webmaster
© Copyright DEHAI-Eritrea OnLine, 1993-2010
All rights reserved
From: wolda002@umn.edu
Date: Tue May 11 2010 - 23:37:52 EDT
The advocacy groups responded that the Obama administration’s muted
response to complaints of rigging showed it was prepared to accept
“practically any process at the ballot box” for the sake of
facilitating the planned referendum early next year on independence for
Southern Sudan.
East African (Nairobi)
Sudan: Split In U.S. Policy Threatens Peace
Kevin Kelly
10 May 2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New York — Sharp differences inside the Obama administration over Sudan
are producing a weak US response to the intensifying threat of renewed
north-south warfare, a coalition of advocacy groups and a leading US
lawmaker charged last week.
President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton must take full
control of a strengthened US policy toward Sudan, the critics urge,
charging that the president’s special envoy, Scott Gration, has been too
soft in his dealings with Sudanese leaders in Khartoum.
A tougher approach promised months ago by the Obama administration has
failed to materialise, the advocacy groups noted in a report.
“There are virtually no indications that the administration has held any
of the parties to account for their actions since the policy review was
announced, and senior administration officials appear badly divided on
their approach to Sudan,” said the groups’ assessment.
Representative Frank Wolf, one of the US Congress’ leading voices on
Sudan, added in a letter to President Obama that Mr Gration, “with your
apparent blessing,” has misjudged the nature of the Khartoum regime.
Mr Wolf echoed the activist groups in suggesting that Mrs Clinton should
take the reins of US-Sudan policy.
Mrs Clinton acknowledged during a television interview last week that she
is “certainly not satisfied” with the Obama administration’s record
to date on Sudan.
A more muscular American stance could include a warning that the US will
“take out chunks of the North’s air force,” if Khartoum begins
bombing villages in the South, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, a
recent visitor to Sudan, wrote.
The US should strengthen Southern Sudan’s military capabilities,
Congressman Wolf added in a May 5 press conference on Capitol Hill.
He also called on President Obama to reject the outcome of Sudan’s recent
presidential elections, which many observers say were not free or fair.
The voting was won handily by President Omar al-Bashir, who stands accused
of war crimes by the International Criminal Court.
Mrs Clinton had earlier said that Sudan’s election was “by any
measure...flawed.” But, she added, the US goal had been in part to “try
to empower opposition parties, empower people to go out and vote.”
The advocacy groups responded that the Obama administration’s muted
response to complaints of rigging showed it was prepared to accept
“practically any process at the ballot box” for the sake of
facilitating the planned referendum early next year on independence for
Southern Sudan.
These clashing perspectives reflect an underlying disagreement on how to
deal with President al-Bashir.
Mrs Clinton offered a rationale for the American diplomatic approach during
her TV interview. The Obama administration “could back off and say, ‘We
won’t deal with these people, we’re not going to have anything to do
with them, al-Bashir is a war criminal.’ I don’t think that will
improve the situation. So along with our partners — the UK, Norway,
neighbouring countries — we are trying to manage what is a very explosive
problem.”
The Secretary of State added, however, with regard to President al-Bashir,
“He is an indicted war criminal. The United States is very committed to
seeing him brought to justice.”
All eyes are now turning to the likelihood that East Africa’s biggest
country will split in two next year – if Southern Sudan is able to hold
the referendum that is expected to produce an overwhelming vote for
secession.
Times columnist Kristof took note of “a strong belief in the South that
the North is planning to nurture tribal conflicts by handing out guns and
encouraging grievances, so that the South will be too chaotic to hold the
referendum on time.”
The Washington-based advocacy groups meanwhile cautioned that “the
referendum is a ‘redline’” for Southern Sudan’s leadership. “Any
delay in the holding of the referendum could immediately spark a return to
war,” the groups’ report warned.
The focus on the referendum, due to take place in eight months, has
distracted attention from the ongoing conflict in Sudan’s western region,
Darfur.
Mrs Clinton said the Obama administration has helped make it possible for
aid organisations to resume their services to displaced people in Darfur.
“We’re beginning to see some slight progress in Darfur,” she said in
last week’s interview.
The advocacy groups, including the Save Darfur coalition, offer a more
pessimistic assessment.
They say continued fighting between rebel forces and Khartoum’s troops
— as well as within the rebels’ own ranks — make it unlikely that a
lasting peace agreement will be reached any time soon.
Copyright © 2010 East African. All rights reserved. Distributed by
AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com).