Darfur conflict dominates Africa summit

Darfur conflict dominates Africa summit

ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia — Bloodshed in Sudan's Darfur region dominated the African Union summit Monday, undermining Sudan's bid to lead the bloc as the U.N. chief said scorched-earth military policies are "a terrifying feature of life" in the vast, arid area.
With Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir looking on, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said that "the toll of the crisis remains unacceptable," with more than 200,000 people killed and 2.5 million displaced in four years of fighting.
He called on African leaders to end the deadlock created by Sudan's refusal to allow U.N. peacekeepers into Darfur.
Hours later, in a rebuff to al-Bashir, the African Union chose Ghana to head the 53-member bloc, turning aside Sudan's bid for the post for the second year in a row.
"By consensus vote, President (John) Kufuor of Ghana has been elected to the presidency of the African Union," Alpha Oumar Konare, the AU's chief executive, told reporters at the session in Ethiopia's capital, Addis Ababa.
Konare said Sudan supported the decision, but Sudanese leaders had been adamant that their country deserved the rotating chairmanship.
"This is a very unfortunate development," Sudanese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ali Sadiq said in Khartoum, Sudan. "The African heads of states had committed to this last year. That they changed their mind shows there was heavy pressure from outside Africa."
Sudan had pushed to get the post at last year's summit, which it hosted, but African leaders selected Republic of Congo's president in a compromise deal in which he would hold it for a year and then hand it over to al-Bashir.
But that deal hinged on Sudan demonstrating progress in bringing peace to Darfur. Instead of calming, Darfur's violence in recent months has spilled into neighboring Chad and Central African Republic.
International organizations opposed Sudan leading the AU, accusing al-Bashir's government of encouraging conflict in Darfur. Rebel leaders in the region said they would stop considering an AU peacekeeping mission as an honest broker if Sudan was selected.
Nobel laureate Desmond Tutu also sharply criticized Sudan on Monday, and a French aid group said it was pulling out of western Sudan because of insecurity. Six other international charities said Sunday that their work in Darfur will soon be paralyzed unless urgent action is taken.
Darfur has been spiraling out of control since rebels from ethnic African farm communities took up arms against the Arab-dominated central government in 2003.
Sudan's government has been accused of retaliating against civilians as well as supporting paramilitary groups from nomadic Arab tribes blamed for some of the worst atrocities in the conflict. Sudan's government denies the allegations.
The government signed a peace agreement with one Darfur rebel faction last May, but violence has only worsened. Sudan and Chad also have been trading accusations of supporting each others' rebel groups.
Al-Bashir has opposed a U.N. Security Council resolution that calls for 22,000 U.N. peacekeepers to replace or absorb the weak AU force of 7,000 soldiers now in Darfur.
But late Monday, Sadiq, the Foreign Ministry spokesman in Khartoum, said Sudan's government had agreed to cooperate on forming a "hybrid force" for Darfur that would include U.N. troops.
"What has come to be known as the hybrid force has been agreed on by all parties, including Sudan," Sadiq told The Associated Press.
He said no final agreement on troop numbers had been reached, although AU and U.N. officials say the United Nations could be sending as many as 10,000 to 15,000. Sadiq said U.N. troops could begin deploying in July.
Sudan has reneged on previous agreements to allow the United Nations into Darfur, however, and al-Bashir — who has the final say on such matters — was not immediately available for comment.
Ban released a statement Monday saying Sudan's president had agreed to "accelerate" efforts to create such a force.
The summit, which ends Tuesday, is also focusing on assembling an African peacekeeping force for Somalia, which has been without an effective central government since clan warlords toppled a longtime military dictatorship in 1991 and then fell to fighting among themselves.
A U.N.-backed interim administration supported by Ethiopia's military defeated an Islamic militia in the Horn of Africa nation, but Ethiopian troops are pulling out and there are worries that warlords and other armed groups could disrupt efforts to restore stability.

PEACE ANDPEACE ANDPEACE ANDPEACE AND

PEACE AND
HUMAN RIGHTS
IN SUDAN
Conference on 3rd February 2007 sponsored by Liberation and Aslef
4pm-8.30pm
Venue: Paddington Art Centre
32 Woodfield Road
London W9
Tel.020 7286 2722
Nearest station-Westbourne Park (Hammersmith & City line)
PROGRAMME
Sudanese Exhibition
Welcome Address by Jeremy Corbyn MP (Liberation Chair)
Co-Chair Hashim Mohammed Ahmed
Opening Session
Human Rights in Darfur - Ahmed Diraige
Situation in Eastern Province - Speaker
Prospects for Peace in Southern Sudan - Speaker
Peace and Women’s Rights - Aissha Humarda
Questions
Refreshments- Tea and Coffee
Session Two
Tom Sibley - ICTUR
The role of the Sudan Trade Unions in the UK
Representative of the Sudanese Trade Union Federation - Eltayeb Ibrahim Elmadih,
Trade Union Rights - Alham Nasir (Sudanese Centre for Trade Union Rights)
Women’s Rights in the Sudan - Kawther Hamed
Questions
DECLARATION
Close: Hashim Mohammed Ahmed
For more information call Liberation on 0207 435 4547

Plea over Darfur crisis

Plea over Darfur crisis The world is facing a huge human tragedy in Darfur unless the international community intervenes, a humanitarian organisation said today.Speaking after a visit to the region, Concern Worldwide chief executive Tom Arnold called for political action to enforce a ceasefire in the war-torn region.The UN has warned that if the security situation doesn’t improve, it may pull out its humanitarian aid teams.Concern claims that 12 aid workers have been killed in Darfur since last July and a further five are missing.Mr Arnold said: “Unless there is increased recognition, within Sudan and internationally, of the scale of the humanitarian crisis in Darfur, we will be faced with a huge long-term human tragedy.“The only way to prevent this is for urgent political action to improve security in the short-term and to start a meaningful longer term peace process.”

Texas Legislators File 'Stop the Darfur Genocide Act'

Texas Legislators File 'Stop the Darfur Genocide Act'

Bipartisan Bill Directs State Pension Funds to Divest Holdings in Companies
Supporting Genocide and State-Sponsored Terrorism

AUSTIN, Texas, Jan. 24 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Senator Rodney Ellis
(D - Houston) and Rep. Corbin Van Arsdale (R - Houston) announced the
filing of Senate Bill 247 & House Bill 667. The bipartisan legislation
calls for the targeted divestment of state pension funds invested in
companies doing business with the government of Sudan. Texas Railroad
Commissioner Michael Williams, Sen. Florence Shapiro, Rep. Ruth Jones
McClendon and representatives of the University of Texas anti-genocide
student coalition, The White Rose Society, joined the legislators in
announcing the legislation.
In the past four years, the Sudanese government and their allied
organizations have systemically killed more than 400,000 people and
displaced more than 2.5 million in Sudan's Darfur region. For the first
time in history, the U.S. government declared these ongoing atrocities to
be genocide. The U.N. declared the crisis the "worst humanitarian disaster
in the world today."
The Sudan Divestment Task Force, a project of the Genocide Intervention
Network, developed the model legislation. Adam Sterling is the Project
Director of the Task Force.
"We are grateful for the bipartisan support and leadership of Senator
Ellis, Rep. Van Arsdale and Commissioner Williams on this vital initiative.
Texas has a unique opportunity to lead the nation and the world by
divesting its state pension funds from companies that support and condone
state- sponsored terrorism," Sterling said.
'Stop the Darfur Genocide Act' utilizes a targeted divestment model
focusing on the companies in Sudan that have a business relationship with
the Sudanese government, impart minimal benefit to the underprivileged and
have expressed no corporate responsibility policy regarding the current
situation in Sudan. The targeted divestment approach will help to maximize
the desired effect on the Sudanese government while minimizing harm to
Sudanese civilians and investment returns.
The legislation ensures that only the most egregiously offending
companies will be affected and excludes any company that substantially
benefits those outside of government circles such as those involved in
medicine, education, general consumer goods, and agriculture. The
legislation has already passed in 6 states and is similar to efforts
currently underway in over 20 other states.
Sterling also added, "While the exact figure won't be known until Texas
fully scans its portfolios, most pension fund systems have somewhere
between tens and hundreds of millions of dollars invested in problematic
companies tied to Sudan -- a figure that is relatively small compared to
Texas' pension funds size, but is rather large in the context of Sudan."
"It is clear the Sudanese government is largely unresponsive to recent
political pressure," said Senator Ellis. "It's time to turn up the economic
pressure, and the pocketbook is a good pressure point. Texans have said
with a loud and clear voice that it is time for the State of Texas to take
a strong stand against this genocide."
Rep. Van Arsdale added, "Texas can't stand idle while thousands of
innocent people are being systematically slaughtered. The White House and
Congress have declared Darfur a genocide. That's an important threshold.
And we shouldn't be funding Texans' retirements by investing in companies
who fuel a genocidal engine."
"Ending the ongoing genocide is a bipartisan issue we can all agree
on," said Texas Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams, a long-time Darfur
advocate. "The effort in Texas reflects a coalition of support from
progressive liberal organizations as well as faith-based, ecumenical groups
united for a common good. I'm calling upon all Texans to join the effort to
end this atrocity and embarrassment to humanity," he added.
Leran Minc, a board member of The White Rose Society, a UT
anti-genocide student coalition, joined the press conference and voiced the
support of many campus-based initiatives working to help Darfur. The
contingent of students concerned about this issue is sizable and
organized," Minc said. "We will play an active role in advancing this
legislation and raising awareness of this issue."
For more information, go to

