Pronk’s fault

Editorial, the Sudan Tribune

October 25, 2006 — Jan Pronk, the UN Envoy to Sudan, angered the Sudanese government by
stating that morale was low among the ranks and files of the army, while
Khartoum was still mobilizing troops, arming Janjaweed militia. Pronk
added “the use of militias recalls the events in 2003 and 2004.” Such a
statement did not intend to create a lot of fuss: it wanted to make a
point against what .Sudanese officials were saying on Darfur’s security
improvement and the implementation of the Darfur peace agreement (DPA).
To a certain extent, the Khartoum decision to make him PNG should remind
us what happened to Mukesh Kapila, the former United Nations’
Humanitarian Coordinator in Sudan back in February 2004, when he
declared mass killings and forced displacements of people in Darfur had
reached the level of “the world’s greatest humanitarian crisis.”

In both cases, UN highest officials to Sudan did what they were supposed
to do: monitoring the humanitarian situation and verifying the
implementation of a peace agreement in the Sudan. Kabila and Pronk were
pushed out by Sudanese government systematic denial of the truth on the
ground. In 2004, Khartoum was practicing in a systematic manner mass
killings of civilians in Sudan’s Darfur. Kapila was the first to loudly
highlight that there was something very wrong going on in Darfur. At
that time Kapila even declared “the only difference between Rwanda and
Darfur now is the numbers involved.” More than two years later, should
we really contest his statement? At least, we must say, he was a brave
man, he said the truth”.

Jan Pronk may have made mistakes throughout his stay in Sudan but in
this case, if he did something wrong, it was that he said the blunt
truth. He refuted Khartoum’s allegations on the current state of peace
and security in the region. He furthermore alerted the international
community that we were going to witness the next step of what the UN
qualified “atrocities” which at a later time would be unanimously
qualified “Darfur Genocide”.

Describing the current clashes on the ground, Pronk said “the tribal
conflicts are politically motivated and the political conflict has
acquired tribal dimensions, in particular since the fragmentation of the
rebel movements. Tribes try to settle their accounts or to finish a job,
by putting to flight the last people of other tribes who are living in
an area which they claim as their homeland. Rebel factions try to
strengthen their weakened position on the ground by suppressing the
population.”

In 2004, Kapila was declared persona non grata. Yet, it was at the end
of his mandate. But, the fact is he was fired. Now, in similar
conditions Sudan booted Jan Pronk. It becomes a normal matter.
Pronk was the conscience of the international community in Sudan’s
troubled Darfur. He was very committed on Darfur even though some
criticize him for having underplayed his initial mandate that was to
support the Comprehensive Peace Agreement between the Sudanese
government and the former rebel SPLM.

Whereas the international community seeks to strengthen its stance
against North Korea and Iran, and while efforts are done to make the
principle of “responsibility to protect” as an international norm, it
would be extremely dangerous for the UN integrity to allow Khartoum
under the pretext of “national sovereignty” to mistreat its
representative after ridiculing its principles.

The Darfur’s atrocities are first and foremost the Sudanese government’s
responsibility, but if the international community let Khartoum acting
with a total impunity and with its benediction then it would become also
UN responsibility.