Sudanese oil violence, post referendum

KPFA Weekend News, 03.05.2011:

Audio link:  http://goo.gl/133F2


Host Cameron Jones:  The Southern Sudanese people voted for independence from Northern Sudan in January of this year, but the hotly contested, oil rich Abyei region, between the districts now scheduled to join the independent states of North and South Sudan, did not vote with the rest of the country because North and South could not agree as to who would be eligible to vote.   Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir vowed that he would not agree to Abyei becoming part of the South.   This week clashes broke out again in Abyei, and the death toll is already reported to be over 100.  KPFA's Ann Garrison has more.

Sudan's oil rich Abyei
district is in yellow.
Image: Wikimedia Commons

KPFA/Ann Garrison:  Some sources claim that the Misseriya herdsmen identified with the North attacked the Dinka Ngok farmers identified with the South, but Government of Southern Sudan spokesperson Marial Benjamin Barnaba blamed the Sudanese Army and Popular Defense Forces loyal to Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir.

Marial Benjamin Barnaba:   “The areas being attacked are north of Abyei and the people on the attack are the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Popular Defense Forces. This morning at nine fifty am, Makir village was completely burned down by the Sudanese Armed Forces which is being claimed to be Misseriya.  And other attacks are pending.  The citizens of Abyei, the Ngok Dinka in this areas, they have been moving southwards because of these continuous attacks and in fact most of the causalities have been the local police, plus the civilian population.”

Nile Fortune Managing Editor
Mugume Rwakaringi. 

KPFA:  Nile Fortune Editor and Contributor Mugume Rwakaringi told KPFA that the people of Abyei are trapped between the counter accusations of Khartoum and Juba, the capitols of Northern and Southern Sudan, and that traditional Misseriya herdsmen and Dinka Ngok farmers would peacefully co-exist, if not for the oil thirst of the outside forces driving the conflict.

In January, as soon as the votes for independence had been counted in Southern Sudan, Massachusetts Senator and former presidential candidate John Kerry declared the U.S.A. would not leave Abyei behind.

John Kerry:  “Let’s be clear.  Even as today marks the end of one journey and the beginning of another, a lot of work remains ahead in the very new term in the next months of the CPA before July 9th, in order to resolve outstanding issues regarding oil revenues, borders, and of course Abyei and Darfur.  Abyei is front and center on the agenda even today.  Abyei is not being left behind, Abyei is not being forgotten.

KPFA:  Mugume Rwakaringi's essay, "Who should save the Abyei people?" will be available tomorrow on the websites of the San Francisco Bay View and AfrobeatRadio.  For Pacifica, KPFA and AfrobeatRadio, I'm Ann Garrison.

KPFA/Afrobeat News: Southern Sudan votes, but not oil rich Abyei

Sudan's oil rich Abyei Territory did not vote
with the rest of Southern Sudan this week because
North and South could not agree on who would

be allowed to vote.

KPFA Weekend News Host Rose Ketabchi:

The Southern Sudanese people finished voting in their referendum on independence today.  A new African nation, Southern Sudan is expected to emerge as a result. However, the people of Sudan's hotly contested, oil rich region of Abyei did not vote with the rest of the South this week.  KPFA's Ann Garrison reports.

KPFA/Ann Garrison:
Fighting began in the Abyei Territory, on the border of what are expected to become North and South Sudan, before the rest of the Southern Sudanese people began voting on independence last Sunday. Seventy-six people were reported dead as the fighting continued this week. Before the South began voting, Omar al-Bashir told Aljazeera that he would not accept Abyei's independence from the North:

Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir:

Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir

We will not accept Abyei to be part of the South. If any party takes any independent action over Abyei that would be the beginning of a conflict. That's why we say that the status quo in Abyei remains unchanged, with the same administration and components, until we reach a solution.

KPFA:
The Abyei Territory is an area of 4,038 square miles accorded special administrative status by the Comprehensive Peace Agreement that ended the Second Sudanese Civil War in 2005. It is not only oil rich but also very fertile agricultural land. The Dinka Ngoc farming people, who are aligned with the South, are Abyei's majority inhabitants, but the nomadic Misseriya herdsmen, aligned with the North, have grazing rights and Abyei is considered a historical bridge between North and South Sudan.