Early CIA Involvement in Darfur Has Gone Unreported

Early CIA Involvement in Darfur Has Gone Unreported

There has been a glaring omission in the U.S. media presentation of the Darfur tragedy. The compassion demonstrated, mostly in words, until recently, has not been accompanied by a recognition of U.S. complicity, or at least involvement, in the war which has led to the enormous suffering and loss of life that has been taking place in Darfur for many years.In 1978 oil was discovered in Southern Sudan. Rebellious war began five years later and was led by John Garang, who had taken military training at infamous Fort Benning, Georgia. "The US government decided, in 1996, to send nearly $20 million of military equipment through the 'front-line' states of Ethiopia, Eritrea and Uganda to help the Sudanese opposition overthrow the Khartoum regime." [Federation of American Scientists fas.org]Between 1983 and the peace agreement signed in January 2005, Sudan's civil war took nearly two million lives and left millions more displaced. Garang became a First Vice President of Sudan as part of the peace agreement in 2005. From 1983, "war and famine-related effects resulted in more than 4 million people displaced and, according to rebel estimates, more than 2 million deaths over a period of two decades." [CIA Fact Book -entry Sudan]The BBC obituary of John Garang, who died in a plane crash shortly afterward, describes him as having "varied from Marxism to drawing support from Christian fundamentalists in the US." "There was always confusion on central issues such as whether the Sudan People's Liberation Army was fighting for independence for southern Sudan or merely more autonomy. Friends and foes alike found the SPLA's human rights record in southern Sudan and Mr Garang's style of governance disturbing." Gill Lusk - deputy editor of Africa Confidential and a Sudan specialist who interviewed the ex-guerrilla leader several times over the years was quoted by BBC, "John Garang did not tolerate dissent and anyone who disagreed with him was either imprisoned or killed." CIA use of tough guys like Garang in Sudan, Savimbi in Angola, Mobutu in Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo), had been reported, even in mass media, though certainly not featured or criticized, but presently, this is of course buried away from public awareness and meant to be forgotten, as commercial media focuses on presenting the U.S. wars of today in a heroic light. It has traditionally been the chore of progressive, alternate and independent journalism to see that their deathly deeds supported by U.S. citizens tax dollars are not forgotten, ultimately not accepted and past Congresses and Presidents held responsible, even in retrospect, when not in real time.Oil and business interests remain paramount and although Sudan is on the U.S. Government's state sponsors of terrorism list, the United States alternately praises its cooperation in tracking suspect individuals or scolds about the Janjaweed in Darfur. National Public Radio on May 2, 2005 had Los Angeles Times writer Ken Silverstein talk about his article "highlighting strong ties between the U.S. and Sudanese intelligence services, despite the Bush administration's criticism of human-rights violation in the Sudan." Title was "Sudan, CIA Forge Close Ties, Despite Rights Abuses." Nicholas Kristof, of The New York Times, won a 2006 Pulitzer Prize for "his having alerted this nation and the world to these massive crimes against humanity. He made six dangerous trips to Darfur to report names and faces of victims of the genocide for which President Bush had long before indicted the government of Sudan to the world's indifference." [Reuters] But last November saw the opening of a new U.S. consulate in Juba the capital of the Southern region. (Maybe consider this an example of "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em!" especially where oil is involved.)The point is there is human suffering at mammoth level proportions. Humanitarian activists are trying to pry open the purse strings of an administration and congress willing to spend billions upon billions to get people killed and keep them in their place, namely, at our feet. Reminding Congress of what needs to be atoned for because of past policies of supporting war and human destruction could eventually make present policies of war intolerable. Americans are presently not exactly conscious stricken about dead and maimed Iraqis and Afghans, for commerical media always keeps of most of the human particulars of war crimes modestly out of sight, dramatizing much lesser losses and suffering of American military personal abroad. Darfur made the headlines again because a governor of presidential timber was building up his foreign policy credentials. Meanwhile we are going to continue to see newsreels of our mass media depressing us with scenes of starving children, basically as testimony of how evil another Islamic nation's government is, so we can feel good - and want to purchase the products needing the advertising - which pays for the entertainment/news programs - which keep viewers in the dark about THEIR contribution to the suffering brought upon those people all the way over there in Africa.Just try to put 4 and 2 million of anything into perspective. We are talking about an equivalent to the sets of eyes of half the population of Manhattan. Imagine one of us, whether a precious child ,a handsome man, a beautiful women, - to the tune of, (dirge of), one times four million, half of us dead. Sorry! It has no impact right? We realize that, remembering the words of Joseph Stalin (of all people), "One man's death is a tragedy, a thousand, is a statistic." There is absolutely no way we can whip up enough anguish to match a total of four million displaced and two million dead Sudanese, unless we could be of a mind and heart with Martin Luther King dealing with three million dead Vietnamese, also as in this case, over on the other side of the world, far from our living rooms - "So it is that those of us who are yet determined that "America will be" are led down the path of protest and dissent, working for the health of our land." (MLK, 1967, "Beyond Vietnam") This writer remembers reading newspapers articles about the U.S. backing the Southern Sudan rebellion way back then. If we had supported a side that wound up winning, we would be bragging about our having supported 'freedom fighters'. But we just threw a lot of money and outdated weapons at a John Garang in the Sudan, as we did with Jonas Savimbi in Angola, to the ultimate destruction of millions of people, and they LOST! Like we did in Vietnam, and half-way lost in Korea, and now are mid-way losing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Jesus! Calculating the chances of an investment in human life and money coming to a fruition of sorts - that is certainly the job of any intelligence gathering agency! What we have had is an Agency using its gathered intelligence to do unintelligent things because, as our Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote more than a hundred and twenty-five years ago, "Things are in the saddle and ride herd over men" (trampling others under foot, we might add)The European Union is under pressure from inside to assure that a United Nations force of 20,000 men will be sent to Darfur as required by Security Council resolution 1706, and to threaten sanctions in order to halt a war the U.S. was originally interested to see begun. The U.N. Security Council will receive a list from the International Criminal Court of those Sudanese officials who could be charged with war crimes. The list is expected include some members of rebel organizations among Sudanese government officials and Janjaweed militias. There assuredly will be no names on the list of non-Sudanese officials of nations which were known to have involved themselves in this Sudanese civil war contrary to accepted provisions and obligations of U.N. membership. But we can know that the responsibility for war, slaughter, rape and theft in Sudan extends beyond the leaders of those murderously weilding guns and swords. It will be good if outside influence will now be focused on peace, but citizens best be vigilant of their nation's foreign policy intentions. The world has heard many protestations that oil is not a reason for war, but blood and oil has been known to mix.

INTERNATIONAL PAPER

INTERNATIONAL PAPER

It was Lenin who amended Marx’s dictum ‘workers of all lands unite’ to ‘workers and oppressed peoples of all lands unite’. He did so on the understanding that with imperialism capitalism had entered a new stage in its development with the exportation of capital and the carving out of new markets for manufactured goods. This brutal process of colonisation, both economic and military, continues today, though now with more emphasis on securing sources of cheap labour and production costs rather than markets. The result has been a human catastrophe for the developing world and an increase in poverty in the developed world.

AFRICA

In the Darfur region of Sudan ethnic cleansing continues while the UN and the West wring their hands. The racism implicit in the inaction in the face of this ongoing catastrophe mirrors the inaction which resulted in the Rwandan genocide of 1994. We call upon the UN to fund a robust African Union presence in Sudan to stop the violence, followed by the immediate arrest of members of the incumbent Sudanese government responsible for the violence in the region to face charges of crimes against humanity in an all-African court.

Ultimately, the cause of the conflict in Darfur is the devastating legacy of colonialism, which has retarded the natural economic development of the entire African continent. Where there is poverty there is tension as tribes, ethnic and/or religious groups, struggle to gain control over what little resources are available. This has resulted in a neverneding series of civil wars throughout the African continent.

In addition, six million children under the age of 5 perish yearly in sub-Saharan Africa through hunger and preventable diseases such as malaria. Through international institutions such as the World Bank, World Health Organisation (WHO), and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the West continues to keep Africa in a perennial state of under development.

As such, Solidarity rejects completely the idea that initiatives promulgated by campaigns like Make Poverty History, involving fair trade, the cancelling of the debt, and trade liberalisation, can ever offer a way forward for the peoples of the African continent. We do so on the understanding that the solution to poverty in Africa simply cannot be supplied by the cause of that poverty: namely capitalism and its need to continually generate profit or else stagnate and die. We demand, instead, an end to the super exploitation of the African continent by multinational corporations with the aid of the IMF and World Bank; an end to Western interference in African affairs, especially US covert and overt military operations, and the return of both economic and political sovereignty to the African peoples.

MIDDLE EAST

As the twin occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq continue, Solidarity holds to the inviolability of the right of self determination. As such, we call for the immediate withdrawal of all occupying troops from both nations. The Iraqi and Afghan people have the right to resist the military occupation of their respective countries, and Solidarity recognises that right without equivocation. Whilst lamenting the sectarian violence in Iraq, we apportion the blame for the violence to the occupation. Over 650,000 Iraqis have died in this imperialist adventure and we charge the British and US governments with war crimes and crimes against humanity in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Moreover, the likelihood of the conflict widening to involve Iran has increased, and the resulting tension has served to destabilise the entire region.

Further, this imperialist war and occupation has impacted negatively on the working class here at home. The £1.4 billion pounds the twin occupations will cost this financial year is money denied the NHS, our schools, communities and pensions. As with all wars under capitalism, the premise involved in the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan is simple: poor people being sent to a foreign land by rich people to fight and kill other poor people in order to make those rich people richer.

We view the troops as victims in this war too, and we call upon them to return home to stand with their class in the struggle against their real enemy: the millionaires, the corporations and a government which governs on their behalf.

Understanding the Middle East as constituting the front line in the international struggle against the spread of the Free Market, understanding the desire by the US ruling class to control the energy supplies of the competing and emerging economies of China, India and the EU, as well as maintaining the currency hegemony of the dollar, Solidarity desires the defeat of US-led efforts to pacify the region in their own economic and strategic interests. We do so rejecting any and all propaganda which attempts to justify US and British military presence as an attempt to democratise the region.

Solidarity acknowledges the work of the Stop the War Coalition (STWC) and Military Families against the War and we resolve to continue to support both campaigns in the coming period.

