---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: John Ashworth <[email protected]> Date: Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 5:27 PM Subject: [sudan-john-ashworth] Western nations now on the sidelines To: Group <[email protected]>
1. Western nations now on the sidelines at Sudan talks BY ALAN BOSWELL MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia — Last week, while African leaders toiled behind closed doors at a luxury hotel to try to prevent renewed war between Sudan and South Sudan, U.S. and other Western diplomats huddled in the lobby waiting for updates. The negotiations over Sudan's contentious breakup increasingly are becoming an African-only affair, a sharp departure from just a few years ago, when the United States, South Sudan's most powerful ally during its long civil war struggle, played the key role in brokering the 2005 agreement that set the stage for the country's independence. The relegation of the United States to the back seat reflects the more multilateral, behind-the-scenes approach the Obama administration favors and the iciness between Washington and Khartoum, but the result is that the Western nations that had dominated Sudan policy for years are mostly peripheral observers of the negotiations today. The talks at Addis Ababa's Sheraton hotel have been led by the African Union and overseen by former South African President Thabo Mbeki. Also at the table is the United Nations' special envoy to the two countries, Haile Menkerios, from the African country of Eritrea. The talks failed to produce any agreement on how to split South Sudan's all-important oil revenues, but African diplomats' growing role in the latest chapter of the Sudanese conflict seems to match the continent's increasingly assertive approach to Somalia, another long-running trouble spot on the continent. In both cases, while Western money continues to bankroll regional negotiations and policies, it's the African governments and not their patrons who appear to occupy the driver's seats. That African leaders are taking greater responsibility for two of the continent's most chronic conflicts could mean that the oft-heard refrain, "African solutions for African problems," may become more than just a slogan. Britain, Norway and the European Union _which also helped broker the 2005 deal — sent senior envoys to Addis Ababa but were excluded from the meeting rooms. They and their aides spent most of the time in the Sheraton's palatial lobby, sipping macchiatos and sparkling water, waiting for the meetings to recess. When the negotiations paused, the envoys sought out participants and members of Mbeki's team for briefings on what happened. Western envoys say that although they weren't at the table, their presence at sideline meetings helped raise the pressure for peace. The United States, the U.K. and Norway released a statement Tuesday that urged both sides to reconvene for further talks "as soon as possible" and said they fully supported Mbeki's role as facilitator. The U.S. special envoy, Princeton Lyman, wasn't in Addis Ababa, although he's participated in previous rounds. A young American staffer served as the sole U.S. representative who was allowed to observe some meetings, though not those concerning oil, the most crucial part of the talks. Phaedra Gwyn, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Embassy in Juba, South Sudan, said Lyman was in Washington for meetings with senior White House officials but was following the negotiations through his representative and African Union contacts. If Lyman had been present, observers said, he wouldn't have been in the negotiating rooms either, because of the African Union's increasingly assertive stance as well as the Sudanese government's desire to keep the West from the mediation table. That's a major shift from several years ago, when the U.S. drafted baseline text for parts of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement, ending nearly two decades of Sudanese civil war. Officials who attended the recent talks, who requested anonymity in order to speak freely, said the United States had lost most of its leverage with Khartoum. Sudanese officials are deeply bitter about the internationally backed agreement that shaved off a third of their territory but left the regime of President Omar al Bashir — who's been charged with crimes in the Darfur region — as isolated as ever. U.S. officials counter that Khartoum has only itself to blame. Twice, American offers to improve ties with Sudan fell apart after Bashir responded brutally to internal challenges. In 2005, after the peace deal, the Bush administration refused to relax sanctions on Sudan because of the atrocities that were taking place in Darfur. Then, earlier this year, moves by the Obama administration to begin normalizing ties halted as renewed fighting in Sudan's South Kordofan and Blue Nile states — areas that also fell under the 2005 accord — prompted more reports of widespread human rights violations by Bashir's government. U.S. officials say they won't normalize ties with Khartoum until the fighting stops and restrictions on humanitarian aid are lifted. Gwyn said Lyman was focused on those issues. The result, close Sudan watchers say, is that moderate elements within the regime who'd argued for engagement with the U.S. have now been sidelined or silenced. Thanks to a rising Asia and Africa's new eagerness to tackle its own problems, Sudan no longer may feel compelled to accept the United States' mediation. On Monday, Beijing announced that it was sending its top Africa envoy to Sudan and South Sudan to press for a deal after the breakdown in talks last week. China, which has much at stake due to its oil deals with Sudan and South Sudan, has been "conspicuously absent" from the talks, Said al Khatib, a senior Sudanese negotiator, said last week. But when Sudan — which hosts the main pipeline and port through which South Sudan's oil is sold — recently halted a shipment of South Sudanese oil meant for a Chinese firm, Beijing broke its silence, with its Foreign Ministry urging both sides to exercise "restraint" and "flexibility" to keep the oil flowing. The African