Mugume Rwakaringi, the Managing Editor of Nile Fortune, is the author of the magazine's November-December cover story "Why Abyei Oil Will Make or Break South Sudan Independence?" "On the map of Sudan itself, Abyei is a mere spot in the middle of the country," he wrote, "but because of its oil reserves, its importance is far beyond its size. Abyei is Sudan’s main oil producing region and by 2003, was responsible for over one-third of Sudan’s crude oil production.

Rwakaringi spoke to KPFA and AfrobeatRadio from Juba, the capitol of Southern Sudan:

Mugume Rwakaringi, Managing Editor of Nile Fortune,
based in Juba, South Sudan

Mugume Rwakaringi:

Concerning the reaction of the Sudanese people, if the Abyei people are not allowed to vote: If the Abyei issue is not resolved, then you would expect no stability in this region. That's why the Abyei is of concern for every Sudanese. They all want the Abyei crisis resolved. That's when they would be assured of stability in their country, be it the North or the South.

KPFA:
In NBC Dateline's December 3rd "Winds of War" report, NBC host Ann Curry asked UN Ambassador Susan Rice whether she will consider intervention by a multilateral military force if war breaks out again. Rice responded that she would not rule out anything.

For Pacifica, KPFA and AfrobeatRadio, this is Ann Garrison.


(KPFA audio link: http://goo.gl/Q84jG.)

Bono Bashers, Clooney Patrols, and the International Humanitarian Snark Brigade

Three cheers for Bono bashers, Clooney patrols, and the "international humanitarian blogosphere's snark brigade" cited by Joshua Keating, in his Foreign Policy essay, "Is George Clooney helping?"   Without the brigade, the West would hear of nothing but the White Man's Burden as the Southern Sudanese people vote in their referendum on independence this week.

And what's George Clooney really concerned about in Sudan?  Let's start with China, whom the U.S. is competing with, ever more fiercely, for Africa's resources, including Sudan's oil.  Note the Telegraph, April 2008, "What George Clooney told Gordon Brown about China and Darfur":

"The shared cause that brought Clooney to No 10 after a tough night's partying is Darfur.

^{Although Olympic protests focus on Tibet, demonstrators also decry China's policies in Sudan. Anger against the 'Genocide Olympics' first crystallised when Steven Spielberg withdrew as artistic adviser to the Games after Beijing had refused to put pressure on President Omar al-Bashir to end the killing.}" 

Of course Clooney, like Stephen Spielberg, and their pal John Prendergast, is also bothered by big bad Arabs, most of all by Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who's been indicted by the ICC, the International Criminal Court, for war crimes in Darfur. Never mind that the U.S.A. and Israel, like China, Russia, and India, all refuse to sign and ratify the treaty that created the International Criminal Court, the Rome Statute, because signing might make both their leaders, maybe even heads of state, subject to the court's jurisdiction as well.  As long as they don't sign and ratify, they're not, unless of course the UN Security Council refers their cases to the court, as they did that of Omar al-Bashir, since Sudan hasn't signed or ratified the Rome Statute either.

Hypocrisy, thy name is Clooney.  Thy name is Bono; thy name is Prendergast; thy name is Kerry---John Kerry, the Senator from Massachusetts, one of the global oligarchy's top elected managers, also in Sudan for the referendum.  

Hypocrisy thy name is UN Security Council.  Three of your members, the U.S., China, and Russia, have not signed and ratified the Rome Statute and thus have not agreed to the jurisdiction of the ICC that you referred Omar al-Bashir's crimes to----although that doesn't stop George Clooney from invoking the moral authority of the Security Council in NBC Dateline's "Winds of War," at Stanford University, and wherever else he appears on behalf of the stop-genocide industrial complex.

ENOUGH ENOUGH ENOUGH ENOUGH!!!   ENOUGH of the ENOUGH Project, a mightily endowed "advocacy organization" lodged deep in the bowels of the Democratic Party, the Clintonista Center for American Progress, in D.C.

ENOUGH exists to make the national security state look like it's responding to constituents and activists, when it's really just responding to itself.   ENOUGH's founder, John Prendergast, was the Director of African Affairs on Bill Clinton's National Security Council and Special Advisor to his Under-Secretary of State for African Affairs, Susan Rice, who is now Barack Obama's Ambassador to the UN.

