Global Dynamics

Inteligence Profiling
              &
ForensicProfiling

The crisis in the Sudan has appeared to be a failure of the international community and IOs to end the violence that is occurring in the Sudan, the problem is that Sudan, much like Afghanistan is a country that has been at war with itself for longer than there has been peace in the region. This fact will make it difficult for any sort of peace process to take place as those individuals involved in the conflict will not see any government as being able to end the conflict and therefore do not hold the legitimacy needed to end the violence and provide stability.

For background on the region, Sudan is “the largest country in Africa” (Republic of Sudan) In addition to this Sudan ranks among the Least Developed Countries which have the “following 3 criteria:” (Least Developed Countries (LDCs)

  • Low-income criterion based on a three-year average estimate of the gross national income (GNI) per capita (under $750 for inclusion, above $900 for graduation)
  • Human resource weakness criterion involving a composite Human Assets Index (HAI) based on indicators of: (a) nutrition; (b) health; (c) education; and (d) adult literacy.
  • Economic vulnerability criterion
  • Based on indicators of the instability of agricultural production; the instability of exports of goods and services; the economic importance of non-traditional activities (share of manufacturing and modern services in GDP); merchandise export concentration; and the handicap of economic smallness. (Least Developed Countries (LDCs)

Given this criteria the Sudan will also fall into the category of a failed state. A failed state is defined as “states {that} can no longer perform basic functions such as education, security, or governance, usually due to fractious violence or extreme poverty. Within this power vacuum, people fall victim to competing factions and crime, and sometimes the United Nations or neighboring states intervene to prevent a humanitarian disaster. However, states fail not only because of internal factors. Foreign governments can also knowingly destabilize a state by fueling ethnic warfare or supporting rebel forces, causing it to collapse” (Failed States) As a failed state the Sudan will have a difficult time when attempting development due to the fact that there is currently no functional government and a high percentage of violence taking place within the nation. According to the Fund for Peace the Sudan ranks 3rd out of 178 in terms of failed and/or failing states. (The Failed States Index 2013)

The fact that the Sudan is a failed state also has the potential to destabilize nations that border the Sudan, these nations include “Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Libya, Uganda” (Republic of Sudan) All nations that are showing signs of instability and an increasing level of political violence, even among relatively developed nations such as Egypt and Libya.

Political violence in the Sudan has been occurring for the past thirty years, meaning that citizens of the Sudan have become accustomed to violence and may be unwilling and/or afraid to support a stable government. “The latest north-south civil war began in 1983, following the breakdown of the 1972 Addis Ababa agreement. For more than two decades, the Government and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A), the main rebel movement in the south, fought over resources, power, the role of religion in the state, and self-determination. Over two million people died, four million were uprooted and some 600,000 people fled the country as refugees.” (UN) Large amounts of refugees leaving the Sudan to escape the violence has also lead to an increased drain on the resources of neighboring nations and have led to humanitarian crisis in these nations, as nations find it difficult to care for their own population, let alone a large refugee population.

For the purpose of this report I will limit the remaining analysis to the Crisis that has occurred/is still occurring in the Darfur region of the Sudan. “Darfur is a region in Sudan the size of France. It is home to about 6 million people from nearly 100 tribes. Some nomads. Some farmers. All Muslims. In 1989, General Omar Bashir took control of Sudan by military coup, which then allowed The National Islamic Front government to inflame regional tensions. In a struggle for political control of the area, weapons poured into Darfur. Conflicts increased between African farmers and many nomadic Arab tribes.” (Genocide in Darfur) Initial attempts to end violence in the Sudan, the Machakos Protocol 20 July 2002 took steps to end the violence. “The parties to the conflict signed the Machakos Protocol, in which they reached specific agreement on a broad framework, setting forth the principles of governance, the transitional process and the structures of government, as well as on the right to self-determination for the people of South Sudan, and on state and religion. They agreed to continue talks on the outstanding issues of power sharing, wealth sharing, human rights and a ceasefire.”(UN)

In addition to this, the UN has made several attempts to end the violence that has occurred/is occurring in Darfur, “As a response to the escalating crisis in Darfur, the Security Council, by its resolution 1556 (2004) PDF Document on 30 July 2004 assigned some additional tasks to UNAMIS relating to Darfur.” (UN) This effort was not effective in ending violence as in “February 2003, attacks on government targets by the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army (SLM/A) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), and the Government’s decision to respond by deploying its national armed forces and mobilizing local militia, took the violence to unprecedented levels. The cycle of terror inside Darfur also threatened regional peace and security.” (UN) The African Union (AU) also took steps to end the violence in Darfur, “For several years, the African Union (AU) led international political efforts to seek a solution to the crisis in Darfur. In July 2004, the AU launched negotiations at the inter-Sudanese peace talks, also known as the Abuja talks. AU political initiatives were complemented by the deployment of 60 AU military observers and 310 protection troops in Darfur to monitor and observe the compliance of the parties to the Humanitarian Ceasefire Agreement signed in N’Djamena on 8 April 2004 by the Government of the Sudan, SLM/A and JEM.” (UN) None of these efforts have been completely successfully in ending the violence in Darfur. During this period the UN also undertook a humanitarian mission in Darfur to assist with citizens that had been displaced by the violence or have been victims of violence.

