E. Ablorh-Odjidja, Ghanadot

September 14, 2006

The recent order by Sudan for the African Union to pull its forces out of the Darfur region prompts one to ask: With members like Sudan who needs the AU?

Also, let’s bring Darfur up to mind and see what is happening there in the name of African unity.

Sudanese of Arab descent are killing Sudanese of African descent in the western part of Sudan called the Darfur region. The killings have recently been labeled as genocide by President George W. Bush.

Though the attention of the world was brought to this genocide some four years ago, little worthy of description as credible or humane has been done in response to the atrocities in the Sudan area.

As of today, Sudan is refusing to allow in a force of 20,000 UN peacekeepers to police the Darfur region. So, the stalemate continues.

And as the world and the UN waits, the poor people of the Darfur region are being slaughtered. The number given so far for the dead alone is fast approaching 400,000.

Secretary-General Kofi Annan of the UN is frustrated by the impasse between the UN and Sudan and has said so. He recently accused the Sudan government of “showing utter disregard for the peace agreement, signed in May by Khartoum and the main rebel movement.”

The Sudan government, for its part, prefers to vent its frustration on the AU and is now asking the organization to pull its token 7000 force from the Darfur region by the end of September 2006.

"If the AU wants to transfer the mission to the UN, then they have to pack up their troops and leave by September 30," said Al-Samani Al-Wasila, Sudan's junior foreign affairs minister after a meeting with AU officials in Addis Ababa.

Al Wasila’s threat was directed at an AU force that was inadequate, severely under-funded, understaffed and been plainly ineffectual from the word go.

The threat, in itself, is enough to ask why Africa, at this stage of awareness for a continental government, cannot raise a unified command of her own to tackle this indifference from Sudan. Considering the sums individual countries spend on their armed forces each year, the absence of an African High Command must raise doubt about the whole African unity resolve.

It is hard to believe that Rwanda happened barely a decade ago. Yet, no lessons were learned and the entire tragic episode has been quickly forgotten.  Not only did Africa learn nothing, but also the entire international community; especially by the UN Security Council.

Somebody must love this genocide thing; how else could it continue in Darfur?

There are few voices here and there, though, that continue to raise alarm about Darfur. Among these are few, easily recognizable as people of authority and respect; starting with President Bush, Secretary General Annan, Colin Powel, George Clooney and others.

But these voices have proven insufficient to wake the conscience of the world up.  The reality is what it has been from the start, plain genocide.

The BBC quotes Secretary General Annan as saying that "the government (of Sudan) had renewed aerial bombing and had sent thousands of troops to the region….” naturally to decimate the resistance of the Sudanese Africans as the world watches.

Could it be that genocide is going on because it is happening to Africans?

Archbishop Desmond Tutu, a South African Nobel laureate and a man of faith must be thinking of the possibility.

"The harsh truth is that some lives are more important than others…. if you are of a darker hue you are always going to end up at the bottom of the pile" he said.

Archbishop Tutu has seen the parallel between what happened in Rwanda in 1994 and what is happening in Darfur now, and he fears that the international community, meaning the United Nations, again, cannot be persuaded to take forceful action; just like it didn’t when genocide raged on in Rwanda.

That lesson, so far as Darfur is concerned, is buried in history. In its stead is the complete disdain Sudan has for the AU, as evidenced by her demands.

Sudan, a so-called member of the AU, has the audacity to tell the AU how to behave:

"The AU force can remain in Darfur only if it accepts Arab League and Sudanese funding,” the Foreign Minister of Sudan, Ali Ahmed Kerti, was reported to have said last week.

And if the funding didn’t come?

The Foreign Minister also said the “AU does not have the authority to transfer the mission to the UN.”

The minister has given a thumb sketch of the world views on Africa; helpless, penniless, gutless and unimaginative leadership, in plain English.

Left to continue the minister’s diatribe was the Chinese Premier, Wen Jiabao, with a double-talk.

He said, “he backed the proposed deployment of the United Nations peacekeepers in strife-torn Darfur, but warned that Sudanese government consent was vital first.”

The Prime Minister knew the AU’s stand concerning the UN force as well as that of Sudan, so what was he saying or attempting to do, if not an attempt to muddy the water?

But the Chinese Premier’s intention came clear to some of us:  It was to leave the people of Darfur in an indeterminate state, never mind what the AU wanted.

Africans were being murdered in Sudan with the apparent consent of the Sudanese government and it had to be this government's consent that must be sought for? 

Sudan is part of Africa, but Africa is not an Arab colony.  Because events in Darfur are a continuing genocide against Africans, it is the duty of Africa to do something about it, regardless of what Sudan thinks. That was why the AU force went to the Darfur without the permission of the Arab League.

Let someone in Taiwan, not mainland China, remind the Chinese Premier, Wen Jiabao, that in Africa our concern is humanity first because of lessons learned in Rwanda.

As for the Arab League money, of course the AU can accept it.  Africa is known, among other things, for its penchant for “the cap in hand approach” to self-government.  So, the AU can accept the money from the Arab league. But the Arab League must not dictate how Africa acts to save its people in Darfur.

E. Ablorh-Odjidja, Washington, DC September 14, 2006