ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 1/44 CB PT
ANNEX13 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 2/44 CB PT
DARFUR
THE RoAD TO PEACE
DR DAVID HOILE
European-Sudanese Public Affairs Council ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 3/44 CB PT
army" . . disarm lad says Chapter Five several 1encans ~en calls ALLEGATIONS OF GENOCIDE IN DARFUR jaweed" ·eate the I solution I don't think that we should be using the word "genocide" to describe this e role conflict. Not at all. This can be a semantic discussion, hut nevertheless, >aganda. there is no systematic target- targeting one ethnic group or another one. its own It doesn't mean either that the situation in Sudan isn't extremely serious 'Pocrisy. by itself I and the Dr Mercedes Tafy, Midecins sans Frontieres deputy emergency discredit directol'57 ;olutions the Bush Our teams have not seen evidence of the deliberate intention to killpeople fix", the of a specific group. ·flawed. alidating Midecins sans Frontieres- France President ion. Dr Jean-Herve Bradol 658
In September 2004, the American Secretary of State, Colin Powell, declared that events in Darfur constituted "genocide". This was despite having stated two months previously that the Darfur crisis did not "meet the tests of the definition of genocide" .659 Claims of genocide are amongst the most heinous allegations that can be !' made. De Waal sums it up succinctly: "The term 'genocide' consigns its \:' architects to the realm of pure evil, beyond humanity and politics."660 Mahmood Mamdani has also observed: "It seems that genocide has become a label to be stuck on your worst enemy, a perverse version of the Nohel Prize, part of a rhetorical arsenal that helps you vilify your adversaries while ensuring impunity ·for your allies." 661 It must be noted, however, that over the past decade or so a number of similarly grave but ultimately deeply questionable claims have been ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 4/44 CB PT
Darfztr: The Road to Peace
made about Sudan. These have included allegations that Sudan possessed and several domesti manufactured weapons of mass destruction. On 20 August 1998, for example, column inches cl the Clinton Administration launched cruise missile attacks on the ai-Shifa the worsening si pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum alleging that the plant was making That the de, chemical weapons as part of Osama bin Laden's infrastructure of international domestic politic; terrorism. Every one of the American claims proved to have been false. The under considera London Observer newspaper spoke of "a catalogue of US misinformation, a genocide. The~ glaring omissions and intelligence errors about the function of the plant". 662 Save Darfur act These claims are now accepted internationally to have been unfounded. anti-Sudan activ One of the other widely-publicised sensationalist claims about Sudan has only a pool of ex been allegations of government-sponsored "slavery" and "slave trade" in of Congressi Sudan. As "proof" for this, a great number of newspaper articles "reported" legislators ... prc instances of "slave redemption" in which alleged "slaves" were said to have first American F been "bought" back from "slave traders". These sorts of claims began to be Wolf, came fror exposed as questionable where not simply false as early as 1999. 663 In February Congress on 2 A 2002, in an unprecedented international focus, and as the result of some of the Khartourr excellent investigative journalism, The Irish Times, London's Independent on Corzine. On 24 Sunday, The Washington Post and International Herald Tribune chose to publish Brownback int1 articles definitively exposing the deep fraud and corruption at the heart of declaring that g claims of "slave redemption" in Sudan. 664 The Irish Times reported: "According pressured Colin to aid workers, missionaries, and even the rebel movement that facilitates it, visited Darfur, a slave redemption in Sudan is often an elaborate scam."665 Washington's claims did not constitut about genocide can be seen in the same light. attack from Cm Powell's September flip-flop, in the lead-up to the US elections, was widely passed the cone~: seen as both an attempt to divert media attention away from the disastrous as genocide. 671 F 1 events in Iraq and to pander to the large and well-established anti-Sudan and editorials and c anti-Muslim constituencies within the United States. 666 It appears that the Bush Washington Post, administration had decided that it was to its electoral advantage for the to September 20 sensationalism and inaccuracy thathas obscured events in Darfur to continue. manyof them in It was a simple enough equation. The 2004 US election was seen at the time by appearance hef• the Bush White House as possibly being a very close run affair.667 The war in reversed his pre· Iraq was a key electoral issue, and that war continued to go badly. 668 The day in Darfur ... anc before Powell's Darfur comments had seen the American military death toll in President Bush i Iraq since 2003 reach over one thousand.669 Declaring Darfur to he a genocide investigations, 'i was useful to Republican party strategists for very simple reasons. It appeased Darfur. Presider
142 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 5/44 CB PT
Allegations of Genodde in Datfur
sessed and several domestic constituencies and the more US television coverage and r example, . column inches devoted to Darfur at the time, the less media time focused on :e al-Shifa • the worsening situation in Iraq. lS making That the declaration also served a second political purpose, relieving ernational ( don1estic political pressure, is also clear. The Bush administration had come false. The · under considerable pressure from a range of constituencies to declare Darfur ormation, . a genocide. These calls had come from pre-existing anti-Sudan structures. Key ' plant". 662 Save Darfur activists Rebecca Hamilton and Chad Hazlett have noted that 1ded. anti-Sudan activism previously focused on southern Sudan had "created not Sudan has only a pool of experienced and well-connected advocates, but also a contingent / trade" in of Congressional 'champions' for Sudan. These committed reported" . legislators ... provided a ready source of allies for Darfur activists." 670 The id to have ftrst American politician to allege genocide in Darfur, Representative Frank egan to be Wolf, came from this contingent. He alleged genocide in Darfur in the US :February . Congress on 2 April2004. 671 This was followed by other long-time opponents t of some of the Khartoum government, Senators Mike DeWine, John McCain, and Jon oendent on Corzine. On 24 June 2004, Representative Donald Payne and Senator Sam to publish Brownback introduced concurrent resolutions in the House and Senate, e heart of declaring that genocide was occurring in Darfur. In June 2004, 52 senators \ccording pressured Colin Powell to take punitive action on Darfur. Powell subsequendy cilitates it, visited Darfur, arriving in Sudan on 30 June. He stated that the Darfur crisis •n's claims did not constitute genocide. His position came under immediate and sustained attack from Congress and pressure groups. In July 2004, the US Congress ras widely passed the concurrent, nonbinding resolution labelling the violence in Darfur disastrous as genocide. 672 Further Congressional and media pressure ensured. Of the 83 >udan and editorials and op-eds on Darfur appearing in The New York Times, The ttheBush Washington Post, The Wall Street journal and The Washingwn Times fromMarcli \e for the to September 2004, almost half alleged "genocide" or potential "genocide", continue. many of them invoking the spectre of Rwanda.673 On 9 September 2004, in an 1e time by appearance before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Powell 'he war in reversed his previous position and stated that "genocide has been committed 8 Theday in Darfur. .. and that genocide may still be occurring. " 674 The same day, eath toll in President Bush issued a statement stating that as a result of State Department genocide itwestigations, Washington had concluded that genocide had taken place in :appeased Darfur. President Bush called on the UN "to undertake a full investigation of
143 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 6/44 CB PT
Daifur: The Road to Peace the genocide and other crimes in Darfur". 675 President Bush restated this DeWaal: assertion when he addressed the UN General Assembly on 21 September. In a Darfurtobe subsequent presidential debate he again restated the genocide allegations. 676 While ultimately coming down to sheer political opportunism, Powell's Theim] use of the genocide word has undoubtedly further tarnished the image of the neocon: American government, not least of which because at the time of making the of then genocide declaration he also stated that the United States would not act upon outrage this finding. Bizarrely, having made a public declaration of genocide before support the Senate, Powell then stated that " [n ]o new action is dictated by this Congre determination ... So let us not be too preoccupied with (it]". 677 Bush the reli1 subsequently reconfirmed that the US would take no further action: "We rightsg shouldn't be committing troops."678 This lack of concern can be seen as Departl confirmation in itself that the declaration of genocide was made more as the regime result of internal political pressure and politics and less on the reality of Souther events. There is no doubt that Save Darfur activists saw a direct link between their That the work and the genocide declaration. Hamilton and Hazlett have spoken of "the pressure was first accomplishment of Darfur advocacy: the genocide determination". 679 In envoy to Sue their words, "For the burgeoning Darfur movement, getting the U.S. July 2005 B1 government to use the 'G-word,' as activists referred to it, was an unimaginable something tl: coup" .680 When asked The extent to which the Bush administration's approach to the Save Darfur Financial Tin movement was a cynical one did not escape activists. Hamilton and Hazlett notably frorr have observed: "To date, the movement's efforts to pressure the U.S. any instance government may have, somewhat perversely, forced the Administration to place genocide in : a higher priority on 'managing' activists than fmding a workable solution for Taft, a coun: Darfur."681 This analysis is echoed by de Waal who has described the US use stated in Au1 of the genocide label as "the outcome of intra-beltway political calculus". 682 Darfurdid n De Waal also observed that it was the result of "a very specific set of political term.-6as processes in Washington D. C. in which interest groups were contending for The adrni control over U.S. policy towards Sudan. In this context, the call to set up a however, as State Department inquiry into whether or not there was genocide in Darfur have been an was a tactical manoeuvre designed to placate the anti-Khartoum activists so, the strate circling around Congress".683 Even anti-Sudan activists such as Eric Reeves above other : have termed Bush's position on genocide "hopelessly opportunistic". 684 crisis most d
