Darfur is no longer in the headlines. The war in the western region of Sudan has killed more than 180,000 people and displaced 2 million out of the 6 million population to refugee camps there and in bordering Chad.
The African Union-sponsored negotiations have led to a ceasefire. The next round of negotiations between the Sudanese government and the two leading rebel groups began this week.
Still, the grave humanitarian crisis remains. According to United Nations reports, 3.5 million Sudanese in the region need food. The World Food Program faces a funding shortfall of $268 million for Darfur. The people in Darfur cannot plant crops. The pledges totaling $4.5 billion made at the Oslo Donors’ Conference in April have yet to materialize.
The conflict began in February 2003 when black African rebels sought separation from Sudan, accusing the Arab-dominated government in Khartoum of discrimination against non-Arabs.
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell and President Bush have described government-supported crimes committed by militias, called janjaweed, as genocide. These militias have carried out a scorched-earth policy in Darfur, committing crimes such as ethnic cleansing, mass murder and widespread rape.
Why has the world community been so slow to act? The U.N. has not taken robust, effective action. As an organization, it is state-centered under its charter, and concern of sovereignty has caused it to fetter its efforts. Shouldn’t the sovereignty of human beings be the ultimate priority?
China and Russia, both with economic interests in Sudan – China in oil and Russia in weapons – have stood in the way of a clear message. There has been no followup to the U.N. Security Council resolution to tighten sanctions against the Sudanese government because of the fear of their possible veto.
Some resources have been mobilized to help the victims in Darfur, but not enough. Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick announced in early June that Congress had agreed to donate $50 million as logistical support to the 53-nation African Union for its mission in Darfur. Under that mission, the AU currently has 2,500 troops to monitor the ceasefire. Eventually, the troop strength is to reach 7,700.
The European Union and NATO are now coordinating the airlift of those troops from Nigeria, Senegal, Rwanda and South Africa into Darfur. The United Kingdom has pledged financial help, and the U.N. and the Arab League are also on board.
Furthermore, Russia has said that it would provide humanitarian aid and military advisers under U.N. auspices to Darfur, but refused to do much more. Unfortunately, Russia is not alone.
The wheels of international justice have already been set in motion, but it is uncertain if they will succeed. The International Criminal Court in The Hague has begun investigations of 51 people referred to it by the Security Council. These are suspects involved in crimes against humanity, war crimes and possibly crimes of genocide in Darfur.
Among the 51 names before the ICC are several high-ranking Sudanese government officials. Not surprisingly, the government has refused to cooperate with the ICC, announcing instead its own criminal court would try the accused. The Sudanese law enforcement system and judiciary have not been responsive to several attempts made by people in Darfur to seek justice with the Sudanese government. Notably, after Doctors Without Borders issued a report on rapes, Sudan reacted by arresting two representatives of the organization.
Following the Holocaust, the Rwandan genocide of 1994 and the hollow promises of “never again,” the world community’s hypocrisy in addressing the Darfur crisis is appalling. The need in Darfur is not just to end the brutal conflict there and bring those responsible for heinous crimes to justice, but for rehabilitation of the homeless and the end of starvation. Eventually there must be tribal reconciliation and development efforts that would again permit people in Darfur to live in a climate of peace and security.
Ved P. Nanda (vnanda@law.du.edu) is the Evans University Professor and director of the International Legal Studies Program at the University of Denver.