In Palestine, a brutal and bloody programme of ethnic cleansing continues to be resisted by the Palestinian people. The apartheid state of Israel, a strategic asset of the US, must be brought to its knees in the interests not only of peace in the region, but also in the interests if human progress. In its actions, its repeated violations of international law, its continued acts of aggression against its neighbours, Israel has revealed itself to be a lawless state, intent on a policy of perpetual war and the formation of a greater Israel. We pay tribute to the heroic resistance of the Lebanese people in repelling an invasion of Southern Lebanon in August, 2006, and we demand an end to Israel’s occupation of Palestine and the Golan Heights in violation of UN resolution 242. In solidarity with the Palestinian people, we support the right of return of all Palestinian refugees, demand the release of the 10,000 prisoners currently being held in Israeli prisons, and recognise the 1948 Naqba as a crime against humanity.

Just as the apartheid state of South Africa was brought to its knees through a combination of domestic resistance and an international solidarity campaign to isolate it economically, politically and socially, Solidarity supports the ongoing efforts of activists around the world to carry out a similar campaign against the state of Israel in solidarity with the Palestinian people. As such, we recognise and endorse the work of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign (SPSC).

LATIN AMERICA

The leftward shift which has taken place in this region of the world provides hope for the world’s poor and for working class people in every nation.

The Cuban revolution continues to inspire and act as a beacon of hope for the world’s poor in its ability to harness the human capital of its people in the cause of socialism. Despite a low intensity war being waged against them by the US, in the form of an economic embargo, in the continued occupation of its territory by US forces at Guantanamo, in the pernicious attempts by successive US governments to fund and foment internal dissent, the Cuban people continue to astound the world with their resolve, resilience and commitment to the cause of social and economic justice. The internationalism demonstrated repeatedly by the Cuban government in sending medical aid and personnel to countries throughout the developing world is testament to Cuba’s determination to advance the cause of human progress globally. Solidarity salutes the Cuban government and the Cuban people, and we support their ongoing resistance to the concerted efforts by the US government to isolate and destabilise the Cuban revolution.

Solidarity supports the work of the Cuba Solidarity Campaign (CSC) in raising awareness and educating the working class at home and abroad on the outstanding achievements of the Cuban revolution.

In Venezuela, the Bolivarian revolutionary process, headed by Hugo Chavez, has literally transformed the lives of the nation’s poor. Just under a million children in Venezuela from the shanty towns and poorest villages now receive free education; 1.2 million illiterate adults have been taught to read and write; secondary education has been made available to 250,000 children previously excluded by their social status. As for healthcare, the 14,000 Cuban doctors sent to help the country have transformed the situation in poor communities, where 11,000 neighbourhood clinics have been established and the health budget has tripled. New homes have been and are being built, agrarian reform has redistributed large swathes of land to the poor, and an entire generation are being politicised in the process.

Internationally, Chavez has shown courage in confronting US imperialism, denouncing Bush and his administration at the UN, as well as demonstrating his solidarity with the Palestinian, Iraqi and Lebanese people in their respective struggles against US and US-sponsored imperialism in the Middle East. At time of writing, Chavez, buoyed by yet another landslide victory at the polls, has announced his intention of moving Venezuela towards socialism in the coming years. In this he enjoys the support of the overwhelming majority of the Venezuelan people, the same people that overturned a US backed coup attempt in 2002, the same people who are helping to change the course of history across the whole of Latin America.

Solidarity supports the efforts of Hugo Chavez to rid Latin America of US economic penetration and his ongoing efforts to effect, where possible, economic, political and cultural ties throughout the region in the interests of working class, poor and indigenuous peoples. We applaud the continuing shift towards the complete socialist transformation of Venezuelan society, and we view with hope the general leftward trajectory currently taking place across Latin America as a whole.

We support the efforts of the Hands Off Venezuela Campaign (HOV) in forging links between the Bolivarian Revolution and the trade union movement and working class here at home.



SOUTHEAST ASIA

The effect of the economic crisis which beset the so-called Asian tiger economies of the Pacific Rim in the late-nineties has been an increase in the penetration of the region by the US, through the IMF. This economic penetration is reinforced by a huge military presence in the region, with US military bases in Japan, Thailand, South Korea and Indonesia. The ongoing tension in the region involving the DPRK is the direct result of over 30,000 US troops stationed in South Korea and the presence of nuclear-strike aircraft carriers and submarines. This military encirclement, married to an economic embargo, married to the awful memory of a war (1950-1953) in which over 3 million Koreans were slaughtered, has led directly to the isolation of the DPRK and the continuing hardship suffered by its people.

Where the material conditions for bureaucratic degeneration exist – i.e. economic privation and military threat – then we, as socialists, view our task as effecting a change in those material conditions, rather than attacking their symptoms. We therefore demand the removal of all US military personnel from the Korean peninsula and a lifting of the economic embargo against the DPRK.

EUROPE

The expansion and enlargement of the EU, to include countries of the former Soviet Bloc, has made available an increased supply of cheap labour and offered cheaper production costs to multinational corporations. All across Europe wages have been depressed, and working conditions and the social wage are under assault in what has been the most regressive period in post-war European history. As European capitalist economies strive to compete with the US, China and India globally, European workers have found themselves at the sharp end of a rightward shift as social democratic formations in France, Germany and Italy have come under the influence and control of big business. As a result of increasing and unrelenting competition for market share European workers have found themselves involved in a race to the bottom against workers in China, India and southeast Asia, as profits are squeezed.

As for small nations, such as Ireland, the Baltic and Scandinavian states, neoliberalism has been embraced by all the mainstream political parties, with the resulting deepening of inequality and increase in poverty. The so-called Celtic tiger of Ireland has seen child poverty increase to a third, the highest rate in Western Europe, with a concomitant increase in poverty indicators amongst other sectors of society. With corporation tax at 13 percent, Ireland is now a haven for global corporations; the Irish ruling class having shamelessly offered up their working class for exploitation.

Sadly, Sinn Fein has also embraced neoliberalism throughout the island of Ireland, having cleverly been led down the political cul de sac which is the Good Friday Agreement by both the Irish and British governments.

Across the whole of Europe the need for a socialist alternative is greater than ever, and Solidarity expresses the hope that those flashes of resistance to neoliberalism which have taken place in recent years, such as the exemplary action taken by French youth in beating back regressive reform of the employment legislation, can and do develop into movements of sustained resistance.

We offer solidarity with the working class and socialists throughout Europe, pledging our determination to stand with them in resisting a rise in anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim racism unleashed by governments intent on fomenting division amongst the working class; this in order to more easily implement regressive economic policies designed to transfer increased wealth to the rich.

NORTH AMERICA

Here, in the belly of the beast, we view with hope the rise of an immigrants’ rights movements from below in recent years, and we support the continuing struggle against racist and regressive anti-immigrant laws. We call upon the US antiwar movement to join forces with this movement in an attempt to draw the links between the social and economic injustice which lies at the core of US society, the foundation upon which US imperialism rests, and the US war machine.

With just 5 % of the world’s population, the US uses 25 % of the world’s resources and wealth. Over 45 million Americans have no healthcare provision whatsoever, over 30 million live below the poverty line, 8 million of which are children; this despite the US being by far the wealthiest economy in the world with a GDP of 9 trillion dollars.

The US criminal justice system is the harshest and most brutal in the industrialized world, with a full quarter of the entire world’s prison population – just over 2 million people – being held in the US. Sixty percent of this figure are ethnic minorities. Hurricane Katrina left no doubt as to the racism which lies at the heart of the US government, and with further attacks on civil liberties, and as the working class continues to suffer at the sharp end of a virtual economy based on consumer credit, armaments production, and financial speculation, and with a national debt spiralling ever upwards towards, 40% of which is held in international reserve banks overseas, we see the potential for an economic crisis which could lead to social convulsion.

CONCLUSION

The common enemy of humanity in the current epoch is US imperialism and its various allies. Intent on spreading that extreme variant of capitalism – the Free Market – to every part of the planet, a process accelerated after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the US ruling class has demonstrated a brutality and barbarity virtually unparalleled in human history.

In simple terms, they have unleashed war without end on the poor and working class in every land, of every religion and every ethnicity. No respecter of borders, culture or democracy, a major violator of international law, subverter of democracy and human rights, and with over 700 military bases around the world, this is a juggernaut of death and destruction that must be resisted.

Solidarity, Scotland’s Socialist Movement, stands with the working class and the oppressed of all lands currently engaged in this resistance. Along with the rest of the world, especially the developing world, we look forward to the day when US imperialism is defeated on all fronts.

END.

Sudan: Darfur - Worsening Security Could Irreversibly Damage Aid Efforts for Millions - UN

Sudan: Darfur - Worsening Security Could Irreversibly Damage Aid Efforts for Millions - UN

