Radio Dabanga [Umm Shalayla], February 15, 2013)

§  The level of impunity enjoyed by Khartoum's militia and paramilitary allies is strikingly clear in the following incidents:

• North Darfur civilian killed for asking militia "to speak politely"

Four pro-government militiamen shot a civilian dead who asked them to speak politely to him at a Kabkabiya market in North Darfur. Onlookers said the gunmen wanted to purchase fuel at the city's market on Thursday and asked the victim Adam Adam to remove his car from in front of the pump and give way to them.   Adam asked the militia to speak to him "politely" prompting the gunmen to shoot him two times on the chest.

The victim, a resident of the Kirekir village, passed away upon arriving at the Kabkabiya hospital. (Radio Dabanga [Kabkabiya], February 15, 2013)

• SAF leader refuses to hand over alleged rapist to court, [West] Darfur

The leader of a Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) military base in Bindissey, [formerly West] Darfur, is reportedly refusing to hand over a colleague to court who is accused of raping two displaced girls last December. According to previous reports the girls were abducted at gunpoint and dragged outside the Bindissey camp where they were raped. The victims knew who the perpetrators were and their family pressed charges against them at the police station. On Wednesday, policemen announced one of the alleged perpetrators was scheduled to appear in court, but the local army commander said he would not hand over his soldier. He claimed not to recognize the testimonies provided by the victims, nor the accusations by the police or the court.  (Radio Dabanga [Bindessey, West Darfur], February 13, 2013)

• Militants attack livestock traders in Kutum, North Darfur

A pro-government militia has been accused of beating four livestock traders in the area of Sandou, northern part of Kutum in North Darfur. Besides, the militants have been accused of looting the money the traders were carrying, 65 sheep and four mobile phones after beating them and stripping them of their clothes and shoes at gunpoint. The victims claim that several of the gunmen threatened them at gunpoint to remove their clothes. They added that they were held, without their clothes, for more than three hours, while the remaining gunmen took the money and livestock and fled. (Radio Dabanga [Kutum], February 18, 2013)

• Gunmen threaten to arrest Bindissey camp's sheikhs, [West] Darfur

The Zakat Chamber in Bindissey locality, [formerly West] Darfur has threatened to arrest the sheikhs and omda's of Bindissey camp unless they collect zakat (alms) from the camp's residents. A camp activist informed Radio Dabanga that seven gunmen in a Land Cruiser vehicle arrived in the camp on Friday, 15 February, to arrest the camp's sheikhs for not collecting zakat from the camp's residents, as instructed by the Zakat Chamber. He stated that the displaced intervened and were able to prevent the arrests from taking place. The activist explained that the camp’s sheikhs and omda's informed the Zakat Chamber previously that the displaced deserve to receive alms and are not able to give them. (Radio Dabanga [Bindissey, West Darfur], February 18, 2013)

§  Fighting is not, as press reports often suggest, confined to North Darfur—both West Darfur and South Darfur have seen heavy fighting and aerial bombardment:

• Fierce battles erupt in South Darfur between Sudan army and SLA-MM

The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and Sudan Liberation Army of Minni Minnawi (SLA-MM) have clashed in different parts of South Darfur on Thursday [February 14, 2013] amid reports of heavy casualties. The deputy South Darfur governor Amin al-Sakin in remarks before a student convention in the state confirmed that fighting broke out in Oum-Gounga, which lies south of the capital town of Nyala…. [M]ultiple sources told Sudan Tribune that SAF suffered heavy losses in the battle and that the rebels managed to seize a number of army vehicles.

In Nyala, tension was growing among the residents amid rumors that rebels are closing in on the city. The local government has started mobilising paramilitary units to secure the state and stop any possible rebel attack. Saleh Abakr, a spokesperson of Sudan Revolutionary Front (SRF), of which SLA-MM is a member, claimed that they are now in control of Oum-Gounga, Baleel locality and South Railroad region. He said that they have inflicted heavy losses on SAF and captured 11 military vehicles and a large cache of ammunition. (Radio Dabanga [Khartoum], February 14, 2013)

§  And aerial bombardment, which apparently warrants only a single instancing in the October 2012 Darfur report of the UN Secretary General, is relentless:

• Rebels: shelling kills 12 in [West] Darfur, thousands displaced

The military spokesman of the Sudan Liberation Movement-Abdel Wahid (SLM-AW) is accusing the Sudanese government of shelling the Gidu village in West Jebel Marra, [formerly West] Darfur and killing 12 civilians on Thursday. Mustafa Tambour said an Antonov airplane bombed Gidu around 3:00pm, burning nine homes and all 12 civilians in them. He added three of the victims were children. In addition, more than 20 people were injured due to the shelling; some of them are in critical conditions. Tambour declared the Sudanese government is bombing civilians' areas and called on the UN Security Council to establish no-fly zones over Darfur. Gidu residents fled the attacks and are hiding around valleys and mountains, he said.

