Welcome break in Darfur impasse
Editorial, Irish Times
April 04, 2005 — There should be a definite, if qualified, welcome for the agreement reached at the UN Security Council last week on the crisis in Darfur. It has broken a disgracefully long-standing political impasse on bringing relief and justice to the nearly two million people expelled from this region of Sudan and the death of nearly 200,000 of them over the last two years in flight or in refugee camps.
According to the resolutions adopted, 51 named individuals are to be referred to the International Criminal Court. A peacekeeping 10,000 strong force will be appointed to oversee an overall peace agreement in Sudan. Selective sanctions, including arms and travel embargos, will be applied to back these up.
It very much remains to be seen whether this will move the crisis in Sudan forward sufficiently to bring relief to those who have suffered so much in its multiple conflicts for so many years. The most positive change registered by these agreements has been in the attitudes of major powers towards them. The United States abstained on the resolution referring individuals to the ICC after it obtained exemptions for its citizens. This represents a substantial change of policy, following the Bush administration’s systematic opposition to the court. It is an unsatisfactory state of affairs, which leaves the future role of the court unclear so far as US citizens are concerned; that argument will continue, but should not disguise the welcome shift involved.
China, Russia and Algeria also abstained on the resolutions, after having previously blocked progress towards an agreement arising from their particular interests in the region. Their decisions are in response to international pressure, which must now be maintained in pursuit of a more comprehensive settlement. The Security Council’s agreement to raise a 10,000 strong force to oversee the agreement between northern and southern Sudan is also welcome, but it will definitely not be strong enough to ensure the pact is implemented should there be resistance to it, as Sudan’s government rejects any ICC role.
International political will matters in this conflict and is taken seriously by the Khartoum government. The 51 individuals referred to the ICC include leaders of the Janjaweed militia responsible for the vicious expulsion of so many people from Darfur, some foreign military personnel and some rebel commanders. The rebel organisations have welcomed the move and pledged co-operation. There should be pressure now for a wider negotiation on inclusive institutions and reconciliation procedures after such a long period of war.
But above all Sudan needs international commitments of aid for those displaced in Darfur and elsewhere in the vast country, concrete plans to return them home and assurances that political pressure will be kept up to ensure these agreements are followed through. This is a huge and demanding agenda which has been kept in the public eye mainly by aid agencies. Governments must now act on it with sustained pressure on all concerned.