144 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 7/44 CB PT
A !legations of· Genocide in Darfur
'stated this De Waal has outlined some of the American domestic pressure pushing for ember. In a Darfur to be labelled as genocide: ~ations. 676 n, Powell's The impetus for the genocide ruling did not come from Washington's nage of the neocons, but rather from liberal human rights activists and members making the of the religious right. The origins of this coalition lie both in genuine ot act upon outrage at the conditions of life in Sudan, but also in the politics of cide before support for the SPLA ... which intersected with influence trading in ed by this Congress [bringing] together the Black Caucus, the Israeli lobby, 671 ". Bush the religious right (for whom Sudan is a crusade) and the human :tion: "We rights groups ... Several of these groups were frustrated that the State be seen as Department, under the Republicans, had switched from a policy of nore as the regime change in Khartoum to a pursuit of a negotiated peace for e reality of Southern Sudan. 685
tween their That the Bush administration in essence caved into domestic political ken of "the pressure was confirmed by Senator John Danforth, President Bush's special .tion". 679 In envoy to Sudan and subsequently US ambassador to the United Nations. In a :; the U.S. July 2005 BBC interview he stated that the use of the genocide label "was imaginable something that was said for internal consumption within the United States". · When asked whether he meant the Christian Right, Danforth agreed.""' The aveDarfur Financial Times has also noted that Powell was under intense domestic pressure, nd Hazlett notably from Christian lobby groups, to reach the genocide definition.687 In e the U.S. any instance, it is also clear that the Bush administration's declaration of ion to place genocide in Darfur was against the advice of its own legal experts. George olution for Tail:, a counsel within the State Department's Office of the Legal Adviser the US use stated in August 2005, sometime after Powell's statement, that events in alculus". 682 Darfur did not constitute genocide and that he had opposed the use of that c:Jf political term. 6&8 ending for The administration's cynicism in using the term had unexpected results, to set up a however, as outlined by Hamilton and Hazlett: "Use of the 'G-word' may ·in Darfur have been an early attempt by the Administration to assuage activists- but if n activists so, the strategy had the opposite effect. Calling it genocide elevated Darfur ric Reeves above other atrocities with high death tolls, seemingly highlighting it as the c" _684 crisis most deserving of attention. The legitimacy the term gave to Darfur
145 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 8/44 CB PT
Daifur: The Road to Peace
advocacy emboldened a fresh and growing pool of activists, convinced that giving you' the 'worst crime imaginable' demanded an uncompromising response." 689 The goes withou administration was hoist by its own petard. enthusiasm. Assuming for one moment that the Bush administration had not been as administrati· crassly cynical as it seems, there are two further possible explanations for its admit his di use of the genocide label. The first is that this declaration was simply based on misinformec poor intelligence. This is of course equally disturbing but not totally ontheAmer unimaginable. It is a matter of record that this declaration of genocide came Security Co- from an administration and intelligence community that has come to be lt is now, characterised by systemic intelligence failures. 690 It would appear, for example, genocide in that Washington's intelligence on Iraq, both pre-and-post invasion was abysmal prominent -- even though it was presumably, from an American intelligence perspective, declaration: the most watched and studied country in the world. What would the intelligence community necessarily know about a region on the edge of the Sahel? Powell' Confidence in American intelligence and analysis was not enhanced by former stunt Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld 's admission that: "Reports that say· throng] something hasn't happened are always interesting to me because as we know, UN in: there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know decisioJ there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we by the do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns- the ones we don't know proved we don't know."'" and cm The second explanation, one which has gained momentum within sections goverr of the American left and internationally, is that the Bush administration declared interve: genocide in Darfur in order to lay the ground for a military intervention in yet a confl another oil-rich Muslim country just as WMD had been used as a pretext for where 1 the US invasion of oil-rich Iraq. baclc se Whichever explanation holds, the American record for crying wolf, in the wake of the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction fiasco, has not improved."' That this Only 18-months earlier, the same Colin Powell had been wheeled out by the immediately Bush administration to state that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, It is interest forcefully alleging, amongst other things, the existence of a nuclear weapons IraqiWMD programme, mobile bio-weapons laboratories, 500 tons of chemical agent, Prunier, sta1 tons of VX nerve gas, thousands of litres of anthrax and biological weapon practically 1: armed rockets and warheads. Powell stated that "every statement 1 make today September 2 is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we are that he [had
146 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 9/44 CB PT
Allegations of Genocide in Darfor
693 cl that giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid evidence." It perhaps "The goes without saying that the American media accepted Powell' s claims with enthusiasm. The reality is now all too clear. There were no WMD. The Bush 694 een as administration had lied. Powell has subsequently had the good grace to for its admit his disastrous mistake, stating that he felt "terrible" at having been 695 ;edon roisinformed. Powell's chief-of-staff described Powell's claims as "a hoax )tally on the American people, the international community, and the United Nations 696 came Security CounciL" to be It is now evident that Powell made similarly misinformed allegations about mple, genocide in Darfur. Brendan O'Neill, the British political commentator and vsmal prominent blogger, clearly saw an ulterior motive in Powell's Darfur ctive, declaration: sence 1hel? Powell's labelling of the Darfur conflict as genocide was a cynical stunt- and even many of those of an anti-war persuasion who saw
t say through his rubbish about Saddam having WMD, as spouted at the :now, UN in February 2003, fell for it hook, line and sinker. Washington's cnow decision officially to defme Darfur as a genocide was motivated more ;s we by the fallout from Iraq than by events in Sudan. As Gulf War II ;::now proved both a practical and political disaster -leaving Iraq in a mess and causing endless embarrassment for the American and British tions governments - Washington launched what we might call an lared intervention-lite into the affairs of Sudan, hoping that posturing over nyet a conflict that could be presented in black-and-white terms (and t for where there were no WMDs to worry about) would help them win back some of their fast-collapsing international moral authority.'97 1the ed."2 That this move was a cynical one appeared to have been borne out almost r the immediately by Washington's statement that no action on its part would follow. :wn, It is interesting to note, in the light of Powell having been used to front the )0flS Iraqi WMD claims, that French academic, and noted Khartoum critic, Gerard
~ent, Prunier, stated that he was "assured that Secretary of State Colin Powell had Jon practically been ordered to use the term 'genocide' during his high profile 9 >day September 2004 testimony to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations but
~are that he [had) also been advised to add in the same breath that this did not
147 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 10/44 CB PT
Darfur: The Road to Peace
