ON MY WAY TO PAY LOCAL UTILITIES IN BETWEEN THE RAIN STORMS

WEARING THE T-SHIRT THAT CAME WITH THE DOUBLE ALBUM DARFUR INSTANT KARMA ORDERED FROM AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL IN 2007!

WHAT A GREAT ALBUM AND MEANINGFUL SHIRT!

- As clashes between SAF and RSF continue in Khartoum, RSF shelling on a neighborhood in East Jireif claimed 7 lives - all from the same family.

- Drone strikes reported in Gedarif today, targeting the intelligence service HQ.

- Unclear who is behind the attack, the 2nd of its kind in the last week (the 1st being drone strike on iftar event in Atbara).

As in many conflicts of this nature, there is an ethnic tension behind the fighting. Some attribute the conflict to tension between Arab and African Darfuris. However, these groups were not as distinct as many media sources claim. The makeup of Darfur was less like the ethnically polarized Kosovo and more like Bosnia before the Yugoslav conflict; with intermarriage, mixed settlements, and socio-economic connections blurring the line between groups. The Sudanese Arabs, who control the government, have been accused of practicing apartheid against non-Arabs in Sudan starting in 1991. This claim is controversial, as are the terms used to describe different groups, as “Arabs” and “Africans” are equally indigenous.

The Sudanese also used tensions over land and water to their advantage during the conflict. Severe droughts are common in Darfur and nearby Chad, which affect the movement of nomadic Darfuri. This has led to an increase of clashes between nomadic breeders of cattle and camels and sedentary farmers. When the Sudanese prepared to retaliate to the 2003 rebel attacks nomadic Darfuri were recruited for the Janjaweed, sometimes offering land or financial incentives.

The government used existing tensions to mask planned genocide, as so many previous governments have done. The violence was blamed on the Darfuri rebel movements; on ethnic tension; and on disputes over land and water, pushing the blame away from the government which organized the perpetrating forces. The Sudanese government publicly denies that it supports the Janjaweed, but there is significant evidence to the contrary, including coordinated joint attacks against civilians.

The crisis in Darfur is notable for many reasons, not least of which because in September 2004 US President George W. Bush declared it a genocide. This was the first time a sitting American president called a conflict genocide while it was still occurring, rather than dancing around with the commonly used phrase “genocidal acts.” Nigerian President Olsegun Obasanjo spoke in Ethiopia against “stand[ing] by and see[ing] genocide being developed in Darfur.” Other public officials used the word “genocide” to describe the Darfur Conflict, and they used the word as an impetus to act.

A ceasefire was agreed to in 2004, but both Janjaweed and rebel attacks continued. A peace agreement was signed in 2006, but once again the agreement was broken. Further agreements were signed and abandoned equally quickly. In December 2010 a new round of peace talks began in Doha, Qatar. These talks resulted in an agreement which included regional authority and a referendum on autonomy for Darfur. While this seemed like a promising step towards peace in Darfur, and it lasted longer than other agreements, violence in Darfur is again on the rise, as are the numbers of people in refugee camps.

There have been intervention attempts from both the African Union and the United Nations, including troop deployments. Although governments discussed pulling UNAMID forces when their people came under attack, the troops did not leave. This is a stark contrast from Rwanda, where UN forces were pulled out due to the killing of Belgian soldiers (and those soldiers were, in fact, targeted because the Hutu correctly assumed killing them would make the foreign troops leave).

Ahmed Haroun, Sudan’s humanitarian affairs minister, and Ali Kushayb, a Janjaweed militia leader, have been charged by the International Criminal Court with war crimes and crimes against humanity. Sudan’s president, Omar al-Bashir, has been charged with war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity, and murder. The Sudanese government has said that the ICC has no jurisdiction to try Sudanese citizen and refuses to hand the men over to authorities in the Hague. al-Bashir will not face trial until he is apprehended in a nation which accepts the ICC’s jurisdiction.

As usual when genocide is on trial, the “intention to destroy, in whole or in part, a protected group” is difficult to prove, and originally the charge of genocide against al-Bashir did not pass the Pre-Trial Chamber.