That's the Susan Rice who is still best known to many for asking, during an interagency conference call on Rwanda, in 1994, “'If we use the word ‘genocide, and are seen as doing nothing, what will the effect on the November [congressional] election be?” 

More recently, when asked by NBC Dateline if she would rule out a multilateral military force in response to renewed fighting in Sudan, UN Ambassador Susan Rice responded, "I'm not going to rule out anything." 

I could hardly disagree more with Joshua Keating's description, of George Clooney's presence in Sudan as benign: "But for now at least, it's hard to see how Clooney's presence as a cheerleader is really hurting."  

I quoted Clooney's remarks to NBC and explained further, in my January 8th WBAI AfrobeatRadio Special on the Southern Sudanese Referendum.  

But, I do thank Keating for naming the "international humanitarian blogosphere's snark brigade," which I'm proud to march in, and for sharing the rest of the brigade's efforts, those of Laurenist, TexasinAfrica, and Wronging Rights, in this widely published  Foreign Policy essay:

Partner content from:

Foreign Policy: Is George Clooney helping Sudan?

by JOSHUA KEATING

Spencer Platt/Getty Images

American actor George Clooney attends voting ceremonies during the first day of voting for the independence referendum in the southern Sudanese city of Juba. Clooney is in Sudan to advocate against genocide and to promote the satellite project that shows what's happening along the north-south border.

text size A A A

January 11, 2011

Joshua Keating is an associate editor atForeign Policy.

George Clooney's "anti-genocide paparazzi"seems to be dominating nearly every transmission coming out of south Sudan this week. Clooney, along with the Enough Project, Harvard researchers, and some of his wealthier Hollywood friends, have hired satellites to monitor troop movements along the north-south border, particularly the oil-rich region of Abyei. Clooney, active for years in the Save Darfur movement, has also become something of a celebrity spokesperson for the independence referendum. Naturally, the international humanitarian blogosphere's snark brigade is out in force.

Laurenist: "If you're anything like George Clooney, you lounge around on your yacht off the coast of Italy thinking up ways to save Africa."

Texas in Africa: "While John Prendergast, George Clooney, and other advocates who don't speak a word of Arabic have been raising fears about violence for months … the likelihood that a genocide or war will break out immediately seems to me to be slim to none."

Wronging Rights: "Clooney has described it as 'the best use of his celebrity.' Kinda just seems like he's trying to recruit a mercenary for Ocean's Fourteen."

Troubling as this morning's border violence is, there seems to be good reason for skepticism about the satellite project. The imagery the satellites provide isn't all that clear, showing about 8 square miles per computer-screen pixel, making it difficult to figure out just what's going on on the ground. That level of imprecision can be dangerous when trying to assign guilt or innocence in crimes against humanity. There's also the question of how much of a deterrent this type of monitoring really is.

Laurenist again:

In 2007, Amnesty International and the American Association for the Advancement of Science launched "Eyes on Darfur," a satellite project that monitored developments on the ground in Darfur. As you'll recall, mere months later, Darfur was saved after millions of people updated their Facebook statuses with a link to blurry photos of sand.

But what about Clooney's presence itself? The actor's use of the paparazzi and basketball as analogies for horrific human rights violations might be grating to those who study these issues seriously, but isn't it worthwhile to bring attention to an often overlooked conflict? Here's UN Dispatch's Mark Leon Goldberg:

I know some people (cough, cough, Bill Easterly, cough, cough) have hangups about celebrity activism.  But does anyone really think that Sudan's upcoming referendum would be covered on a National Sunday morning broadcast without George Clooney's handsome face to greet viewers?

(Interestingly, Bono-basher-in-chief William Easterly doesn't appear to have weighed in yet.)

Clooney has his own words for the haters:

"I'm sick of it," he said. "If your cynicism means you stand on the sidelines and throw stones, I'm fine, I can take it. I could give a damn what you think. We're trying to save some lives. If you're cynical enough not to understand that, then get off your ass and do something. If you're angry at me, go do it yourself. Find another cause — I don't care. We're working, and we're going forward."

