Establish buffer zone in Sudan’s war affected areas

by Steve Paterno

June 17, 2011 — In 2005, the world, led by the USA, rallied to bring a comprehensive peace in Sudan, which ended decades long war. However, six years down the road that peace is seriously crumbling. The regime in Khartoum never honored its part of the deal in maintaining peace. Instead, it choses to wage war. Hence, the world is once again call for action as it is presented with yet another opportunity to stop Khartoum’s aggressions. The aggressions can be stopped by enforcing buffer zones that can halt Khartoum’s military advances as well as cripple its capabilities of slaughtering innocent lives.

The notion of imposing a buffer zone to stop Khartoum’s aggression is not a new phenomena. This suggestion has been making rounds ever since, aptly, by individuals who now occupy high positions within US government. In 2006, serving as a a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, Susan Rice, the current US Ambassador to UN, proposed a more radical military approach against Khartoum. Writing an op-ed for The Washington Post, Rice argued that the only language Khartoum understands is “credible threat or use of force.” She went on to outline that in order for Khartoum to “relent,” the US must take the lead in exerting military pressure against the regime—the pressure that involve strikes against its airfields, aircrafts, military assets and also imposition of a blockade on the Port Sudan waterways. Rice insisted that if the rest of the world could not support the US on this plan, then America must go it alone, just as It has done throughout the history.

US Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton all echoed Susan Rice’s sentiment, before they took up strategic positions in the current US administration. The then, Senator Joe Biden, declared that in any discussions on Sudan, the use of force must be put on the table, because “those kids will be dead by the time the diplomacy is over.” President Barack Obama actually shared the same sentiment like these top officials of his administration. During his campaign for presidency, he summed his sentiment pretty well by saying, “we can’t say ‘never again’ and then allow it to happen again. And, as President of the United States, I don’t intend to abandon people or turn a blind eye to slaughter.”

Now Sudan is at its critical juncture, where these top members of US administration are in better positions to translate their political rhetorics into concrete policy, strategy and then swing into immediate action. In other words, it is time for the administration not to “turn a blind eye to the slaughter” in Sudan, which is ongoing. The plan awaiting US action is not as radical and ambitious as suggested by Ambassador Susan Rice in 2006.The US only needs to play a minimal role to augment what is already being suggested in many circles; the establishment of buffer zones on the flashpoints.

South Sudan, which is the victim of Khartoum’s aggression vowed not to pursue war, at least at this point in time. South Sudan government actually calls on establishment of buffer zones so as to stop the aggression and prevent another all out long war between the South and the North. Ethiopia has taken this call of establishing buffer zones seriously by offering to deploy its neutral troops in the war affected areas.

What is now left of US is to provide air support to patrol the demilitarized zones. US already has a strategic military base in the region, located only a flight away in Djibouti. The US war planes will easily have access to Sudanese airspace by flying from Djibouti over Ethiopia and into the intended targets, without having to necessarily get permission of passing over any hostile territory.

The objectives of this ‘operation to stop genocide’ is to practically halt troops movements from entering the demilitarized zones, intercept Khartoum airplane bombers, and eliminate any threats against the air patrols as well as the peacekeeping forces and humanitarian personnel on the ground.

Such an operations can easily gain legitimacy from around the world. Ambassador Rice, who is a proponent of this plan need to table a UNSC resolution to provide an international mandate for the action. The US Congress has two chambers full of members who have ever been concerned of Khartoum’s aggressive nature and threats. The US Congress of recent is conducting hearings on Sudan and all the testimonies of the expert witnesses attest to the danger of lack of actions in an event that the aggressions perpetrated by Khartoum is not stop. So, the US Congress gets the message very clear. As far as the regional politics is concern with such a plan, Ethiopia is already taking a practical lead, which actually overshadows any need for African Union blessings.

Therefore, if the only language Khartoum understands and can relent is credible threat and the use of force, then buffer zones enforced by neutral ground troops and air patrols will just be the right fit. Otherwise, Khartoum regime, which has survived for decades by waging wars against the innocent people, will continue with impunity.

Steve Paterno is the author of The Rev. Fr. Saturnino Lohure, A Romain Catholic Priest Turned Rebel. He can be reached at [email protected]