The New Nation - Internet Edition

Chandra Muzaffar

The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court ( ICC) has alleged that the President of the Republic of the Sudan, Omar Al Bashir, has committed the crime of genocide (Article 6 (a) ) of the Rome Statute ( the statute under which the ICC was established) ; crimes against humanity ( Article 7 (1) ) of the Statute ; and war crimes ( Article 8 (2) (e) (i) ) under the same law, in the territory of Darfur.

The allegations are based upon statements from eyewitnesses and victims of attacks in Darfur, recorded interviews with Government of Sudan officials, statements from individuals who possess knowledge of the activities of the government linked militia, the Janjaweed, in Darfur, and documents from various other sources including the United Nations.

If there is a central argument that runs through all the allegations it is that President Al Bashir is determined to eliminate three socially and politically dominant ethnic groups in Darfur, namely, Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa. They are viewed as a threat to his power. It should be emphasized that though in terms of their ethnic origin, these groups are different from the tribes aligned to the Al Bashir government who are labeled "Arabs" , the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa also speak Arabic, are also Muslims and are hardly distinguishable from the so-called "Arabs".

The charges against Al Bashir are grave. They should be investigated in an honest and impartial manner. If Al Bashir is guilty, he should be punished severely, in accordance with the law.

However, is a warrant of arrest from the ICC the best way of dealing with Al Bashir? Will arresting him at this stage serve the larger interest of the people of Darfur and the Sudan?

Quite apart from the fact that Sudan is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, indicting Al Bashir will make it even more difficult to revive the stalled peace process in Darfur. It is feared that a sizeable segment of the Sudanese population that supports Al Bashir will become even more antagonistic towards the targeted ethnic groups in Darfur. The chasm that separates them from the rest of the population in Darfur and the Sudan will become wider.

Charging Al Bashir could also affect the recently concluded peace agreement between the government in Khartoum and the South which brought to an end a 50 year civil war. If Al Bashir feels that he is under siege, he or his followers could scuttle the agreement.

On the other hand, if the agreement holds and leads to a more permanent peace, both the government and the ethnic groups that are under attack in Darfur, may be persuaded to absorb some of its features such as power sharing between different communities, and decentralized administrative arrangements, into a future deal between them.

Indeed, all those who cherish peace in Darfur and would like to see justice and democracy prevail in the Sudan should help the country move in the direction of greater autonomy for tribes and provinces within the framework of a decentralized federation. Sudan's fellow members in the Arab League, the African Union and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) in particular should encourage Al Bashir to take the necessary steps towards devolution of power. China which reportedly buys almost two-thirds of Sudan's oil should also be asked to coax Sudan to transform its political and administrative structure.

Of course, it is not going to be easy. Dictators don't relish sharing power. But what is the alternative? Isn't it significant that the very threat of arresting Al Bashir has already strengthened his hold upon his people? This is why one should try to overcome the Darfur tragedy through a different route. Reviving the peace process should take precedence over everything else. Together with the Khartoum-South peace accord, it could- as we have suggested- lead to other fundamental political and administrative changes. At the same time, one of the other major causes of the Darfur tragedy- the conflict between subsistence farmers ( mainly non-Arab ethnic groups) and nomadic herders ( mainly Arab groups) over water and land brought about to a great extent by the encroaching Sahara Desert-should be addressed urgently. Irrigation of the land, rather than indictment of the President, is what Darfur needs.

Unfortunately, the centres of power in the West have a different view of the situation. They have given the impression to the world that their conscience has been savaged by the alleged genocide in Darfur. Can we believe them? If genocide is what distresses Washington and its allies, how does one explain their lack of concern over what is happening in another African state, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) where " as many as five million have died since 1994 in overlapping convulsions of ethnic and state-sponsored massacre?"

As Glen Ford, executive editor of Black Agenda Report asks, "Why is mass death the cause of indignation and confrontation in Sudan, but exponentially more massive carnage in Congo unworthy of mention? The answer is simple: in Sudan, the US has a geopolitical nemesis to confront: Arabs, and their Chinese business partners. In the Congo, it is US allies and European and American corporate interests that benefit from the slaughter.

Therefore, despite five million skeletons lying in the ground, there is no call to arms from the American government."

It is not just the Congo. What has been the response of Washington and European capitals to the ethnic cleansing that has been going on in Palestine since 1948? The ethnic cleansing that has appalled and angered Israeli intellectuals like Illan Pappe. And if there are heads of state or heads of government who should be indicted for war crimes and crimes against humanity, what about the US's George Bush or Britain's Tony Blair in connection with the unjust and immoral invasion and occupation of Iraq, borne of deceit and duplicity, and the subsequent carnage that has already claimed a million lives?

So it is not genocide or war crimes that move the centres of power in the West. Sudan has huge reserves of oil and gas. It also possesses one of the largest deposits of high purity uranium and copper in the world. Besides, it is strategically located on the Red Sea and borders eight other African states. Since the late eighties, Sudan has sought to assert its political independence and refuses to yield to Washington's hegemony.

What makes Sudan more of an adversary in Washington's eyes, is its close relationship to China and China's dominant role in its oil industry. China also sells arms to Sudan. For some hawkish policy analysts, the Sudan-China tie fits in neatly with Huntington's discredited thesis of a Muslim-Confucian collusion to confront Western civilization! In this regard, is the targeting of China in relation to Darfur in the mainstream Western media part of a larger agenda that is aimed at tarnishing China on the eve of the Beijing Olympics?

The Darfur conflict has provided the centres of power in the West with yet another opening. Since there is - though grossly exaggerated and distorted-an Arab-non-Arab dimension to the conflict, the media and a lot of Western NGOs present Darfur as an example of Arabs slaughtering non-Arabs, specifically, Africans. The conflict serves the interests of those who are set on whipping up anti-Arab and even anti-Muslim sentiment in the West. Darfur thus feeds into Islamophobia. It has become a magnet for right-wing Zionists and the Christian Right who play a pivotal role in the Darfur campaign in the US.

This is yet another reason why we have to approach the Darfur conflict with circumspection. It is so inextricably intertwined with the complexities of global culture, economics and politics, at the kernel of which is the relationship between the centres of power in the West and the rest of the world. However, in taking cognizance of the global scenario, one should not, as the respected Sudanese intellectual, Muddathir Abdel Rahim reminds us, minimize the culpability of Al Bashir and the Khartoum government. The failure to put one's own house in order has contributed in no small measure to the tragedy that is Darfur.