9,000 displaced

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs affirms that recent fighting in West Jebel Marra has led to a new wave of civilian displacement with over 9,000 people arriving in Nertiti over the past week, bringing the total to 17,000. Nertiti is already home to 42,000 displaced, OCHA reported.  (Radio Dabanga [Gidu, West Darfur], February 14, 2013)

• "Airstrike South Jebel Marra leaves several dead"

An airstrike by the Sudanese Air Forces in the area of Narwa, South Jebel Marra on Sunday, 17 February, has left several people killed and injured. Also, a number of livestock was killed as a result of the airstrike. Sources from the area told Radio Dabanga that an Antonov warplane dropped more than 10 bombs in two separate bombings on Sunday afternoon. According to the sources, several people have been killed and wounded as a result of the bombings in the area of Narwa, South Jebel Marra. Witnesses added that they were not able to count the number of dead and wounded victims as people fled in all directions. They pointed out that most of the people fled in the direction of Yama, on the way from Nyala to Zalingei. (Radio Dabanga [Narwa, South Jebel Marra], February 18, 2013)

§  The avalanche of rape, unreported by the UN, also continues to sweep across Darfur; again Ban Ki-moon's report is wholly inadequate to this widespread and vicious brutality that goes completely unpunished:

• "Nine raped" in just over a week in Gereida camps, South Darfur

Displaced camps around Gereida in South Darfur have witnessed nine rapes in just over one week by pro-government militias, sources say, adding the general security situation at the camps is "worsening." The first incident occurred on 5 February when seven militiamen raped three women from the Hashaba camp in Gereida while they were collecting firewood. Witnesses told Radio Dabanga two of the victims were minors. Six women who were also collecting firewood were raped by the same faction on 7 February. According to sources these victims live at camp Foreeka. Females suffer the most from the lack of security around camps, a source explained. Besides, he noted that pro-government militias commonly invade camps at night and start firing shots "at random."  The source demanded state and local authorities to provide security and protection to displaced persons. He further demanded UNAMID to establish patrols so women can collect firewood. (Radio Dabanga [Gereida, South Darfur], February 13, 2013)

• Militants rape displaced woman in West Darfur

Pro-government militants raped a displaced woman from Sirba locality in West Darfur on Saturday and wounded four other displaced women, sources informed Radio Dabanga. A witness claims that pro-government militias on horses attacked the neighborhood of "Shafo Helou" and beat the village's residents in addition to seizing their belongings and livestock. After beating and looting residents, approximately nine militants raped an 18-year-old displaced woman in turns, the witness continued. (Radio Dabanga [Sirba], 11 February 2013)

• Militants kidnap displaced girl near Garsila, [West] Darfur

A pro-government militia kidnapped a displaced girl on Saturday from Garsila camp in Wadi Saleh locality, [formerly West] Darfur. It was reported that the child was taken to an unknown destination. A sheikh from Garsila camp told Radio Dabanga that the militants arrived on camels and attacked a group of children, aged between six and 13. Among the group were seven displaced girls. The sheikh added they were attacked while they were on their way back to the camp from collecting firewood. He stated that the girl is still missing, while the other children returned to their homes on Saturday evening. (Radio Dabanga [Garsila, South Darfur], February 18, 2013]

§ Khartoum has sent a clear signal to the embryonic Panel of Experts in an account that comes from the UN itself:

• UN Spokesman: "On 26 September 2012, two Sudanese Armed Forces helicopters flew at low altitude over a UNAMID patrol that was returning from an assessment mission to Thabit (North Darfur). The authorities claimed the aircraft mistook the patrol for an armed movement convoy. The patrol, which was clearly displaying UNAMID/United Nations insignia, returned to base safely.  The mission was a pre-planned verification patrol that a Panel of Experts member availed himself of the opportunity to join." (Inner City Press UN/New York], February 14, 2013)

This was no mistake or accident: it was the clearest possible signal to the UN and its new "Panel of Experts" that they will travel only to those areas that Military Intelligence designates.

Why Khartoum believes it has succeeded

Despite its open contempt for various elements of the UN, Khartoum too often continues to have its way within the UN.  In one of the most bizarre and morally incomprehensible decisions every made by any UN body, Khartoum appears poised to head the committee charged with monitoring humanitarian access:

"A UN subcommittee dealing with economic and social matters selected Sudan to chair a special session in Geneva in July on the promotion of humanitarian assistance, prompting European and other Western governments to request the decision be reversed and that Sudan be given a less controversial assignment, diplomats told Turtle Bay. Nestor Osorio, the president of the UN Economic and Social Council, was expected to announce Sudan's selection for the post tomorrow at a meeting at UN headquarters. But European governments requested that a decision be postponed as government scrambled to convince Sudan to abandon its quest for the job. Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, spoke with Osorio this week to express Washington's concerns about the selection of Sudan.

