Artbrain!

behind the news :: explaining the world

The Darfur conflict is an ongoing (as of 2004) conflict in the Darfur region of western Sudan between the Janjaweed, a Sudanese-government-supported armed militia recruited from local Arab tribes, and the black African peoples of the region. The conflict has been widely described as "ethnic cleansing", and not infrequently as "genocide". As of July 2004, an estimated 50,000–80,000 people had already been killed or starved, and more than 1.2 million people displaced from their homes. 200,000 have fled to neighboring Chad.

Origins of the conflict
Darfur is inhabited by a variety of peoples, generally constituting two distinct groups: black African peoples such as the Fur, Masalit, and Zaghawa, and Arab tribes collectively termed Baggara, who settled the region from about the 13th century onwards. Both groups are Muslims. However, relations between the two groups have long been tense; the precolonial Fur kingdom regularly clashed with the Baggara, particularly the Rizeigat. Moreover, before the 20th century (and by some accounts well into it) Darfur was a centre of the slave trade, and Fur slavers competed with Arab ones to raid the nearby Bahr el Ghazal to obtain slaves for the coastal regions. The two groups also have differing economic needs, which has led to clashes: the Fur and Masalit are primarily sedentary farmers, while the Arabs and Zaghawa are nomadic herdsmen, which has brought them into conflict over access to land and water resources.

The government of Sudan has had a strongly Arab character since the country's independence in 1956; it has been a military dictatorship since 1958. A civil war between the Muslim government and the mostly non-Muslim African population of the southern Sudan broke out in 1962 and continued, with a break between 1972 and 1983, until a ceasefire was declared in 2002. Peace talks in 2003 produced an agreement under which state revenues — oil money in particular — would be shared between the government and the southern rebel groups.

The agreement did not, however, satisfy Darfur campaigners' demands for a fairer deal for the region's population. Two local rebel groups — the Justice and Equality Movement (Jem) and the Sudanese Liberation Movement (SLA) — accused the government of oppressing black Africans in favour of Arabs. Hassan al-Turabi was put in jail in March in connection with an alleged coup plot linked with Jem[1] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3496731.stm)[2] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3890891.stm), but denies supporting Jem[3] (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/BDE0F12D-A1E8-40BA-A522-A214A30FA0CE.htm), although he blames the government for "aggravating the situation." The SLA is generally associated with the Fur and Masalit, while the JEM is associated with the Zaghawa of the northern half of this province.

[edit]
Course of the conflict
The conflict began in early 2003 when Jem and SLA rebels attacked government forces and installations. The government, caught by surprise, had very few troops in the region, and — since a large proportion of the Sudanese soldiers were of Darfur origin — distrusted many of its own units; its response was to mount a campaign of aerial bombardment supporting ground attacks by an Arab militia, the Janjaweed, recruited from local tribes and armed by the government. While the conflict has a political basis, it has also acquired an ethnic dimension in which civilians were deliberately targeted on the basis of their ethnicity, and an economic dimension related to the competition between pastoralists (generally Arab) and farmers (generally non-Arab) for land and water. A United Nations observer team reported that non-Arab villages were singled out while Arab villages were left untouched:

The 23 Fur villages in the Shattaya Administrative Unit have been completely depopulated, looted and burnt to the ground (the team observed several such sites driving through the area for two days). Meanwhile, dotted alongside these charred locations are unharmed, populated and functioning Arab settlements. In some locations, the distance between a destroyed Fur village and an Arab village is less than 500 meters. (UN Interagency Report cited below, 25 April 2004)
The Janjaweed are also said to have "torched dozens of mosques and torn up and defecated on copies of the Koran." (The Economist, May 15, 2004).

Both sides have been accused of committing serious human rights violations, including mass killing, looting, and rapes of the civilian population. However, the better-armed Janjaweed quickly gained the upper hand. By the spring of 2004, several thousand people — mostly from the non-Arab population — had been killed and as many as a million more had been driven from their homes, causing a major humanitarian crisis in the region. The crisis took on an international dimension when over 100,000 refugees poured into neighbouring Chad, pursued by Janjaweed militiamen, who clashed with Chadian government forces along the border. More than 70 militiamen and 10 Chadian soldiers were killed in one gun battle in April.

The scale of the crisis has led to warnings of an imminent disaster, with United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan warning that the risk of genocide is "frighteningly real" in Darfur. The scale of the Janjaweed campaign has led to comparisons with the Rwandan Genocide, a parallel hotly denied by the Sudanese government. Independent observers have noted that the tactics are more akin to the ethnic cleansing used in the Yugoslav Wars but have warned that the region's remoteness means that hundreds of thousands are effectively cut off from aid. The Brussels-based International Crisis Group has reported that over 350,000 people could potentially die as a result of starvation and disease. [4] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3741875.stm)

In early July 2004, Annan and United States Secretary of State Colin Powell visited Sudan and the Darfur region, and urged the Sudanese government to stop supporting the Janjaweed militias. Annan described the trips as "constructive".

