A U.S. role in the southern Sudan
Bathsheba N. Crocker and Chester A. Crocker, The International Herald Tribune
June 10, 2004 — WASHINGTON While bloody mayhem continues in Sudan’s western province of Darfur, Sudan’s government and the rebel Sudan People’s Liberation Movement have signed accords in Kenya that clear the way for a comprehensive agreement on ending 40 years of civil war in the south of the country. The United States, as the primary midwife of an African and European-backed peace effort, could achieve a bold vision for peace, opening a new chapter in a devastated land that has known little but war since gaining independence from Britain in 1956. For a U.S. administration in need of a foreign policy victory, this would be a big prize.
The stakes are huge: millions of lives have been lost in Sudan’s intractable conflict. Sudan, which remains on the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism, is strategically important in the U.S. effort to combat failed states and terrorism throughout the Horn of Africa and Red Sea region. A successful re-engagement with this multireligious, Muslim majority society could give substance to the rhetoric about America’s desire for constructive relations with the Islamic world, while assuring that Sudan’s millions of non-Muslim citizens regain their rights.
Implementing Sudan’s complex, six-year transition agreement will be far more difficult than negotiating it. Ultimately, the Sudanese people are responsible for sustaining their peace. But the agreement will fly apart without sustained international attention.
There is ample evidence that Sudan’s government and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement are less than fully committed to the agreement, having signed on partly to avoid blame for a breakdown, and partly to seize the opportunities and standing they will enjoy during the prolonged transition. The parties succumbed to external pressure to sign the deal. External pressure will be required to see it through.
Peace will only have a chance in Sudan if there is active U.S. leadership. The United States has the needed leverage, including through the potential to lift sanctions and normalize diplomatic relations. It can also provide serious resources and play a key role on the UN Security Council.
The challenges in implementing Sudan’s peace accord cannot be overstated. Hatred and mistrust run deep among the Sudanese. Potential spoilers abound, from armed militias and hardliners in both parties to meddlesome neighbors. Only the United States has the mobilizing and coordinating capacity to make Sudan’s complex, post-conflict reconstruction work.
Four central tasks require U.S. leadership. First, we must address the immediate crisis in Darfur, while aggressively nailing down the broader north-south peace agreement. The Bush administration has achieved much in Sudan since it began its peace initiative in 2001. It must not be blown off course either by the maneuvers of the north-south parties or by those demanding a sudden shift toward an anti-Khartoum campaign over Darfur. Darfur is another unforgivable scar on Khartoum’s record, but such crises will end only when there is a durable structure for peace. The answer is sustained action – currently being organized under U.S., African and EU leadership – to set up a cease-fire commission, preposition vitally needed resources and deploy monitoring teams with observers to bring Darfur’s humanitarian situation under control.
The second challenge is to convert the already negotiated protocols into a comprehensive peace agreement (including a nationwide cease-fire) and then start implementing it. This will require tough-minded diplomatic leadership. A UN peacekeeping force must be properly mandated and equipped so it can respond with force against threats to the peace.
Third, the United States and other donors will have to commit serious money for reconstruction needs. The Sudanese people, especially in the underdeveloped south, need to see real benefits flowing from peace. Finally, ending the civil war means taking the gun out of politics and giving substance to the agreements’ promise of an inclusive political system.
Negotiating peace in Sudan has required years of intense work. Making it stick will be even more demanding. It is a challenge worthy of American leadership.
Bathsheba Crocker is co-director of the postconflict reconstruction project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington. Chester Crocker, a former assistant secretary of state for African affairs, is a professor of strategic studies at the Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University.