"Western powers are concerned that appointment of Sudan would set the stage for another embarrassing UN spectacle in which a country routinely denounced for denying access to humanitarian aid workers is given the job of advocating for their interests. The move comes against a background of troubled relations between Khartoum and humanitarian aid workers. In March 2009, one day after the International Criminal Court accused Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir of committing genocide, his government expelled 13 international relief agencies from Darfur. Sudan has also prevented international aid workers into the restive Sudanese regions of Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile states, where conflict has displaced nearly 700,000 people and forced more than 200,000 to flee to Ethiopia and South Sudan.  (Colum Lynch, Turtle Bay, February 14, 201)

Khartoum persists in its barbaric ways because the world refuses to take the suffering and destruction in Darfur seriously, and nowhere is this more conspicuous than within the United Nations.  The National Islamic Front/National Congress Party long ago calculated that it could simply outwait the international community on "changing the demography of Darfur," in the words of notorious Janjaweed leader Musa Hilal.  It has taken a full ten years, but success for Hilal and his partners in Khartoum is now in sight.

Eric Reeves, a professor at Smith College, is author most recently of Compromising with Evil: An archival history of greater Sudan, 2007 – 2012; www.CompromisingWithEvil.org

February 18, 2013 (SSNA) -- On November 27, 2012, over 50 scholars of genocide studies from around the world wrote a letter to U.S. Special Envoy Sudan Princeton Lyman regarding their concern about the crisis in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile in Sudan. Mr. Lyman, for some reason, chose not to respond to the letter. Shortly after the genocide scholars sent the letter to Lyman, he, for whatever reason, tendered his resignation. (The copy of the letter Lyman did not respond to is included below.)

Then, on December 12, 2012, over 60 scholars of genocide studies and anti-genocide activists sent a letter to the U.S. Atrocities Prevention Board (APB), a board that President Barack Obama personally established and has touted as being part of a sea change in regard to how past administration had dealt with issues of crimes against humanity and genocide. The letter was sent in care of Ms. Samantha Power, a member of the National Security Council and Chair of the Atrocities Documentation Board. That letter also went unanswered. Subsequently, in January 2013, Power, for some reason, submitted her resignation and left government service. (The copy of the letter sent to the Atrocities Prevention Board is included below, following the letter that was sent to U.S. Special Envoy Lyman.)

The aforementioned genocide scholars are preparing to resend the letter to the Atrocities Prevention Board in the hope of getting a response to their concerns. The lack of response, thus far, seems to speak volumes to the APB’s lack of interest in and concern about the opinions of scholars and activists. That, though, is in direct contradiction of Obama’s words that “citizens and activists, who have been carrying the torch,…are partners in this work.” 

November 27, 2012

Dear Envoy Lyman:

First, thank you for your recent letter of November 1, 2012, in response to our (scholars of genocide studies’) missive regarding the ongoing crises in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile in Sudan. Second, thank you, too, for inviting us to take part in your conference call on November 14, 2012, during which you provided an update vis-à-vis the various situations in Sudan (Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile), and the U.S. efforts regarding these ongoing situations.

Prior to positing numerous concerns and questions we have in regard to issues you raised in your letter and conference call, we wish to convey our appreciation of the tough situation you face: dealing with a regime in Khartoum that is better at making promises than keeping them; making food available along the border of The Republic of South Sudan and Sudan only to realize that many (especially infants, the elderly and the ill) are continuing to starve to death in the Nuba Mountains; witnessing the UN Security Council  repeatedly issue Chapter VII Resolutions vis-à-vis the humanitarian crises in Sudan but never following through by getting truly tough; and having to swallow  Khartoum’s cavalier dismissal of U.S. entreaties and UN resolutions. 

At the outset, we feel compelled to duly note that the debilitating and deadly malnutrition and desperate conditions currently faced by the Nuba Mountains people are not caused by crop failures or flooding. Indeed, we have solid information from local sources that the bombing of civilians by GoS aircraft, which began in June 2011 and have continued unabated throughout the rainy season (even if less regularly), is responsible for the decimation of people’s villages, homes and farms. Tellingly, when various organizations and individuals have suggested the critical need to transport humanitarian aid to the region, the response (from both the U.S. Government and the UN) is that the GoS has threatened to halt all such efforts by any means necessary.

Statements by President Bashir, backed up by videos recording the words of his subordinates on the ground, make it very clear that Khartoum's intent, from which it will not be deterred by outside diplomatic pressure, is to physically eliminate the peoples of the Nuba mountains. By destroying the people’s farms and preventing humanitarian aid from reaching the Nuba Mountains, the GoS’ actions indicate an attempt to perpetrate "genocide by attrition." The armed attacks by troops and planes, carried out without meeting any effective opposition, only accelerates the attrition. The Obama Administration, which claims to be in favor of early prevention vis-à-vis crimes against humanity and genocide, has much to answer for.

As for your comments, first, we wish to draw attention to the contradictory information we’ve garnered from various sources regarding the actual amount of food that has reached those remaining in the Nuba Mountains. In your letter of November 1, 2012, you stated that as a result of the United States’ effort “we have reached 470,000 people in South Kordofan with food and 88,000 with non-food items, such as medicines, seeds, tools, and other material. The food represented roughly half-rations that could sustain the recipients through the rainy season.”  Conversely, another authoritative source has informed us that no more than 5.5 thousand tons of food were delivered into the Nuba Mountains during this year’s dry season – and absolutely nothing into Blue Nile. That is extremely disconcerting in light of the fact that humanitarian logisticians estimate that roughly 1,700 metric tons of food per month are required per 100,000 of population in need. Using the current UN figure for South Kordofan and Blue Nile, and not including Upper Nile and Unity, this means roughly 3,000 tons per week are required. A dramatic shortfall by any calculation.