Mounting violence in Sudan's war-torn Darfur region, repeated military attacks, arbitrary bombing of villages and the targeting of aid workers threaten to permanently disrupt the fragile lifeline ensuring the survival of millions of people, the United Nations warned today, noting that relief access in December was the worst in nearly three years.
"If this situation continues, the humanitarian operation and welfare of the population it aims to support will be irreversibly jeopardized," 13 UN bodies involved in the relief efforts said in a joint statement, calling for protection for civilians and humanitarian workers and an end to impunity for perpetrators of human rights abuses.
"If not, the UN humanitarian agencies and NGOs (non-governmental organizations) will not be able to hold the fragile line that to date has provided relief and a measure of protection to some 4 million people in Darfur affected by this tragic conflict."
The agencies, joined by the International Organization for Migration (IOM), noted that over the last two years humanitarian agencies saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians caught up in the conflict, in which nearly four years of fighting between Government forces, allied militias and rebel groups seeking greater autonomy have killed at least 200,000 people and displaced more than 2 million others.
Mortality rates have been brought below emergency levels, malnutrition halved from the height of the crisis in mid-2004 and nearly three-quarters of all Darfurians now have access to safe drinking water and in 2006 alone, 400,000 metric tons of food were delivered.
"In the face of growing insecurity and danger to communities and aid workers, the UN and its humanitarian partners have effectively been holding the line for the survival and protection of millions," the statement said. "That line cannot be held much longer.
It stressed that access to those in need in December was the worst since April 2004, citing repeated military attacks, shifting frontlines, and fragmentation of armed groups that compromised safe humanitarian access. In the last six months alone, more than 250,000 people have been displaced by fighting, many fleeing for the second or third time.
"Villages have been burnt, looted and arbitrarily bombed and crops and livestock destroyed. Sexual violence against women is occurring at alarming rates. This situation is unacceptable. Nor can we accept the violence increasingly directed against humanitarian workers," the agencies said, noting that 12 relief workers have been killed in the past six months, more than in the previous two years combined.
More than 400 humanitarian workers have been forced to relocate 31 times. The reduction in services is leading to deteriorating hygiene in displaced persons' camps, reflected by a cholera outbreak that struck 2,768 people and killed 147 in 2006.
Malnutrition rates are edging perilously close to the emergency threshold, while 60 per cent of households in need of food aid cite insecurity as the main barrier to cultivating their lands.
"The humanitarian community cannot indefinitely assure the survival of the population in Darfur if insecurity continues," the agencies said. "Solid guarantees for the safety of civilians and humanitarian workers is urgently needed. At the same time, those who have committed attacks, harassment, abduction, intimidation, robbery and injury to civilians, including IDPs, humanitarian workers and other non-combatants, must be held accountable."
The statement was endorsed by the following members of the UN Country Team in Sudan: Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), UN Children's Fund (UNICEF), UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), UN Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), UN Development Programme (UNDP), UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), UN Joint Logistics Centre (UNJLC), UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS), UN Office for Project Services (UNOPS), UN Population Fund (UNFPA), World Food Programme (WFP), and World Health Organization (WHO).
Darfur: worsening security could irreversibly damage aid efforts for millions – UN warns
17 January 2007 – Mounting violence in Sudan's war-torn Darfur region, repeated military attacks, arbitrary bombing of villages and the targeting of aid workers threaten to permanently disrupt the fragile lifeline ensuring the survival of millions of people, the United Nations warned today, noting that relief access in December was the worst in nearly three years.
"If this situation continues, the humanitarian operation and welfare of the population it aims to support will be irreversibly jeopardized," 13 UN bodies involved in the relief efforts said in a joint statement, calling for protection for civilians and humanitarian workers and an end to impunity for perpetrators of human rights abuses.
"If not, the UN humanitarian agencies and NGOs (non-governmental organizations) will not be able to hold the fragile line that to date has provided relief and a measure of protection to some 4 million people in Darfur affected by this tragic conflict."
The agencies, joined by the International Organization for Migration (IOM), noted that over the last two years humanitarian agencies saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians caught up in the conflict, in which nearly four years of fighting between Government forces, allied militias and rebel groups seeking greater autonomy have killed at least 200,000 people and displaced more than 2 million others.
Mortality rates have been brought below emergency levels, malnutrition halved from the height of the crisis in mid-2004 and nearly three-quarters of all Darfurians now have access to safe drinking water and in 2006 alone, 400,000 metric tons of food were delivered.
"In the face of growing insecurity and danger to communities and aid workers, the UN and its humanitarian partners have effectively been holding the line for the survival and protection of millions," the statement said. "That line cannot be held much longer.
It stressed that access to those in need in December was the worst since April 2004, citing repeated military attacks, shifting frontlines, and fragmentation of armed groups that compromised safe humanitarian access. In the last six months alone, more than 250,000 people have been displaced by fighting, many fleeing for the second or third time.
"Villages have been burnt, looted and arbitrarily bombed and crops and livestock destroyed. Sexual violence against women is occurring at alarming rates. This situation is unacceptable. Nor can we accept the violence increasingly directed against humanitarian workers," the agencies said, noting that 12 relief workers have been killed in the past six months, more than in the previous two years combined.
More than 400 humanitarian workers have been forced to relocate 31 times. The reduction in services is leading to deteriorating hygiene in displaced persons' camps, reflected by a cholera outbreak that struck 2,768 people and killed 147 in 2006.
Malnutrition rates are edging perilously close to the emergency threshold, while 60 per cent of households in need of food aid cite insecurity as the main barrier to cultivating their lands.
"The humanitarian community cannot indefinitely assure the survival of the population in Darfur if insecurity continues," the agencies said. "Solid guarantees for the safety of civilians and humanitarian workers is urgently needed. At the same time, those who have committed attacks, harassment, abduction, intimidation, robbery and injury to civilians, including IDPs, humanitarian workers and other non-combatants, must be held accountable."
The statement was endorsed by the following members of the UN Country Team in Sudan: Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), UN Children's Fund (UNICEF), UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), UN Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), UN Development Programme (UNDP), UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), UN Joint Logistics Centre (UNJLC), UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS), UN Office for Project Services (UNOPS), UN Population Fund (UNFPA), World Food Programme (WFP), and World Health Organization (WHO).

Darfur Is a Priority Issue for New UN Leader

Darfur Is a Priority Issue for New UN Leader
His address to the Association for a Better New York came at the same time as word from Khartoum, announced by American envoy Bill Richardson, that rebels in Darfur agreed to a 60-day ceasefire with the Sudanese government. The agreement comes ahead of an African Union summit later this month that Secretary-General Ban plans to attend. "I myself intend to participate in my first trip overseas [at] the African Union summit meeting ... later this month in Addis Abbaba in Ethiopia. There, I hope, I will be able to have diplomatic activities and negotiations with President [Omar al-]Bashir of Sudan and other leading players of the African Union. I am firmly committed to resolve this issue as soon as possible, to prevent further sufferings of innocent people in the Darfur area."
Just before he took over the top U.N. post, Secretary-General Ban came under fire from the international community for his failure to publicly condemn use of the death penalty -- at the time of Saddam Hussein's execution in Iraq.
Mr. Ban had written to the Iraqi High Tribunal, urging restraint in the Saddam case, and he tried to set the matter straight during his first news conference with correspondents who cover the United Nations. "I recognize the growing trend in international law, and in national practice, towards a phasing out of the death penalty. I encourage that trend. As member states are taking their decisions, I expect that they will comply with all aspects of international law."
The continuing violence in Iraq has the world's attention this week, following President Bush's decision to increase U.S. troop strength in Baghdad and other Iraqi trouble spots. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is heading to the Middle East (Friday) on a diplomatic campaign to boost support for U.S. policies.
Asked what the U.N. can do to help resolve the strife in Iraq, Secretary-General Ban avoided making any commitment to an expanded role for the United Nations in Iraq. "We will continue to participate in that process as much as we can. But our participation and contribution at this time is largely dictated by the security situation on the ground. We will closely monitor the situation."
Mr. Ban says the worldwide demand for U.N. peacekeeping and mediation services is at an all-time high, and he pledges to streamline those efforts and make them more efficient.

Sudan ’astonished’ by US prodding China over Darfur

Sudan ’astonished’ by US prodding China over Darfur

Jan 15, 2007 (KHARTOUM) — Sudan expressed "astonishment" at US efforts to push China, a key ally of Sudan, to exert more influence on Khartoum to resolve the conflict in Darfur.
During a visit to Beijing on Friday, the US special envoy to Sudan, Andrew Natsios, said he expected China to play a greater role in helping to end the conflict in the western province that has cost thousands of lives.
Sudanese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ali al-Sadek "expressed his astonishment over the trend of the United States and its envoy ... to call on Sudan’s trade and economic partners and friends to help (find) a solution to the Darfur crisis," Sudan’s official SUNA news agency reported.
"Sudan’s door is open to Natsios, who has already visited the country twice, and he has an opportunity to develop ideas and cooperate with the Sudanese government with regards to the Darfur problem," it quoted Sadek as saying.
Sadek recalled that the Sudanese government has already worked out arrangements that will see the United Nations provide support to the ongoing African Union peacekeeping mission in Darfur over three phases.
If Washington and its envoy are serious about helping "the Darfur problem... they should have looked for a solution in cooperation" with the United Nations and African Union, Sadek said.
"Any efforts outside this framework are pointless."
The conflict in Darfur — one of the most violent in Africa — has left some 200,000 people dead and displaced two million others in nearly four years, according to UN figures disputed by the Sudanese authorities.
In August, the UN Security Council called on Khartoum to accept the deployment of 20,000 UN peacekeepers in Darfur to replace the overstretched African Union force.
But that appeal went unheeded — prompting the United Nations, the African Union and Sudan to hammer out a compromise in November for a mixed AU-UN force
China’s relations with Sudan have been criticised in the West as motivated by the need for Sudanese oil, and groups such as the US-based Council on Foreign Relations have accused Beijing of selling arms to Khartoum.
Sadek described China — a veto-wielding permanent member of the UN Security Council — as "a main partner and strategic ally".
"We are confident that China will deal with us through the diplomatic dialogue existing between the two countries," Sadek added.

Dangerous times as desperate duo seeks new global threat

Dangerous times as desperate duo seeks new global threat

WHAT GEORGE Bush really needs now is another 9/11. It is more than five years since al-Qaeda got lucky with the plane bombings in Manhattan and at the Pentagon. Public enthusiasm for retributive justice has waned, not least since more Americans have now died in the war in Iraq than were killed in the twin towers. The danger is that Bush and his ally Tony Blair might now be searching for a new global threat to justify those deaths before the court of history.
Any thoughts that the prime minister has been having second thoughts about the war should have seen dispelled by his Portsmouth speech last Friday. There he was, "Basra" Blair, standing proud on a warship, surrounded by assault vehicles, extolling the virtues of "hard power" above that wimpish "peacekeeping" that other European nations have settled for. "I'm hard, me - feel my role."
This was Tony Blair as the great invader; the people's conqueror. His attempt to recast the Iraq disaster as a humanitarian intervention comparable to Kosovo or Sierra Leone was an insult to the British military who fought the actions there. Those were measured operations, taken in co-operation with the international community, designed to save lives and prevent ethnic cleansing. Iraq is completely different.
continued...

