George W. Bush: A hero in Sudan? Bush Diplomacy to End 20 Year Civil War?

Aug 14, 2001
11,061
0
0
Bush Points the Way

I doff my hat, briefly, to President Bush.

Sudanese peasants will be naming their sons "George Bush" because he scored a humanitarian victory this week that could be a momentous event around the globe ? although almost nobody noticed. It was Bush administration diplomacy that led to an accord to end a 20-year civil war between Sudan's north and south after two million deaths.

If the peace holds, hundreds of thousands of lives will be saved, millions of refugees will return home, and a region of Africa may be revived.

But there's a larger lesson here as well: messy African wars are not insoluble, and Western pressure can help save the day. So it's all the more shameful that the world is failing to exert pressure on Sudan to halt genocide in its Darfur region. Darfur is unaffected by the new peace accords.

I'm still haunted by what I saw when I visited the region in March: a desert speckled with fresh graves of humans and the corpses of donkeys, the empty eyes of children who saw their fathers killed, the guilt of parents fumbling to explain how they had survived while their children did not.

The refugees tell of sudden attacks by the camel-riding Janjaweed Arab militia, which is financed by the Sudanese government, then a panic of shooting and fire. Girls and women are routinely branded after they are raped, to increase the humiliation.

One million Darfur people are displaced within Sudan, and 200,000 have fled to Chad. Many of those in Sudan are stuck in settlements like concentration camps.

I've obtained a report by a U.N. interagency team documenting conditions at a concentration camp in the town of Kailek: Eighty percent of the children are malnourished, there are no toilets, and girls are taken away each night by the guards to be raped. As inmates starve, food aid is diverted by guards to feed their camels.

The standard threshold for an "emergency" is one death per 10,000 people per day, but people in Kailek are dying at a staggering 41 per 10,000 per day ? and for children under 5, the rate is 147 per 10,000 per day. "Children suffering from malnutrition, diarrhea, dehydration and other symptoms of the conditions under which they are being held live in filth, directly exposed to the sun," the report says.

"The team members, all of whom are experienced experts in humanitarian affairs, were visibly shaken," the report declares. It describes "a strategy of systematic and deliberate starvation being enforced by the GoS [government of Sudan] and its security forces on the ground." (Read the 11-page report here.)

Demographers at the U.S. Agency for International Development estimate that at best, "only" 100,000 people will die in Darfur this year of malnutrition and disease. If things go badly, half a million will die.

This is not a natural famine, but a deliberate effort to eliminate three African tribes in Darfur so Arabs can take their land. The Genocide Convention defines such behavior as genocide, and it obliges nations to act to stop it. That is why nobody in the West wants to talk about Darfur ? because of a fear that focusing on the horror will lead to a deployment in Sudan.

But it's not a question of sending troops, but of applying pressure ? the same kind that succeeded in getting Sudan to the north-south peace agreement. If Mr. Bush would step up to the cameras and denounce this genocide, if he would send Colin Powell to the Chad-Sudan border, if he would telephone Sudan's president again to demand humanitarian access to the concentration camps, he might save hundreds of thousands of lives.

Yet while Mr. Bush has done far too little, he has at least issued a written statement, sent aides to speak forcefully at the U.N. and raised the matter with Sudan's leaders. That's more than the Europeans or the U.N. has done. Where are Tony Blair and Jacques Chirac? Where are African leaders, like Nelson Mandela? Why isn't John Kerry speaking out forcefully? And why are ordinary Americans silent?

Islamic leaders abroad have been particularly shameful in standing with the Sudanese government oppressors rather than with the Muslim victims in Darfur. Do they care about dead Muslims only when the killers are Israelis or Americans?

As for America, we have repeatedly failed to stand up to genocide, whether of Armenians, Jews, Cambodians or Rwandans. Now we're letting it happen again.

Here's a BBC link about the background of this conflict and some about the possible peace. BBC

A formal deal ending the war is expected in the next few weeks, possibly sooner. Since President George Bush is widely seen as the architect of peace, he is perhaps more popular in southern Sudan than anywhere else on earth. At the Rumbek sub-chief's election one young warrior called Thuapon leaps frenetically in the air, proudly waving a white Barbie-doll in a pink dress. ?This is a new wife for President Bush. May God grant him many fertile women with firm bodies and an election victory without problems in Florida.?