This kind of "at least I'm doing something" rhetoric drives development scholars absolutely bonkers and for good reason. But for now at least, it's hard to see how Clooney's presence as a cheerleader is really hurting. Once the referendum is over however, I hope he heads back to Lake Como. In international negotiations, a certain degree of obscurity can often be just as helpful as the media spotlight. Making a new country is a messy business anywhere, and in Southern Sudan, it's going to involve some very ugly compromises. (I wonder, for instance, what Clooney thinks about the Southern Sudanese government expelling Darfuri rebels in what seemed to be a conciliatory gesture to Khartoum.)

In the difficult weeks and months ahead, Southern Sudan will certainly need international help, but it should come from people with a slightly more extensive background in the situation. Most of all, it's probably not helpful for celebrities and the media to promote a narrative of the Juba government as the "good Sudan." Even in the best-case scenario, it's bound to be shattered pretty quickly.

In any event, the Southern Sudanese themselves seem pretty nonplussed about Danny Ocean's presence in their midst:

"Who is that man talking?" a Sudanese journalist asked, gesturing to a white man with a group of reporters around him. When told it was George Clooney, a movie star, the Sudanese journalist looked confused and walked away.

Oil, African Genocide, and the USA's LRA Excuse

KPFA Radio Weekend News, 12.04.2010. 

On Wednesday, November 24th, President Obama sent Congress his plan to mobilize Uganda's army, the Uganda People's Defense Force, to cross its northern border into the Central African Republic and Southern Sudan, to disarm the Lord's Resistance Army, a militia that has been fighting the Ugandan government for over 20 years. The White House issued a statement saying:

“The development of the strategy, relied on the significant involvement of the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the US Agency for International Development and the Intelligence Community."   --White House "Strategy to Support the Disarmament of the Lord's Resistance Army," posted to the website of the Pulitzer Center

The President seemed either unaware or unconcerned about the UN Mapping Report, released on October 1st, which documents Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni's army's war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocidal massacres of civilians, Rwandan Hutu refugees and Congolese Hutus, in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

How else could he propose to mobilize the very same army to enter the Central African Republic and Southern Sudan to protect civilians and refugees, and "meet humanitarian requirements" in "affected populations," as his strategy statement said he would?

Just over a week later, on Friday, December 3rd, NBC News Dateline aired "Winds of War, George Clooney in Sudan," which warned that the Northern Sudanese Moslem regime of Omar al-Bashir might commit genocide in Christian Southern Sudan.  The next day I called Black Star News Editor Milton Allimadi from the KPFA Radio studios, in Berkeley, California, to produce this segment for the KPFA Weekend News: 

KPFA Weekend News Anchor/David Rosenberg:

NBC's Dateline last night aired an hour long documentary titled "Winds of War, George Clooney in Sudan."   The actor warned Dateline's audience that Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir's regime in Khartoum has already been indicted, by the International Criminal Court, for war crimes and genocide, and that he is now amassing weapons and troops to prevent Southern Sudan from forming an independent state.  Critics of U.S. interventions in the region say that the U.S. is also amassing weapons and troops to move on Southern Sudan, from the Central African Republic, and from its southern border with Uganda, to secure oil.  Ann Garrison is live in the studio with this report.

KPFA/Ann Garrison:

George Clooney, on Friday night's NBC Dateline, cited the opinions of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the CIA, and President Barack Obama as evidence that everyone agrees that the U.S. must engage to stop genocide after Southern Sudan's January referendum, in which the Southern Sudanese are all but certain to vote for independence. 

Actor George Clooney on NBC's Dateline: 

The State Department said, the Secretary of State said it's a ticking time bomb. The CIA said this is the next genocide if we're not careful; it is the biggest risk.  The President has said as much.  This, everyone acknowledges that this is what is going to take place if someone doesn't moderate and mediate.  And that's not just my saying it.  That's everyone saying it.  I'm just trying to say it as loud as possible.

Ann Garrison:
Clooney's "everyone" did not include Ugandan American journalist Milton Allimadi, Editor of the New York City-based Black Star News.  Allimadi says that if the President were really serious about stopping genocide in Africa, he would send peacekeepers into eastern Congo, where the worst African genocide is ongoing and has been for the past 16 years, with a loss of over 6 million lives.    