oblige the United States to undertake any sort of drastic action ... Thus Darfur genoc President Bush tried to be all things to all men on the Sudan/Darfur reported that question ... Predictably the interest level of US diplomacy on the Sudan State Depar question dropped sharply as soon as President Bush was re-elected."698 This atrocities con begs the question of whether Powell was more than aware of the weakness in Atrocities in L his claim. One wonders if he will have the courage to admit that his claim of up of State I genocide in Darfur was as fraudulent as his WMD allegation. for lnternati< The first question, therefore, that must be asked is whether or not the Bush with refugeef administration would play political games with allegations of genocide. It was of a family 1 a question posed by genocide activist Gerald Caplan: Atrocities D< the [United S· What would have been the point of making this declaration unless Bush has also significant action was being planned ... Had the historic declaration then Washin; of genocide been nothing more than an opportunistic political ploy one. Firstly, by the Bush administration to assuage some domestic pressure "genocide" .. groups? Could even the Bush neo-cons be so cynical as to play Centre for R' politics with genocide? If not, how could this wholly unanticipated flaw at the he development be explained? How could the esteemed Colin Powell way to funct participate in this destructive exercise, which had done so much to sampling me1 debase the currency of the Genocide Convention?" 699 200,000 refuf people affect< This crucial question, which lies at the heart of Washington's genocide of mortality i declaration, is perhaps best answered by Arianna Huffington, the syndicated Estimates De~ US columnist: "Almost every day btings fresh evidence that Bush and his Be Enhanced crew believe they can get away with just about anything - no matter how Atrocities D· shocking, offensive, corrupt, underhanded or in-your-face the source of da· transgression. "700 And, it should be noted, Huffington was summing up the Darfur, base< Bush administration before the Iraqi invasion and subsequent WMD fiasco. information < Her view is shared by David Corn, the Washington editor of The Nation. from represe Writing in his New York Times list bestseller, The Lies of George W. Bush. Having o Mastering the Politics of Deception, Corn quite baldly stated: "George W. Bush administratic is a liar. He has lied large and small, directly and by omission. He has mugged this term awi the truth - not merely in honest error, but deliberately, consistently, and of anti-Sudru repeatedly."701 to 'walk bac: It is also worth noting that even the fig-leaf used by Powell to justify his Deputy Seer•
148 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 11/44 CB PT
Allegadons of Genocide in Darfur
1. .• Thus Darfur genocide claim has subsequently been discredited. The Washington Post /Darfur reported that as the basis for his claim, "Powell cited a report released by the
149 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 12/44 CB PT
Darjitr: The Road to Peace
Khartoum following Powell's genocide declaration in September 2004. It was genocide clear that he was uncomfortable with the term. When asked if the US believed bands, ye genocide was being committed in Darfur, he stated: "I don't want to get into a Outsi' debate over terminology." Zoellick did however speak of "crimes against genocide humanity", in line with the findings of the United Nations commission of of State inquiry.707 In October 2005, the US ambassador to the UN blocked abriefing having a on Darfur by the UN secretary-general's special adviser on genocide.708 In disappoir early February 2006, the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, happenin Jendayi Fraser, would not respond to questions as to whether events in Darfur declarat: still constituted "genocide". Fraser stated that the situation was "very different contradic than it was ... It is a very serious situation and it's a series of small attacks and there hav incidents. It is not the government directing the militia attacking civilians."709 African t Yet, two weeks later, the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, speaking in July z, before the US Congress, stated that "genocide" continued in Darfur.710 levels of And then, one year later, in February 2007, at a meeting at Georgetown the situal University, Andrew Natsios, President Bush's special envoy to Sudan, stated Nigerian that "The term genocide is counter to the facts of what is really occurring in that even Darfur."m Interestingly enough, a week or two after Natsios, the US point it does n< man on Darfur, a man with decades of experience of Sudanese affairs, declared be conde claims of genocide to be counter to what was happening in Darfur, the US issue of I Department of State's annual human rights report claimed that "genocide into a mi continued to ravage the Darfur region of Sudan."712 At a subsequent hearing conferen, before a US Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on 11 April2007, in 2004, PrE a heated exchange with Senator Robert Menendez, N atsios repeatedly refused is genoci to characterise the ongoing violence in Darfur as genocide. N atsios was asked plan and "Do you consider the ongoing situation in Darfur a, genocide, yes or no?" He then we\ responded: "There is very little violence in Darfur right now." When pressed, that.Wh< he replied: "There is very little fighting between rebels and the government aimed ar. and very few civilian casualties going on in Darfur right now." A press release That doe by Senator Menendez confirmed that "Natsios ... refused to give Menendez a course cc straightforward answer as to whether the conflict in Darfur can still be deemed Union ha a genocide."713 Later in 2007, President Bush returned to the genocide theme. first-ha Speaking in a UN Security Council meeting on Africa, he declared that "when conclusic we find genocide it's time to do something about it. Time is of the essence." Simih Bush gave what appeared to be his somewhat open-ended definition of there was ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 13/44 CB PT
Allegations of Genocide in Darfur
104. It was genocide: "If you've been raped .. .if you're mercilessly killed by roaming Sbelieved bands, you know it's genocide."714 'get into a Outside of the Washington Beltway, the Bush administration's claim of es against genocide has been regarded with scepticism. In late September 2004 Secretary nission of of State Colin Powell admitted that the Bush Administration was alone in a briefing having alleged that genocide was happening in Darfur: "I must say, I am •cide 708 In disappointed that not more nations have made this clear statement of what's 715 m Affairs, happening there." The international community has shunned the American •inDarfur declaration. United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, for one, ydifferent contradicted American claims: "I cannot call the killing a genocide even though .ttacks and there have been massive violations of international humanitarian law." 716 The vilians. " 709 African Union's position was clearly outlined by its Peace and Security Council , speaking in July 2004: "Even though the crisis in Darfur is grave, with unacceptable lf.no levels of death, human suffering and desttuction of homes and infrastructure, eorgetown the situation cannot be defined as a genocide. "m The then AU Chairman, lan, stated Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo, also stated in early December 2004 •curringin that events in Darfur did not constitute genocide: "Now, what I know of Sudan US point- it does not fit in all respects to that definition. The government of Sudan can 3, declared be condemned, but it's not as ... genocide." Obasanjo stated that "the real 1r, the US issue of Darfur is governance. It is a political problem which has mushroomed "genocide into a military (one) when the rebels took up arms. " 718 Speaking at a press nt hearing conference at the United Nations Headquarters inNew York on 23 September ril2007, in 2004, President Obasanjo had previously stated: "Before you can say that this !ly refused is genocide or ethnic cleansing, we will have to have a definite decision and was asked plan and program of a government to wipe out a particular group of people, r no?" He then we will be talking about genocide, ethnic cleansing. What we know is not ·n pressed, that. What we know is that there was an uprising, rebellion, and the government Jvernment armed another group of people to stop that rebellion. That's what we know. ess release That does not amount to genocide from our own reckoning. It amounts to of enendez a course conflict. It amounts to violence." It should also be noted that the African Jedeemed Union had hundreds of observers on the ground throughout Darfur, whose ide theme. first-hand observations would have shaped President Obasanjo's hat "when conclusions. · ·essence. " Similarly, the European Union's fact-fmding mission concluded that, although inition of there was widespread violence, there was no evidence of genocide. A spokesman
151 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 14/44 CB PT
Darfur: The Road to Peace
for the mission stated: "We are in not in the situation of genocide there. But it opportunisr is clear there is widespread, silent and slow, killing going on, and village burning genocide v. on a fairly large scale. "719 The Arab League took the position that events in deliberate i Darfur were neither genocide nor ethnic cleansing and accused the Bush reports of: administration of seeking to exploit the crisis for electoral gain. Even Israel, a members of statefounded in large part by survivors of a genuine holocaust, has perhaps whoworke< indirectly demurred from Washington's claim in publicly turning away hospitals tl Darfurian refugees.720 warned: "I Given the level of international concern about allegations of genocide in describe th Darfur, and partly in response to President Bush's call for such a measure, the nevertheles: United Nations Security Council established the International Commission another. one of Inquiry on Darfur pursuant to Security Council resolution !564 (2004), serious by i1 adopted on 18 September 2004. A five-member body, chaired by Italian jurist Medecin Antonio Cassese, was appointed by the Secretary-General in October 2004. to allegatio• The Commission was tasked "to investigate reports of violations of first humar. international humanitarian law and human rights by all parties" and "to unfolded. ~ determine also whether or not acts of genocide have occurred". It was requested emergency to report back to the Secretary-General by January 2005. The Commission 2, 000 staff. · reported that while there had been serious violations of human rights in Darfur, displaced b~ genocide had not occurred. m present anc Of particular significance, perhaps, has been the fact that Washington's awareness< genocide claims have been pointedly criticised by well-respected humanitarian beyond rep groups such as Medecins Sans Frontieres.722 In 2004, MSF pointedly criticised Peace Prize the unfounded use of words such as genocide: "By screaming 'the crime of all its outstandi crimes', mixing military with humanitarianism ... to justify intervention, words record with do have concrete implications and often serve political interests." The headed MSl organisation also noted of the allegations of genocide in Darfur: "Resorting the surgical to this terminology says much about the racist representation of African Bradol and conflicts in the West (the conflict in D arfur reduced to an inevitable antagonism can't stop g between Blacks and Arabs). It also demonstrates, as if it were necessary, that situation in words are used by States, not for what they mean but for the political objectives the human that they might serve." MSF cautioned that to continue with its job would Unfortunat1 entail "distancing ourselves from propaganda and resisting this era of came to pas confusion"/23 MSF-France President Dr Jean-Herve Bradol subsequently until after t: described American claims of genocide in Darfur as "obvious political with regar