Do you, in fact, know how much food has reached the people still stuck in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile? Do you have any sense – even a rough estimate –  how many individuals are suffering from severe malnutrition? Starvation? Or, even a crude estimate as to how many individuals have perished by now due to severe malnutrition (or the effects thereof) and starvation?

Second, in your letter of November 1^st and during your conference call on November 14^th, you suggested that the seeds and tools that were donated to the Nuba Mountains, along with the fact that this is harvest season, could bode well for the people. However, based on sources in the Nuba Mountains, we fear the situation is not that sanguine. More specifically, it is our understanding that while the situation may look “bright” for some since they will be able to harvest and eat their produce, “it is also a fact that due to the lack of adequate amounts of food in August and September people began eating their produce even before it was ripe. Furthermore, under normal conditions a family would not even start eating the fruits of the new crop until January or February” (Nuba Reports, November 1, 2012). Essentially, this means that an untold number of families have already tapped into next year’s food supply. Furthermore, the same source reported that “some areas of the Nuba Mountains got very little rain and thus some crops were poor this year.” The point is, the efforts of the U.S. have been far from enough to ameliorate ongoing hunger or worse.

A classic example of “worse” was documented in a recent statement issued by “Nuba Reports”: Dr. Raphael Veicht, a physician with Cap Anamur Emergency Doctors, who is heading up a tiny hospital in the Nuba Mountains, has reported witnessing “a sharp increase in malnourished children over the past five months.” Many of the young children “were suffering from severe malnutrition.” He also reported “it was likely that there were people who were so weak they could not make the long trek to the hospital and were starving to death.”

Concomitantly, reports coming from highly reliable sources in the Nuba Mountains assert that “most villages in Abassyia County in north eastern South Kordofan have been burned down recently and these villagers’ food stocks were destroyed and they were not able to farm. They are currently displaced in the mountains. Not only will these people not have food but they are in a region that is extremely difficult to reach.”

Additional information we’ve received indicates that the food being provided by the U.S. along the South Sudan/Sudan border was being given to the refugees; and in turn, the refugees purposely limited their consumption of the rations so that they could carry what they had left to those remaining in the mountains. The point is, it seems that much less food is getting up to the Nuba Mountains than some seem to think. Is this your understanding of the matter as well? If so, is there a reason why the U.S. has not at least doubled the amount of food donated?

The upshot is that while food donated by the United States may have warded off mass starvation in the Nuba Mountains, there are still plenty of people suffering and dying there due to the GoS’ obstructionary actions. And many of those perishing are the youngest of the young, the oldest of the old, and the sickest of the sick. Does this not resonate with the highest levels of power within the White House? From our perspective, it seems as if it doesn’t.

Indeed, in a very real sense, it seems that the international community is fine with this latest crisis in Sudan as long as the numbers of dead do not creep too high and no concentration-camp-like skeletal bodies appear on television news channels and in local, state, regional and national newspapers across the globe.  Half-hearted efforts to stave off starvation are akin to attempting to stave off a tsunami by erecting paper fences along a beachfront.

Third, during your conference call, when asked by Samuel Totten, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, whether the US government had any statistics in regard to the extent of severe malnutrition and starvation in the Nuba Mountains and/or the mortality rates of the people in the Nuba Mountains, you replied that since no outside organizations or agencies are allowed into South Kordofan or Blue Nile, there was no way to conduct a formal assessment along those lines. Our question is this: If the U.S. government is truly interested in conducting such assessments, why couldn’t they be carried out in the various refugee camps in The Republic of South Sudan, where literally hundreds of individuals are flowing over the border every single week seeking sanctuary? Not only would the researchers have tens of thousands of individuals to choose from but the latter would likely be from various areas within South Kordofan and have been in the camp for various amounts of time, all of which would be ideal for such a study.

Fourth, during the conference call you mentioned that numerous sanctions have been applied against Sudan. In doing so, you seemed to suggest that sooner or later Sudan will feel their effect and thus begin to cooperate with the international community. Perhaps. But how can the U.S. and the international community allow month after month after month (and in many cases, year after year after year) to go by while Sudan continues to kill its own people in Darfur, carry out murderous attacks against its own people in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile, starve to death its own people in the Nuba Mountains, and engages in one ethnic cleansing spree after another in various regions of its nation?  It makes absolutely no sense. Essentially, it is giving credence to vacuous promises and abject lies by a government, Sudan, that has absolutely no compunction about engaging in bald-faced lies. Our question for you and President Obama is this: Why in the world has the Obama Administration not applied and/or pushed for sanctions against Sudan as tough as those that have been applied to Iran?