It was - is - a unilateral exercise of neo-imperial power by America, which we legitimised through our uncritical support. And by engaging in this venture in defiance of international law and world opinion, Tony Blair has undermined Britain's capacity to launch humanitarian interventions in places where they are still desperately needed - such as Darfur. With the democratic world bogged down in Iraq, the world's dictators have been given a free ride.
Even George W Bush admits to making mistakes. Not so Tony Blair, who will not give an inch in his resolve to prove that he was right. Nor will he waver in his determination to follow Bush into the next phase of his bloody adventure in Iraq and elsewhere, even as he tells us that British troops are to pull out of Iraq.
The press portrayed Bush's escalation of the war last week as his "last throw of the dice", as if the president were sitting deluded and powerless in his bunker, desperately trying to stave off the inevitable. But what if this isn't his last gasp; what if last week's "surge" in Iraq is the start of something new and altogether more dangerous?
My fear is that the second battle of Baghdad is not a cover for retreat, but the start of a new conflict. That Bush is about to "go large" - rebuild his support by launching a bigger war.
Like Blair, the president has few options left and precious little time. Congress is in revolt open against the new troop deployments and threatening to cut off his access to federal funds. Popular support for the war has collapsed to barely 30%, according to US opinion polls. The military are making no secret of their fears that lives are being squandered in Baghdad.
The president has barely two years left in office, Blair much less. If they are to escape the wrath of history they are going to have to do something dramatic. Turn this squalid sectarian impasse in Iraq into a historic cause similar to that which followed 9/11, and which propelled America into the Iraq disaster.
This, I believe, is the New Year message Bush was sending by the assault on suspected al-Qaeda bases in Somalia following the execution of Saddam Hussein. It also explains the sabre-rattling by intelligence chief John Negroponte last week against Pakistan for supposedly giving Osama bin Laden a safe haven from which to reorganise and renew his global terrorist front. (The obvious answer to which is: if the US was so sure about the location of bin Laden, why did it abandon Afghanistan to launch an irrelevant war in Iraq?) The need to broaden the war also explains the threats against Iran. In his speech last week, Bush said: "We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq." This sounds pretty much like a declaration of "pre-emptive" war. Following last week's reports of an imminent Israeli nuclear strike on Iran's nuclear reprocessing plants, I think we would do well to brace ourselves for a regional war.
It would not be the first time that a leader desperate to restore his authority has resorted to military escalation. The quagmire in Iraq is destroying American military prestige, swallowing soldiers and costing many billions of dollars a year. There is no way out, short of admitting defeat or sending three or four hundred thousand troops there to mount a full-scale military occupation.
That's the kind of troop deployment Britain required in Iraq in the 1920s, and what the US military has been telling Bush for the past three years he needs today. Even his hawkish Republican ally, Senator John McCain, admits that the extra 20,000 is a drop in the bucket.
But, politically, there is no way in which Bush could get away with tripling the Iraq occupation force right now, unless there was a much greater perceived threat to American security. Only a major terrorist outrage or a broader war could mobilise sceptical American opinion behind Bush's military adventurism.
If Bush can provoke Iran into some form of belligerence, and can ramp up the terrorist threat from Somalia to Pakistan, then, perhaps, he can call for further sacrifice from America in the name of combating international terror.
Escalation is of course directly contrary to the policy advice given by the Iraq Study Group before Christmas. The Baker-Hamilton committee urged diplomatic engagement with Iran and Syria and orderly troop withdrawal. But Blair and Bush have other ideas.
Obsessed with their own unpopularity, the two leaders have cast themselves as victims of a fickle public who don't realise the danger they are in and irresponsible opposition politicians willing to exploit public apathy. These are people who fail to understand that we face "the greatest military threat since revolutionary communism", as Blair put it.
Bush and Blair see themselves as standing alone against this sinister new challenge. Mystified at the failure of this threat to actually materialise, despite all their forecasts of a wave of al Qaeda plane and suitcase bombs, they are determined to prove themselves right before they are dumped into the dustbin of history.
They are the most dangerous men in the world: desperate politicians running out of time and willing now to do almost anything.

UN to reassess peacekeepers in Darfur border area

UN to reassess peacekeepers in Darfur border area

Jan 11 2007 (UNITED NATIONS) — The United Nations will reassess whether to send peacekeepers to Chad and the Central African Republic after an initial survey found the Darfur border area too dangerous, diplomats said on Wednesday.
team to the area, which borders on Sudan’s troubled western Darfur region, after Security Council members complained that civilians there were suffering and the international community was doing little to protect them, the diplomats said.
"There was a real interest expressed by members of the Security Council in moving ahead with this endeavor, even though we have to take all factors into account, including the situation on the ground, both political and military," Russian U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said.
"There was some frustration expressed in the room about the pace of these activities," said Churkin, the council president for January. "Some members wanted to see things happening much faster than has been the case."
Civil war in Darfur spilled over into neighboring Chad and the Central African Republic last year, driving civilians near the border from their homes and into camps already crowded with hundreds of thousands of refugees that earlier fled Darfur.
The Security Council in June asked the U.N. Peacekeeping Department to explore protection of the camps, and an initial assessment mission was sent in late November.
Fighting on the ground in Chad prevented the mission from visiting some of the affected areas, and a report issued in November recommended against deploying peacekeepers in the border area until all parties agreed to stop fighting and begin talks aimed at a political solution.
The report said U.N. peacekeepers could be attacked by rebel groups if they tried to stop cross-border activities and that a U.N. force " would be operating in the midst of continuing hostilities and would have no clear exit strategy."
But council members were unhappy with the report.
"Our goal is a U.N. peacekeeping mission," said Churkin, calling for the new assessment mission to leave "as quickly as possible."
"We are very concerned about people in the region," said South African U.N. Ambassador Dumisani Kumalo. "We want to see some action to end the suffering."

Wednesday 10 January 2007 04:13. SLM statement on the secular state

Wednesday 10 January 2007 04:13. SLM statement on the secular state

The dignity of each Sudanese man and woman is the cardinal principle of a peaceful democratic society Jan 2, 2006 (LONDON) — In the following paper, Abdelwahid al-Nur, the leader of the rebel Sudan Liberation Movement, explains his position that a secular state is the only way to realize unity and equality in Sudan. SLM/A. Mission Statement Sudan Liberation Army and Movement (SLA/M) is an independent political movement dedicated to fostering equal citizenship rights in the Sudan. Through our objectives of equal rights and democratic initiatives, we hope to engage our fellow Sudanese who are concerned that we have a democratic state that is constituted to advance peace, order and good governance. Perhaps more than almost any other nation, Sudan is composed of people of various religious, racial, cultural ethnic and geographical backgrounds. This diversity has had a unique history in the Sudan. There are, of course, many citizens who retain strong religious, ethnic, racial and tribal ties; but also there are others who in their heritage are able to find different racial, ethic and tribal heritages represented, and who think themselves simply as Sudanese. And that, of course, is important, because difference is primarily a matter of how a person thinks of himself or herself. Self-identification invariably affects the way one relates to community or group behavioral patterns, both politically and otherwise. As identification with a particular community is common among Sudanese, Sudan is in many ways a diverse society, with all the complexities normally attending such a situation. This diversity is manifest in many ways, including social cultural, religion, language, regions, economics and politics. While these differences require equitable accommodation in order to achieve a stable and peaceful nation, for more than a half century there has been projection of a specific identity model as “Sudanese” that has alienated and denied equal citizenship rights to the majority of our citizens. From the standpoint of the relation between citizens and government, we are living in strange times, and it seems that there is more value in addressing this time on its own terms than in continuing to patch up and preserve that hollow architectonics of our society. Our efforts could go into defense of the integral equal representational principle, whereby we seek a systematic governing arrangement that at once satisfies the demands of our communities and regions for empowerment while unifying us in a single national endeavour, where equal rights are an imperative endowment; or we negate the reality of the Sudanese nation and descend into dissolution. Our precious time may be better spent trying to figure out what the political reality has become and how to constructively respond to the developments that have brought us to the current situation. One of the most important lessons we must remember from the old non democratic Sudanese political parties (right and left wing political parties) is that they failed to create a coherent political vision that gives equal representation throughout our society. We believe that this is the real threat to our unity as a nation, as well as to the long-term social, economic and political stability in our quarter of Africa. The fundamental reality of our sad political life dates back to our independence day in 1956. Our independence was formulated on the existence of a few dominant elites in central government in Khartoum. In this sense, many of the pivotal episodes in Sudan’s ruling history have centered in the hands of a few exclusivist elites in the central government. This reality made the two-thirds of our citizens’ feel alienated, or that the polity is not theirs to engage in. And these precise scopes of exclusion remain the most serious threat to the unity and stability of our country. Visions of how to address this dilemma play vital roles in our contemporary Sudanese politics. Sudan is a unique country. It appears that an enormous amount of ink has been spilt supposedly trying to resolve the problem of how to achieve equal political representation. However, as Sudanese people, in our more than 50 years as an independent nation, we have failed to build a prosperous, tolerant, peaceful, free, and democratic society in what is one of the most diverse ethno-cultural countries in the world. We have become so accustomed to our diversity that we unconsciously take it for granted without acknowledging how exceptional Sudan is in this regard. For much of our modern history, the policies of the state have been exclusive to some individuals, groups and regions. The power is actually concentrated in a central government borne of a vision that gave ultimate rights to one or a few groups of people to rule the country, while denying equal representation to the majority of the country’s citizens. In this exclusivist vision there is a characteristic constitutional and policy emphasis on one culture, language and religion, in respect of an assumption that all citizens in this naturally diverse country have to assimilate such culture, language and religion. However, the reality is that most of the Sudanese people are unwilling to tolerate this chauvinism. It is now widely recognized that the great historical proclamations of those ruling our country actually excluded the majority of our citizens. In other words, increasing numbers of people today consider the political process exclusive, unrepresentative, and failing to reflect the diversity of all Sudanese people and their regions. A vivid illustration is the constitutional set up of the country, in which the fundamental terms of our political life are being decided by a few elites in the central government. They excluded most Sudanese from the representative process; we might say they have excluded the majority of the society from their equal share of rights, as most Sudanese communities have been excluded from the higher ranks of political power, as well as from top public offices, which has resulted in an untold loss of rights. It is not today that this has been recognized by those on the margins of the Sudanese power structure, but it has become abundantly evident the longer this unfair situation pertains the more deeply it becomes entrenched in the psyches of the exclusivist group that this is the only way Sudan is supposed to ever be. And we have good reason to believe that this long sustained history of exclusion is not a matter of historical blind spots, this exclusion is calculated into the very conceptual framework of the Sudanese state and its institutions, with the express intention of denying equal rights to some specific individuals and groups of people of our country. Naturally this situation has fueled increasingly intense demand and struggle for equal citizenship right, resulting in the current crises. This built-in exclusion has meant that everywhere in the Sudan people struggling for equality face resistance to their strategies that involve reference to traditional conceptions of citizenship and equal rights, which challenge the current subordination and exclusion of some individuals, groups and regions. In fact, the concept of equal citizenship rights we assert promises to eradicate such exclusion and subordination. But the problem has an added complexity when the existing structures of inequalities reinforce the economic, religious, ideological, social, regional and cultural imbalances and anomalies, which in turn imply legitimacy to the exclusivist structures and its accompanying conceptions of citizenship. Thus, the question, then, is, can we let the unequal distribution of wealth and power remain heavily influenced by the memberships of the few elites circles who volley between themselves the reigns of the central government in Khartoum, can we let these elites practice their exclusion policies forever? Can we expect a fair, open process of democracy, responsive to the public will; with consensus on how this process out to work? Shall we be able to achieve respect and equal political representation for all our citizens? Why have we had such trouble learning to live together as a nation? What can be done to eradicate such practices and hold our country and its diverse societies together? As politically alert citizens in our society are well aware, it is proper that the state be neutral in affairs of race, culture and religion, giving respect to all and preference to none. We see that if the state commits to one religion, race or culture, members of other race, culture or faiths would feel alienated, since specific values that are not their own would be imposed upon them. They may be hindered through various policies and state sponsored practices from practicing the rituals of their religion or culture, and they may be deprived of their right to hold certain positions in the state, such as president, or other key positions. This would create disturbances and conflicts that would present obstacles for the progress of our country. In this respect, we are not in favor of any values of one religion, race or culture being imposed on all the diverse communities comprising the Sudanese republic. We are in favor of a constitution based on equal citizenship rights, rather than religion, race, culture or region. Citizenship should be the sole basis for belonging to the state, since our citizens have different religions, races and cultures. For these reasons, we consider that the state should take a secular approach, neither supporting nor denying any race, culture or religion. It is up to the citizens to follow whatever faith and values they choose and practice what rituals they please. The best way to achieve such objectives is obviously through equal political representation. In this sense, we consider that in any political system, political leadership requires guidelines for action, which is the supreme law or constitution of the state, defining the limits and conditions of political power. A constitution should embody in legal context the vision of a wholesome, peaceful, stable and functional state. In doing so the constitution must necessarily set out a commitment to guaranteeing citizenship rights to all our people as well as the goals of national progress and development. The authority of the state is to be exercised rationally and without malice, whereby all citizens, no matter what her or his transgression, are guaranteed due process of law. It therefore regularizes the relationship between citizens and the government. No individual or group is above the law; no one is exempted from it, and all are equal before the law. No government or administrative official has any power beyond what is awarded by law. Equal rights are the basic precondition for affording all our citizens, as individuals and regions, the realization of these egalitarian principles. It has been with a view to realizing these egalitarian principles that people of the excluded communities and regions had since the independence of Sudan called for a federal system. In other words, we believe that federalism is the ideal mechanism for accommodating all citizens and regions; and providing meaningful self-government for all people within a unified Sudan. Federalism guarantees their power to make decisions in certain areas without being ordered by the central government. When we say federalism, we mean that there is a special relationship between the national government and the government of the regions, wherein both the regional and national governments have duties to perform as defined by the Constitution and both have a direct relationship to individual Sudanese who are citizens of both. Simply put, federalism refers to a division of jurisdiction and authority between at least two levels of government. It is usually characterized by the existence of one central government and two or more regional, state or provincial governments operating simultaneously over the same territory and people. Therefore, we strongly believe that the federalism we are calling for would provide a constitutionally protected realm of self government for the regions, while still providing the economic, political, military, and socio-cultural benefits of participation in a large state. To obtain equal citizenship rights to all our citizens, we strive to provide a flexible democratic structure whereby all Sudanese people can be equally included and actively represented. To do so, we committed to the view that the dignity of each Sudanese man and woman is the cardinal principle of a peaceful democratic society and the primary purpose of all economic, social, cultural, religious and political organization and activity in such a society. We are therefore dedicated to the principles that groups’ rights, individual freedom, responsibility and human dignity constitute the framework of a just society. Also, we recognize that human dignity requires that all citizens have access to full information concerning the policies and leaderships of the country; as well as the opportunity to participate in open and public assessment of such means, such modifications of policies and leadership as they deem appropriate to promote the general well-being of Sudanese. We aspire to contribute to the creation and emergence of a strong Sudanese civil society. Such a society, we believe, would offer an alternative political structure to the vast majority of the Sudanese people, and become both an incentive and a compulsion for the establishment of the country to improve. Transcending the emotions and psychology of exclusion, discrimination, segregation and stereotyping is as much a human problem as it is political; and in this respect civil society has a crucial role to play in promoting and accelerating the much needed social, cultural, religious, economic and political reforms. Overall, we are working for equal citizenship rights. We are working for the right of all Sudanese people to a decent life; a life that is free from fear, oppression, and persecution. We do not intend to weaken or be antagonistic to any entity, group, or individual. To achieve our goals, we intend to work with all those who share our vision for liberty, equality, human rights, tolerance and a democratically governed Sudan. Abdul Wahid Mohamed Ahmed Alnour Chairman, Sudan Liberation Movement and Army (SLM/A)

U.S. state governor hopeful for breakthrough in Darfur crisis

U.S. state governor hopeful for breakthrough in Darfur crisis

EL FASHER, Sudan: U.S. governor and potential presidential candidate Bill Richardson pressed delegates from Darfur's rebel factions on Tuesday to participate in a 60-day cease-fire and hold peace talks with the government.
On a one-day visit to Darfur, Richardson met in the North Darfur state capital of El Fasher with local government leaders and the commander of the overwhelmed African Union peacekeeping force in the region.
The New Mexico governor also met with a few of Darfur's 2.5 million refugees and held talks with delegates from various rebel groups battling the government in this remote region of western Sudan where more than 200,000 people have been killed in four years of fighting.
The commander of the African Union peacekeepers, Maj. Gen. Luke Aprezi, told Richardson he desperately needs more troops if he is to end the spiraling violence plaguing Darfur civilians and chasing many international aid workers from the region.
"The force is too small to do the job we are doing," Aprezi told the U.S. governor. "We need to be enhanced. We need more troops on the ground," he said of his 7,000-strong force, meant to
While at AU headquarters, Richardson also had discussions with delegates from some of the deeply divided rebel factions that refused to sign the Darfur Peace Agreement with the Sudanese government last May.
Richardson told the rebels that he had asked Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir to agree to a temporary cease-fire during a meeting Monday in the capital of Khartoum.
"We all want peace," said Richardson. "We just want to bring it to you."
Col. Abul Abdallah Ismail of the Sudan Liberation Movement expressed frustration that the government has continued to arm militias in Darfur. Though SLM leader Minni Minawi signed the peace deal with Khartoum last May, SLM troops fought janjaweed militiamen as recently as December, and several splinter SLM factions have joined other rebel groups battling the government in the region.
The Arab-dominated Sudanese government denies backing the janjaweed militia of Arab nomads to help fight Darfur's ethnic African rebels. But the United Nations, the AU and international aid groups say that Khartoum is massively arming the janjaweed and that the paramilitary has recently carried out several deadly raids against civilians with the regular army's support.
The rebel delegates in El Fasher told Richardson that the rebellion wasn't making offensive attacks against the army.
Under pressure from Richardson, Ismail agreed to meet with the government if there is prior agreement on a 60-day cease-fire. "When the government is serious we have no problem," Ismail said.
Richardson is planning to meet al-Bashir again on Wednesday and promised the rebel emissaries he would report back to them after that meeting.
Richardson's trip to the region could be a boost for a possible bid for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008 by drawing attention to his extensive foreign policy background, including his tenure as U.S. envoy to the United Nations during the Clinton administration.
In Washington, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said he would not characterize Richardson's visit as "freelancing," but rather said it underscores that al-Bashir's government is "getting the message from multiple directions about what they need to do."
McCormack said the administration's new special envoy for Sudan, Andrew Natsios, had met with Richardson before his trip. Natsios has experienced a number of frustrations in his initial dealings with the al-Bashir government and is now seeking Chinese help to apply economic pressure on its Sudanese trading partner.
Al-Bashir has fiercely rejected for months a Security Council plan to replace the African force in Darfur with some 20,000 U.N. peacekeepers, but is now conducting negotiations for a "hybrid mission" of combined U.N. and AU personnel to deploy.
The Save Darfur Coalition brought Richardson to Sudan because the governor has successfully negotiated in the past with al-Bashir. In September, the governor persuaded al-Bashir to release a New Mexico journalist imprisoned in Darfur.
Richardson also worked with al-Bashir in 1996 to negotiate the release of three Red Cross workers held hostage by Sudanese rebels.
Darfur was due to meet officials in the South Darfur capital of Nyala later Tuesday before returning to Khartoum.
The fighting in Darfur began in February 2003 when the region's ethnic African population revolted against what they saw as decades of neglect and discrimination by the Khartoum government