The African Union and European Union have sent monitors[5] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3868793.stm)[6] (http://www.sudan.net/news/posted/8820.html) (as of 5 July 2004) to monitor the cease-fire signed on 8 April 2004[7] (http://www.darfurinformation.com/cf_ceasefire.shtml); however, the Janjaweed's attacks have not stopped, as noted by the United States [8] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3621347.stm) and more recently Human Rights Watch[9] (http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004/08/11/darfur9217.htm).

On 23 July 2004, the United States Senate and House of Representatives passed a joint resolution declaring the armed conflict in the Sudanese region of Darfur to be genocide and calling on the Bush administration to lead an international effort to put a stop to it.

However, both the U.N. and the Bush Administration do not consider the Darfur Conflict to be an act of genocide. If it does constitute an act of genocide, international law is considered to allow other countries to intervene. According to CNN, Colin Powell said that more reports were needed from the region in order to determine if the situation is a genocide. Kofi Annan has not yet called the conflict a genocide or an ethnic cleansing though he has called it "a tragic humanitarian situation." According to BBC, it is estimated by analysts that at least 15,000 soldiers are needed to put an end to the conflict though no country is willing to send any number close that; but British Prime Minister Tony Blair has not ruled out military intervention. Mike Jackson, Britain's top military commander said his country could gather approximately 5000 troops to counter the Janjaweed. At the moment, the only possible solution governments (especially the U.S.) are willing to put into action is the threat of sanctions. The European Union announced it will join the U.S. in threatening sanctions against Sudan if the conflict is not resolved. The African Union itself also does not believe this to be a genocide though it will send 300 troops to protect military observers.

On 30 July, the United Nations gave the Sudanese government 30 days to disarm and bring to justice the Janjaweed; if this deadline is not met, it "expresses its intention to consider" sanctions.[10] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3940527.stm) The Arab League has asked for a longer term and warns that Sudan must not become another Iraq.

From the Sudanese government's point of view, the conflict is simply a skirmish. The Sudanese president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, said, "The international concern over Darfur is actually a targeting of the Islamic state in Sudan." Sudan has warned Britain and the United States not to interfere in the internal affairs of the East African country saying it will reject any military aid, while asking for logistic support.

In August 2004, the African Union sent 150 Rwandan troops in to protect the ceasefire monitors; however, "their mandate did not include the protection of civilians." [11] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3562096.stm) Rwandan President Paul Kagame declared that "if it was established that the civilians are in danger then our forces will certainly intervene and use force to protect civilians"; however, such an effort would certainly take more than 150 troops. They may be joined by 150 Nigerian troops later this month.[12] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3568766.stm)

Peace talks, which had previously broken down in Addis Ababa on July 17, were resumed on August 23 in Abuja. The talks reopened amid acrimony, with the SLA accusing the government of breaking promises[13] (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-08-19-sudan-darfur_x.htm) that it made for the little-respected ceasefire signed in N'Djamena on April 8[14] (http://www.darfurinformation.com/cf_ceasefire_agreement.shtml).

The UN's 30 day deadline expired on August 29, after which the Secretary General reported on the state of the conflict. According to him, the situation "has resulted in some improvements on the ground but remains limited overall". In particular, he notes that the Janjaweed militias remain armed and continue to attack civilians (contrary to Resolution 1556), and militia disarmament has been limited to a "planned" 30% reduction in one particular militia, the Popular Defense Forces. He also notes that the Sudanese government's commitments regarding their own armed forces have been only partially implemented, with refugees reporting several attacks involving government forces.[15] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/01_09_04darfursecurity.pdf) He concludes that:

Stopping attacks against civilians and ensuring their protection is the responsibility of the Government of Sudan. The Government has not met this obligation fully, despite the commitments it has made and its obligations under resolution 1556 (2004). Attacks against civilians are continuing and the vast majority of armed militias has not been disarmed. Similarly, no concrete steps have been taken to bring to justice or even identify any of the militia leaders or the perpetrators of these attacks, allowing the violations of human rights and the basic laws of war to continue in a climate of impunity. After 18 months of conflict and 30 days after the adoption of resolution 1556 (2004), the Government of Sudan has not been able to resolve the crisis in Darfur, and has not met some of the core commitments it has made.
and advises "a substantially increased international presence in Darfur" in order to "monitor" the conflict. However, he did not threaten sanctions, which the UN had expressed its "intention to consider" in Resolution 1556.

click here for a comprehensive Darfur Sudan reading list

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.

It uses material from the Wikipedia article "darfur".