 |
 |
 |
|
Crisis in Darfur
In this section, please find the below topics: 1. Background For more than seven years, the world has watched in horror as thousands of Darfuri civilians have been mercilessly massacred, brutally raped and violently separated from their families by government-supported janjaweed militias. 4.2 million Darfurians have been categorized as "war affected" and entirely dependent on international assistance, 2.5 million civilians have been torn from their homes, hundreds of habitats and livelihoods have been destroyed, 240,000 refugees have been hosted by Chad and the Central African Republic, and the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs estimates that over 400,000 people have been killed. While the government of Sudan has orchestrated a campaign of ethnic cleansing through proxy militias, world leaders with the power to stop the atrocities have failed to react to protect Darfuris due to conflicting geopolitical interests and a lack of political will.
Because the government of Sudan has flagrantly disregarded its responsibility to protect the people of Darfur, the responsibility has fallen to the international community and regional organisations to protect Darfuri citizens from grave violations of human rights. The following will offer an overview several regional and international institutions that have had a role in addressing the situation. The African Union (AU) has made progress in quelling violence through troop deployment, but its resources are grossly inadequate. The African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) was an African Union (AU) peacekeeping force originally founded in 2004, with a force of 150 troops, whose deployment was endorsed by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). By mid-2005, its numbers were increased to about 7,000, but it was still not able to effectively contain the violence in Darfur. AMIS' mandate was extended repeatedly throughout 2006, while the crisis in Darfur continued to escalate. The overwhelmed African Union troops were to be reinforced by a robust UN peacekeeping mission in Darfur under 31 August 2006 UN Security Council Resolution 1706 but the failure to obtain consent of the Sudanese government prevented the force from being operationalized. Resolution 1706 was the first to make reference in a country-specific situation to paragraphs 138-139 of the 2005 World Summit, by which governments endorsed unanimously the Responsibility to Protect. The unanimous adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 1769 on 31 July 2007 later authorized the deployment of a 26,000-strong joint UN-AU force for Darfur
3. European Parliamentary endorsements of RtoP in the context of Darfur and EUFOR
A. The EU Parliament The EU Parliament has passed a number of resolutions referring to the Responsibility to Protect, denouncing atrocities and asking for protection of civilians on the ground in Darfur:
B. EUFOR
The European Force in Chad-Central African Republic (CAR) was sent in January 2009 for a year with two main objectives; to protect civilians, in particular refugees and displaced persons around the Darfuri border, and to improve security to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid. The EUFOR mission has been the largest multinational EU operation in Africa to-date, involving 3,700 troops from 23 EU Member States, displaying efficient cooperation between the EU and the UN. Similar to the AU and UN missions, EUFOR struggled to implement its mandate due to a lack of political will, logistical support, and inadequate military equipement.
The May 2006 international community-backed Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA), signed in Nigeria by the government of Sudan and one faction of the Sudanese Liberation Army, did little to curb the violence, in part because it failed to secure endorsement by key rebel factions.
In March 2007, the UN High-Level Mission released a report on the human rights situation in Darfur, using the Responsibility to Protect as a framework to analyze the failure of Sudan to protect its population from mass atrocities and how the international community had responded. The report made clear that while the international community, acting through the UN and the AU, had intervened with diplomatic, humanitarian, human rights and development assistance, the vast majority of its reccomendations remain unimplemented by the Sudanese Government, and effective protection for civilians is yet to be secured.
On 30 April 2007, UN Security Council Resolution 1755 was passed, reaffirming the World Summit Outcome document which endorsed the Responsibility to Protect, and Resolution 1674 on the Protection of Civilians. In addition to extending the mission in Southern Sudan for 6 months, the resolution expressed "grave concern" over the seriousness of the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Darfur, condemned attacks on civilians, called upon all parties to "put an end to the violence and atrocities in Darfur," and also asked Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to appoint "urgently" a new special representative for the U.N. Mission in Sudan (known as UNMIS). The unanimous adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 1769 on 31 July 2007 authorizing the deployment of a 26,000-strong joint UN-AU force for Darfur was an important step toward providing much needed protection to mistreated civilians. However, the Sudanese government’s continuous administrative harassment and diplomatic obstruction of the deployment of the UNAMID peacekeeping mission stood in the way of an already belated reaction to the needs of civilians for peace and security. The troops were initially scheduled to be deployed by the end of 2007, but only 9,000 soldiers of the proposed force, the UN's largest, had been deployed as of January 2008. The joint UN and AU peacekeeping force officially took over from the AU Mission in Sudan (AMIS) on 31 December 2007 and took almost two years to reach full deployment due to Khartoum's continued hampering and delays as well as large gaps in logistics and helicopters.
5. Darfur and the International Criminal Court
On 14 July 2008, Luis Moreno Ocampo, Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), filed an indictment against President Omar Al-Bashir, President of Sudan, the first time the ICC indicted a sitting Head of State. The ICC’s unrelenting commitment to end impunity sent a strong message to all state leaders that they will be held accountable for international crimes they commit against their populations. On 12 November 2008, Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir called for an "immediate, unconditional ceasefire" in Darfur. Al-Bashir’s move to call for a ceasefire, although failing to end clashes with the rebel groups, appears to be a calculated response to international pressure in hope of a possible deferral of the case.
On 4 March 2009, the ICC issued a warrant for the arrest for Omar Al-Bashir on five counts of crimes against humanity, and two counts of war crimes. The five counts of crimes against humanity were for murder, torture, rape, extermination, and forcible transfer; the war crimes charges were based on intentionally directing acts against civilians and pillaging. Genocide charges were not accepted on the grounds that the Prosecutor had not provided sufficient evidence. However, the ICC judges found that Al-Bashir had played an "essential role" in orchestrating and coordinating the state apparatuses and security forces (including the Janjaweed militias), and that the attacks had followed a consistent and repetitive pattern.
In response to the arrest warrant, the Sudanese government immediately expelled 13 humanitarian non-governmental organizations that were working in Darfur. The expulsion was tantamount to creating another humanitarian crisis, as IDP's in Darfur have been entirely dependent on the work of NGOs for their survival. Halting their operations left 1.1 million people without food, 1.5 million without healthcare, and at least one million without drinking water, according to the UN, which describes the groups as "integral" to the world's biggest humanitarian operation. The government also launched a clamp down on human rights activists in Sudan. Many have been forced to leave the country while the government’s National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS) have silenced those remaining, according to Amnesty International.
Click here for more information on consequences of the expulsion of NGOs. The Sudanese government, Al-Bashir supporters, the Arab League and the African Union have denounced this indictment. While the 108 states that are signatories of the ICC have the responsibility to arrest Al-Bashir should he travel to their country, it will remain a challenge to ensure that he is arrested and held accountable for the crimes committed in Darfur. To learn more:
Also, see the box at the top of this page for all government, United Nations and civil society statements on the crisis in Darfur and the Responsibility to Protect.
|