Washington, DC — After protracted debate, the Obama administration last week rolled out a policy blueprint for Sudan, Africa's largest country in land area. The policy is designed to address the challenge of bringing peace to the oil-producing nation that has experienced both a long-running civil war between northern and southern areas and a humanitarian crisis in the western Darfur region, where the violence has been widely labeled as genocide.
While the U.S. role in Afghanistan dominated headlines, senior policymakers from president on down were also wrestling with the dual conflicts in Sudan – continuing suffering in Darfur and the squalid refugee camps across the border in Chad; and the unraveling of a peace deal between the largely Arab north and the black African south, which ended decades of brutal warfare. The seemingly insoluble conundrum facing the administration was this: how to pressure the Sudanese government to curb the bloodshed, while encouraging continued cooperation on fighting terrorism from a regime led by the only sitting head-of-state ever to face an international arrest warrant for war crimes.
The most effective path to success, the Obama team has decided, is to tackle all aspects of the problem simultaneously. "It will not be easy, and there are no simple answers to the extraordinary challenges that confront this part of the world, President Obama said in a statement . "But now is the time for all of us to come together and to make a strong and sustained effort on behalf of a better future for the people of Sudan."
To underscore Sudan's prominence on the foreign policy agenda, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced the approach at an unusual early morning briefing last Monday, accompanied by two other principals in formulating the policy, United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice and President Obama's Special Envoy to Sudan, General J. Scott Gration.
Rice, who served as assistant secretary for Africa during the Clinton administration and was a top foreign policy adviser to Obama during the campaign, has been a vocal proponent of a tough stance towards Khartoum. Gration, who spent childhood years with his missionary parents in Kenya and Congo and became a trusted Obama adviser when he accompanied the then-U.S. Senator to Africa in 2006, has been working to establish a dialogue with the Sudanese government and other parties since he was tapped as special envoy in March.
Clinton said an "intensive review" within the U.S. government had produced a policy reflecting "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," which curbed conflict between the north and the south in 2005.
Sudan received high-level attention from both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush when they were in office. President Clinton ordered a missile strike against a pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum in September 1998, based on intelligence reports linking the plant to Osama bin Laden, who was blamed for the attacks a month earlier on U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam. President Bush took a personal interest in ending Sudan's north-south conflict, after conservative Christian organizations championed the cause of the southern Sudanese, who are predominantly Christian and animist. The northerners – who ruled the country before a partial power-sharing arrangement in the peace accord – are mostly Muslim.
While the new approach will build on previous peace initiatives, Secretary of State Clinton said that past policies "too often has focused narrowly on emerging crises." The policy document "sets forth a comprehensive U.S. policy toward Sudan," which means that the key issues of Darfur and the Comprehensive Peace Agreement will be engaged "simultaneously and in tandem," she stated. "Let me be clear." she said, in a strong warning to Khartoum and other parties to the negotiations. "It is too late for talk, or idle promises, or delays over misperceptions and misunderstandings."
When the first questioner at the October 19 State Department press briefing asked her about Afghanistan, the Secretary deflected the query firmly, saying she wanted "to stay focused on Sudan, because this is such an important issue for so many people, and literally millions of people are kind of waiting to hear what we have to say on it."
As the State Department briefing was taking place, the White House released the five-paragraph statement from President Obama that summarized the new strategy, underlining the administration's unity and top-level attention. Later that day, senior White House officials who crafted the policy document held a background briefing for leading human rights and Sudan advocacy groups who, collectively, had grown increasingly uneasy about what they feared was a lack of sufficient forcefulness to address the Sudanese crises.
Later in the week, Gration and other officials briefed members of Congress to seek their support for a coordinated approach. "While a policy of engagement is an important tool to achieve these objectives, I strongly believe that engagement without credible pressure will not work," Rep. Donald Payne (Democrat-New Jersey) said in a statement , welcoming a renewed administration push to get results on the ground. "The new Sudan policy links engagement with verifiable progress and not promises," said Payne, who chairs the House Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health and has been a harsh critic of Khartoum.
Gration, whose activities since his appointment have drawn most of the fire from those seeking a more aggressive administration stance, was unequivocal at the State Department briefing that he fully endorses the outlined policy. "Success will require a unified approach, a renewed sense of urgency," he said. "The President's Sudan strategy provides that approach, that resolve."
In their statements, Obama and Clinton singled out Gration for commendation, as did Rice, who praised "the exceptional commitment, energy, and integrity he's brought to this critical work." Adding a touch of humor to the otherwise sober presentation, Rice also thanked Gration "for being the only man ever to testify before the Senate that he loves me," a reference to an appearance in June before the Foreign Relations Committee where he was sharply questioned about his handling of negotiations with the regime. "I cleared [the testimony] with my wife," Gration interjected, with Clinton looking on in amusement.
"Bringing about lasting peace and improving the lives of millions of people are daunting tasks," Rice said in brief but pointed remarks. "We understand the importance of effective and faithful implementation of our strategy, and we will use all elements of U.S. influence to transform our objectives into reality."