2005 indicated that a turning point was about to occur in relation to violence in Darfur with,
“the Government of the Sudan and SPLM/A signed in Nairobi, Kenya, the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). The CPA included agreements on outstanding issues remaining after the Machakos Protocol and had provisions on security arrangements, power-sharing in the capital of Khartoum, some autonomy for the south, and more equitable distribution of economic resources, including oil.” (UN) While this did seem to be a turning point in ending violence, in addition to peace accords, “the Secretary-General recommended the deployment of a multidimensional peace support operation, consisting of up to 10,000 military personnel and an appropriate civilian component, including more than 700 police officers.” (UN) These peacekeepers were simply meant to assist in maintaining peace and stability in the region while allowing the government of the Sudan to establish itself as a legitimate government, thusly allowing the Sudan government to deal with addition/future violence. “The UN Mission in the Sudan would be headed by his Special Representative and would include components focusing on the following four broad areas of engagement: good offices and political support for the peace process; security; governance; and humanitarian and development assistance.” (UN) All of this was done to allow for the Darfur region and Sudan to stabilize while implementing a standard government that would be capable of dealing with issues of safety and stability. To facilitate the UN mission of brining safety and stability to the Sudan while the government of the Sudan attempts to develop into a functional government with the assistance of a UN peacekeeping force in place to offer stability in the region.

With assistance of the UN all parties involved in the Sudan crisis signed a peace agreement “African Union efforts to seek a solution to the crisis in Darfur culminated in the signing of the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) on 5 May 2006. The Secretary-General said that the DPA, signed after more than three years of conflict, had given hope that the parties might be prepared to lay down their weapons. At the same time, he noted that the Agreement still faced formidable challenges. Following the signing of the Agreement, there was an escalation of clashes between those who supported it and those who did not.” (UN) However, all efforts taken by the UN to bring stability to the Sudan have been for not as violence in Darfur continues.

“The violence in Darfur’s decade-old war spiked in 2013, as the mostly Arab militias initially armed by the government to contain the rebellion increasingly escaped Khartoum’s control and fought each other. Recent fighting has displaced nearly half a million additional civilians – in all 3.2 million Darfurians need humanitarian help.” (Sudan's Spreading Conflict (III): The Limits of Darfur's Peace Process) It would appear that the UN has been unable to maintain stability and security in the Sudan. If the UN has been unable to offer stability it is becoming doubtful that any nation of IO will be able to provide the stability needed to prevent further violence. In addition to peace treaties that have been offered by the AU and the UN were unable to provide for stability in Sudan, an addition attempt was made to bring peace to the region with the “The Doha Document for Peace in Darfur (DDPD) signed in Qatar in 2011 is largely unimplemented, notably because it was endorsed by factions with limited political and military influence, blocked by the government and suffered fading international support. The main insurgent groups remain active, have formed an alliance that goes beyond the region and increasingly assert a national agenda. If Darfur is to have durable peace, all parties to the country’s multiple conflicts, supported by the international community, need to develop a more coherent means of addressing, in parallel, both local conflicts and nationwide stresses, the latter through a comprehensive national dialogue; eschew piecemeal approaches; embrace inclusive talks; and recommit to Sudan’s unity.” (Sudan's Spreading Conflict (III): The Limits of Darfur's Peace Process)

The crisis in Darfur is a prime example of what Huntington called the clash of civilizations. Differing groups within Sudan are seeking power and control of government. Until all groups living in the Sudan are recognized and attempts are made to pacify all parties involved in the Darfur conflict, this conflict will continue.

To this point the UN and AU have been unsuccessful in ending the violence in the Darfur region of the Sudan. However, this failure is not a political of military failure. The in ability of the UN and AU in end the violence has to do with the fact that several factions are fighting over dominance of the same region, that being Darfur. All peace treaties that have been signed and all military peace keeping operations have been ineffective due to the fact that they have not addressed the fact that a variety of different civilizations are seeking to be in power in the same region. The issue of ethnic conflict is difficult to address, as all ethnic groups need to feel that their needs have been taken into account and that they will not be marginalized with a new government. As it is impossible to please all of the people all of the time, it may be impossible to end the conflict in Darfur. This is a situation where the international community must sit by and allow the conflict to continue and hope that eventually differing ethnic groups come to some sort of agreement on their own.

Reference List:

"Failed States." Global Policy Forum. http://www.globalpolicy.org/nations-a-states/failed-states.html (accessed March 25, 2014).

"Genocide in Darfur." United Human Rights Council. http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/genocide/genocide-in-sudan.htm (accessed March 24, 2014).

"Least Developed Countries (LDCs)." One World Nations Online. http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/least_developed_countries.htm (accessed March 25, 2014).

"Republic of Sudan." One World Nations Online. http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/sudan.htm (accessed March 25, 2014).

"Sudan's Spreading Conflict (III): The Limits of Darfur's Peace Process." International Crisis Group. http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/africa/horn-of-africa/sudan/211-sudan-s-spreading-conflict-iii-the-limits-of-darfur-s-peace-process.aspx (accessed March 25, 2014).

"The Failed States Index 2013." The Fund for Peace. http://ffp.statesindex.org/rankings-2013-sortable (accessed March 23, 2014).

UN. "UNMIS Background - United Nations Mission in the Sudan." UN News Center. http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/past/unmis/background.shtml (accessed March 25, 2014).