President's Corner: Can There be Justice and Peace in Darfur?
Monday, February 26, 2007
Why doesn't President Bush listen to his conscience? He has said that Sudan is committing genocide in Darfur, yet has taken no military or effective diplomatic action to stop it.
Events this week will highlight the timidity of the U.S. response to genocide. The Prosecutor for the International Criminal Court plans to reveal evidence he has assembled during a two year investigation of brutalities by Sudanese forces, government-backed militias and rebel groups. The ICC prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, probably won't charge anybody with genocide -- at least now -- but the charges will be serious. Last week his office said that "Moreno-Ocampo will submit evidence in connection with named individuals of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur."
Mr. Moreno-Ocampo told the UN Security Council late last year that he may bring several waves of charges, meaning that the evidence he sends to the ICC judges could be just the first round. Under the ICC's rules the judges will review the evidence and decide whether to issue arrest warrants and then issue formal charges.
The Darfur docket is the young ICC's highest profile case. It raises three important questions. First, what will be the Sudanese response to public evidence of heinous crimes that is likely to name high government officials, as well as rebel leaders? Second, will the announcement of the evidence further complicate a stumbling effort to negotiate an end to the Darfur conflict, or can there be justice and peace in Darfur at the same time? Third, if high-level government officials are indeed named, will there be further government efforts to harass and clamp down on the most visible representatives of western nations in Sudan -- the humanitarian agencies and their staff?
Exactly two years ago I was in Sudan when the government was working hard to discourage the UN Security Council from launching an ICC investigation of its actions in Darfur. A UN panel had just issued a lengthy report that found 51 government, militia and rebel officials guilty of war crimes, violations of international humanitarian law, and crimes against humanity for such crimes as murder, rape and attacks against innocent civilians. The list, which eventually was turned over to the ICC, has never been made public. After the UN Commission of Inquiry report came out, Sudanese officials warned that any effort to prosecute government officials for war crimes would create an "explosion" of hostility to UN and humanitarian workers in Sudan, leading to attacks and abductions that would make Darfur look like Iraq. If the presentation of the ICC case provokes such a response, the UN and the U.S. will be put on the spot: Will they respond to these attacks in a way that punishes the Khartoum government or will they merely issue toothless statements of condemnation?
The second question -- can there be justice and peace at the same time -- is hotly debated by human rights advocates, diplomats and humanitarian workers. U.S. diplomats in Khartoum argue that the ICC proceedings at least will complicate and at most will block ongoing efforts to negotiate an end to the Darfur conflict, which has displaced 2.5 million people and led to an estimated 400,000 deaths in four years. The fears are understandable, but peace talks are going nowhere now, so it will be hard to measure whether the ICC's presentation of evidence has any further impact. Not surprisingly, Mr. Moreno-Ocampo told the UN Security Council last year that he believes the presentation of charges actually will improve the chances of reaching a peace agreement.
In fact, the ICC's action isn't likely to shed much light on whether justice can come before peace. But it will highlight once again the brutality of all sides in the Darfur conflict and how ineffective the U.S. response has been, despite President Bush's charges of genocide.
Events this week will highlight the timidity of the U.S. response to genocide. The Prosecutor for the International Criminal Court plans to reveal evidence he has assembled during a two year investigation of brutalities by Sudanese forces, government-backed militias and rebel groups. The ICC prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, probably won't charge anybody with genocide -- at least now -- but the charges will be serious. Last week his office said that "Moreno-Ocampo will submit evidence in connection with named individuals of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur."
Mr. Moreno-Ocampo told the UN Security Council late last year that he may bring several waves of charges, meaning that the evidence he sends to the ICC judges could be just the first round. Under the ICC's rules the judges will review the evidence and decide whether to issue arrest warrants and then issue formal charges.
The Darfur docket is the young ICC's highest profile case. It raises three important questions. First, what will be the Sudanese response to public evidence of heinous crimes that is likely to name high government officials, as well as rebel leaders? Second, will the announcement of the evidence further complicate a stumbling effort to negotiate an end to the Darfur conflict, or can there be justice and peace in Darfur at the same time? Third, if high-level government officials are indeed named, will there be further government efforts to harass and clamp down on the most visible representatives of western nations in Sudan -- the humanitarian agencies and their staff?
Exactly two years ago I was in Sudan when the government was working hard to discourage the UN Security Council from launching an ICC investigation of its actions in Darfur. A UN panel had just issued a lengthy report that found 51 government, militia and rebel officials guilty of war crimes, violations of international humanitarian law, and crimes against humanity for such crimes as murder, rape and attacks against innocent civilians. The list, which eventually was turned over to the ICC, has never been made public. After the UN Commission of Inquiry report came out, Sudanese officials warned that any effort to prosecute government officials for war crimes would create an "explosion" of hostility to UN and humanitarian workers in Sudan, leading to attacks and abductions that would make Darfur look like Iraq. If the presentation of the ICC case provokes such a response, the UN and the U.S. will be put on the spot: Will they respond to these attacks in a way that punishes the Khartoum government or will they merely issue toothless statements of condemnation?
The second question -- can there be justice and peace at the same time -- is hotly debated by human rights advocates, diplomats and humanitarian workers. U.S. diplomats in Khartoum argue that the ICC proceedings at least will complicate and at most will block ongoing efforts to negotiate an end to the Darfur conflict, which has displaced 2.5 million people and led to an estimated 400,000 deaths in four years. The fears are understandable, but peace talks are going nowhere now, so it will be hard to measure whether the ICC's presentation of evidence has any further impact. Not surprisingly, Mr. Moreno-Ocampo told the UN Security Council last year that he believes the presentation of charges actually will improve the chances of reaching a peace agreement.
In fact, the ICC's action isn't likely to shed much light on whether justice can come before peace. But it will highlight once again the brutality of all sides in the Darfur conflict and how ineffective the U.S. response has been, despite President Bush's charges of genocide.
Labels: Darfur, President's Corner
1 Comments:
America doesn't have any soldiers to spare, in case you haven't noticed we already have two war fronts in the middle east !!!
Have you contacted France, Italy, Spain, Russia, China, N.Korea, Canada ??? These countries and a FEW DOZEN others all have ARMIES, why can't they send THEIR ARMIES to Darfur ???
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
<< Home