|
John O'Shea, Irish Examiner, 23rd May 2006
The cries of the hungry women and children of Darfur remain as loud and
as pitiful as ever, despite the efforts of the United Nations and other
bodies, to bring a measure of relief to a population, ravaged by almost
three years of unrelenting oppression and misery.
While the peace agreement signed this month between a rebel fraction
and the Sudaneese government was greeted with international optimism,
a grisly new battle now rages between rebel factions, unleashing a tide
of violence against the very civilians they once joined forces to protect.
From the onset of the conflict, massive displacement, constant violence
and attacks against civilians characterised Darfur where humanitarian
aid agencies struggle to satisfy the most basic needs to an estimated
3.5 million people, whose traditional means of livelihoods have been devastated
by the conflict. UN funding shortfalls of US$389 million for the region
is aggravating an already dire situation, pushing the lives of the people
over the edge.
In recent years, organisations like GOAL have had to pull the plug in
lawless countries such as Somalia and Iraq, as security of our personnel
must always take precedence. It is likely that GOAL will be forced to
depart the Darfur theatre before long, as attacks against relief workers
in recent weeks have occured and are threatening operations in many areas.
Staff, compounds, trucks and vehicles are being targeted.
GOAL was among the most recent casualties, forced to suspend our work
in Jebel Mara in the wake of the tragic death of our nutritionist, Sudanese
Hadja Hamid, who was killed in a helicopter crash during an evacuation
from the fighting. This meant an end to the 9 supplementary feeding programmes
which supported 230,000 of the most vulnerable people in the region.
Last week saw a second GOAL aid delivery vehicle hijacked at gunpoint
by three armed rebels in Kasab camp en route to a clinic.
Tensions in displacement camps have been extremely high since the government
and the leader of the largest rebel fraction, Minni Arcu Minnawi, signed
a peace agreement with Sudan’s government on May 5, in the face
of mounting pressure from international diplomats.
Communities who fled their homes and languish in miserable camps now
fear that the government may force their return to rural communities where
reports of attacks by government-supported Janjaweed militia remain a
significant problem. Thousands of Darfuris demonstrate daily against the
peace deal, asking for U.N. troops to be sent to protect them.
While the peace agreement was heralded internationally as a triumph,
worrying is that the leader of a second fraction, Abdul Wahid al-Nur,
refused, saying the agreement did not meet basic requirements on issues
like power-sharing and disarmament of the Janjaweed militias. Two of the
main rebel fractions fighting the Sudanese government and its allied militias
have turned on each other, spurred by ethnic tensions and what appears
to be a determined grab for more territory.
In reality, the deal brokered is unlikely to make any lasting difference
on the ground. There is little to suggest for instance that the Sudaneese
Government is prepared to reign in the Janjaweed, who destroy villages
alongside government forces causing the bulk of the rising 400,000 death
toll, and who are responsible for a third of the population having fled
their homes.
Several aid agencies in the region argue that the Sudaneese authorities
have broken this month’s peace deal by attacking and looting villages
in Darfur, an accusation backed by the region’s largest rebel group.
Nor have the Sudan government shown any willingness to discuss how Sudan
should be run going forward. The deal covers issues only since the war
began, such as disarming, and it doesn’t provide for a whole reorganisation
of the state of Sudan - which is what this war is really all about.
It has been abundantly clear from as early as a fortnight into this most
horrendous of human catastrophes, that only a robust protective army,
appropriately mandated, could bring peace to Darfur.
Anybody, with even the vaguest understanding of the Darfur problem, realised
that unless a UN force was deployed with authority to protect the vulnerable,
huge loss of life would ensue.
But not for the first time, the United Nations failed to act, or more
specifically, the Security Council of that unwieldy body could not find
the moral fibre, to convince two of its members, Russia and China that
human lives were more important than greed.
China and Russia have until now stalled any such resolution, putting
their own perceived economic interests (in arms sales to Sudan and oil
interests) ahead of the humanitarian catastrophe that is gripping Darfur.
But reports emanating form the Security Council now suggest that the
two permanent members of the Security Council no longer present obstacles
to the deployment of the peacekeeping force. Yet doesn’t it seem
curious, to say the least, that the date for such a deployment has been
listed for the end of September? Why must the hapless people of Darfur
wait another four months for salvation? Must the dithering, procrastination
and heel-dragging continue at a time when the aid agencies, the last bastion
of hope for the inhabitants, are looking at picking up their tents and
moving out.
And no nation is willing to commit troops or resources to the force until
the scope and size of the Darfur mission become clearer. In the meantime
suffering and anarchy continue, irrespective of calls for peace.
Further delays do not sit well with the thousands of villagers, women
and children who huddle in make-shift camps with scant water, food or
health services and who are running for their lives for the second and
third time in this increasingly chaotic conflict since violence between
rebel fractions started.
Sudan has not only previously rejected the notion of U.N. troops in its
vast Western region, it has refused entry to the U.N. assessment team.
It has also raised objections over the possible make-up of an international
force, which it portrayed as a possible Iraq-style coalition of Western
forces that would attract jihadists to Darfur.
The African Union peacekeeping mission in Sudan has suffered from funding
problems and a weak mandate, with a mere 7,000 troops patrolling an area
seven times the size of Ireland. Lets bury the suggestion of offering
the African Union more support and take it off the table. Grossly outnumbered,
naive, ill-equipped, under-funded, and outgunned, in the final analysis
the AU failed to quell the bloodshed and protect civilians.
Yet, the UN, the organisation charged with advancing human rights and
equality, and promoting better standards in life and larger freedom have
sent 15,000 fully-mandated troops to Liberia, a region one-fourth the
size of Darfur.
The GOAL Darfur team are distressed with the prospect that they may soon
be pulled from the aid frontlines on security grounds. The scale of suffering,
misery, squalor, depression and fallout of societal breakdown that they
witness is surpassed by few other regions in the world. With so many dead,
and with millions of displaced people surviving in camps and villages,
even articulating the extent of the misery is near impossible.
GOAL wants to stay with the people of Darfur who we’ve been with
from the outset of the tragedy, and whose health largely depends on our
continued efforts.
John O’Shea is CEO of GOAL, the aid agency which has worked with
the people of Darfur for almost three years.
|