Union is still searching for a diplomatic success story, apart from Sudan's semi-peaceful partition earlier this year. The African style of diplomacy has its critics: It's deferential and consensus-oriented, lacking the coercive tools that often are necessary to close big deals. It also has struggled to be taken seriously on major issues: Its opposition to NATO intervention in Libya largely was ignored, and its efforts to end the post-election crisis in Ivory Coast failed to gather momentum. The talks between Sudan and South Sudan aren't going much better. They've yet to produce a major breakthrough since South Sudanese voted overwhelmingly for independence in January, and tensions have risen steadily. Still, some observers credit Mbeki's diplomacy as the only thing that's keeping the two old enemies talking at all. (Boswell is a McClatchy special correspondent.) http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/12/06/2534438/western-nations-now-on-the-sidelines.html END1 2. Condemn Sudan: It is Easy Sudan Vision By Dr. Osama Ahmed Idrous Ahmed - (Sudanow.info), 05/12/11 It is not easy for the Western mindset or the US government to simply believe that Sudan is striving for the better of its people and a peaceful settlement to volatile situations erupting in some parts of the country after the separation of Southern Sudan. Open any website or use any search engine to look for Sudan news and you will find a bizarre and a ceaseless campaign to illustrate an ugly and one-sided picture of the situation on the ground. The campaign is very intense and far-reaching beyond any capacity to counter efforts by Sudan government. One example of such campaigns that are inhibiting peace efforts, giving one-sided coverage of the conflict and prolonging the wars in Darfur and other areas in Sudan could be seen in the activities of Save Darfur Coalition. Based in the United States, it is a coalition of more than 180 religious, political, and human rights organizations designed to campaign against the Sudan government and its response to the War in Darfur. In 2006, the Jerusalem Post reported that the Coalition has "begun exclusively as an initiative of the American Jewish community". The Coalition has also been criticized because none of the huge funds it raises go to help needy refugees on the ground in Darfur, but instead are used for lobbying the United States Administration to intervene, militarily, in the Sudan. The work of these organizations reflected Sudan in stereotype stories and distorted the country's image beyond repairs. Comprehensive and well organized, the campaign is led by heavy weights such as the Enough Project Co-founder John Prendergast and advocated by celebrities like Mia Farrow who was a participant in the 12-Day Hunger Strike for Darfur and the Academy award-nominated star, producer and screenwriter, George Clooney. The bony-faced actor himself is a co-founder of the Darfur aid organization, which he launched with actors Don Cheadle, Matt Damon, and Brad Pitt. He also initiated the Satellite Sentinel Project during an October 2010 visit to South Sudan with Enough Co-founder John Prendergast. The project is designed to systematically monitor and report on potential hotspots and threats to security with the aim of heading off humanitarian disaster and human rights crimes before they occur. Today, George Clooney continues to fundraise and promote the work of Satellite Sentinel Project in Sudan. However, the project reports were only focused to criminalize Sudan government and provide for further international condemnation. The negative impact of such campaigns is not only crippling Sudan government's actions to ease the burdens of refugees, but also has blown up several opportunities for lasting and peaceful settlement. Despite tremendous efforts and outstanding progress made by Sudan Government on the ground in Darfur- as witnessed by UNAMID that comprises UN and AU put together as well as the United States itself as could be shown in this article shortly- and the signing of the Doha Peace Accord, the US government continues to deal with this issue in the same manner and attitude as before. During November 2001, a workshop on Darfur was hosted by the U.S. Institute of Peace and was attended by some Darfuri armed factional movements, Darfuri civil society, and stakeholders in the international community, including U.S. government officials. The statement of the workshop reads: "The United States remains deeply concerned about the situation in Darfur. Although some progress has been achieved on the road to a definitive settlement, fundamental issues remain unresolved and a serious humanitarian and human rights crisis is ongoing in the region." Sudan government questioned the motive behind hosting such workshop at a time when the conflict in Darfur is coming to a close. Not only the Doha Accord was widely accepted as a comprehensive deal answering to all questions behind the conflict, but furthermore, the environment was strategically moved towards peace in the region. The armed rebellion movements have been disarmed from the claims that they were the sole advocates for the Darfuri demands. The Sudan government has concluded a conclusive agreement with Chad that ended cross border infringements. The change of regime in Egypt and Libya was the last stroke that signaled an end to the conflict that had been escalated mainly by external, rather than, internal factors. Nonetheless, these smearing international campaigns did not change their course, strategies or tactics in mobilizing forces against Sudan. Phony outcries cries and false tears were shed lamenting against Sudanese efforts to bring peace to Southern Kurdofan and Blue Nile States. None of these reports succeeded to mention that Sudan National Army is fighting against foreign troops from the newly inaugurated Southern Sudan state, namely the Ninth and Tenth Brigades from Sudan Peoples' Liberation Army (SPLA). Furthermore, ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo popped out once again these days to request that an arrest warrant be issued for serving Sudanese Defense Minister Abdelrahim Mohamed Hussein on charges of alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes supposedly committed in Darfur from August 2003 to March 2004. As expected, the move was widely been applauded by safe Darfur coalition and enough project.Such a move would prove once again how difficult it is to change the Western or the US Government mindset with regard to Sudan. It is very difficult to follow the call from the Chinese Deputy Representative of China to the United Nations, Wang Min, that the world should reward Sudan for its efforts to bring peace to its southern region which is now a separate entity, a sovereign state and to work for improving the relations with Khartoum.Wang Min added that the Sudanese government has shown political will to implement the peace process between North and the South and has made great efforts in this regard. Rather, the US and many Western countries chose the easy course, they preferred to condemn Sudan because this was the easy option. http://news.sudanvisiondaily.com/details.html?rsnpid=202876 END2 3. West presses Sudan, SSudan to reach oil deal WASHINGTON, Dec 6, 2011 (AFP) - Western powers on Tuesday urged Sudan and South Sudan to hold talks as soon as possible to reach an agreement on oil exports, hoping to avert fresh conflict in the wake of Juba's independence. The United States, Britain and Norway in a joint statement said they "strongly urge" Sudan and South Sudan to convene a new round of talks on oil exports before the scheduled date of December 20. "We urge both states to finalize as soon as possible a sustainable agreement that encompasses all outstanding petroleum sector and financial issues," said the statement by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, British Foreign Secretary William Hague ad Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store. Khartoum won international praise for accepting South Sudan's independence in July after decades of bloodshed. But the new landlocked state took with it around three-quarters of the nation's oil production capacity. November 25-30 talks arranged by the African Union failed, with Khartoum -- which controls access to the sea -- saying it would take 23 percent of southern exports. South Sudan said such a move would amount to theft. The United States, Britain and Norway also pressed Sudan and South Sudan to withdraw forces from the fertile border region of Abyei. The Sudanese army took over Abyei in May, causing some 110,000 residents to flee. The UN and African Union brokered a September agreement under which both nations would withdraw forces and some 4,200 Ethiopian peacekeepers would come in, but the UN says Khartoum and Juba have not honored their commitment. "Swift resolution of these outstanding issues will advance security and prosperity for citizens of both countries," the US, British and Norwegian top diplomats said. "We further call on the parties to refrain from any further destabilizing actions or inflammatory language that might jeopardize the relations between both states," they said. The United States, Britain and Norway form a so-called "troika" of powers on Sudan. Britain was the vast African nation's former colonial power, while Norway is a major provider of aid. http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5inVaKmUY9g-KD5fGv8OFrcF_rsjQ?docId=CNG.e611ebd178808f855c88ccddb02d23b7.731 END3 4. Sudan 1st VP dismisses talks of popular uprising December 5, 2011 (KHARTOUM) – The Sudanese 1st Vice President Ali Osman Taha described those speculating a popular uprising in the country as “naive”, expressing confidence that the people are able “to distinguish the wicked from the good”. Addressing the Khartoum state legislative assembly Taha said the people will not respond to the “credulous” who are betting that the citizens will take the street to topple the government. Taha was apparently responding to statements by his former mentor and leader of the opposition Popular Congress Party (PCP) Hassan al-Turabi who called last week for a revolution against the government. "Those who dreamed that separation [of South Sudan] means judgment day has come had their dreams shattered,” Taha said. The Sudanese VP said the people’s awareness and content with the government stems from the latter’s sincere handling of crucial issues that need immediate and bold decisions. He nonetheless acknowledged the severity of the economic crisis but demanded patience saying that the medicine will be bitter tasting. The Sudanese south became an independent nation last July and took with it 75% of the country oil wealth which meant that the north lost billions of dollars in revenues that have helped fuel an economic boom particularly since a peace agreement was signed between Khartoum and southern rebels in 2005. Analysts and critics say that the Sudanese government failed to use the oil money to diversify the economy and help non-petroleum sectors such as agriculture. They also accuse the government of overspending and mismanaging the country’s resources with special focus on defense and security. Several small protests have broken out in the Sudanese capital and other parts of the country against rising food prices and deteriorating public services. (ST) http://www.sudantribune.com/Sudan-1st-VP-dismisses-talks-of,40916 END4 ______________________ John Ashworth Sudan Advisor [email protected] +254 725 926 297 (Kenya mobile) +211 919 695 362 (South Sudan mobile) +27 82 853 3556 (South Africa mobile) +44 750 304 1790 (UK/international) +88 216 4334 0735 (Thuraya satphone) PO Box 52002 - 00200, Nairobi, Kenya This is a personal e-mail address and the contents do not necessarily reflect the views of any organisation -- The content of this message does not necessarily reflect John Ashworth's views. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, John Ashworth is not the author of the content and the source is always cited. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sudan-john-ashworth" 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.co.za/group/sudan-john-ashworth -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "South Sudan Info - The Kob" 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/SouthSudanKob?hl=en.
