Goals of US Policy in Sudan
You might ask, what is the United States involvement in Sudan? Why are they interested and what is trying to be accomplished? There are five main goals that the State Department has laid out both as a guide for policy and a measure of success.
1. First, to achieve a unified, peaceful Sudan that would contribute to regional development and also cooperate with the United States in counterterrorism. This started through a comprehensive peace accord that Senator Danforth helped initiate between the North-South strife. Another important element is economic development throughout all of Sudan, because part of the precursors of this problem has been a recurring cycle of famine and suffering that leads to cross-border violence and refugee flows. In addition, the US wants to have Sudan be a constructive participant in African and international affairs and to strengthen the US counterterrorism cooperation.
2. Second, to achieve this overall goal, the US needs to follow through on Sudan’s Government of National Unity that was created by the Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA), make sure it’s responsive to the needs of all of Sudan’s people and accountable to them through free and fair elections. The device for this is the follow-through under the CPA to have local, regional and national elections in the four years, but equally important is building the capacity of the southern Sudanese government because they will need this to be able to participate effectively in a federalized Sudan.
3. Third, an end to the violence in Darfur, which needs to lead to a reconciliation among the various tribal groups, eventually the voluntary return of people to their homes, and accountability for the perpetrators. At this point the focus has been on humanitarian care, expanding the security network for civilians in Darfur and Chad through the security operations, with also the tremendous help of the NGOs and the international observers.
4. Fourth, to strengthen the African Union’s capacity to provide basic security, ensure humanitarian access, mediate political conflicts and build from what the US hopes will be a success for them in Darfur and Sudan.
5. Fifth, to demonstrate strong U.S. support for peaceful development and democracy in all of Africa.
US Involvement
After understanding the political and historical realities of Sudan, what actions are the US and international communities doing to stop these wars and prevent reoccurrences in the future? While many entities are operating all over Sudan, we’ll highlight Darfur as an example as this has been most exposed.
It is important to understand that in conflicts such as these, an attempted regional solution is always the preferred action and a preface to any international intervention. In this case, Africa needs to try to solve Africa’s problems first.
Previously, there was an organization called the Organization of African Unity (OAU) that lasted as an international body until 2002. The body was dismantled and replaced with a stronger, more organized political structure in the African Union (AU). This new organization took the steps of attempting to deal with its own African security issues. It established among African countries “a right to intervene in national or regional conflicts.” There is now an opportunity for the AU to set an important precedent for Africans and demonstrate their ability to deal with African problems.
When the Darfur conflict matured, the African Union responded. It’s infancy proved a challenge for a conflict the size and reach of Darfur (the size of France), but the international community supported the AU on many levels. Politically, they did want an African body to solve their own problems. In addition, bringing in any sort western military was not advantageous financially or for image. Plus, the Government of Sudan (GOS) would not have allowed western troops into their borders, but African peacekeepers were allowed based on the agreed diplomatic AU mandate.
From a humanitarian standpoint, aid has been delivered in Darfur for some time. In fact, the United States has provided 68 percent of the food delivered to Darfur in 2005. It’s interesting to see the GOS’s fluctuation in allowing the aid workers access to Darfur (periodically denying visa’s or access to supplies for seemingly no reason). None-the-less, Humanitarian and NGO’s exposure to Darfur have helped ’sell’ these atrocities to the international community and this support has indirectly effected the mission through awareness.
Meanwhile, the diplomatic and international community have worked closely with the African Union to provide any support necessary for a successful mission. The European Union provides money and funding to help pay for the salaries, facilities, and admin costs. NATO is working closely to provide support as well. The United States has said that they will provide logistical support. This is where I come in. Through a government contractor, my company, we have built 32 base camps in and around the Darfur region to support the 7,700 African troops and Civilian Police that have deployed to Darfur over the last year. In addition to maintaining these camps, we provide catering and medical services, aircraft support, as well as vehicle and communication maintenance. We also support Armored Personnel Carriers that Canada has generously donated to the cause. The United States Government and international community as a whole has provided a considerable amount of funding to support this mission. My company works hard to ensure timely completion and coordination to meet the deployment needs.
As with any new body, there are considerable challenges for a successful mission. The AU struggles to deploy troops on a consistent basis. The troops are borrowed from donor countries like Senegal, Nigeria, South Africa, and Rwanda, among others and finding full and trained units to deploy with rotation has proven difficult, especially as the mission has increased from 3,300 to 7,700. As rumors of 12,000 troops float around, we often wonder if there are that many African troops available. It is also often difficult with language and hierarchal barriers to implement a clear and concise mandate. The African Union is headed in Addis Abeba, Ethiopia and many time directives implemented in the field do not necessary reflect a strong resemblance from that established in Addis. In addition, operating in a challenging and harsh environment with desert conditions and basically no real infrastructure, along with the bureaucratic tape that swallows the sanctioned Government of Sudan make operating in this environment a frustrating but worthy challenge.
There are the nay-sayers out there that say the mission is not happening quick enough, too many lives are being taken, and more needs to be done. All things considered, the international community has worked very hard to put together a realistic and reasonable plan with the African Union to solve this problem. It requires a hard balance of military a diplomatic relations. Insiders are not certain of the outcome because of so many factors that affect the stability of the region. What is certain is that the people of Darfur need to return to their homes and lifestyles and we will not stop until this occurs. Stabilizing Darfur will have a direct impact on the north and south peace agreement and everyone is wanting this to remain intact. Whether Sudan will remain one or become two countries 6 years from now, the international community is dedicated to providing security, civilian protection, humanitarian assistance, and infrastructure development in Darfur and around the South.