Welcome to Sudan and continue to be prudent Dear Ban Ki-Moon
By James Okuk Solomon
September 2, 2007 — A country into which UN enters (by force or by dialogue) is a country that has failed to solve its own problems, and as a result sent out bad signals of violations of human rights and jeopardy of peaceful co-existence of its dignified people. UN was born after the World War II to stop the grave bad news of wars, destruction of lives and properties, insecurity of livelihoods, and instability of innocent civilians. The World Chief diplomat, Ban Ki-Moon is in Khartoum today and will be in Southern Sudan and Northern Darfur in the days after before he ends his field visit to Sudan.
As a man of protocol, Ki-Moon will first meet the head of state of the Sudan in respect to his presidential authority on the Sovereignty. After dialogue with the president El-Bashir, regarding the problem of peace and development in the whole Sudan, Ki-Moon will get permission to meet the president of GoSS, H.E. Salva Kiir, in Juba and to listen to his fears and hopes about the implementation of the CPA, and to urge him not at all to be pushed to put a back-gear on the SPLM/GoSS vehicle of peace and development in Southern Sudan. He will appreciate Mr. Salva for at least having managed to maintain the-absence-of-war in Southern Sudan, so far so good. He will also be interested to hear about the efforts of SPLM leadership to unite the Darfurians rebel movements for a common one roadmap in the coming peace negotiations with the government, given the SPLM experience in government-rebels table dialogue.
Ki-Moon will also meet the leaders of Sudanese opposition political parties (Umma, Popular Congress, Democratic Unionist, etc.) who are not satisfied with the power sharing dividends of the CPA and who are opposed to possibility of the breakage of the Sudan from the result of the Southerners’ right of Self-determination in the 2011 referendum. He will be eager to hear their opposite views on the root causes of the problem of Darfur and the possible way for resolving it without necessarily opting for the undemocratic downfall of the current NCP/SPLM dominated government.
Since the main job description of the UN Secretary General is the promotion of Peace in the world through dialogue and respect of human dignity and fundamental human rights, I am optimistic that Ban Ki-Moon is going to realize his search for peace and development in the whole Sudan, with the priority given to the insecure Darfur and conflict-ruined Southern Sudan. Since he took over the UN tenure from his predecessor Kofi Anan in January 2007, a lot has been desired in the diplomacy of the South Korean (Ki-Moon) in his attempts to resolve Darfur crisis to the satisfaction of the conflicting forces (the government and the rebels). His patience and respect to the views of the rivalling parties in the Sudan is almost awarding him the honour of a virtuous man. For the first time in the history of UN, and with the consistence dialogue with the Foreign Minister of the Sudan, Dr. Lam Akol and AU Chief diplomat, Alpha Aumar, Chapter Eight of the UN charter for peace-keeping emerged out from the documentary hidings into tangible practice. For the first time, UN is able to cooperatively joint with a regional body (AU) in the efforts to prevent wars and keep peace. This makes African continent proud because it has been recognized by UN to be part of the solution to its African problems in Darfur. However, the common stand of H.E. Ki-Moon, H.E. Aumar, and H.E. Dr. Lam on the solution to the problem of Darfur irritates and intimidates the former colonialists (UK, France, and US). These colonial masters approach African problems with paternalistic attitudes based on superiority complex that they are the only ones who could resolve the third world’s conflicts. Those three top diplomats have understood very well the political intrigues of the first world and have learn how to work together with trust, sincerity and commitment for the relief of the suffering of the innocent civilians of Darfur among which the rebels hide, using them as shields for defence mechanism from government attacks.
His Excellency Ki-Moon is welcomed to Sudan with a hope that he will listen carefully and critically to what the different parties (oppositions, government, and rebels) are going to tell him about the Sudanese problems. After having listened and talked to the Sudanese leaders, people’s eyes will be set on this trusted first class diplomat to work out a fair compromise that is going to end the destructive conflicts in Darfur and speed up the implementation of the suspended articles of the CPA. However, he is also expected to be cautious to filter whatever he will hear because each of the conflicting and opposing sides will tell its own story and justification with bias and fallibility. He will get prophets of dooms and bad wishers of peace, telling him about their pessimism and hope for a continuous war. Notwithstanding, he will also get prophets of salvation and bad wishers of war who will tell him sincerely that out of the bitterness comes something sweet in the Sudan. He should not attempt to disqualify the Abuja DPA of 2006 which brought H.E. Meni Arko Manawi into the Sudanese presidential palace, because that would mean his (Manawi) expulsion into the street in favour of Abdel Wahid. If Abdel Wahid comes to the palace to take the place of Manawi without his consent, the whole thing is going to end up in a vicious circle, like what happened when the group of Abdel Wahid and Dr. Khalil refused to sign the DPA.
Therefore, at the end of Ki-Moon’s visit, he should sit down to reflect deeply on his findings and come out with prudent conclusion for a wise solution to the complicated Sudanese problems of insecurity, politics, socio-economics and development. Neither, the CPA, the DPA, the EPA nor any peace agreement is going to survive without the fulfilment of the right of development for the poor and marginalized Sudanese. Peace dividends rewards enjoyed only by the politicians, bureaucrats and businesspersons in the Sudan will never get sustained and will always drip into crisis, sooner or later, if it does not trickle down to the common citizen in the villages and slums. Conflict history of Africa, and particularly Sudan, is rich of reference lessons of the consequences of centralized and elites segregated development and luxury – insecurity and war.
* James Okuk is a PhD. Student in the University of Nairobi in the area of Political Philosophy. He can be reach on: [email protected]