Peace Pact Urged For Darfur By UN

Peace Pact Urged For Darfur By UN
United, Nations - (Reuters) The United Nations and the African Union announced on Friday a new push for peace talks in Sudan's Darfur region to get splinter rebel groups and the government to stop fighting each other.
The Khartoum government and one rebel groups signed a peace agreement last April. But since then violence has escalated, Sudan has sent troops into Darfur, where at least 200,000 people have died in three year, and United Nations efforts for a robust peacekeeping force have been stalled by Khartoum.
Jan Eliasson, a former Swedish foreign minister, U.N. official and the current special envoy for Darfur, told reporters the object was to reduce the level of violence through the political process.
But Eliasson said his job was not to negotiate a peacekeeping force, which would be done by other U.N. officials.
Elliason left on Friday for meetings at African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa in Ethiopia, after which he will go to Khartoum and then Darfur before returning to Addis Ababa for an African Union summit, the United Nations said.
He and Salim Ahmed Salim, the African Union's Darfur envoy, conferred with the new U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon of South Korea, who will also go to the AU summit.
Sudan has more or less agreed to a "hybrid" African Union-United Nations force in Darfur but has rejected the 20,000 peacekeepers and police the Security Council wanted to send to support the 7,000 under-equipped African Union troops now in Darfur. An AU-UN team is to work out the numbers.
Both men were peppered with questions about why diplomacy was in the forefront when civilians needed security from brutal militia, some armed by the Sudan government, who have raped and pillaged and driven 2.5 million villagers from their homes.
"Everything is relative," Salim said, recalling Sudan's total rejection of U.N. troops to its acceptance of some kind of a mixed force. "Let's keep building on what is possible."
"There is a hybrid in the peacekeeping area and we need a similar hybrid on the diplomatic front," Salim said. "We have to do it."
Western nations, including the United States, as well as many African states have pushed for U.N. peacekeepers in Darfur. But Sudan's Arab neighbors have been silent.
The war has spilled over into neighboring Chad and the Central African Republic. In December, the peacekeeping department, in a report issued in former Secretary-General Kofi Annan's name, recommended deploying peacekeepers in those two nations until all parties agree to a ceasefire and start negotiations toward a political solution.
He said U.N. peacekeepers could be attacked by rebel groups if they tried to stop cross-border activities and that a U.N. force " would be operating in the midst of continuing hostilities and would have no clear exit strategy."
The Security Council in June asked the peacekeeping department to explore protection of the camps and a mission was sent in late November. Several Western members said the report visualized a traditional peacekeeping force rather than rapid reaction units and guards for refugee camps.
Salim said fighting would not stop in Chad either unless that nation and Sudan came to an agreement. The two countries are supporting each other's rebels.

Peace Pact Urged For Darfur By UN

Peace Pact Urged For Darfur By UN
United, Nations - (Reuters) The United Nations and the African Union announced on Friday a new push for peace talks in Sudan's Darfur region to get splinter rebel groups and the government to stop fighting each other.
The Khartoum government and one rebel groups signed a peace agreement last April. But since then violence has escalated, Sudan has sent troops into Darfur, where at least 200,000 people have died in three year, and United Nations efforts for a robust peacekeeping force have been stalled by Khartoum.
Jan Eliasson, a former Swedish foreign minister, U.N. official and the current special envoy for Darfur, told reporters the object was to reduce the level of violence through the political process.
But Eliasson said his job was not to negotiate a peacekeeping force, which would be done by other U.N. officials.
Elliason left on Friday for meetings at African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa in Ethiopia, after which he will go to Khartoum and then Darfur before returning to Addis Ababa for an African Union summit, the United Nations said.
He and Salim Ahmed Salim, the African Union's Darfur envoy, conferred with the new U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon of South Korea, who will also go to the AU summit.
Sudan has more or less agreed to a "hybrid" African Union-United Nations force in Darfur but has rejected the 20,000 peacekeepers and police the Security Council wanted to send to support the 7,000 under-equipped African Union troops now in Darfur. An AU-UN team is to work out the numbers.
Both men were peppered with questions about why diplomacy was in the forefront when civilians needed security from brutal militia, some armed by the Sudan government, who have raped and pillaged and driven 2.5 million villagers from their homes.
"Everything is relative," Salim said, recalling Sudan's total rejection of U.N. troops to its acceptance of some kind of a mixed force. "Let's keep building on what is possible."
"There is a hybrid in the peacekeeping area and we need a similar hybrid on the diplomatic front," Salim said. "We have to do it."
Western nations, including the United States, as well as many African states have pushed for U.N. peacekeepers in Darfur. But Sudan's Arab neighbors have been silent.
The war has spilled over into neighboring Chad and the Central African Republic. In December, the peacekeeping department, in a report issued in former Secretary-General Kofi Annan's name, recommended deploying peacekeepers in those two nations until all parties agree to a ceasefire and start negotiations toward a political solution.
He said U.N. peacekeepers could be attacked by rebel groups if they tried to stop cross-border activities and that a U.N. force " would be operating in the midst of continuing hostilities and would have no clear exit strategy."
The Security Council in June asked the peacekeeping department to explore protection of the camps and a mission was sent in late November. Several Western members said the report visualized a traditional peacekeeping force rather than rapid reaction units and guards for refugee camps.
Salim said fighting would not stop in Chad either unless that nation and Sudan came to an agreement. The two countries are supporting each other's rebels.

Statement from the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army - Egypt Disk and the Middle East.

Statement from the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army - Egypt Disk and the Middle East.

Iam writing this statement to defuse the confusion created by the Government - agents and those few sell - outs, who pretend to be members and leaders of the Sudan Liberation Movement /Army (Al sanousi, Abuelgasim Imam, Ahmed Abdulshafei (Toba), Babiker Mohamed Abdullah, Mohamed Abdou ........ etc).

When we simply took the Liberation process after we liberated our minds from biases and prejudices, as a sacred duty and personal commitment to pursue, either to achieve our objective or die until the last man; making the dash for freedom from the unambiguous firmnesses, pillars and the principle objectives that embodied in the Sudan Liberation Movement /Army, for which we are struggling with persistence, long - suffering, impartiality and insight to fulfill, making our uttermost keenness not to deviate from the our way. So as to get and preserve the right and gains of our masses. Their continuous and unreserved support to the Movement and its loyal leadership under the founder and the chairman of the movement Abdul Wahid Mohamed Ahmed Elnour bewildered the entire world.
Yet the masses have shown full support hoping to get at the end their just and uncompromised rights, mindfull of the humiliation and injustices done to them by the regimes in Khartoum.

To our loyal Masses ........................................

In Continuation to the series of conspiracies that constantly planned against your a just cause by the regime of the ethnic cleansing and architecture of genocide in Khartoum, which craftily excelled in buying the consciences of the unscrupulous individuals, through its covert and overt deals; so that they might escape scot - free from the crimes committed against you, the regime is still alluding itself and repeating the same scenarios and the narrow - minded individuals accept such deals thinking that by so doing will acquire short - lived interests to themselves.

Although history had proved that such deals are futile and escapism to resolve the real issue; nevertheless, the regime in Khartoum is burying its head on the sand and repeating them. Starting from Haskanita, Abuja, Tripoli and know the group of Ahmed Abdulshafei Bassi (Toba) and only God knows what they have in store.
All the pre mentioned forlorn attempts to weaken the cause of Darfur, fortunately came as strengthening blows that united the people and the Movement more than before, and guided those who signed it to a byss. What happened to Abuelgasim Imam in Kalma Refugees Camp, which Ahmed Abdulshafei and his few prophets of doom are continuation to the same case as for Abdurrahman Musa, and before them the presidential Aide Minnie Arkou Minnawi who is now under the presidential arrest in the Republican Palace after he served his purpose to betray his colleagues in the revolution, and for sure he is going to be turned in to a ploughshare and buried. These valuable lessons ought to be an eye - opener to anybody who thinks that he can simply grasp, what it seems to him as a rare opportunity at the expense of the people or weakening the cause of the masses, in a time that all supposed to rally behind it. Definitely the spirant enlightened masses will continue supporting the true leaders who sacrifice their life for them and not the power hungry opportunists or the splitters.

Therefore we want to explain to our stakeholders and the entire masses the following: -

Firstly: - The unity is in the consensus of the public which rallied behind their just cause and their true leaders who see the leadership as a social contract, and not in the unity with the opportunist individuals created by the Government or fake alliances or groups coming together to steal the show, who are no longer in the trust of the public. And they merely want to play with the will of the people which already decided, in their support to the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army.
A survey conducted by the U.N proved that 90% of the Sudanese masses in Darfur are totally against what so called “Abuja Agreement” and all the selective agreements signed by the individuals which followed it, the survey further confirmed that 80% of the Darfurian masses are ardent supporters of the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army, and it is clearly seen during their demonstrations in the Universities, IDPs Camps and in different Towns and cities of the Sudan country - wide, holding the photos of their leader backing his courageous stand to reject Abuja, so we don' t know which unity other people speaking about, after the clear voice of the masses .

Secondly: - The issue of Darfur is the issue of the nation it is not the issue of individuals that the National Congress party (NCP) plant or approach them, and from time to time divide them as in the case of Abuelgasim Imam and Ahmed Abdulshafei (Toba), Babiker Mohamed and the other cases and our public is fully a ware of all these deceptions.

Thirdly: - Boldness, fidelity and the noble stands are the main traits of the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army; accordingly it will not degenerate by one way or another to keep pace with the opportunists or hand full sell - outs, who want to use the cause of Darfur as a ladder, in order to satisfy their personal interests and ambitions, as the movement has its specific principled objective to build the new secular democratic Sudan that all Sudanese would adhere with pride, therefore the Movement will not and never turn an eye to the droppers in its long process.

Fourthly: - Undeniable facts proved that 80% of the Keys to a just, comprehensive and a lasting solution to the Sudanese problem in Darfur will be by the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army, which strife to restore with dignity the usurped rights of the people, Thus it will not support any individuals, splitters or tribe working to create superiority or dominance at the expense of the majority.