If the point of sanctions is to push and prod a nation into better behavior and the sanctions applied thus far are ineffective then it is obvious that the sanction regime must be ratcheted up. It is high time for the Obama Administration (and the international community) to recognize and admit that the sanctions imposed on Sudan have not had the desired effect.

In your letter you stated that the U.S. continues to “strongly condemn” the actions of al Bashir and the GoS, but that means little to nothing to the culprits. Indeed, their translation of such condemnation, sans tough action, seems to be: “Who cares? In the end, we have no punitive actions of consequence to deal with.”

Fifth, as you well know, the Government of Sudan and its leaders, particularly President Omar al Bashir, are untrustworthy, unreliable, and experts at dissimulation. Time and again, both during the crisis in Darfur and now during the crises in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile, the GoS and al Bashir have made promises one day only to break them the next. Currently, the GoS is playing games with the international community --  and, literally, with peoples’ lives – in regard to the “tripartite initiatives,” which would have allowed for the creation of a humanitarian corridor to provide humanitarian assistance to people affected by the crises in South Kordofan and Blue Nile areas. Sudan waffled over whether it would even sign onto the initiative (February-July 2012), and then when it signed a memorandum of understanding to implement the initiative within 90 days  (August 5, 2012), it allowed the period to elapse without any movement at all. Then, on November 3, 2012, Ahmed Haroun, the governor of South Kordofan, vowed “that no talks will be held with the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N) until the defeat of the rebel group” (Sudan Tribune). Days later, on November 6, 2012, Agence France-Presse reported that the GoS asserted that “There is no humanitarian crisis in the war-torn South Kordofan and Blue Nile States.” And then, a day later, the GoS blatantly lied that it had “fulfilled all its commitments toward the implementation of the [tripartite] initiative” (November 7, 2012).

That is not the entire story. What has not been mentioned is that the GoS and al Bashir got away with exactly the same murderous plan in the 1990s in the Nuba Mountains. And the impunity for the latter crimes swiftly dovetailed into the genocidal crisis in Darfur. As a result of the killings in Darfur, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued a warrant for al Bashir’s arrest on charges of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide and an arrest warrant for Haroun on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity. What leads the U.S. government to continue to believe that the GoS and al Bashir will eventually, one of these years (not days or months, but years), honor an agreement, especially when it is aimed at helping their putative enemies (meaning, the civilians of the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile, including women, children and infants and the elderly)?

Year after year after year, diplomacy has been tried and yet the GoS continues to kill at will and thumb its nose at international law and the will of the international community. Talk has lorded it over action. It is time to act, and to act boldly. People are dying and it is untoward to be silent and passive in the face of such atrocities. Likewise, it is unconscionable to accept the status quo; more of the same by the U.S. and international community (i.e., talk, talk and more talk) is bound to result in more of the same by the GoS (i.e., broken promises, more destruction, more deaths, more heartbreak).

With all due respect, Envoy Lyman, for the last dozen years the GoS and al Bashir have been treating both the United States and the international community as fools: “a person [or entity] who has been tricked or deceived into appearing or acting stupid.” By all accounts, the GoS and al Bashir have hoodwinked and duped the U.S. and the international community time and again by issuing fatuous promises that the latter never intended to honor. One can almost hear the laughter of derision in the corridors of power in Khartoum as they celebrate yet another successful act of bamboozlement.

Sixth, word has it that a key, if not the main, reason why the United States has taken a kids-glove-like approach to the genocidal actions and serial ethnic cleansing by the GoS in such places as Darfur, the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile is because Sudan is playing ball with the U.S. vis-à-vis America’s “war on terrorism.” Seemingly, the U.S. Government’s war on terrorism supercedes all other policies and promises, including the Obama Administration’s purported dedication to preventing crimes against humanity and genocide.

Rumors are also rife that an adjunct reason for the U.S. going easy on Sudan is that it (the U.S.) has drone bases dotting Sudan and wishes to retain them – if not at all costs then certainly at the cost of the lives of those residing in Sudan’s peripheries. Is that, in fact, the case?

In light of the above and the ongoing death and destruction in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile, we call on you  -- and we do so in full appreciation of the gravity of our request  --  to resign in protest over both Sudan’s habitual tendency to act in bad faith while murdering its own people and the totally inadequate response of the United States and the United Nations to the crises facing the people of the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile.

We believe it would be the honorable and heroic thing for you to do, and that such an action by an individual of your stature might finally prod the United States, if not the international community, to begin to deal with al Bashir and the GoS with the firm resolve that has been missing over the past dozen years. In the end, you, Envoy Lyman, could be instrumental in saving the lives of countless numbers of people in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile, all of whom undoubtedly cherish life as much as we (you, President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton, and the signatories to this letter) do.

We must all ask ourselves: “When all of the bodies in the Nuba Mountains and the Blue Nile are buried, how will history judge us?”

We thank you in advance for your serious consideration of our concerns, questions and request. We look forward to receiving a written response from you.