She said the administration is intent on employing "calibrated incentives" to exert pressure "on any party that fails to act to improve the lives of the people of Sudan…There will be no rewards for the status quo, no incentives without concrete and tangible progress. There will be significant consequences for parties that backslide or simply stand still. All parties will be held to account."
White House and State Department officials insist that administration strategy is transparently outlined in the public document released on Monday . "There's no 'hide-the-ball' in the classified version," one of the document drafters said during the Monday briefing for advocacy groups. What remains under wraps is what Clinton called "a menu of incentives and disincentives, political and economic" that will be used to reward progress or punish inaction. That list is in a classified annex to the policy document, Clinton said.
"We don't think it's in the interest of the success of the policy to lay it all out at this time," said one senior official speaking during a not-for-attribution briefing that followed Clinton's press conference. The options "encompass a range of diplomatic, economic, and other possibilities" and include "all elements of national power," the official said.
The promise of a calculated balance was applauded by advocacy groups who had grown concerned that Gration was tilting too heavily towards Khartoum, in what the groups believed would be a vain quest for an agreement unless coupled with increasing pressures. Participants in the White House briefing included prominent proponents of a tougher Sudan stance, including John Prendergast of the Enough Project, Jerry Fowler from Save Darfur, representatives from Human Rights Watch and Human Rights Now and former Special State Department Representative for Sudan Roger Winter, who has a long history of support for the southern Sudanese.
Last month, a letter to Obama from advocacy groups authored by Prendergast described the administration's diplomatic strategy as "fundamentally flawed". In an AllAfrica interview at the same time, Prendergast called for "a united, all-Sudan, holistic policy" and expressed misgivings about the way Gration was proceeding. After the policy was released last week , Prendergast expressed hopefulness, saying the policy "demands accountability and verifiable progress on a wide range of issues before incentives would be deployed," instead of relying on incentives as "the primary means for encouraging behavioral change on the ground in Sudan", which was the direction he and others sensed the policy was heading.
Gration, a gregarious retired Air Force general with a 'can-do' demeanor, has a mandate from President Obama to solve a complex problem with a tortured history. Since becoming special envoy, he has made repeated trips to see all Sudanese factions. He has met with heads-of-state in the region, conducted talks at the United Nations and traveled to both Beijing and, this month, to Moscow for additional consultations.
In June, he organized a conference with participation from more than 30 countries and international organizations, designed to reinvigorate the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. Briefing reporters at the State Department prior to the conference, Gration grabbed headlines when he seemed to pull back from the 'genocide' designation for Darfur that has been U.S. policy since 2004.
"What we see is the remnants of genocide," he said in response to a reporter's question. "What we see are the consequences of genocide, the results of genocide." He said the violence currently taking place is "primarily between rebel groups: and doesn't appear to be like the "coordinated effort" that took place in 2003-2006
During a session with bloggers at the State Department several weeks ago, when asked why he was willing to engage with the Khartoum regime while President Omar al-Bashir is facing war crimes charges, Gration said: "We'd like to be able to fix Darfur and the south without ever having to go to Khartoum." The achievement of "durable lasting peace" requires bridging gaps and resolving tough challenges, he said. "That's why I have had to establish a relationship of trust, even with Khartoum." He said he has not met with Bashir, "but I'm not ruling it out if we have to do it to move the process forward."
Washington Post correspondent Stephanie McCrummen, who traveled with Gration to Sudan in September, quotes him saying on the topic of dealings with Khartoum: "We've got to think about giving out cookies," adding: "Kids, countries -- they react to gold stars, smiley faces, handshakes, agreements, talk, engagement," comments which Gration and the White House claimed were misconstrued. Critics feared that Gration wanted to ease U.S. sanctions on Sudan to boost his diplomatic efforts.
But there won't be any gold stars for the moment, it seems. Obama said he will renew Sudan sanctions by executive order before they expire early next month. "If the Government of Sudan acts to improve the situation on the ground and to advance peace, there will be incentives," the President said. "If it does not, then there will be increased pressure imposed by the United States and the international community."
According to several officials, the administration has ruled out direct contact with Bashir. Other incentives, such as an easing of sanctions, will depend upon "verifiable" movement on both Darfur and the peace accord, several officials stressed. "We have to see significant, tangible, concrete progress across the board," one senior official said during the background State Department briefing. Before any incentives are approved for Sudan, the administration will require "progress in all three areas," not just one.
The State Department strategy paper lists three U.S. strategic priorities in Sudan:
• 1) A definitive end to conflict, gross human rights abuses, and genocide in Darfur.
• 2) Implementation of the North-South Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) that results in either a peaceful post-2011 Sudan or an orderly path toward two separate and viable states, at peace with each other.
• 3) Ensure that Sudan does not provide a safe haven for international terrorists.
