The Darfur Directive

Pressure On Darfur
Jill Savitt
May 05, 2006

From Tom Paine

Jill Savitt is the director of the campaign department at Human Rights First, which runs the HOPE for Darfur project.To take a stand against the atrocities in Darfur, click here to add your name to a petition calling for a peace envoy:
After two years and seven rounds of talks, negotiators working to resolve the crisis in Darfur appear to be close to signing a peace agreement.
As you read this, representatives of the Sudanese government and the rebels who oppose them are working out the nitty-gritty issues of security and power and wealth sharing at peace talks sponsored by the African Union in Abuja, Nigeria.
The points of contention have not changed, but in this particular round of negotiations something is quite different: the international community has recognized its obligation to the people of Darfur—and has finally exerted real political muscle to bring the conflict to resolution. They have done this, in large part, because of a massive and growing public outcry about the atrocities.
Can it be a coincidence that a deal is at hand after a major peace rally in Washington, D.C., and in other U.S. cities? After major media attention has been devoted, finally, to Darfur—educating millions? After human rights and religious groups here and around the world put together an all-out effort urging world leaders to press for peace?
Last Sunday, April 30th, the first news was bad: just hours after the major Darfur peace rally in Washington, the peace talks broke down: an important deadline for a peace agreement, imposed by the African Union and backed by the United Nations, was not met. The Sudanese government negotiator walked out of the talks.
But the effect of public pressure took its toll: On Monday, the British and American governments sent senior envoys to Abuja to urge a continuation of the talks. President Bush called President al-Bashir of Sudan, urging him to do the same. The heads of several African nations also descended on the talks. The deadline for an agreement has now been extended—at first for 48 hours, now for longer if needed.
Many at the talks right now are hopeful that a deal will be reached. But whatever piece of paper is signed, no one should think that the job is done. In fact, the moment of signing will be the moment that the real hard work begins. The test will be if the peace agreement leads to a genuine ceasefire. History has not been kind on this front so far: the Darfur ceasefire signed by these parties in April 2004 was all but ignored. Tens of thousands of people were killed, raped and displaced during the reign of that agreement.
That’s why it’s critical that the powerful role the international community has played to date must not cease. In fact, it must intensify. Anything else would be a tragic mistake. There is one thing the international community can do to ensure progress.
The U.N. Secretary General, backed by the United States and other powerful governments, should appoint a special envoy for peace in Darfur—a person of the highest international stature who will make Darfur his or her daily priority. It will be this person’s responsibility to implement the peace agreement and to keep the world—heads of state, the United Nations, the media—posted about progress.
The envoy would work immediately to end the paralysis in dispatching U.N. peacekeeping forces to Darfur. Khartoum has said that no international troops would be allowed in Darfur unless and until there was a peace agreement. This will be the first test of whether the Sudanese government is able to keep its word. Governments on the Security Council—prominently China and Russia—have been obstructing the deployment of U.N. forces. The envoy can play an essential role in holding Khartoum to its word, ironing out troop deployment snags at the Security Council, and urging western governments to commit the necessary resources and logistical support.
Next, the envoy can play an important role in making sure the peace is rooted in Sudanese society. African Union mediators have made clear that a lasting peace will only be possible if there is a local, grassroots dialogue—by Darfurians in Darfur. In fact, an entire chapter of the draft peace agreement outlines a “Darfur to Darfur” dialogue process.
An envoy could immediately help initiate a dialogue that includes legitimate representatives of all parties—not only the Sudanese government and the rebel movements, but also the militias that support the government, the ethnic and tribal groups that oppose its actions and the millions of displaced people. It should be noted that not all the Arab groups in Darfur are part of the Janjaweed; many are unhappy with Khartoum’s policies and deserve to be heard.
Of course the envoy cannot act alone. Caring people from around the world have embraced the people of Darfur and demanded that governments act. It is critical that they continue this call: it works—and Darfurians’ lives depend on it.
To take a stand against the atrocities in Darfur, click here to add your name to a petition calling for a peace envoy: