Tess Finch-Lees: No, Darfur hasn't been 'solved', whatever the media suggest

Saturday 09 May 2009 19:00 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

A the risk of incurring a "feckwa" from Sir Bob, I have always been sceptical about celebrities and the Africa bandwagon. But, all credit should go to actress Mia Farrow. A fortnight ago she embarked on a hunger strike as "an expression of personal outrage" at the world's abandonment of Darfur. Yesterday, on the advice of her doctor, she quit. Now Richard Branson has taken up the baton.

On 4 March, the Sudanese President, Omar al-Bashir, was indicted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity and war crimes. Within days, he expelled 16 aid agencies from Darfur. Over the past six years, an estimated 450,000 people have been slaughtered and some four million displaced, all of them now dependent on aid, without which they face imminent death by starvation and disease. Even now, as we enter the final chapter of the Darfur genocide, the UN blindly pursues its deadly policy of appeasement. Instead of standing up to the bullies in Khartoum, the UN despatched an envoy to seek permission for aid agencies to be readmitted. Unsurprisingly, talks ended in failure.

Meanwhile, Bashir, who dismisses the humanitarian crisis as a Zionist conspiracy, has offered to plug the gap left by expelled NGOs. Despite the fact that this amounts to putting the fox in charge of the hen house, the UN is going along with it. The beleaguered souls in the camps are now prepared to die of hunger, rather than accept "aid" from Khartoum.

The handling of this crisis has been marred by missed opportunities and diplomatic ineptitude. In 2005, the international community unanimously signed up to the "Responsibility to Protect" mandate. This requires them to intervene, by any means necessary, to protect civilians being persecuted by their sovereign state. It has never been implemented in Darfur.

As the peace deal in Southern Sudan collapses, due to Khartoum's failure to honour its commitments there, peace deals are still being championed as the panacea in Darfur. This plays into the hands of the Khartoum government, which will exploit the fact that some rebel groups refuse to play the peace deal game again. Why? Answer: Khartoum is not a credible partner in peace. In 2004, it signed an agreement in which it undertook to disarm the Janjaweed militia and enforce a no-fly zone to prevent bombs being dropped on African villages in Darfur. Neither has happened.

In December 2007, the deployment of a 26,000 strong UN and African Union force was agreed, but 16 months later only 9,000 troops have been mobilised. In total, 16 UN resolutions have been passed, none of which have been implemented, with no consequences for Khartoum.

The time wasted in brokering deals has prolonged the agony on the ground. It is unconscionable to ask Darfuris to negotiate with a government whose President is wanted by the ICC for crimes against humanity. Further talks are futile until Khartoum is made to obey previous deals.

The urgency for action has never been greater, yet the world's media acts as if Darfur has been "solved". The chief criterion for securing coverage, it seems, is celebrity endorsement. Mia Farrow knew this, and so does Richard Branson. Yet she is sneered at for not being prepared to die for her cause, and doubtless he will be mocked when he goes back to food after three days. Silence and inaction kill just as surely as an AK-47. So does diversionary press sneering. How shameful.

Tess Finch-Lees is a human rights campaigner and freelance writer

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in