The conflict in Darfur is multifaceted and complex, further complicated by propaganda from both the Sudanese government in Khartoum and the Western-oriented human rights organizations. As a human rights activist, I am an advocate of political and social rights for all peoples, and am against violence, especially aimed towards civilians. However, "Save Darfur" and similar campaigns insist on calling the crisis in Darfur a "genocide," creating a black-and-white scenario that pits good versus evil without exploring the issues beneath the surface. Last year, I claimed that there was a genocide occurring in Darfur, and that the international community was obligated to do something. Over the past few months, however, I have reconsidered the situation in Darfur.
There are three components of the Darfur situation: 1)land and access to water; 2)political factors, including an insurgency and counter-insurgency; 3)ethnic clashes. Human rights organizations emphasize the ethnic factor. The Khartoum government insists on the land/water issue, yet responded to the crisis with military measures in a counter-insurgency campaign. The rebel factions of Darfur have political demands, calling Khartoum their enemy.
al-Bashir is accused of orchestrating the campaign of violence against Darfur's "non-Arab" Fur, Masalit, and Zaghawa peoples. Since 2003, it is estimated that 300,000 people have been killed and over 3 million have been displaced.
When the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued a warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir last month, charging him with
war crimes and crimes against humanity, al-Bashir denied involvement in Darfur and claimed that the arrest warrant was a "neo-colonialist" move to destabilize the country. African Union and Arab League states continue to support al-Bashir, stating that the situation is an "internal affair in a sovereign country with its own judicial system" and implying that Western-dominated international institutions should not interfere with the domestic affairs of African countries. President Bashir even went as far as expelling ten humanitarian aid organizations, believed to be "spying" for the ICC.
The conflict in Darfur gained international media attention in early 2003, when rebel factions attacked a government target. Khartoum responded by mobilizing "self-defense militias" (the Janjaweed, among others) and government air raids on farming communities and villages in a counter-insurgency campaign.
This is not the beginning of the story, nor is it the end of it. Janjaweed continue to patrol refugee camps, the government still bombs villages, and millions are suffering from lack of humanitarian aid. Although most of the refugees are considered internally-displaced peoples residing in camps inside Darfur, over 200,000 refugees have spilled into neighboring Chad. Cross-border violence has provoked Chad and Sudan to accuse each other of supporting rebel groups.
Even before the events of 2003, Darfur has suffered from high-intensity armed conflict and tension over land for grazing and access to water. Environmental factors have evolved into an ecological crisis including desertification (expanding desert) and lack of water that have pushed the primarily nomadic Arab tribes of northern Darfur further south, into the settled villages of the non-Arab farming communities with settled villages.
Sudan is the largest Arab country practicing Islam. The people of Sudan consist of nearly 600 tribes, but Arabic is the commonly spoken language of all tribes. In Sudan, "Arab" is more a political identity with ties to the state and its central government rather than ethnic consciousness. In Darfur, the Arabs are a minority (about 1/3 of the population), thus are marginalized. However, Darfur itself has been marginalized by Khartoum, ignored by the government and the Islamic community. The rebels want the government of Sudan to recognize them, demanding political representation and economic development.
Khartoum tried to solve the political land issue with military measures.The UN Commission on Darfur labels the conflict as a "counter-insurgency," with killings a consequence of the effort to militarily defeat an insurgency. When viewed from this perspective, the solution seems to be negotiation. The ICC, on the other hand, insists that there is evidence of a larger intention to kill the non-Arab Fur, Masaleet, and Zaghawah peoples, just stopping short of the "genocide" label. From this angle, the only way to stop the killing is to arrest the political leadership.
Only by labeling Darfur as a "genocide"
can the international community justify intervention. When recognizing Darfur as a mere "counter-insurgency," external "intervention" is viewed as an "invasion" on sovereign territory.When trying to find a solution to the crisis in Darfur, all three components of the conflict need to be addressed: land/water access, political demands, and ethnic factors. The government-sponsored "scorched-earth" campaign of burning villages, poisoning wells, raping women, systematic killing, and obstructing humanitarian aid is unacceptable.
* Kushkush, Isma'il.
"Analyzing Darfur's Conflict of Definitions" IslamOnline 25 Feb 2009.
* Elsergany, Ragheb.
"Darfur Story" Islam Story 16 Mar 2008.
*
Eyes on Darfur - Amnesty International
*
Failing Darfur - Human Rights Watch