152 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 15/44 CB PT
Allegations of Genocide in Darfur ide there. But it
!53 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 16/44 CB PT
.,_,,; Darfor: The Road to Peace unambiguous position in pointedly criticising allegations of genocide in Darfur Darfur is a Cl is all the more powerful. janjaweed att< Dr Bradol has also criticised the way in which the truth was twisted in exterminate a order to claim genocide in Darfur: "The need to revive the notion of race to .The first A support the premise of genocide in Darfur is not the only point of weakness ofg~nocidein in the genocide argument. Puhlic statements of the intent to destroy a human especially whe group have been no more obvious than the existence of distinct races. No the Rwandan traces of this intent can be found in statements by the Sudanese dictatorship or Clinton admi in the country's laws. In short, the alleged intent to destroy a human group is community k1 not obvious, and the definition of the group of victims is based on a category to brand the s that was rightly invalidated many years ago." 729 Interestingly, MSF's comments to whether th about allegations of genocide were echoed by other medical organisations. inquiry in Jan Interviewed in April 2005, Dr Gino Strada, a war surgeon and founder of The study no Emergency, a humanitarian NGO that had worked through the Rwandan genocide, and in Darfur, stated that "I will say there is no genocide at all in That the Darfur. There is a big humanitarian disaster, and the problem is to act toward regardin that humanitarian disaster." Dr Strada further noted that "All this business of at least t genocide in Sudan ... I think has come up as an idea to sort of pave the ground say the I for a possible military intervention. And next door there is the ... Democratic the Dad Republic of Congo, where four million people have died because of the conflict, have its and no one has ever thought about mentioning genocide ... A country comes genocid to the light of the media when there are some political agendas from very reason .. powerful nations behind them. "730 While I There has also been criticism of the Bush administration's questionable atrocitie declaration of genocide from American elder statesmen such as the former froin th president, Jimmy Carter. Speaking during a visit to Darfur, Carter, whose deaths b charitable foundation, the Carter Center, worked to establish the International 10 mon Criminal Court, said that Washington's use of the term "genocide" was both rhetoric legally inaccurate and "unhelpful". He went on to say that: "There is a legal charges definition of genocide and Darfur does not meet that legal standard. The -thattr atrocities were horrible but I don't think it qualifies to be called genocide. If pretext you read the law textbooks... you''ll see very clearly that it's not genocide and Muslim to call it genocide falsely just to exaggerate a horrible situation I don't think it helps."731 Carter also noted that: "Rwanda was definitely a genocide; what The stud Hitler did to the Jews was; but I don't think it's the case in Darfur. I think entailments
!54 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 17/44 CB PT
Allegations of Genocide in Darfor leinDarfur Darfur is a crime against humanity, but done on a micro scale. A dozen janjaweed attacking here and there. I don't think the commitment was to 732 twisted in exterminate a whole group of people. " 1 of race to The first American academic study of the Bush administration's declaration f wea_lmess of genocide in Darfur has also questioned the true motivation for such a finding, ,yahuman especially when compared to the inaction of the Clinton administration during . races. No the Rwandan genocide, noting that "especially perplexing is that while the atorship or Clinton administration sought to deny what (they and) the international mgroupts community knew about genocide in Rwanda, the Bush White House sought a category to brand the situation in Darfur as genocide despite significant uncertainty as comments to whether this was, in fact, the case. Bush continues to do so despite a UN anisations. inquiry in January of 2005 that concluded that genocide had not taken place."133 founder of The study notes: Rwandan de at all in That the UN came to a different conclusion than the United States act toward regarding genocide in Darfur is relevant to the present concern for )Usiness of at least two reasons. First, as a circumstantial matter, it is curious, to he ground say the least that the United States would find it expedient to label Jemocratic the Darfur atrocities 'genodde,' request a UN investigation only to 1e conflict, have its claim challenged and then continue to use the rhetoric of ttry comes genocide despite the UN's contradictory findings ... The second from very reason ... has to do with the simple fact that Darfur is not Rwanda. While Darfur as been characterized as 'Rwanda in slow motion', the estionable atrocities in Rwanda are qualitatively and quantitatively different he former from those in Rwanda I 0 years earlier. Eight hundred thousand :er, whose deaths in 100 days are scarcely comparable to an estimated 70,000 in ernational 10 months. Thus, when the United States continued to use the 'was both rhetoric of genocide despite the UN's contrary findings .. .led to : is a legal charges by several leaders - mainly in the Islamic and Arab worlds lard. The -that the United States was employing the rhetoric of genocide as a nocide. If pretext to invade another oil-rich and predominately Arab and ocide and Muslim state. 734 1't think it ide; what The study also concludes that "the word 'genocide' undoubtedly has tr. I thiiLl( entailments that ... other atrocities do not: it is more inflammatory, more
155 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 18/44 CB PT
Darfur: The Road to Peace
reproachful, and entails at least a moral (if not legal) obligation to stop such paramilitaries acts ... and it is why the Bush administration's characterization of the Darfur and the victin crisis as genocide created a groundswell of controversy in world capitals in rather than in 2004 ... It may indeed be a truism to say that the United States and those elites both as racial who represent it will only use the rhetoric of genocide if they stand to gain Rwandan ge something from doing so." 735 governments, Interestingly, Professor Francis Fukuyama, once the intellectual centre of reason he tha1 the nee-conservative movement within the United States, has also noted the nomoretban difference between Darfur and instances of unambiguous genocide: "If the Rwandaand l conflict in Darfur is genocide, it is also quite different from German treatment in Kivu-is r of the Jews or the Hum slaughter of Tutsis in Rwanda.'m' The.oppo' Mabmood Mamdani has also pointed to the double-standards in any instance has also beeJ of the American position on genocide. Mamdani has succinctly pointed out College, a vt the contradictions in Washington's Darfur genocide declaration: Association government. The similarities between Iraq and Darfur are remarkable. The stated with n estimate of the number of civilians killed over the past three years is non-Arabna roughly similar. The killers are mostly paramilitaries, closely linked reasons of d to the official military, which is said to be their main source of arms. United State The victims too are by and large identified as members of groups, professor, h< rather than targeted as individuals. But the violence in the two places genocide ter is named differently. In Iraq, it is said to be a cycle of insurgency means of shi and counter-insurgency; in Darfur, it is called genocide. Why the The Save difference? Who does the naming? Who is being named? What of genocide difference does it make? 737 been criticis< which "gene Speaking about the "politics around genocide", Mamdani has asked when 1982, for ex; is the killing of civilians a genocide? He stated that "genocide is being conference c instrumentalized by the biggest power on the earth today, which is the United Wiesel pullE States." Deaths "which implicate its adversaries are being named as genocide YehudaBau and those which implicate its friends or its proxies are not being named as out: genocide". 738 Mamdani has compared the American response to Darfur to its non-response to Congo, the dimensions of which "give it a mega-Darfur ElieW quality: the numbers killed are estimated in the millions rather than the hundreds Vashen of thousands; the bulk of the killing, particularly in Kivu, is done by TelAv
156 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 19/44 CB PT
Allegations of Genocide in Darfur