Can Bush legally marry the Barbie-doll?
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
To me, this may very well be one of the biggest, if not the biggest, positive accomplishment of Bush's term. It's a shame that things like the invasion of Iraq and the "axis of evil" speech will get the ink in the history books, while this tremendous event will get completely overlooked.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Bush sent a written statement and some aides to the U.N. and it's the biggest positive accomplishment of his term???

That's SAD.



It's a good thing that diplomacy seems to be working there, though.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Bush sent a written statement and some aides to the U.N. and it's the biggest positive accomplishment of his term???

That's SAD.

It's a good thing that diplomacy seems to be working there, though.

Sad or not, so be it. I'm not a Bush fanboi if you haven't noticed. I'd be happy to consider any other positive achievement of the Bush administration if you care to offer an alternative. And BTW, just that we're doing something, anything in Africa is a great start for us. Bush is the first President I can think of who has done something positive for that continent other than sit with his thumb up his ass.
 

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Clinton sure sat on the sidelines while Rwandans were being slaughtered.

Do you blame Clinton for that? I think it was a horrible situation. We may have lack of action on our conscience, but 2 other countries have the roots of the slaughter on theirs. The world sure sucks.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Originally posted by: conjur
Clinton sure sat on the sidelines while Rwandans were being slaughtered.

Do you blame Clinton for that? I think it was a horrible situation. We may have lack of action on our conscience, but 2 other countries have the roots of the slaughter on theirs. The world sure sucks.

No, I certainly don't blame Clinton. That's like blaming FDR for the holocaust. There's not a one-to-one relationship there.

But, Clinton and the U.N. certainly could have done something, esp. once the killing was brought to light.
 

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,197
4
76
Originally posted by: conjur
Clinton sure sat on the sidelines while Rwandans were being slaughtered.

Aye, and didn't he later on say something along the lines of "We really didn't know it was that bad"?
 
Aug 14, 2001
11,061
0
0
Originally posted by: glenn1
Clinton sure sat on the sidelines while Rwandans were being slaughtered.

Rwanda is only one of many... list of ongoing genocides

Governments don't care about genocide unless they can get something in return. It's sickening, but that's how it seems it goes.

I believe that a little while ago the White House wanted to put more pressure on Sudan's president, but that strategy wasn't supported by European or Arab powers. I think most countries would rather do the most minimal of action or nothing at all when they can't really gain much by action.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
Colin "Lost in Dick Cheney's bowels" Powell has done all the heavy lifting in Africa (in general) and the Sudan (in particular). Alas long as Bush continues to bely responsibility for DOD and DOJ shadiness, I'm unwilling to give him credit (even ancillary) for progress in the Sudan.
 

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
6
81
Well, I'm glad Bush has done SOMETHING...Sudan was (still is, really) pretty darn awful.

Still not going to vote for him, though.
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
76
Yet while Mr. Bush has done far too little, he has at least issued a written statement, sent aides to speak forcefully at the U.N. and raised the matter with Sudan's leaders. That's more than the Europeans or the U.N. has done. Where are Tony Blair and Jacques Chirac? Where are African leaders, like Nelson Mandela? Why isn't John Kerry speaking out forcefully? And why are ordinary Americans silent?

We amaricans are too damn busy worrying about ourselves instead of other people. Not too mention how or media only selects what we get too watch.
 

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,197
4
76
Originally posted by: Tabb
Yet while Mr. Bush has done far too little, he has at least issued a written statement, sent aides to speak forcefully at the U.N. and raised the matter with Sudan's leaders. That's more than the Europeans or the U.N. has done. Where are Tony Blair and Jacques Chirac? Where are African leaders, like Nelson Mandela? Why isn't John Kerry speaking out forcefully? And why are ordinary Americans silent?

We amaricans are too damn busy worrying about ourselves instead of other people. Not too mention how or media only selects what we get too watch.

I doubt most even know where Sudan is or any other country that is engaged in some kind of civil war in Africa.(besides the obvious answer of "it's in Africa")
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: chess9
Conjur:

Uh, yes, that WOULD be Bush's biggest accomplishment. :)

-Robert

Tragically and Ironically he will most likely not be able to use it in the re-election Campaign.

How can he justify the "War" in Iraq when diplomacy worked for the Sudan???