The international response of the Darfur genocide
The different facets of the conflict
To really understand the Darfur crisis it is important to understand where this conflict first started.
The Darfur crisis is related to two civil wars. One was between the Islamist , Khartoum based national government and the two rebel groups and the other civil war is the one between Arab government and Christian. It has affected Sudan for almost 11 years. (Scott Straus, 2005, p.124-125)
The Darfur crisis is related to two civil wars. One was between the Islamist , Khartoum based national government and the two rebel groups and the other civil war is the one between Arab government and Christian. It has affected Sudan for almost 11 years. (Scott Straus, 2005, p.124-125)
Spread of the crisis
Adjoining countries responded to the
conflict in different manners. Some didn’t react to it immediately and others were
more committed into it. While massacres were going on and villages were burning
in Darfur, international governments took time to react to this situation,
which was not taking seriously at first. They knew that the situation was
depraved but not enough to deploy help.
The international countries have not denied the situation there, but it has been deferred. This mobilizing has been gradual for several reasons: First of all, Sudan is a country that is not really accessible for everyone. It is a region that is very repressed and putted apart. Second of all, there is a lack of access by international humanitarian interventions, journalists and also by the media. They do not have direct access to what is going there. It is then very difficult to know all the details about what is going on in this country. Sometimes, you just don’t have enough information to make a statement about a certain situation and to actually know what to do and react to it properly. However, what is most unfavourably for several governments is the fact that ‘’Darfur is considered an unhelpful distraction from the ongoing peace negotiations to settle the twenty-year conflict in southern Sudan.’’ (Lefkow, 2014)
The international countries have not denied the situation there, but it has been deferred. This mobilizing has been gradual for several reasons: First of all, Sudan is a country that is not really accessible for everyone. It is a region that is very repressed and putted apart. Second of all, there is a lack of access by international humanitarian interventions, journalists and also by the media. They do not have direct access to what is going there. It is then very difficult to know all the details about what is going on in this country. Sometimes, you just don’t have enough information to make a statement about a certain situation and to actually know what to do and react to it properly. However, what is most unfavourably for several governments is the fact that ‘’Darfur is considered an unhelpful distraction from the ongoing peace negotiations to settle the twenty-year conflict in southern Sudan.’’ (Lefkow, 2014)
International mobilization
It is only in January 2004, one year after the beginning of this war, that the United Nations began to mobilize Western governments and organizations to become more and more concerned about the situation in Darfur, basically because of the intensification of the war and the deterioration of the whole country. The European Union, the United States, the United Nations and other countries took a step and wanted to do something while many in the diplomatic community, including the one in Khartoum (city in Sudan), appeared to be already aware of the realities going on in Darfur without doing anything. These countries and nations started to put pressure on the Sudanese government but the Sudanese government have been able to escape these pressures, hurtling up the war in the hope of having a military victory. At the end of the January 2004 military campaign made by the President El Bashir, he proclaimed victory and declared the war affirming that ‘’the armed forces had restored law and order and that arrangements for the return of refugees from Chad could now commence, among other points.’’ (Lefkow, 2014) After this announcement, mister the President El Bashir promised that all humanitarian organizations or agencies would have access to Darfur. This declaration was rapidly reversed, though, it is something common with this kind of government promises. International relief workers had to wait approximately six weeks before getting visas to enter in Sudan.
In February 2004, few groups of important State Department officials managed to go to Khartoum to pressure the Sudanese government in order to conclude the peace talks with the South (rebellions) and to conclude a ceasefire which is a total cessation of armed hostilities, regulated by the same general principles as those governing armistice (Dictionary) and to finally enter into discussions involving negotiations with the Darfur protestors.
In April 2004, the African Union (AU) expected the international governments to find a solution to the crisis in Darfur. Later, on May 25 2004, the United Nations Security Council realised its first report on the situation. The Council communicated his anxiety and concern about this humanitarian crisis in Darfur and unfair attacks on civilians. (Eyes on Darfur, 2007)
In April 2004, the African Union (AU) expected the international governments to find a solution to the crisis in Darfur. Later, on May 25 2004, the United Nations Security Council realised its first report on the situation. The Council communicated his anxiety and concern about this humanitarian crisis in Darfur and unfair attacks on civilians. (Eyes on Darfur, 2007)
Civilian Protection Monitoring Team
The United State and the United Kingdom were the two countries that insisted to the United Nations to send the Civilian Protection Monitoring Team (CPMT), which is an agreement to protect civilians from military attack. (U.S Department of State, 2003) They wanted this team to be deployed to supervise the attacks towards the citizens and their villages in Darfur. Khartoum refused CPMT positioning to Darfur. The countries of Germany and the Netherlands appeared to be not so interested in finding solutions to the Darfur crisis. They wanted the Sudanese government and the southern revolutionaries to sign the peace talks. The tensions continued to grow as the negotiation were taking place, confirming power distribution and security for the citizens. Europeans and others hoped that the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), once it is part of the government, would push the Sudanese government to abandon the war in Darfur.
This situation didn’t stop and it keeps continuing after all of these international interventions. More and more medias are talking about it since a lot of countries got involved in the Darfur crisis. What is clear and obvious to remind is that more united countries are facing a catastrophe, better the international governments would be indispensable to bring the suffering of thousands and thousands of civilians to an end, and to avoid and prevent more killings and massacres like this one in the future.
This situation didn’t stop and it keeps continuing after all of these international interventions. More and more medias are talking about it since a lot of countries got involved in the Darfur crisis. What is clear and obvious to remind is that more united countries are facing a catastrophe, better the international governments would be indispensable to bring the suffering of thousands and thousands of civilians to an end, and to avoid and prevent more killings and massacres like this one in the future.