o stop such paramilitaries trained, organised and armed by neighbouring governments; the Darfur and the victims on both sides- Hema and Lendu- are framed in collective I capitals in rather than individual terms, to the point that one influential version defines those elites both as racial identities and the conflict between the two as a replay of the and to gain Rwandan genocide." Mamdani then points out that the neighbouring governments, Rwanda and Uganda, are allies of the United States: "Could the al centre of reason be that in the case of Congo, Hema and Lendu militias-many of them o noted the no more than child soldiers- were trained by America's allies in the region, ide: "If the Rwanda and Uganda? Is that why the violence in Darfur-but not the violence n treatment in Kivu- is named as a genocide?"739 The opportunistic underpinnings of the use of the genocide term in Darfur nyinstance has also been highlighted by Professor Richard Lobban of Rhode Island lOinted out College, a veteran scholar of Sudan, a past chairman of the Sudan Studies Association in the United States and a long-time critic of the Khartoum government. Writing in Macmillan 'sEncyclopaedia on Race and Racism, Lobban . The stated with regard to the genocide claim that "Notably three non-African and ears is non-Arab nations were the most interested in applying this term. Perhaps for !.inked reasons of domestic pressures, or as diversionary efforts were England, the arms. United States and Israel."740 Professor Hisham Aidi, a Columbia University ·oups, professor, has elaborated on Lobban's comment about Israeli interest in the )laces genocide term, stating that pro-Israeli scholars have focused on Darfur as a ;ency means of shifting the international spotlight away from Palestine.741 ;y the The Save Darfur movement's use of Elie Wiesel to support its assertions What of genocide in Darfur has also been opportunistic.741 Wiesel has previously been criticised for flip-flopping on genocide issues, and picking and choosing which "genocide" he wishes to acknowledge and when he chooses to do so. In sked when 1982, for example, Wiesel was scheduled to be the honorary chairman of a e is being conference on genocide in Israel. When Armenia was scheduled for discussion, the United Wiesel pulled out of the event, and urged noted Israeli Holocaust historian s genocide Yehuda Bauer to also boycott the conference. Norman Finkelstein has pointed named as out: ufur to its :ra-Darfur " Elie Wiesel and Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg as well as the AJC and Yad ehundreds Vashem withdrew from an international conference on genocide in ; done by Tel Aviv because the academic sponsors, against Israeli goverri:rnent
!57 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 20/44 CB PT
Daifur: The Road to Peace
urging, included sessions on the Armenian case. Wiesel also sought, Administrat unilaterally, to abort the conference and, according to Yehuda Bauer, Observer ne' personally lobbied others not to attend. Acting at Israel's behest, Powell; "Its the US Holocaust Council practically eliminated mention of the have though Armenians in the Washington Holocaust Memorial Museum, and is, buno cal Jewish lobbyists in Congress blocked a day of remembrance for the going to d< Armenian genocide. m 'genocide'.' had coloure Professor N oam Chomsky has also pointed to this instance as an example claims had t of Wiesel "serving Israeli state interests". 744 It should also be noted that Wiesel workers anc has subsequently put his name to a declaration by N obel Prize winners that Sudan'sDat the Armenian genocide did actually take place. 745 there are stil Bloggers have also been active in highlighting the inconsistencies in crisis is be Washington's genocide finding. Writing on the "Dissidentvoice" blog, Glen interviewed Ford notes: "Possibly a quarter million people have lost their lives in Darfur, of such hyf western Sudan, in ethnic conflict. The US government screams its head off in both northe denunciation of genocide, in this case. In the Democratic Republic of Congo The Ohs< (D RC), as many as five million have died since 1994 in overlapping convulsions inDarfur h~ of ethnic and state-sponsored massacre; Not a word of reproach from puzzled ovE Washington. A human death toll that approaches the Nazis' annihilation of 'plucking fi Jews in World War Two- an ongoing holocaust- unfolds without a whiff of USAID's r 746 complaint from the superpower." Conor Foley, a British academic, president oc humanitarian aid worker and blogger, has also repeatedly challenged the misuse director of of the genocide label in Darfur, stating that given the current political climate Sudanese g 747 in Sudan, it "is bit like crying 'fire' in a crowded theatre". The American civil war ir blogger, David Peterson, spoke for many when he asked the question; "Imagine director of invoking the 'G' -word - politically and morally and legally combined, the QuantiJYin!_ single most invidious word in the lexicon ...-in as deliberately ostentatious a DouglasH fashion as the Bush Administration just has, and then adding by way of for Refuge< 748 footnote; No new action is dictated by our use of the 'G'-word." figure was Reputable British newspapers have also voiced concern at the claims made the exercise by Colin Powell. The London Observer newspaper reported that international expertDav aid workers in Sudan were claiming that American warnings that Darfur is -whether; heading for an apocalyptic genocidal catastrophe, as voiced by the United States -needhav< Agency for International Development, had been widely exaggerated by Consideral
!58 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 21/44 CB PT
. Allegations of Genocide in Darfur
>ught, Administration officials in Washington. An aid worker interviewed by Tlze lauer, Observer newspaper also touched on the apparent lack of concern shown by "hest, Powell: "It suited various governments to talk it all up, but they don't seem to ,f the have thought about the consequences. I have no idea what Colin Powell's game , and is, but to call it genocide and then effectively say, 'Oh, shucks, but we are not Jrthe going to do anything about that genocide' undermines the very word 'genocide' ."749 It was claimed that a desire for regime change in Khartoum had coloured their reports. The Observer pointed out that American genocide n example clainls had been "comprehensively challenged by eyewitness reports from aid 1atWiesel workers and by a new food survey of the region. The nutritional survey of nners that Sudan's Darfur region, by the UN World Food Programme, says that although there are still high levels of malnutrition among under-fives in some areas, the :encies in crisis is being brought under control." Many aid workers and officials log, Glen interviewed by The Observer were puzzled that Darfur had become the focus n Darfur, of such hyperbolic warnings when there were crises of similar magnitude in ead off in both northern Uganda and eastern Congo. 750 Jf Congo The Observer noted that "Concern about USAID's role as an honest broker rrvulsions in Darfur has been mounting for months, with diplomats as well as aid workers lch from puzzled over its pronouncements and one European diplomat accusing it of ilation of 'plucking figures from the air'." The newspaper also pointed out that two of . whiff of USAID's most senior officials, director Andrew Natsios, a former vice :ademic, president of the Christian charity World Vision, and Roger Winter, a former 1emisuse director of the US Committee for Refugees, have long been hostile to the J climate Sudanese government.751 Winter had already attempted, in the course of the lmerican civil war in southern Sudan, to use "genocide" propaganda. While he was 'Imagine director of the US Committee for Refugees, the organisation published ned, the QuantifYing Genocide in the southern Sudan 198.3-'1993.752 As Sudan historian rations a Douglas H Johnson has noted: "At the release of this report the U.S. Committee way of for Refugees pre-empted criticism by suggesting that anyone questioning that figure was denying the scale of human devastation. Herein lies the value of nsmade 7 3 the exercise: it is designed to attract attention. " ; Johnson then quotes statistical national expert David Henige: "Numbers wielded for the immediate benefit of others Jarfur is -whether statistics collected on crowd sizes or numbers of homeless estimated :d States -need have no relation to reality, since it is only the impression that matters. " 754 ated by Considerable caution, therefore, needs to be exercised before accepting any
159 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 22/44 CB PT
Darfur: The Road to Peace of the statistical claims made by American-commissioned reports of war This was a related deaths in Darfur.755 In any instance, USAID claims projecting hundreds though it has l of thousands of deaths were contradicted by the United Nations 2004 end-of the displaced r year report which stated that "The catastrophic mortality figures predicted by and intellectu some quarters have not materialised" .756 Interestingly, while content to use outgrowth of statistical extrapolations and projections in its ongoing propaganda campaign style fight for against Sudan on Darfur, Washington has been noticeably shy of accepting the violence ir 760 any similar statistical extrapolations with regard to its war in Iraq. 757 crusade. " ~ Washington's shallow use of the term genocide has had several negative Research in F effects. Juan Mendez, the Special Adviser to the UN Secretary-General on the been aimed a; 761 Prevention of Genocide, has stated that the discussion of whether or not the targeted." Darfur situation constituted genocide had been "sterile and paralysing". 758 The Short of' Financial Times has reported that "Amnesty and Human Rights Watch say collective "fa that debating tbe definition of the atrocities has detracted from a key issue: Darfur coalit action by the international community to help end the violence and ensure In her gn 75 those responsible are brought to justice." ' Fatigue: How Perhaps the most telling contradiction of claims of genocide in Darfur Moeller mad< also applied to similar ~ and equally propagandistic ~ claims of genocide in the D arfur c; southern Sudan. The simple fact is that victims of genocide do not move "genocide". 1 towards those engaged in their slaughter. Jews within Germany in the 1930s does genocid and 1940s were seeking to flee Germany not move towards Berlin or other that "In corr urban centres. Jews elsewhere in Europe were not moving towards Germany. specific mear Similarly, during the Rwandan genocide, Tutsis were not heading towards with massacr Kigali or other Hutu government-controlled centres; they were fleeing into in Newsweek, the countries neighbouring Rwanda. During the 50-year civil war in southern group is feu( Sudan, however, at least half of the southernpopulation voluntarily trekked atrocities, an northwards ~ often in difficult circumstances ~ to seek refuge in northern This is a! Sudan, and particularly Khartoum. They could more easily have gone to live Financial Ti1 in Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia or the Congo, often amongst their own extended tribalkin. Many thousands more chose to live within government-controlled The we cities and towns in southern Sudan. Similarly, most of those displaced in Darfur includi; have chosen not to flee to Chad, to live amongst their extended kin, but have categor chosen instead to move to government-controlled urban areas such as ai denials Fasher, Nyala and al-Geneina. Most people do not flee toward "genocidal" riders l assaults. . forces.
