Establish buffer zone in Sudan’s war affected areas Article Comments (0) Email PrintSave --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Steve Paterno June 17, 2011 — In 2005, the world, led by the USA,rallied to bring a comprehensive peace in Sudan, which ended decadeslong war. However, six years down the road that peace is seriouslycrumbling. The regime in Khartoum never honored its part of the dealin maintaining peace. Instead, it choses to wage war. Hence, theworld is once again call for action as it is presented with yetanother opportunity to stop Khartoum’s aggressions. The aggressionscan be stopped by enforcing buffer zones that can halt Khartoum’smilitary advances as well as cripple its capabilities of slaughteringinnocent lives. The notion of imposing a buffer zone tostop Khartoum’s aggression is not a new phenomena. This suggestionhas been making rounds ever since, aptly, by individuals who nowoccupy high positions within US government. In 2006, serving as a asenior fellow at the Brookings Institution, Susan Rice, the currentUS Ambassador to UN, proposed a more radical military approachagainst Khartoum. Writing an op-ed for The Washington Post, Riceargued that the only language Khartoum understands is “crediblethreat or use of force.” She went on to outline that in order forKhartoum to “relent,” the US must take the lead in exertingmilitary pressure against the regime—the pressure that involvestrikes against its airfields, aircrafts, military assets and alsoimposition of a blockade on the Port Sudan waterways. Rice insistedthat if the rest of the world could not support the US on this plan,then America must go it alone, just as ithas done throughout the history. US Vice President Joe Biden andSecretary of State Hilary Clinton all echoed Susan Rice’s sentiment,before they took up strategic positions in the current USadministration. The then, Senator Joe Biden, declared that in anydiscussions on Sudan, the use of force must be put on the table,because “those kids will be dead by the time the diplomacy isover.” President Barack Obama actually shared the same sentimentlike these top officials of his administration. During his campaignfor presidency, he summed his sentiment pretty well by saying, “wecan’t say ’never again’ and then allow it to happen again. And, asPresident of the United States, I don’t intend to abandon people orturn a blind eye to slaughter.” Now Sudan is at its critical juncture,where these top members of US administration are in better positionsto translate their political rhetorics into concrete policy, strategyand then swing into immediate action. In other words, it is time forthe administration not to “turn a blind eye to the slaughter” inSudan, which is ongoing. The plan awaiting US action is not asradical and ambitious as suggested by Ambassador Susan Rice in 2006.The US only needs to play a minimal role to augment what is alreadybeing suggested in many circles; the establishment of buffer zones onthe flashpoints. South Sudan, which is the victim ofKhartoum’s aggression vowed not to pursue war, at least at this pointin time. South Sudan government actually calls on establishment ofbuffer zones so as to stop the aggression and prevent another all outlong war between the South and the North. Ethiopia has taken thiscall of establishing buffer zones seriously by offering to deploy itsneutral troops in the war affected areas. What is now left of US is to provideair support to patrol the demilitarized zones. US already has astrategic military base in the region, located only a flight away inDjibouti. The US war planes will easily have access to Sudanese airspace by flying from Djibouti over Ethiopia and into the intendedtargets, without having to necessarily get permission of passing overany hostile territory. The objectives of this ’operation tostop genocide’ is to practically halt troops movements from enteringthe demilitarized zones, intercept Khartoum airplane bombers, andeliminate any threats against the air patrols as well as the peacekeeping forces and humanitarian personnel on the ground. Such an operations can easily gainlegitimacy from around the world. Ambassador Rice, who is a proponentof this plan need to table a UNSC resolution to provide aninternational mandate for the action. The US Congress has twochambers full of members who have ever been concerned of Khartoum’saggressive nature and threats. The US Congress of recent isconducting hearings on Sudan and all the testimonies of the expertwitnesses attest to the danger of lack of actions in an event thatthe aggressions perpetrated by Khartoum is not stop. So, the USCongress gets the message very clear. As far as the regional politicsis concern with such a plan, Ethiopia is already taking a practicallead, which actually overshadows any need for African Unionblessings. Therefore, if the only languageKhartoum understands and can relent is credible threat and the use offorce, then buffer zones enforced by neutral ground troops and airpatrols will just be the right fit. Otherwise, Khartoum regime,which has survived for decades by waging wars against the innocentpeople, 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] -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JFD info" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jfdinfo?hl=en.
