Murder – but no genocide
Edinburgh, Feb 2, 2005 (The Scotsman) – FINALLY, an official UN report has put in black and white what the world has known for several years – that the Sudanese Islamic fundamentalist regime has been systematically murdering its own citizens in Darfur by the tens of thousands. In addition, the Khartoum government has been found guilty of using its own security forces, as well as the Arab Janjaweed militia, to carry out mass rape, bomb black-African villages, and drive hundreds of thousands of people into exile.
Quite correctly, the report calls for those accused of carrying out war crimes in the Darfur region to be put on trial. But why has it taken the UN so long to come to this conclusion, during which time even more people in Darfur have been murdered, tortured and raped? And why has the report gone to such lengths to exonerate the Sudanese government of the crime of genocide? For it now seems – according to the UN – that a government can systematically kill 70,000 of an ethnic minority, eradicate their villages and poison their wells, but have this dismissed as an ordinary case of murder.
What is important in this document is the wealth of detail regarding the crimes that have taken place in Darfur. The Khartoum regime has used its position on the UN Human Rights Commission – a bizarre appointment, but typical of how the UN operates – to maintain that the mass murder in Darfur is the fault of local rebel groups seeking autonomy; or of Janjaweed units who are out of control. This report gives the lie to such sophistry. It is just a pity that the UN’s labyrinthine procedures have taken the best part of 18 months to arrive at a conclusion obvious to every western reporter and NGO in Darfur.
But the failure of the report to label the events in Darfur as genocide is political expediency of the worst sort. Otherwise, it would mean that the Security Council would have to intervene in Darfur automatically under international law. There is a conspiracy to avoid such action. The Arab and African countries, few of whom are democracies, are not anxious to create such a precedent. If Sudan, why not Zimbabwe or the Congo? Even America is not rushing to take on any new overseas commitments, given the situation in Iraq.
Such realpolitik might just be acceptable if the UN Security Council now moves quickly to accept the report and force Khartoum to end the mass murder. Those individuals guilty of planning the murders should be put on international trial, along with the minions who actually carried out the orders. And if Khartoum refuses to give up the guilty, the Security Council must impose economic sanctions.
Unfortunately, knowing how the UN procrastinates, this may not happen quickly. For instance, there is certain to be a dispute over where to hold the trials. Surely in Africa is best, to bring home to that continent’s unelected rulers that they can still be held accountable. Those who have suffered in Darfur deserve justice, even if it is slow in coming.