Fifthly: - The Sudan Liberation Movement/Army, However like to put it clear to the entire Sudanese people that the obstinate regime in Khartoum by killing the innocent, unarmed civilians in El Fasher, Nyala, Malakal, Abu sakkein, Mouzzbad and Khartoum and also by procrastinating the implementation of the CPA of the South Sudan, is destroying all the boats that can take all the Sudanese people to the shore of peace and by so doing is writing its death warrant; therefore we are a appealing to all Sudanese to rally behind the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army and multiply their efforts to topple this murderous regime.
We also a appeal to all Human Rights, and Civil Society Organizations to put pressure on the Government of Sudan to stop killing civilians in Darfur and unconditionally release the 52 innocent IDPs, in detention from Hisahisa Refugees Camp in Zalingei, whose fate unknown until the writing of this statement, and off course all our people detained in connection with the Darfur problem.

Lastly;

The glory and immortality to our revolutionary martyrs.
The swift and quick recovery to our injured comrades and civilians.
The respect and salutation to our vigilant soldiers and masses.

Musa Babiker Idriss.
Media Secretary and the spoke man of the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army.
Egypt Disk and the Middle East.
Email: Musas _ 4@yahoo.com.
Tel: +20127255415.
December 18, 2006.

UN reports tribal clashes in Darfur, 7 killed and 30 wounded

UN reports tribal clashes in Darfur, 7 killed and 30 wounded
Friday 6 January 2007 00:56.

Jan 4, 2007 (KHARTOUM) — Clashes between nomads and farmers killed seven people and injured another 30 in Darfur, where a commercial bus was also ambushed and the compounds of a U.N. agency and an international aid group were raided this week, the U.N. mission in Sudan said Thursday.
The clashes between the Jamala and Terjam tribes erupted in the South Darfur locality of BulBul Abu Angra on Tuesday, the U.N. reported, stating that Sudanese national security deployed to stabilize the zone.
Also in South Darfur, bandits on Wednesday attacked a commercial bus on a road 18 miles north of the regional capital, Nyala, wounding four people. One Sudanese police officer and a bandit were also injured in the gunfight, the U.N. said in its Internet statement.
Also Wednesday, a U.N. vehicle was hijacked in the West Darfur capital of El Geneina. The U.N. said it strongly suspected members of the pro-government janjaweed militia in this attack.
"While cases of carjacking have recently decreased, figures soared in 2006," the U.N. statement said.
Some 118 vehicles were stolen in Darfur in 2006, of which 28 were recovered and 90 are still missing, the U.N. said.
"The use of these stolen vehicles by armed militia and rebel factions in further attacks is a growing concern," the U.N. statement said.
The U.N. said it had five vehicles stolen, while international aid groups lost 96 and the African Union peacekeeping force in Darfur lost 17.
Two AU peacekeepers are being held hostage since their car was hijacked in December, as are five Sudanese water engineers seized in October

Interview: SLM leader rejects Darfur peace talks with Sudan

sudanslm.net
04 January, 2007
Interview: SLM leader rejects Darfur peace talks with Sudan
Jan 4, 2006 (LONDON) — Rebel leader of the Sudan Liberation Movement rejected peace talks with the Sudanese government to end the four-year conflict in Darfur. Instead, he added that this regime “should go and be replaced by secular democratic system”
Abdelwahed al-Nour
In an interview with the Sudan Tribune, the leader of the rebel Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM) Abdelwahid al-Nur said he rejects peace negotiations with the Sudanese government to resolve Darfur crisis.
Al-Nur explained he can not negotiate with a regime that “committing genocide against [Darfur] people”. He also said that the lack of credibility of the ruling National Congress Party undercuts any serious efforts for a negotiated settlement. “This regime has failed to implement one single previous agreement” he said.
According to Al-Nur the solution of Darfur crisis should be within a comprehensive settlement of the Sudan’s problem. “There is only one solution which is that this genocidal regime should go, and to be replaced by secular democratic system.”
Al-Nur detailed for the first time the taken steps to reunite the movement. Also, he explained why the faction of G19 reintegrated the movement.
On the relations with the SPLM, Al-Nur hailed the late Dr John Garang and the current leadership of the movement. But he distinguished between two streams within the SPLM. He clearly supported those who are seeking for “New Sudan”. Nonetheless he demarcated his difference with them because they see the Sudan as one state with two systems (Secular in the South and Islamic in the North). Instead, Al-Nur expressed his preference for a united Sudan with a secular state.
All through the interview, the leader of the SLM explained his attachment to the secular state to realize unity and equality in the country. He provided Sudan Tribune a paper, that we publish separately, on this question.
The following is the full text of the interview with the leader of the Sudan Liberation Movement Abdelwahid Mohamed Ahmed al-Nur:
Mr. Abdulwahid Mohamed Ahmed Al-Nur, you are the founder and chairman of Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM), what is the vision of Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM)?
Al-Nur: Thank you for having me in your nice and comfortable place. First, I would like to take this opportunity to say Happy New Year and Happy Eid Aladha Almubark to the people of Darfur in their Internal Displace and Refugee Camps and to all Darfurians in Sudan and Diaspora, also to the people of Sudan and the international community at large, and we hope that year 2007, will be a year of peace and stability in Darfur, Sudan, Africa and the world.
Second, our vision is very simple, Sudan Liberation Movement is political organization that seeks to create secular united Sudan base on equal citizenship rights and aggregate interests of the all Sudanese people.
ORIGINS OF THE MOVEMENT
When and how the SLM, founded?
Al-Nur: Most of us recognize that Sudan is going through great turmoil. The fundamental reality of our sad political, social, cultural and economic life was dating back to our independent day in 1956, which formulated on the existence of few dominant elites in central governments in Khartoum. This reality made the majority of our people feel alienated or that the polity is not theirs to engage in. We conceived these precise scopes of exclusion remain the most serious threat to the unity and stability of our country. One of the most important lessons we must remember from the most of political parties (right and left wing political parties) including the current regime is that they have failed to create coherent political visions that give equal representation to our contemporarily diverse Sudanese society. For much of our modern history, the policies of the state are exclusive to some individual, groups and regions. The power is actually concentrated in a central regime’s vision which gave ultimate rights to one or few groups of people to rule the country, and deny the equal representation to the majority of the people of Sudan. Most of the time however, there is constitution policy emphasis on one culture, language and religion hold the idea that all citizens have to assimilate to such ethos. In this regard, most of the Sudanese people are unwilling to tolerate such practices.
An increasing number of people today consider the political process exclusive, unrepresentative, and it has failed to reflect the diversity of all Sudanese people and their regions. A vivid illustration is the constitution set up of the country, in which the fundamental terms of our political life is being decided by a few elites in the central government. They have excluded the majority of the society from their equal citizenship rights. Some people excluded from sharing political power, public office, and many other rights. Regions have been excluded from their equitable share of wealth, development, and socio-economic programs. Of course the dearth of some individuals and groups sharing political power and public office continues in Sudan long before today’s demand and struggle for equal citizenship rights. This exclusion is build into the very calculable conceptual framework of denial of equal rights to some specific individuals and groups of people of our country. At the same time, the regime committed genocide in South Sudan, Nuba Mountains, South Blue Nile and in Darfur and we do not know tomorrow will be in other parts of the Sudan such as Kurdfan, East Sudan or Al Hamdab area in far North Sudan.
The question, then, is, can we let the ongoing genocide continue endlessly? Similarly, can we let the unequal distribution of wealth and power remains heavily controlled by members of few elites in central regimes in Khartoum and let them practicing their exclusion policies forever? Can we expect a just and fair, open process of democracy that is responsive to the public will; as well as consensus about how this process ought to work? Can we achieve respect and equal citizenship rights to all our Sudanese people? Why have we had such difficulty learning to coexist together as a nation? What can be done to eradicate such practices and hold our country and its contemporarily diverse society together?
In early 1990s, when we were Student at University we came up with the idea that we should strive to realize a new system of rule that fully respects our diversity and creates inclusive new democratic system. For these reasons, we came up with idea of Secular United Sudan, and we believe that this is the only method of solving our problems and keep us united together as a nation.
To achieve our Secular objective, we went through different strategic plans (civil, military, diplomatic and political mobilization). First, the civil mobilization, we mobilize our civil society against the few elites whom using religion (Islam vs. Christianity/ Islamic Jehad against non muslins) to kill our people in South Sudan, Nuba Mountains, South Blue Nile, Angassana…etc., and at the same time using race and tribe (Arabs vs. non Arabs/African) to commit genocide against our people in Darfur. In the same way, we mobilize our people against the huge economic, social and cultural inequalities all over the Sudan.
Second, the military mobilization; unfortunately, the regime was committing genocide against our people in Darfur. We tried to convince the regime to stop the genocide against our people in Darfur and other places in Sudan and to sit with us and negotiate peaceful political settlement. The regime refused our proposal; and its president Omar Albashir stated clearly in the media that his government will not negotiate with any body unless carrying out weapons against them. So, we have been enforced to create our military faction in 2000-2003, and that was for two reasons, first to protect our people from the genocide against them, and force the regime to sit with us and negotiate the political settlement that we believe is the root causes of the conflict in Darfur and Sudan at large.
Third, the diplomatic mobilization; we worked very hard to enlighten the international community about our just cause, and we believe that we succeeded, and now you can see the positive results from the response of the international community to our just cause. Isn’t it beautiful?
Yes, it is very beautiful. It seems that you are very optimistic?
Al-Nur: Yes, I am very optimistic when you come in here. And there is a reason why. You cannot lead people unless you have a vision and you are optimistic about what you are doing and believe it in your very soul. So, I am not only optimistic, I strongly believe in the decisions I make, I am optimistic that they are going to work. And so, the other thing I want you to know is that no matter how pressurized it may seem, I am not changing what I believe. I might change tactics, but I am not going to change my core beliefs, a belief that Sudan should be a secular state that base on citizenship rights. And I am not changing. I don not care whether they like me at the social life, or not; I will leave this life with my integrity.
We understand that some people in parts of the Sudan disagree with our secular state’s vision. It does not bother us. Our vision is never to promote a religion. Our simple believe is that you should be able to worship freely. People are free to choose their religious and faith, but they are equally Sudanese whether they are Muslim, Christian, or Atheist, they are equal in their citizenship rights. In other words, all Sudanese people are equal and that if we ever lose that, we begin to look like the extremist or religious fundamentalist.