|
|
|
Sudan peace-process in tatters thanks to Bush’s
wrecking tactics
by M. A. Shaikh
When, on May 3, US president
George W. Bush said in a speech to the American Jewish committee
that "we must turn the eyes of the world upon the atrocities in
Sudan" but only as a "first step", adding that "more will follow",
he knew what he was talking about. At the end of May the Bush
administration announced that it had decided to grant $3 million
to the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), an umbrella
organisation opposed to the government in Khartoum, and to release
to the Sudanese Peoples Liberation Army (SPLA) the $10 million
already earmarked for this southern Christian rebel group. And on
June 14 the US House of Representatives voted to prohibit foreign
oil-companies that do business in Sudan from raising capital in
the US or listing their securities in American financial markets.
The legislators, who voted for this decision by 422 votes to 2,
accused the "Muslim-dominated" governments of using oil revenues
to commit "genocide" against the Christian and animist people of
the south.
Bush’s war-like rhetoric and
his release of funds to the insurgents, and the House of
Representatives’ total endorsement of the war-aims of Christian
warlords and Church groups worldwide, had an immediate and
catastrophic impact on the prospect of a negotiated settlement.
The perception that both the new US administration and the US
Congress are united in their determination to topple the regime of
president Omar Hassan al-Bashir had a galvanizing effect on the
hitherto squabbling opposition-groups, and appeared to cause
Sudan’s Horn of Africa neighbours to have second thoughts about
improving their relations with Khartoum.
Two days after the House of
Representatives passed its bill, NDA leaders began a two-day
emergency meeting in Asmara, the capital of Eritrea, to discuss
ways of stepping up their flagging joint operations and of
reviving the fighting in eastern Sudan, suspended after Eritrea
and Ethiopia had decided to improve relations with Khartoum.
According to a statement issued at the end of the meeting, the NDA
decided to step up military operations in oil-producing regions,
and to reopen the eastern front. Instructions for putting the
necessary funds at the disposal of the joint military command were
issued, the statement said, adding that the funds would be used to
improve the fighting capabilities of the NDA forces, particularly
on the eastern front. The Asmara meeting also rejected Khartoum’s
offer to share oil revenues with the southerners, demanding
instead that all oil-operations must be halted.
John Garang, who attended the
meeting, said that his group would abide by the rules of the NDA,
and would continue its raids into the oil-producing regions,
holding Khartoum responsible for the destruction of
oil-installations. Garang knows that any damage his forces inflict
on oil-installations and on villages in the oil-producing areas
will be blamed on the Sudanese government by his US supporters.
Indeed, in his May 3 speech Bush called Sudan "a disaster area for
all human rights" and accused the government of killing
"Christians or those who would not convert to Islam". And the
House of Representatives’ Bill directs the Bush administration to
file regular reports on the extent of government bombing-raids in
the south and the level of oil-production. The mayhem caused by
Garang’s undisciplined forces in the south is regarded as a
by-product of government bombing.
In fact, some legislators use
the allegation of genocide to justify their totally one-sided view
of what they say is happening in southern Sudan. Representative
Tom Lantos, Democrat of California, was quoted in a newspaper
interview as saying that "we should not help foreign oil-companies
who are helping prolong this bloody slaughter". He called it
"shameful" that foreign oil-companies could raise money in the US
and use it to back "genocide".
The foreign oil-companies
operating in the Sudan include China National Petroleum
Corporation, Gulf Petroleum Corporation of Qatar, Lundin Oil
Corporation of Sweden, Petronas of Malaysia, Total Fina (also
known as Elf) of France, and Talisman Energy Corporation of
Canada. The House Bill would force the companies off the New York
Stock Exchange and Nasdaq. But company representatives deny that
their operations are at the expense of the southern Sudanese, whom
on the contrary they say that they bail out, saying that their
withdrawal from the Sudan would not stop the production of oil.
David Mann, a spokesman for Talisman Energy, said: "Talisman’s
leaving does not stop oil production in Sudan. We play a role in
trying to improve the situation there. We’re building clinics and
hospitals. Tens of thousands of southern Sudanese have benefited
from clean drinking water, education and medicine directly because
of Talisman being there."
The Sudanese government appears
to agree with David Mann that oil-companies that withdraw will be
replaced by others who are keen to start operations, as Ahmed
Osman, the minister of state for industry and investment,
indicated in an interview with al-Hayat daily on June 24. Osman
said that oil-companies from all parts of the world were getting
in touch to obtain concessions and exploration-rights. He expected
the value of Sudan’s oil exports to rise to $3 billion within two
years. That sounds like good news, but the bad news is that
Washington’s unequivocal declaration of hostile intent against
Khartoum may persuade Sudan’s neighbours, who were at war with it
only a year ago, to suspend their recent efforts to improve
relations. Eritrea’s readiness to host the NDA meeting is
certainly a worrying sign. So is the recent announcement by the
Ugandan government that it allowed its troops to enter Sudanese
territory to pursue Ugandan rebels. The announcement came only
days after president Bashir travelled to Kampala to meet Museveni,
his Ugandan counterpart, who agreed to withdraw his backing for
Garang’s SPLA. The war between Ethiopia and Eritrea is practically
over, and Asmara and Kampala discount the possibility of a
Khartoum-Addis Ababa alliance being established against them.
The Bashir regime has not
directly expressed any anxiety about either development. But
Mustapha Osman Ismail, the foreign minister, called for the
revival of the defence pact between Egypt and Sudan that was
frozen at the end of Numeiri’s rule in 1985. The call reflects
Ismail’s anxiety rather than his conviction that the pact could be
revived, although relations between the two countries have
improved considerably in recent months and Cairo is committed to
the territorial integrity of its southern neighbour.
Source:
|
|
|