Sincerely,

December 5, 2012

Dear Members of the Atrocities Prevention Board:

We (scholars of genocide studies and human rights activists) are vitally concerned about the ongoing crisis in the Nuba Mountains, Sudan. Since July 2011, the Government of Sudan (GoS) has carried out a scorched earth policy against the Nuba Mountains people. Using both aerial and ground attacks the GoS has, as it did in Darfur, not only attempted to quell the actions of the rebels active in the area but murdered innocent civilians (including children and infants), displaced between 200,000 and 300,000 people from their villages and homes, purposely destroyed the peoples’ farms thus leaving them bereft of food on which to exist, and prevented humanitarian aid from reaching those now seeking sanctuary in the mountains looming over their destroyed farms. As the rainy season has come to an end, the GoS is ramping up for a more concerted aerial and ground campaign against the Nuba Mountains people and those of the Blue Nile. Both the U.S. Government and the international community have largely stood by and watched this tragedy unfold.

We are well aware of U.S. Envoy Princeton Lyman’s varied diplomatic efforts and his attempts to reason with Khartoum. Unfortunately, though, his efforts have not sufficed and clear evidence of that is the fact that the attacks by the GoS have been relentless and more murderous as time has gone by. We are also cognizant of the fact that small quantities of surreptitious aid provided by the U.S. have been welcomed by people of the Nuba (although none reached the people of Blue Nile); but it provided only a very small fraction of what is needed.  The dry season has begun and it is once again possible to move food, medicine and other supplies on the ground, but without secure access, this improvement in transport conditions counts for little.

There is a point, we believe, when it should become self evident that the continuation of endless dialogue with a state that has engaged in serial crimes against humanity, genocidal-like actions, and ethnic cleansing and engaged in habitual denial of its responsibility and been a purveyor of deceit and broken promises, is total waste of time. As hundreds of thousands of innocents needlessly suffer, there is a moral imperative that the continual “diplomatic” talking, negotiating, pleading, and ultimately begging with leaders of such openly deceptive and destructive strategies must be replaced by concrete and effective action  -- action that stanches the killing and death due to mass starvation as a direct result of the destruction of farms and foodstuffs and the obstruction of humanitarian aid to those in need. That time, we believe, is now.

As you undoubtedly know, the time to address a crisis heading towards mass violence is early on; only in that way is it likely the crisis will be nipped in the bud. Unfortunately, that has not happened in the case of the Nuba Mountains. Some three months after the establishment of the Atrocities Prevention Board (APB), the GoS began bombing the Nuba Mountains and carrying out ground attacks, and those attacks quickly morphed into an even greater disaster: the dislocation of hundreds of thousands, a massive food crisis, and the ongoing destruction of farms, villages and the murder of even more people, which continues to this very day.

Presidential Study Directive 10 (August 4, 2011) states that “America's reputation suffers, and our ability to bring about change is constrained, when we are perceived as idle in the face of mass atrocities and genocide.” From our perspective that is exactly the situation we are now seeing vis-à-vis the Administration’s stance in regard to the atrocities, mass displacement, and mass hunger that the GoS has unleashed in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile.

In light of that, we wish to inquire as to whether the APB has addressed the dual crises in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile; and if so, how?

President Obama has stated that one of the results of the creation of the APB was that “Our diplomats will encourage more robust multilateral efforts to prevent and respond to atrocities.” Quite frankly, we are still waiting to see this happen in the case of the Nuba Mountains. To date, ineffective diplomacy has substituted for action and as a result the crisis in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile has not only gone on for 17 long months but is now on the verge of spiraling totally out of control. The GoS is not only bombing village after village but destroying farm after farm by burning them to the ground.

We understand that along with the APB the President has promised to establish “alert channels” that avail lower-level officials of the right to draw attention (or raise red flags) about potential or actual atrocities in areas of conflict. Have, in fact, the crises in South Kordofan and Blue Nile been the subject of such alerts?

In recent correspondence with U.S. Envoy to Sudan Princeton Lyman we were informed that since it was impossible for anyone to reach the Nuba Mountains due to the prohibitions of the GoS it was impossible to conduct a study into the percentage of people in the Nuba Mountains who are suffering from severe malnutrition and starvation or how many people have perished from starvation. Since a specific component of the APB is to “increase the collection and analysis of information relating to atrocity threats and situations,” would it not make sense to conduct an investigation in the refugee camps inside South Sudan? After all, thousands of people have been crossing the border from Sudan to South Sudan for months on end in flight from the terror inflicted on them by the GoS in both South Kordofan and Blue Nile. The point is, there is a solid sample of those who have been in the camps for a relatively long while versus those who have just arrived.

We also must ask: has the APB considered recommending that the U.S. Government prod the UN Security Council to issue a Chapter VII mandate in order to install a peace enforcement contingent in the South Kordofan and Blue Nile to attempt to halt the violence?

Also, has the APB suggested that the U.S. government, either alone or in conjunction with the international community, design and apply tougher sanctions on the GoS for the ongoing and serial murder of its own people, destruction of their villages and farms, and mass displacement of hundreds of thousands of innocent people?