160 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 23/44 CB PT
Allegations of Genocide in Darfur reports of war This was a point touched on by Guardian journalistJonathan Steele: "Grim iecting hundreds though it has been, this was not genocide or classic ethnic cleansing. Many of ms 2004 end-of the displaced moved to camps a few kilometers from their homes. Professionals res predicted by and intellectuals were not targeted, as in Rwanda. Darfur was, and is, the , con tent to use outgrowth of a struggle between farmers and nomads rather than a Balkan ;anda campaign style fight for the same piece of land. Finding a solution is not helped by turning 1y of accepting the violence into a battle of good versus evil or launching another Arab-bashing raq. 757 crusade."760 Marc Lavergne, of the French National Centre for Scientific everal negative Research in Paris, has made the similar observation that the violence has not General on the been aimed at Darfurian identity: "Darfurians who live in Khartoum are not ther or not the targeted.""' 1lysing". 753 The Short of saying that the vast majority of Darfurians are suffering from hts Watch say collective "false consciousness", it is impossible for groups such as the Save m a key issue: Darfur coalition to explain away this simple fact. ce and ensure In her groundbreaking 1999 study of media accountability, Compassion Fatigue: How the Media Sell, Disease, Famine, War and Death, Professor Susan ide in Darfur Moeller made several points which are borne out by recent media coverage of f genocide in the Darfur crisis, points relevant to current attempts to label events there as do not move "genocide". Unlike many journalists, Moeller has asked the key question "How 'in the 1930s does genocide differ, for example, from ethnic, tribal or civil war?" and warned ,rJin or other that "In common parlance and in the media the term genocide has lost its ds Germany. specific meaning and become almost commonplace. It has become synonymous ling towards with massacre and gross oppression or repression. "762 Charles Lane, writing , fleeing into in Newsweek, has also observed: "The world is full of places where one ethnic :in southern group is feuding with another. . .In every case, the fighting is characterized by trily trekked atrocities, and the victims cry genocide. "763 in northern This is also a point touched on by David White, the Africa editor of The gone to live Financial Times: m extended :-controlled The word genocide is too freely used. Deliberate attacks on civilians, 'dinDarfur including indiscriminate bombing and executions, can certainly be n, but have categorised as war crimes or crimes against humanity. Despite official such as a) denials, there is overwhelming testimony that attacks by Arab militia genocidal" riders have been undertaken in joint operations with government forces. But this is not genocide in the sense of a deliberate plan to
161 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 24/44 CB PT
Darfur: The Road to Peace
kill a whole population group, as happened in Rwanda. A more unlike! y to hE plausible version is that, by exploiting traditional tensions in the program at tl region, the authorities unleashed forces beyond their control and author of Fre had difficulty coming to terms with the consequences. Clashes Cold War. A~ between farmers and nomadic herders go back for generations in from.Septeml Darfur. Conflict over land, access to water and the raiding of cattle the organisati have got worse in the past 20 years as a result of drought, crisis very cl< desertification and the availability of modern weapons. At its origin Clough s it is a conflict about resources, not racial hatred. The standard Watch ... con labelling of 'Arabs' as opposed to 'black Africans' is misleading genocide, a le inasmuch as both groups are black and both are Muslim. The of 'intent to ' distinctions are more tribal and cultural. 764 group, as su< Power's boo1 The issue was also addressed in The World Today, the journal of the Royal from invokir Institute of International Affairs. Peter Quayle, an expert working with the international International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, said that it would ConveniE be wrong to label events in Darfur as genocide: "The conflict is a complex genocide do social, political and military struggle for wealth and power. Although it rebutted atteJ coincides with racial differences, the ongoing destruction is a coincidental not They had"] motivating purpose." Referring to the 1954 Genocide Convention, Quayle atrocities in 1 notes: commemora noted, howe· The Convention's two invidious questions ought to be asked. Are non-Arab Darfurians a people that the Convention protects as a the patt group in whole or in part? And is this group, if protected, attacked whath< as such? The group appears not to be a protected group partly to the, because it relies on a regional definition. In answer to the second docum< unhappy question - are these people being attacked only because ruthles: they are members of a protected group? No, Darfurians are targeted elimina because of the possibility they shelter and sustain rebels. Outside were b1 the conflict zone they are unharmed.765 Africar to wip< Michael Clough is another human rights and Africa expert who quite clearly attach stated that the genocide label is inaccurate: "Genocide is not being committed janjaw< in Darfur ... But to call what's happening there 'genocide' when it's not is used tr
!62 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 25/44 CB PT
Allegatioru of Genocide in Darfur
a. A more unlikely to help the people of Darfur."766 Clough was director of the Africa ions in the program at the Council on Foreign Relations from 1987 to 1996. He is the ontrol and · author of Free at Last? United States Policy toward Africa and the End of the s. Clashes Cold War. As Human Rights Watch's interim advocacy director for Africa :rations in from September 2004 to July 2005, during which time he helped to publicise g of cattle the organisation's findings in Darfur, Clough followed the unfolding Darfur drought, crisis very closely. tits origin Clough stated that "lawyers and researchers within Human Rights standard Watch ... concluded that the events in Darfur did not rise to the level of 1isleading genocide, a legal designation in international law, because there was no proof lim. The of 'intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such' That didn't stop activists - inspired in part by Samantha Power's book, 'A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide' ,] of the Royal from invoking the emotive power of the word 'genocide' to mobilize the ·king wirh the international community." 767 1 that it would Convenient sound-bites about the tenth anniversary of the Rwandan is a complex genocide do not make the events in Darfur genocidal. Michael Clough has Although it · rebutted attempts by activists to liken events in Darfur to the Rwandan tragedy. incidental not · They had "buttressed their case by drawing attention to rhe fact that the lion, Quayle atrocities in Darfur were coming to light as the world was holding ceremonies commemorating the 1Oth anniversary of the genocide in Rwanda". Clough noted, however, that £d. Are cts as a the pattern of human rights abuses in Darfur is very different from tracked what happened in Rwanda. As Alison Des Forges, a senior advisor 'partly to the Africa division of Human Rights Watch, and orhers have second documented, the slaughter in Rwanda was carefully planned and Jecause ruthlessly carried out in a matter of weeks; the clear intent was to lrgeted eliminate the Tutsi population of Rwanda. In all, 800,000 people lutside were butchered. In Darfur, the Sudanese government has targeted African villagers. But it is not clear that the government's intent is to wipe out these Africans. The assaults followed successful rebel [Uite clearly attacks on some government military facilities. In unleashing committed janjaweed and targeting the rebels' base of support, the government t it's not is used the same counterinsurgency tactics it employed in a decades-
163 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 26/44 CB PT
Daifur: The Road to Peace
old war against southerners ... The Sudanese government is certainly Flint have< not the first to combat an insurgency by attacking sympathetic to find a "a villages and displacing civilians. 768 "What will Darfurtha1 Clough has also noted that before the current crisis previous inter-tribal say it?- Se "clashes were chiefly the result of environmental pressures and competition for land, not deep-seated ethnic or racial animosities. And, until2003, Darfur Allegation. was relatively peaceful. By contrast, the genocide in Rwanda was presaged by a history of attempts by Hutus and Tutsis to slaughter each other." 769 One of the The way in which Washington's "genocide" label has been used has been in Darfur i: illustrated by the statements of SLA leader Abd a!-Wahid. In November 2005, beenengag. in the months leading up to the signing of the Darfur Peace Agreement, he of claims a declared himself to be fighting "to stop the genocide".770 After the DPA was noted that' signed, he declared genocide again and asked "how can we negotiate with and the oth someone who is committing genocide against our people?"771 What Abd al any, racial c Wahid neglects to mention is that in between his protests about "genocide" in Both cornu Darfur, he came very close to signing the DPA itself. The AU mediators in everybody Abuja paint a picture of a man who was holding out for some more million example, tl dollars and an extra ministerial post in each of Darfur's three state physically : governments.772 where the Given that genocide is not being carried out in Darfur, something which is distinction · very obvious to many observers in the West, and especially within the reality has a developing world-and that the political opportunism of such claims is equally Ryle has r clear- the Khartoum government is able to use Washington's claims to indistingui: strengthen its position within the Third World. This was a point noted by The reporting o Washington Post's Emily Wax: "Sudan's government has used the genocide Kristof alle label to market itself in the Middle East as another victim of America's anti homes by 1 Arab and anti-Islamic policies."773 subsequent It should also be noted that in their propagandistic frenzy, anti-Sudan Arab and A activists have also reduced the issue of genocide to the level of a video game. away the f, Called "Darfur is Dying", and designed and launched by the MTV music fromanAfl channel and Darfur activists, the free game is said to "raise awareness" of rather than events in Darfur. Players would adopt the role of a Darfurian teenager running Darfuriana away from a Janjaweed gunman. 774 the dangerc If not genocide, the question must be asked then what is it? De Waaland at a confere
164 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 27/44 CB PT
