America.gov (Washington, DC)
Jim Fisher-Thompson
9 November 2009
Diplomats and Africa policy specialists are hailing the Obama administration's new policy toward Sudan as a practical approach to stopping violence in Sudan's Darfur region while preserving a peace accord that ended the nation's 22-year civil war in 2005.
At the October 19 unveiling of the new strategy, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said, "It reflects the administration's seriousness, sense of urgency, and collective agreement about how best to address the complex challenges that have prevented resolution of the crisis in Darfur and full implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement [CPA]."
Key elements of the CPA include sharing power at the national level between the predominantly Muslim North and Christian South Sudan for six years, an equal distribution of oil wealth and a referendum in the South in 2011 on the question of secession from Sudan.
The Obama plan calls for a greater dialogue among the United States, international partners and Sudan to end the Khartoum government's support of attacks in Darfur and spur implementation of the CPA while pressing the Sudanese to get tougher on terrorism. The Obama strategy includes potential sanctions if certain benchmarks to progress that remain classified are not met.
Herman Cohen, former assistant secretary of state for African affairs in the administration of President George H.W. Bush, lauded the strategy, telling America.gov, "The Obama administration is implementing a very pragmatic policy toward Sudan."
The former career diplomat said the highest priority for U.S. strategy toward Sudan now is to promote "the successful completion of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement between Khartoum and the [Sudan People's Liberation Army] in the South ... in order to have a free and fair referendum in the South in 2011."
Cohen also said Obama was on the right track "to serve notice on Khartoum that it is being held responsible for making the CPA succeed. The U.S. government will continue to facilitate and mediate the transition process, but if Khartoum sabotages the CPA, the United States will escalate sanctions against the regime."
Terming the strategy "smart, tough and balanced," Susan Rice, U.S. permanent representative to the United Nations, said at an October 19 State Department briefing in Washington that she hoped the Khartoum government would appreciate the need for urgency because "for years, paths to peace have been littered with broken promises and unfulfilled commitments by the government of Sudan." (See "Clinton, Amb. Rice and Special Envoy Gration on Sudan Strategy.")
David Shinn, a U.S. ambassador to Ethiopia in the mid-1990s, also lauded the new strategy, telling America.gov it "properly recognizes several inescapable facts."
"First, progress on implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement between southern and northern Sudan is at least as important to the United States as ending the standoff in Darfur. In 2009, I believe, there have been more violent deaths in southern Sudan than there have been in Darfur," he said.
Second, Shinn said, "if you want to achieve any meaningful results, you must work with the government of Sudan in addition to the other parties. If the government of Sudan contributes to notable progress on implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and ending the conflict in Darfur, it is important that the United States recognize that progress. If there is no progress, the U.S. can always return to a negative policy of isolation."
On the question of progress, President Obama, in an October 19 statement on the new strategy, said, "If the government of Sudan acts to improve the situation on the ground and to advance peace, there will be incentives; if it does not, then there will be increased pressure imposed by the United States and the international community." (See "Statement by President Obama on Sudan Strategy.")
Shinn also said, "The new policy acknowledges the importance of cooperation on counterterrorism in the relationship, although it understates the government of Sudan's cooperation in recent years."
Steve Morrison, senior vice president of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), and Jennifer Cooke, director of the CSIS Africa Program, in a recent policy paper, captured the sentiment of many in the nongovernmental organization community who like the new strategy's focus on multilateralism.
This approach "places the United States in greater alignment with critical international partners concerned with Sudan -- the United Kingdom, the European Union, Canada, France and key African partners -- and opens the way for greater collaboration and consensus building with China and other key global powers," they wrote.
Morrison and Cooke say the collaboration, which fits with the Obama administration's emphasis on a "smarter" more multilateral-oriented diplomacy, "also has the benefit of strengthening the credibility and effectiveness of any pressures the United States might bring to bear...[on] key Sudanese actors."
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2009 America.gov. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
