Bashir blackmails the international community
Article
Comments (3)
email Email
print Print
pdfSave
separation
increase
decrease
separation
separation
facebook
myspace
twitter
buzzyahoo
By Ahmed Hussain Adam
June 12, 2013 - Once again, Bashir proved to be a real threat, not
only to the Sudanese and South Sudanese peoples, but also a threat to
international peace and security. At a public rally on Saturday, June
8, 2013 Bashir instructed his lieutenant the Oil Minister, Dr. Awad
Ahmed Al-Jaaz, to notify all the concerned oil companies that Sudan
had decided to block the flow of South Sudan’s oil through the main
pipeline in Sudan. On Sunday, June 9, Bashir’s Information Minister
held a press conference confirming the unilateral freezing of all the
nine cooperation agreements signed between Sudan and South Sudan in
Addis Ababa on September 27, 2012. Bashir and his information minister
have justified their irresponsible actions for the alleged support of
the Government of the Republic of South Sudan to the Sudanese
Revolutionary Front (SRF), (the coalition of Sudanese resistance
movements that are pursuing an armed struggle against Bashir’s
regime). However, one should question why Bashir has taken such
irresponsible decision which constitutes a flagrant violation to the
cooperation agreements between the two countries that signed and
witnessed by the international community on September 27, in
accordance with the UN Security Council Resolution 2046. Furthermore,
what gave Bashir such courage and confidence to make such move? The
following are some suggested reasons and factors that may shed some
lights on Bashir’s decision:
First, based on his experience, Bashir has been assured that the key
players of the international community would not respond decisively or
strongly against his decision. Moreover, Bashir knew that the
international community is divided and unwilling to hold him
responsible for his irresponsible decision. The irony is that, since
some members of the international community believe Bashir’
allegations against the Republic of the South Sudan and SRF, their
views on that issue are offering Bashir the necessary cover and a
green light, if not justification, to pursue such reckless tactics.
Second, Bashir has lost confidence in his army, after the recent SRF
successful military operations in North Kurdofan against the fatigued,
disillusioned and over-stretched armed forces and militias of the
regime, the Sudanese government has come to appreciate the strength
and support enjoyed by the SRF. In response, Bashir is trying to
blackmail the South Sudan, US and other international key players to
intervene and stop the SRF from continuing its military activities.
Bashir presumes, perhaps incorrectly, that the South Sudan government
and the US have strong leverage, if not control, over the SRF
leadership.
Third, Bashir has been facing unprecedented effective opposition
activities, not only by the SRF but also by the civil opposition,
youth groups, students as well as his own ruling party. Therefore,
Bashir decided to break his isolation and confront the current
mounting opposition against his regime by scape goat the others
including the international community. Furthermore, Bashir has been
resorting to his old failed tactics in mobilizing the jihadists, at
least to keep them busy with his imaginary traditional foreign enemies
such Israel and others. Nevertheless, his recent jihadist
mobilizations have doomed to a big failure.
Fourth, Bashir seems not to be too worried about the consequences of
his decision, which he described as a well-calculated decision. That
is due to his partial success in importing some oil from Iraq with a
deferred payment. Such deal with the government of Iraq can unveil the
level and dynamics of the strong collaboration between Bashir and the
Iranian regime and its proxies in the region, such as Nouri-al-Maliki
Al Maliki, the Prime Minister of Iraq. In other words, one would
observe that, Nouri al- Maliki would have not exported the oil to
Bashir without receiving a green light from Ayatollah Ali Khamenei,
the supreme Leader of Iran.
It has to be said that, Bashir’s decision was no surprise for many who
have been following closely his behavior and tactics; thus, Bashir’s
decision was inevitable. As the regime has been repeatedly signing
agreements and dishonored them. It is also obvious that, the current
international community’s constructive engagement with Bashir’s regime
have failed to deliver peace and stability in Sudan and beyond. The
experience proved that Bashir’s regime has been exploiting the
international engagement in order to buy time and legitimize itself.
At the same time, the government continues its genocidal policies,
which undermine the regional peace and security. With Bashir in power,
there will be no peaceful relationship between Sudan and South Sudan
and Sudan will descend into a chaos and total war, since Bashir
doesn’t believe in peaceful or political solution to the crisis within
Sudan or with the South Sudan.
It is true that Bashir may eventually retreat from his current
blackmailing options; for instance, he has already hinted that he
would reverse his decision provided that the South Sudan stops its
alleged support to the SRF. Nevertheless, the question is for how long
the Sudanese peoples in the two Sudans live in such state of
uncertainty and to what extent the world could tolerate or play this
vicious and endless game with Bashir. The majority of Sudanese people
have already decided to remove Bashir from power as they couldn’t
afford to live under his genocidal regime any more.
Nevertheless, the ball is in the court of the international community,
it is high time that the regional and international key players should
learn their lessons and reverse their current failed policies of
preserving the status quo and support change and its forces in Sudan
such as SRF and other agents of democratic change in Sudan. The US
shouldn’t reward Bashir for his intimidating move and allow to be
blackmailed by this genocidal dictator. The African Union (AU) and its
member States should recognize that their support to Bashir is utterly
counter to the founding documents of the AU, such as the AU
Constitutive Act of 2001, which obliges the AU to intervene in a
member state such as Sudan, in situations of genocide and gross
violations of human rights. Therefore, the AU should withdraw its
unconditional political and diplomatic protection from Bashir and
support the Sudanese groups which are fighting for freedom, justice
and democratic change in Sudan. The SRF should exert further concerted
efforts to build consensus among the Sudanese peoples around the New
Dawn Charter (NDC) as well as the political program for change in
order to realize a managed democratic transition in Sudan. The
Republic of South Sudan should seriously find other alternatives to
export its oil whatever that might cost.
Ahmed Hussain Adam is a Visiting Scholar and Co-Chair of the Two
Sudans Forum at the Institute for the Study of Human Rights (ISHR),
Columbia University in the City of New York. He can be reached at:
[email protected]
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14ooTE-cn9RDho3yCCmW0pv2cvNc0k059WpdEmy_dZ_K%2BPw%40mail.gmail.com?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
