Washington, DC — The Sudanese government has recently hosted the Igad regional summit which called for stepping up the fight against terrorism. Sudanese officials say all governments in the region, including Somalias transitional administration, are cooperating with the United States in the war on terrorism; but in an interview with all allAfrica.com, Sudans Washington ambassador, Khidir Haroun Ahmed, expresses concern over what the future may hold not just for Somalia, but also for Sudan, still considered by the Bush administration as state that sponsors terrorism.
What is your take on whats going on in the Horn of Africa right now, in the light of reports Somalia could be the next target in the US-led campaign against terrorism?
With respect to this issue of Somalia, it was tackled at the ninth summit of the heads of state of the countries of the Inter-governmental Authority for Development (Igad) which concluded its meeting just a few days ago in Khartoum.
Somalia has suffered for the last ten years from a statelessness situation. There are a lot of problems in that country. So the communiqué of the summit dealt with that situation, with respect to state-building as well as combatting terrorism there.
We believe the transitional government of Somalia has made it quite clear that it is willing to cooperate with the United States when it comes to this issue of terrorsim. They offered to open their country for all sorts of investigating teams from the United States, and also from the United Nations.
The feeling in the region is that, since the government is cooperating, there is no need for military intervention, as long as the government itself is still weak due to the situation that everybody knows.
Given the transitional governments very limited hold on power, after all it only controls a small portion of the country, how seriously do you think its offer to cooperate with the United States should be taken?
I would like to say that most of the Igad countries recognize this new transitional government as a legitimate government in the country. So we think that if the United States feels that there are some pockets of terrorism in the country, at least any kind of military operation there should be based on the consent of this transitional government. They should talk to those people in order to minimize the suffering of civilians in that country. The Igad summit expressed its concern that any military action in Somalia will aggravate the situation of Somalis and add to the suffering of civilians.
Also the summit entrusted President Daniel arap Moi of Kenya with holding a reconciliation conference for Somalia in two months time. So I think this may expedite the process of combatting terrorism. It might also convince the warlords there that it is in their interest to reconcile their differences and to cooperate in creating a viable government in the country that could combat terrorism in a very thorough and decisive manner.
That sounds like a long-term goal but is there is anything that Igad or the transitional government in Somalia could do in the immediate term to help avert the risk of military action in Somalia?
The summit tried to do that by encouraging first of all the transitional government and the other factions in Somalia to cooperate by providing information on the whereabouts of any terrorist groups in Somalia, if there are any; and I think they are doing that in order to avert any kind military action.
The Somali reconciliation conference to be held in Kenya in two months is one of the mechanisms suggested by the summit, and by Sudan in particular, for averting any kind of unpleasant situation there.
Your government had strong ties with Usamah Bin Laden in the past. Does it also have any reason to believe that Al-Qaeda is operating in Somalia?
We dont have any information whatsoever on that. You know Somalia has been stateless for the last ten years and it is difficult to know whats going on there.
The final communiqué of the Igad summit in Khartoum called for stepping up the fight against terrorism but stopped short of mentioning any concrete steps that ought to be taken in that regard. Why was the communiqué so vague?
I think there is a strong will among Igad member states to do something about terrorism in terms of exchanging information and trying to create a mechanism of early warning, with respect to conflicts as well as the issue of information. When we talk about exchanging information about terrorist groups, that is a very specific step. Each one of the member states has concerns about this or that group. So by exchanging information among them, the seven states, in my opinion, could produce something tangible.
That would be a first phase. The second phase would be how to determine if this or that group is a terrorist group or not. There are a lot of opposition groups carrying guns throughout the entire region. So the difficulty comes from that. How do you identify these armed groups in the region. But at least people now express a will to work towards that goal. That will help the situation evolve in the right direction.
If there were to be military action in Somalia, what do you think the fall-out would be for Sudan?
If you can treat a disease through medication, why use surgery? If there is a possibility for the United States, or any other government, to achieve its goal without getting into military action, simple logic would dictate that you go that way, unless they eventually find out there is no cooperation from the region. But as long as the parties concerned are willing to help, we think this situation could be handled without adding to the suffering of the people in the region.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
In Sudans case, we have been cooperating with the United States for the past eighteen months and not just since 11th Sepetember.
But do you feel that the threat that is hanging over Somalia now is also hanging over Sudan? You have been cooperating with the US administration but the administration still has Sudan on the list of countries that sponsor terrorism?
What is the justification for that, when you have Secretary Colin Powell, as recently as three days ago, telling the Washington Times that these people [the Sudanese] are cooperating thoroughly! Some cynics say that Sudan is so afraid that it is cooperating, but that is not true. We have been cooperating since May 2000, during the life of the previous administration. There is no justification whatsoever for Sudan to be the next target at all. If they are talking about flagrant aggression, thats something else. But if theyre talking about specific allegations, we feel that there is no justification for us to be targeted. We are cooperating, we are exchanging information, we have had an investigating team in Sudan for the last eighteen months.
