By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, November 10 -- With killing in Darfur escalating and internally displaced people arrested and harassed for providing testimony, United States Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice was asked Wednesday by the Press why the US has told Sudan that if it allows the referendum in South Sudan and “addresses” Abyei, the Obama administration will move to take Sudan off the state sponsors of terrorism list.
This was called “decoupling from Darfur” by an Obama administration official who asked to not be named; human rights advocates have called it “de-emphasizing” or even selling out Darfur.
When Ambassador Rice came to speak about blocking Iran from the board of UN Women at the stakeout in front of the UN Security Council, which will host a November 16 ministerial level meeting on Sudan, mostly on the South Sudan referendum, Inner City Press twice asked that she take a Sudan question. To her credit she did, offering an explanation -- unconvincing to some -- of the administration's thinking. Video here.
In essence Ambassador Rice argued that since there are other US sanctions regimes on Sudan, taking the country off the state sponsor of terrorism list in exchange for allowing the South Sudan referendum should not be read as de-emphasizing Darfur. Said otherwise, the US is offering a “carrot” for something other than Darfur.
Inevitably, Sudanese diplomats see in this a de-emphasize of scrutiny on Darfur. Something that they went -- off of the terrorism sanctions list -- could be obtained regardless of escalation of killing and harassment in Darfur. Some might even call this, intentionally or not, a green light.
Regarding the November 16 meeting, a Sudanese diplomat complained to Inner City Press on Wednesday that while “it is a ministerial meeting and the Council is supposed to send formal invitations to the Minister of Foreign Affairs” Ali Karti, no invitation has been sent.
This seemed strange, since other Council sources have already described to Inner City Press statements in an open session of the Council by Thabo Mbeki and diplomats from both Khartoum and South Sudan, following by closed door briefings from the envoys on South Sudan and Darfur, Haile Menkerios and Ibrahim Gambari respectively.
Inner City Press asked this month's Council president, Mark Lyall Grant of the UK, about the Sudanese complaint that Ali Karti had yet to be invited. Lyall Grant acknowledged this is the case, saying that the format has yet to be decided. But why the talk already about the attendance of South Sudan? Lyall Grant said that he understands they (South Sudan) will already be in New York that day, November 16. But will Ali Karti?
At the November 10 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked acting deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq to confirm a report by Radio Dabanga, the closure of whose Khartoum office has been denounced, that UN Humanitarian Coordinator Valerie Amos “apologized” to IDPs in Darfur for the UN's failure to protect them, including after some spoke to the Council and Ms. Rice on October 8.
Haq pointed to canned (and confusing) statements issued by Amos' office, while indicating she may speak to the press upon her return to New York. Video here.
Here is the US Mission to the UN's transcript of Inner City Press' question and Susan Rice's answer:
Inner City Press: I wanted to know about the decoupling Darfur from the state sponsorship of terrorism, with a State department official quoted, unnamed saying that the Obama administration would move to take Sudan off the state sponsored terrorism list if the referenda go forward, but that Darfur is being decoupled... I just wanted to understand, how is one to read that in terms of the importance of humanitarian and the escalating violence in Darfur?
AMBASSADOR RICE: Well first of all the United States, as you've heard me express on many occasions, and so have my colleagues and counterparts in Washington, is very much focused on the deteriorating security and humanitarian situation in Darfur. We're very concerned about it. We're focused on it. There are a number, frankly a large number, of sanctions in U.S. law that relate not only to the situation between the north and the south, but also to Darfur, and they will not be alleviated [unless and] until the situation in Darfur is adequately addressed consistent with U.S. law. What we have also said to the Government of Sudan is that were it to take the steps that it's committed to and allow the peaceful and on-time conduct of the referendum in the South, and resolve all of the outstanding issues that remain between the two sides, including Abyei and borders and security and citizenship, to name just a few, as well as respect the outcome of the referendum, then that could initiate a process of improved relations with the United States. We've communicated to them what that process might look like, and we think it's in the interest of the Government of Sudan and the people, all of the people of Sudan, to fulfill their commitment to implement the CPA and choose a peaceful resolution to this longstanding conflict. Thank you very much.
On this last, another Permanent Five member of the Council's Permanent Representative has said, on condition of anonymity, that it is increasingly unlikely that even the South Sudan referendum will be held on January 9, and that focus has turned to convincing the leaders in South Sudan not to hold their own referendum. Watch this site.