Allimadi also said that Obama would not be martialing the Ugandan army of Yoweri Museveni in Northern Uganda, to move into the Central African Republic and Southern Sudan, enacting the LRA DIsarmament Act, after the October 1st release of the UN Mapping Report documenting the Ugandan Army's war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocidal massacres of Hutu civilians in Congo.  Allimadi says the LRA is really an excuse to secure Southern Sudanese oil after Southern Sudan's January referendum on independence.

Black Star News Editor Milton Allimadi:

I don't buy this LRA business, not for one minute. The United States is not interested in going after the LRA. If the Ugandan government, which is familiar with the terrain, could not defeat the LRA in 24 years of conflict, what added dimension can the United States bring to this? We already saw one disastrous instance, in December 2008, using U.S. logistical support and intelligence, the Ugandan Army attacked the LRA camp at Garamba, in the Democratic Republic of Congo. And the consequences were just disastrous. They failed to get the key leaders of the LRA and instead provoked massacres of innocent Congolese civilians. Who knows who did the killings, whether it was the LRA or the Ugandan troops? It was a massive disaster.

Milton Allimadi:

I think this is what's really happening: 

As you know, in early January, Southern Sudan, whose capitol is Juba, is going to vote on a referendum.  That referendum will decide whether it becomes an independent republic, and it's a foregone conclusion that they're going to vote for independence.  

Now here's the deal.  Most or all of the oil wealth that is now sustaining the government of Sudan in the North happens to be located in Southern Sudan.  I don't see how the government in Khartoum can survive and sustain itself without this oil wealth.   

I think the U.S. has taken a keen interest in the management and control of this oil wealth.  And if you look at the map very carefully, the LRA right now, is purported to be concentrated in Central African Republic, which also conveniently happens to be bordered with the Sudan.  It's on the southwestern part of the Sudan's border, so they share a border.  And in fact, if you're going to look at it from a military point of view, it's half the distance to march from the outpost of the border in Central African Republic to the capitol of Khartoum than it is to march from Juba, the capitol of Southern Sudan, to Khartoum.   

I am convinced that the United States, with its ally, the Ugandan dictator Yoweri Museveni, are setting up a front line in Central African Republic, in order to weaken the government of the Sudan in Khartoum and make it difficult for the government of the Sudan in Khartoum to launch an attack against Southern Sudan, should they declare independence, which is a foregone conclusion.  That to me is a much more credible story than this bogus story about the U.S. wanting to go after the LRA. 

KPFA/Ann Garrison:

And do you think they want to do this in order to secure Southern Sudanese oil reserves?

Absolutely.  Southern Sudanese oil reserves.  And that is becoming a huge oil field now.  Southern Sudan borders northern Uganda.  And going from that region into Western Uganda, that's a vast oil field.  As you know in recent years there's been massive discoveries of oil fields in that part of Uganda as well.   So if you look at this as a continuous region, starting from Western Uganda sweeping into Northern Uganda, into Southern Sudan, very rich oil fields, which, considering the U.S. presence in the region right now, is much more secure than some of the oil fields in the Middle East.   

KPFA/Ann Garrison:

President Obama himself, in his 2006 Senate Bill, the Obama Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act, said that rebel militias serve as pretexts for Uganda and Rwanda's invasions and resource plunder of neighboring Congo, but Allimadi says that Obama, the U.S. Africa Command, and federal legislators now seem to be using the pretext themselves.  

For Pacifica/KPFA Radio, I'm Ann Garrison.

See also:
U.S. Troops Train Ugandan Soldiers, Photo Essay, U.S. Department of Defense, Black Star News, 02.12.2008

DRC: Civilians suffer as Uganda takes on LRA, IRIN, 01.20.2009

Peace in Northern Uganda via U.S. Bullets and Bombs, Black Star News, 03.29.2010

How Invisible Children Falsely Marketed The LRA Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act, Black Star News, 06.02.2010
Congo Genocide; Obama Knows the Real Story, Black Star News, 10.07.2010

Sen. Barbara Boxer Co-sponsored Bill That Strengthens African Genocidal, Homophobic, Dictator, Black Star News, 09.22.2010