The Special Envoy "will play the leading role" in carrying out the strategy, and in pursuit of these goals will engage in "frank dialogue with the government of Sudan about what needs to be accomplished, how the bilateral relationship can improve if conditions transform, and how the government will become even more isolated if conditions remain the same or worsen."
"The United States will seek to broaden and deepen the multilateral coalition actively working to achieve peace in Darfur and full implementation of the CPA such that backsliding by any party is met with credible, meaningful disincentives, leveraged by the United States and the international community," the document states.
A key component of the strategy is the commitment to a quarterly review "at senior levels" to examine "a variety of indicators of progress or of deepening crisis. The review will encompass "calibrated steps to bolster support for positive change and to discourage backsliding."
"Progress toward achievement of the strategic objectives will trigger steps designed to strengthen the hands of those implementing the changes," the document states. "Failure to improve conditions will trigger increased pressure on recalcitrant actors."
The quarterly assessment will be conducted by the Deputies Committee of the National Security Council, whose members are the second-ranking officials at State, Defense and Treasury and other agencies. "That provides some direct accountability for the president, the vice president, the secretary of state, and the permanent representative to the UN, as there should be," Prendergast said. "This high-level review must be rigorous and demanding – not just a pro forma checking of the box."
Prendergast, along with other activists, believes the announced policy can succeed only if there is consistent, high-level engagement from administration officials. He noted that candidates Obama and Clinton, as well as then-Senator, now Vice President Joseph Biden all took a "tough line" on Sudan, but lamented what he called their "absence of attention" as day-to-day policy makers. Implementing measures that will end the violence, he argued, requires a "fierce urgency" at the highest levels of the U.S. government, as well as engagement by Congress and civil society organizations.
Active involvement by other countries is another key component of the strategy. "This requires the issuing of demarches, the deployment of senior diplomats to capitals and to the UN, and telephone calls and meetings by the president and other senior administration officials in the construction of such a multilateral coalition" Prendergast wrote. "The president and other cabinet officials need to be seen to be doing this right away, or other countries will dismiss this strong policy statement as largely rhetorical."
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
A January 2009 report on the effectiveness of the sanctions, issued by the Office of Foreign Assets Control at the Treasury Department, concluded that the arms embargo and other measures "have applied constructive pressures" that have influenced Sudanese government decisions, but also said that "multilateral sanctions offer the most powerful opportunity" to increase sanctions' impact.
An aspect of the stated policy welcomed by Congressman Payne is the explicit recognition that the people of southern Sudan may choose independence when they vote in a referendum on the issue in 2011, which is part of the negotiated peace agreement of 2005. "We must be prepared for that outcome now and do what we can to help prepare for the existence of two countries in peace," he said.
The principle of a referendum was negotiated in the 2005 peace agreement, but the parties differ on interpretations. Gration, who has been working on achieving consensus between the government in the north and the southern Sudanese, says that 10 of the 12 points have been resolved. Still outstanding are how to conduct a nationwide census and the terms for carrying out the vote. With the referendum scheduled to take place in 15 months and a national election in Sudan slated in six months, Gration said progress on these issues is urgent. The suffering of an estimated 2.7 million people, who have been uprooted from their homes in Darfur and are still dying in camps in both Sudan and neighboring Chad, is also waiting to be addressed.
With the policy now on the table, key questions include: (1) has the administration succeeded in creating internal consensus and soothing critics on this issue and (2) will the strategy begin to produce movement on the critical issues it is designed to address.
The pressure on the administration over Sudan policy has, for the most part, come from critics who have worked closely, in the past, with current officials. The 'Save Darfur' campaigns that spread across the country in recent years engaged many people who helped mobilize support for Obama's election last November.
Prendergast's co-founder at the Enough Project was Gayle Smith, who now holds a senior post on the National Security Council (NSC) staff and played a significant part in drafting the new policy document. Prendergast also worked closely with Smith and with Rice in the Clinton administration, which he served as director for African affairs at the NSC and special adviser at the State Department.
Divisions that emerged over Sudan in the months after the inauguration have seemed to narrow during the recent policy formulation process. The positive reception to the White House and State Department announcements by activist groups suggests that their unease has diminished, at least for now. But the hardest work lies ahead.
"There is much uncertainty in how the strategy will ultimately be implemented and how it will hold up under the stresses and complexities of what is looming in Sudan on the one hand and the scrutiny and impatience of domestic skeptics on the other," Stephen Morrison and Jennifer Cooke from the Center for Strategic and International Studies wrote in an analysis of the policy last week.
The administration's policy statement opens with an apt summary of the current challenge: "Sudan is at an important crossroads that can either lead to steady improvements in the lives of the Sudanese people or degenerate into even more violent conflict and state failure."
The statement continues: "Sudan's implosion could lead to widespread regional instability or new safe-havens for international terrorists, significantly threatening U.S. interests. The United States has a clear obligation to the Sudanese people -- both in our role as witness to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, and as the first country that unequivocally identified events in Darfur as genocide – to help lead an international effort."