If little to nothing concrete has been attempted or accomplished by the APB along the aforementioned lines, then we strongly urge that the APB immediately call an emergency session to examine how the U.S. Government could use the full range of instruments at hand  --   diplomatic, economic, humanitarian, and military –  that can be brought to bear on this, the latest, crisis in Sudan.

It is our ardent hope that the new approaches, “tools and expanded capabilities” developed by the U.S. Government for the express purpose of the prevention of atrocities will be implemented in order to prevent the current tragedies in South Kordofan and Blue Nile from expanding into the years-long and deadly affair that Darfur has become. Here, we are referring to, for example, the following, all of which were touted by the White House as approaches that the APB would implement: new kinds of targeted sanctions, financial levers, and getting truly tough on impunity. The latter is especially relevant in light of the fact that President Omar al Bashir is wanted by the International Criminal Court on charges of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide for the atrocities perpetrated in Darfur, and that the Governor of South Kordofan, Ahmed Haroun, is also wanted by the ICC on charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes for atrocities committed in Darfur by the GoS.

As you might recall, when the Genocide Prevention Task Force report, in 2008,  called for creation of the Atrocities Prevention Board, it alluded to situations exactly along the lines of the current situation in the Nuba Mountain and Blue Nile regions of Sudan. Indeed, it was clearly stated that the express purpose of an agency such as the APB was to deal, in a decisive fashion, with such humanitarian emergencies in the face of the deep failures of US policy in recent years, especially the case of Rwanda.

We are counting on the APB to honor its charge to “ensure that key decision-makers receive early warning and hear dissenting views” in regard to potential or actual crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, war crimes, and genocide.  For well over a year now, we have written and submitted letters to Congress, the White House, State, and individual U.S. officials, and to date we’ve only received replies from Special Envoy Princeton Lyman. While we certainly appreciate his engaging with us, we believe he needs the full-fledge support of top decision makers with the Administration.

We believe it is absolutely critical for the APB and the Administration to address, openly with the rest of the U.S. Government and U.S. citizens, the fate of the people in Nuba Mountains (South Kordofan) and the Blue Nile. Indeed, we believe that silence is acquiescence and goes totally against the grain of President Obama’s declaration in April of this year that atrocity prevention is "a core national security interest and core moral responsibility,” and “a high priority for his Administration.” A lack of attention and action by the APB to these matters would go counter to its stated mission.

We thank you in advance for your serious consideration of our concerns expressed herein, and we await both your written response and your determined action.

Sincerely,

By Wani Tombe Lako

February 17, 2013 (SSNA) -- I am seriously bothered by the assertion that, one of the main goals for the purported national reconciliation process (NRP) in South Sudan (SS), is the reconciliations of cattle wrestlers (RCW), in SS, as one method of engendering peace in SS. I am worried that, the organisers of this NRP may be starting from wrong premises, and which may later on, produce the wrong results.

I do sincerely appreciate interests shown by the United Nations (UN), and various international non-governmental organisations (INGOs). However, these international organisations, do not know and understanding the cultural and moral underpinnings of so many variables of instability in SS, including the phenomenon of cattle wrestling (PCW). To these foreign organisations, the PCW is run-of-the-mill variant of social conflict, which also becomes armed conflict, albeit, with economic and financial implications.

Therefore, my intention, of writing this article, is to enlighten these foreign components of the NRP, and others, within and without the SS. The PCW is intrinsically saturated in cultural mores and associated conducts; which result in criminal offenses, and at common-law, which is the legal tradition of formal legal institutions in SS, those crimes are the crimes of robbery and theft. 

At common-law, robbery is the illegal taking of property from the person of another, or in the person’s presence, by violence, or intimidation; that is, aggravated larceny. It is a crime at common-law and under statutory laws. It is theft because; it is the felonious taking and removing of another’s personal property with intent of depriving the true owner of it. The (mens rea) or the guilty mindfor theft is the intent to deprive the rightful owner of the property.

The (actus reus) or the wrongful deed or conduct of cattle wrestling, is the actual removal of the cattle and the property in them from the rightful owners. It is important to note that, the actus reus which is the result of conduct, and therefore an event, must be distinguished from the conduct which produced the result. For example, in simple case of murder, it is the victim’s death, brought about by the conduct of the murderer, which is the actus reus, the mens rea is the murderer intention to cause that death.

To an objective, and formalistic legal bystander, the vile conduct in the PCW, and the PCW itself, fall within the ambit of the criminal justice system (CJS), if there is any functioning in SS. This objective, and formalistic legal bystander, may further wonder, as to why, should the government of South Sudan (GoSS), organise a conference, of thieves and robbers, in which, they meet their victims; whose hurt and victimhood, ought to have been remedied, through the CJS as indicated above. This is because, our objective and formalistic legal bystander would argue, the communities of consciences in SS, have been universally offended by the conduct in the PCW.

