God's Politics - Jim Wallis blog, faith blog, religion, christian, christianity, politics, values

The genocidal regime in Khartoum is, unsurprisingly, trying to undermine and block the joint U.N./African Union peacekeeping team that has been authorized to offer desperately needed protection to civilians in Darfur. As a recent article put it,

[U.N. peacekeeping chief] Jean-Marie Guehenno told the Security Council that it may face a hard choice about the 26,000-strong force scheduled to deploy in a month: to send troops that cannot defend themselves and the people of Darfur, or to not send troops at all.

Here's a better choice: the U.S. and its allies must build on the strategy of concerted economic and political pressure that has worked on Khartoum multiple times in the past. But to make this work, the U.S. can't go it alone - we must demand that the Bush administration set aside its allergy to working closely with allies.

Incredibly, the U.N. is still looking for 24 helicopters for the peacekeeping force, according to the article. Unbelievably, the U.S. diplomatic staff in Sudan is meager, when putting a few extra diplomats on shuttle diplomacy in the Darfur region could help to counteract the increasing infighting among splinter rebel groups (which is partly a result of Khartoum's divide-and-conquer strategy) and to give credence to civilian leaders who have been ignored for too long.

We cannot and must not take no for an answer, from the Khartoum regime or from our own governments.

Elizabeth Palmberg is an assistant editor at Sojourners.

Comments

The author is flawed in her logic that economic pressure is going to be a viable strategy for bringing about change in Sudan. The fact of the matter is that the US doesn't have much to divest in and cannot control the giant that is China and the source of so much of Sudan's wealth. The European Union is also conveniently taking a backseat while companies like White Nile oil company begin drilling holes in the South. Getting Europe and China to divest in the North's oppressive government will bring about change, the US tried talking of sanctions awhile ago and of course nothing came of it.

http://aaronstewart.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Aaron Stewart | November 29, 2007 11:24 AM

Oi? The Bush administration going it alone on the Sudan? The administration has been working closely with its allies on this matter. Can't get in a paragraph without bashing your enemy, eh?

Posted by: Ben Wheaton | November 29, 2007 11:33 AM

@Ben

Are you trolling? At what point did I mention GW? That has absolutely no bearing on what I said above.

Please answer this question for me. How is it that Khartoum is experiencing such an economic boom while American companies for years have been barred from investing in the Sudanese economy?

American policy has very little impact on where Sudan's money is coming from. Please prove me wrong.

Aaron

Posted by: Aaron Stewart | November 29, 2007 11:54 AM

I should also say that a few economic concessions (food, agriculture, etc )are also taking a lot of the bite out of any proposed sanctions.

Posted by: Aaron Stewart | November 29, 2007 11:59 AM

'...to send troops that cannot defend themselves and the people of Darfur...'

Wow - the UN can't defend themselves of the people of Darfur? You mean this could be another Ruwanda - shock!

'...when putting a few extra diplomats on shuttle diplomacy in the Darfur region could help to counteract the increasing infighting...'

How is a few more people working in the area going to make a difference, they are not listening to the ones that are there now.

We do not do a lot of business with Sudan. We are and have worked with other countries on several occasions with conflict around the world. (20+ countries on Iraq with several putting troups in the area to assist in the efforts there)

'...must not take no for an answer...'

So - how are we going to make them say yes? They have heard the world community talk about stopping all the 'wrongs' they are doing and have not listened - if anything they just 'flip-us-off'.

You might want to think this one through a little more Ms. Palmberg.

Blessings -
.

Posted by: Moderatelad | November 29, 2007 11:59 AM

Aaron, I wasn't referring to your post, but the main one. I guess I should have been more obvious to whom I was referring.

Posted by: Ben Wheaton | November 29, 2007 12:00 PM

Stewart is certainly correct that unilateral U.S. economic sanctions are not going to work - Khartoum well knows how to evade the sanctions which the U.S. imposed a decade ago. That's why it's so vital that the U.S. work with its allies in Europe, and why we must all pressure China, to develop the united economic (and political) front that we do not presently have. (We must also use current intelligence to develop the most effective new sanctions).

It will require spending some political capital, but combating genocide is worth it.

For more details, see the links in my original post to the analysis of the Enough Project, which I have found very helpful.

Posted by: Elizabeth Palmberg | November 29, 2007 1:57 PM

The problem isn't only that foreign companies are doing business with Sudan.

http://www.savedarfur.org/page/content/other_resources/

We need to begin checking with our own investment companies to make sure that our retirement funds are not invested in stock from these companies that do business in and with Sudan, specifically PetroChina.

"As of the most recently available filings, these five prominent investment firms—

Franklin Templeton,
J.P. Morgan Chase,
Capital Group/American Funds,
Fidelity Investments,
Vanguard

—are the largest U.S. mutual fund company investors in PetroChina (PTR). PetroChina, through its parent company CNPC, is the worst of the “highest offending” companies helping to fund the genocide in Darfur, according to the targeted divestment model developed by the Sudan Divestment Task Force (SDTF)."

If you hold mutual funds from these companies, more than likely you are supporting the genocide in Darfur through your investments.

Posted by: ds0490 | November 29, 2007 2:03 PM

Divesting from Sudan and applying economic pressure will only push the country further towards the Chinese. Boohoo. Just what we need.

Posted by: SudaneseDrima | November 30, 2007 1:44 AM

"Divesting from Sudan and applying economic pressure will only push the country further towards the Chinese. Boohoo. Just what we need."

And maintaining investments in funds that support PetroChina does what, exactly, to help the situation there?

What you are really saying is that you are willing to help as long as it doesn't cost YOU anything.

Thanks a lot.

Posted by: ds0490 | November 30, 2007 9:26 AM

Darfur: Don’t Take No for an Answer (by Elizabeth Palmberg)

Comments

Post a Comment