Allegations of Gwocide in Darfur s certainly Flint have an answer. Noting that any outside western observer would expect mpathetic to find a "a sort of slow-motion Rwanda in the desert" in Darfur they stated: t "What will you fmd on arrival? A reality that's complicated and messy. A I Darfur that has more in common with Chad, southern Sudan and- dare we ms inter-tribal say 1t.. ~ - s oma]• ta. »715 td competition J 2003, Darfur Allegations that the Daifur Conflict is Racial >S presaged by ~er."' 769 One of the other sensationalist themes encountered with respect to the conflict used has been in Darfur is that it is a racial one in which light-skinned "Arab" tribes have 'vember 2005, been engaged in the "ethnic cleansing" of black "African" tribes. 716 These sorts .greement, he of claims are particularly inflammatory and very questionable. Mamdani has theDPA was noted that "The implication that these are two different races, one indigenous egotiate with and the other not is dangerous. "777 The simple fact is that there is very little, if Vhat Abd al- any, racial difference between the many tribes of Darfur, "Arab" or "African". genocide" in Both communities are black. Prunier has noted: "In terms of skin colour mediators in everybody is black."778 The London Observer newspaper has reported, for nore million example, that "[c]entnries of intermarriage has rendered the two groups three state physically indistinguishable"."' The UN media service noted: "In Darfur, where the vast majority of people are Muslim and Arabic-speaking, the ingwhichis distinction between 'Arab' and 'African' is more cultural than racial."780 This within the reality has also been confirmed by de Waal and other anti-government activists. ns is equally Ryle has noted that Arabs and non-Arabs "are generally physically s claims to indistinguishable". 781 The New York Times has exemplified contradictory )tedby The reporting on this issue, with articles on one hand by their columnist Nicholas te genocide Kristof alleging, for example, that "black Africans have been driven from their ~rica's anti- homes by lighter-skinned Arabs in the Janjaweed"782 while also publishing subsequent news articles such as "In Sudan, No Clear Difference Between mti-Sudan Arab and African" .783 Kristof has subsequently found it necessary to explain .deogame. away the fact that Sudanese President al-Bashir's family "appears to come TV music from an African tribe". Kristof then chose to disingenuously point to political reness" of rather than racial roots for his claims of genocide in Darfur. 784 Even "African" or running Darfurian anti-government figures such as Dr Eltigani A teem Seisi contradict the dangerously lazy shorthand of Kristof in The New York Times. Speaking Waal and at a conference in Brussels he stated with reference to "Arabs" and "Africans"
165 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 28/44 CB PT
Darfur: The Road to Peace
in Dar:fur that "we all look alike" and that one "can't tell from the features if have said that he is Arab or African". He added that he, an "African", had a lighter skin than tribes are repr 0 785 cleansing. "7
166 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 29/44 CB PT
Allegations of Genocide in Daifur
have said that it doesn't fit the legal definition of ethnic cleansing. The same features if tribes are represented both among those who are cleansed and those who are r skin than cleansing."790 Egeland's views have been echoed by key human rights experts. "African" Asma Jehangir, the UN rapporteur on extra-judicial summary and arbitrary executions, for example, has said: "I wouldn't categorise it as ethnic cleansing bs' versus at the moment because that is not the impression that I am getting. It could be 1s, African an unintended purpose."'" Dr Charles King, the Chairman of the Faculty, School of Foreign Service, ion a! Georgetown University, has also highlighted in any instance difficulties with 'and the "ethnic" label: and •and The 1990s seemed to be the age of ethnic conflict. Around the world, , the the end of superpower competition heralded a sudden upsurge in alize age-old animosities. Federations collapsed and genocidal wars broke 1ins. out, each one over basic differences of religion, language, and history. ·abs, This is one common reading of the last two decades, but it is in sert large measure inaccurate. In the first place, the very label "ethnic can. conflict" is largely a product of perception and representation, not ·een an analytical tag that describes a unique kind of social violence. No violent conflict ever involves all, or even most, members of one ethnic group suddenly rising up and deciding to kill all the members of another group. This is the cartoon version of ethnic war, but it is seriously out of step with reality ... Mobilized ethnic groups certainly Darfur, can and do have an effect on politics, but the opposite can also be ecruited true: politics can help create mobilized ethnicity in the first place. In m rights other words, "ethnic conflict" is not a meaningful category of r ethnic analysis unless we untangle what we, and the belligerents themselves, 791 Alkhair really mean by that label. Darfur 'nocide. French academic Gerard Prunier is clear in his views about claims of "ethnic 1s noted cleansing" in Darfur: another l not fit The notion of 'ethnic cleansing', implying that the GoS had been :orched trying to displace African tribes in order to give their land to 'Arabs', ;esome is not backed by any evidence other than the shouts hurled at the
167 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 30/44 CB PT
Darfur: The Road to Peace
victims by the perpetrators themselves. Although they (the example of perpetrators) might have hoped for such an outcome of the andotherp< massacres, it is doubtful that a policy of that kind had been clearly attempts by thought out in Khartoum. This does not exclude the possibility that -in Darfur some in the GoS might have wished for that outcome, but the few where they instances of 'Arabs' settling on the land abandoned by African peasants Allegati< do not seem very convincing. The 'Arabs' are mostly nomads who do also jar witl not seem much interested in becoming agriculturalists. 793 and policerr are foreigne Allegations of ethnic cleansing have also been clearly contradicted by into Darfu1 Sudanese government actions. Far from wishing to see the displacement of nation, and "African" Darfurian communities, the government has self-evidently been very New York: eager to see these communities returned to their homes. In the Plan of Action Times, Th, signed on 5 August 2005, the Government committed itself to signing an Telegraph, agreement with the International Organization for Migration (IOM) to oversee newsservic and assist in the voluntary return of internally displaced persons. The UN weeks, and Secretary-General has noted with regard to this agreement that "since the programm• Management and Coordination Mechanism was established, progress has been journalists, made in reaching definitions of appropriateness and voluntariness and De Wa establishing standard operating procedures, and these definitions have been Washingto practically implemented" .794 This agreement was signed by the government, from then IOM and the United Nations on 21 August. In November 2004, Khartoum has been e: reported to the UN that 270,000 displaced people had been returned to their places of origin. The Sudanese humanitarian affairs minister stated: "More The f than 270,000 people have voluntarily returned to their homes. This is a very the D good sign and indicator that the situation in Darfur is improvingo"795 Jan Prank, topo the then UN Special Envoy to Sudan, was said to be concerned because neither USd< the UN High Commissioner for Refugees nor the UN Organisation for to pu Migration had been consulted prior to the repatriation. From While there may well be some concern as to whether all the returns were inAf voluntary, Khartoum's eagerness to return refugees to their place of origin is to be manifest. The United Nations has noted government pressure on displaced and c people to return home, and has undertaken profiling exercises which "will solid: inform appropriate and timely planning of interventions when conditions for the v return are in place". 796 Attempts to compare Darfur to Kosovo or any other from
168 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 31/44 CB PT
Allegations of Genocide in Darfur
he example of ethnic cleansing fail to explain why it is. that- unlike in Kosovo he and other parts of the former Yugoslavia, for example, where there were clear ·ly attempts by governments to permanently exclude people from their homeland tat - in Darfur the government is being criticised for trying to return people to where they came from.797 1t5 Allegations of a concerted, planned genocide or ethnic cleansing in Darfur ~0 also jar with the fact that in addition to several thousand AMIS peacekeepers and policemen, Khartoum has also allowed 13,500 aid workers, many of whom are foreigners, into the region. It has also allowed hundreds of foreign reporters :ted by into Darfur. These have included journalists from virtually every Western nent of nation, and have included reporters from the BBC, Reuters, The Times, The en very New York Times, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, The Financial Action Times, The Christian Science Monitor, The Daily Telegraph, The Sunday ling an Telegraph, The Independent, The Guardian, Sky, CNN, Time, Knight-Ridder )Versee news service and The Economist. Several of these journalists have spent several he UN weeks, and some several months, in Darfur. Most governments involved in a nee the programme of genocide go out of their way to prevent any outsiders, especially as been journalists, from roaming around the area in question. 'ss and De Waal has pointed to several of the negative consequences of te been Washington's cynical use of the genocide label. It has distanced Washington nment, from the rest of the international community -something which he believes artoum has been exploited by the Sudanese government: to their "More The fact that the US media and government have mischaracterized a very the Darfur war as 'Arabs' killing 'Africans' has allowed Khartoum Pronk, to portray it as (another) American conspiracy against Arabs. The neither US determination that genocide has been committed ... has appeared ion for to put Washington out on its own in its opposition to Khartoum. From the perspective of Khartoum (and indeed many other capitals 1s were in Africa and the Middle East), the genocide determination appears rigin is to be the cynical use of a new tool to legitimize US interventionism lplaced and demonize Arabs ... At the very minimum, this new-found Arab h "will solidarity will buy time for the Sudan government. At the maximum, ons for the way in which the US has declared 'genocide' will disqualify it y other from contributing to any solutions in Sudan."'