However, a cynically subjective and informal socio-cultural bystander would point out that, in fact, within the PCW, you are dealing with dualistic situation in terms of perpetrators and victims of the PCW. Our cynic would further say that, same communities become victims and perpetrators at once. Today’s victims are tomorrow’s perpetrators. It is a vile zero-sum game. It is like violently outwitting the other with same cultural satisfaction. The terms of engagement are culturally known in all communities which take part in the PCW in SS.

In almost all communities which take part in the PCW in SS, the PCW is a socio-cultural modus operandi for wealth accumulation. That is, socio-culturally speaking, the PCW is only resented when you are the loser. In many occasions, successful raiders organise festivities to celebrate their loot, and are on standby, to defend their newly begotten wealth, albeit illegally, in formal sense.

In all communities that indulge in the PCW, there is ubiquitous absence of guilty moralities and consciences. These are the most crucial elements of humanity that, any processes of reconciliation would like to capitalise on. How on earth do you reconcile two or more nomadic human communities, who believe that, there is nothing morally wrong within the remit of the PCW?

Many years ago, at Rumbek Senior Secondary School, in SS, I use to listen to stories of the PCW, from some colleagues, and those standpoint narratives, gave me the feelings of, as if, I was listening to human persons, narrating encounters, in wild mushroom picking sprees. In these episodes, those involved, do not feel guilty, for picking the God given food, in the form of the wild mushroom. It all depended on your muscle power; to gather as much mushroom as you could. The only difference is that, no fire, or white arms are used, in wild mushroom picking. Not only that, the land on which, the mushroom picking is done, is common land, and the property in the mushroom, is natural property, possessed and owned by all.

Now then, try to organise NRP between wild mushroom pickers. They will wonder, as to what is it all about. It is normal to pick wild mushroom, is it not? Here, I want you, the reader, to understand the consciences, of these wild mushroom pickers. It is not that, I Wani Tombe Lako is heartless. I am trying by all means, to make you, the reader, understand, the socio-cultural, and moral paradigms, in which, communities, indulging in the PCW, operate.

It is not that, I am condoning the processes of the PCW. I want you the reader, to determine the place of the PCW in this purported NRP in SS. Not only that, but take into serious account, the fact that, various young men, in various cattle camps, in communities indulging in the PCW, consider the PCW as past-time activities, when they have nothing much to do, in certain times of the year, or when the cultural cycle dictates so.

It is therefore essential to appreciate that, the cultural urge, to indulge in the PCW is an aspect of human socialisation. Boys, adolescents, and young men, are invariably, in conscious and subconscious fashions, socialised into the dynamics of the PCW. These categories of human persons grow into potential and actual raiders. They were not born cattle wrestlers. They grew up in respective communities, to appreciate and look forward, to the days they will too, demonstrate their worth, and acquire wealth through the PCW.

The PCW is therefore, a direct and indirect mode of material and social values production, albeit, wrongful values. The PCW takes place without prior anger. There is nothing to defend either. There is just raw lust, for the property in the cattle, so sought after. How do you reconcile peoples, or communities, who do not, in fact, hate one another, so to speak?

How do you condemn a group of young men, who indulge in the PCW, when, in fact, their society, expect them to do so, either expressly, or impliedly? This said society, include the elders and others, who are supposed to be the opinion leaders? These issues always make me reflect, on what, I was told, many years ago, in Rumbek Senior Secondary School.

If you carry out a census count of all those communities in SS, in which the PCW is practiced as a matter of course, you may end up with the majority of communities in SS, being as infected by this socio-cultural vile conduct. Therefore, it can be argued that, the socialisation of children and adult population, of those tribes in SS, involved in the PCW, is a socio-cultural priority of the GoSS.

The tribes which indulge in the PCW are undermining the social peace in SS. They are also undermining the economic and financial stability of many communities in SS. There is a kind of comprehensive cultural selfishness and greed which fuel the urge for indulgence in the PCW. How do you use the variables of NRP in order to change the socio-cultural perceptions of these people?

Can we tangibly bring the representatives of all these communities of cattle wrestlers, into this purported NRP? Whereby, we then carry out some indoctrination exercises, in which, our European and American friends shall take part? After which, we then, release these representatives of cattle wrestlers, to go back home, to their various villages, and killing swamps, and high grounds? They go home, like peace pigeons. Whereby, they shall set forth, in their crusade of social extension work? During which crusade, they shall hopefully, infuse the variables of civility, and civil commonsense, into centuries old traditions?

Is this what we hope to achieve in this NRP? What about the hundreds of organised forces personnel, who, without any hesitations, always, and promptly join their village warriors in these human carnages within the remit of PCW? After all, which types of reconciliation structures are the Europeans and Americans going to use? It is known that, these communities in which the PCW is practiced with impunity, and as a way of life, it is known that, they have their own reconciliation frameworks. These frameworks are built into their anthropological paradigms. Shall there be applied, some universal framework, to cater for particular norms; or shall we use particular norms, to produce a universal approach, and framework, for mini reconciliations? I am just querying because, I want the best outcome. I am still not sure, where this best outcome is located; and discoverable!

The author is Professor of Social and Rural Development and Lecturer in Laws. He can be contacted at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it