169 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 32/44 CB PT
Darfur: The Road to Peace
Additionally, de Waal has pointed out that "the genocide finding is being The pr internalized into the politics of the region ... The Islamists in the Justice and Palestir Equality Movement have a strategy for regime change, using the atrocities in Even if Darfur to delegitimize the Khartoum government internationally, thereby to when n bring it down. The SLA ... has yet to develop a full political programme, the poi and is instead largely reacting to events ... It seeks intervention as a best poor ... option. " 799 separat De Waal's concerns have been echoed by The Washington Post's East Africa dream.' bureau chief, Emily Wax, who has stated that "The 'genocide' label made [the Darfur conflict] worse". She noted that "Many of the world's governments Brendan have drawn the line at labelling Darfur as genocide. Some call the conflict a opportunisti case of ethnic cleansing, and others have described it as a government going too far in trying to put down a rebellion." She has observed that the American The lib government's labelling of the conflict as a "genocide" "only seems to have clashes strengthened Sudan's rebels; they believe they don't need to negotiate with Firstly, the government and think they will have U.S. support when they commit history attacks. Peace talks have broken down seven times, partly because the rebel war-zo: groups have walked out of negotiations."800 The UN's special adviser on the like Ge Prevention of Genocide warned that the "genocide" debate had adversely has ne> affected the resolution of the conflict. 801 obscur< The extent to which the genocide label has been devalued was also of stru. demonstrated by the fact that in June 2005 JEM accused the Chad government sustain of committing genocide in Darfur. 802 side of Prunier has asked perhaps the most pertinent question about allegations using tl that the Sudanese government has sought to carry out genocide in Darfur: the pre "genocide began to he mentioned as an explanation [for events in Darfur] in approa early 2004 by more militant members of the international community ... This hypothesis ... failed to explain why Khartoum would have picked such an Michael' obviously wrong moment. "803 "Over the J, Prunier also examined what did happen in Darfur. He concluded that: together. C< "Darfur is a had case of poorly conceived counter-insurgency carried out with completely inadequate means." 804 Commenting on de Waal's description of events in Darfur as "counter-insurgency on the cheap", Prunier asks whether "refined" or "efficient" forms of counter-insurgency exist. He added:
170 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 33/44 CB PT
Allegations of Genocide in Darfur
is being The predicament at the time of writing of the Israeli army in .tice and Palestine and even more of the US army in Iraq are cases in point. >cities in Even if the dominant army tries to restrain its forces and kill only ereby to when necessary, and to keep repeating public relations slogans to ramme, the point of dulling peoples' receptivity, the results tend to be tS a best poor ... 'Careful' or 'focalised' repression techniques aimed at separating an insurgency from its causes are largely a techno-military ;tAfrica dream.805 ade [the rnments Brendan O'Neill has perhaps best summed up the dangers of the onflicta opportunistic use of terms such as genocide: 1t going merican The liberal use of the word" genocide" to describe civil wars, brutal to have clashes and Stalinist repression is deeply problematic for two reasons. 1te with Firstly, it distorts history.. .It belittles the greatest horror of human commit history by suggesting that similar things happen all the time in various he rebel war-zones or under tin pot dictatorships. No, they do not. Something r on the like Germany's industrialised slaughter of half of Europe's Jews lversely has never been repeated since ... Secondly, over-use of the G-word obscures a true understanding of wars that take place today. Instead 1as also of struggling to understand why there is a war in Darfur, what is crnment sustaining it and how it might be resolved, we simply denounce one side of the conflict as "evil" and deserving of punishment ... Stop cgations using the Holocaust in this way. It relativises history and simplifies Darfur: the present. It is time we took a more grown-up and less hysterical 1rfur] in approach to international affairs. 806 ' ... This such an Michael Clough has also pointed out how self-defeating such claims are: "Over the long run, peace in Darfur will require Africans and Arabs to live ed that: together. Calling their conflict 'genocidal' won't make that easier."807 ried out Waal's ch eap " , 1rgency
171 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 34/44 CB PT
Darfor.· The Road to Peace
646 Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Paragraphs 6 and 13 of Security Resolutum 1556 (2004), S/2004, United Nations, New York, 30 August 2004. 647 !bid. See also, for example, "Sudan Says Disarmament of Militias Taking Darfur", News Article byDeutsche Presse-Agentur, 19 August 2004; "UN Arms Handover by Government-backed Group in Darfur", News Article by Nations News Service, 27 August 2004. 648 See, for example, "Sudan Jails Darfur Militiamen", News Article by Keuters; July 2004. 649 "We Fight On,SaystheDemonofDarfur", The Sunda;y TimeS (London) 25 650 "Prospects for Peace", Justice Africa Briefing, London, July 2004, justiceafrica.org>. 651 See, for example, "US Tells Sudan, Disarm Darfur Militias", News Article Agence France-Presse, 3 June 2005. 652 The presence of militias in Iraq has been well documented. See, for example, Militias Will 'Undermine Government"', News Article by Reuters, 26 May "Delicate Challenge of Tanting Iraq's Militias", Christian Science Moniwr, !3 April "New Factor in Iraq: Irregular Brigades Fill Security Void", Wall Yark), 16 February 2005; "Invisible Militias in Iraq", Article by UP!, 9"March "Unravelling Iraq's Secret Militias", ZMaga'{ine Online, May 2005, available at I zmagsite.zmag.org/Images/ guptapr0505.html; "Iraq' Militias' Law Rules", Article by Aljazeera.net, 11 March 2004. 653 "Q&A: Iraq's Militias", Th< New York Times, 9 June 2005. 654 "Iraq's Militias: Many Little Armies, One Huge Problem", The New York March 2006. 655 "Sadr Strikes"-, Newsweek, 10 April 2006. 656 "Can Iraq's Militia's be Tamed?", Time, 10 April2006.
Chapter Five
657 "Violence in the Sudan Displaces Nearly l Million. An Aid Worker Describe>l'i Gravity of the Humanitarian Crisis", News Article by MSNBC, 16 April2004.
658 c'Thousands Die as World Defmes Genocide"' TJ.e Financial Times 'LC>HU<>ll July 2004. See also Bradol's views in"France Calls on Sudan to Forcibly Disarm Militias", News Article by Agence France-Presse, 7 July 2004. 659 For a full transcript of Powell's comments. see "Powell Says Talks with Government Yielded Agreement", l July 2004 at
444 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 35/44 CB PT
Notes
662 "Sudanese Plant 'Not Built for Weapons'", The Obseryer (London), 30 August 1998. 663 See, for example, Richard Minirer, "The False Promise of Slave Redemption", The Atlantic Monthly, July 1999. 664 "The Great Slave Seam", The Irish Times, 23 February 2002; ((Seam in Sudan-An Elaborate Hoax Involving Fake African Slaves and Less-than-Honest Interpreters is Duping Concerned Westerners", The Independent on Sunday (London), 24 February 2002; "Ripping Off Slave 'Redeemers': Rehels Exploit Westerners' Efforts to Buy Emancipation for Sudanese", The Washington. Post, 26 February 2002; "Sudan Rip Offs Over Phony Slaves", International Herald Tribune, 27 February 2002. See, also, The Reality of Slave Redemption, European~Sudanese Public Affairs Council, London, March 2001. 665 "The Great Slave Seam", The Irish Times, 23 February 2002. 666 ·see, for example, Peter Hallward's observation in The Guardian; "Bush's opportunity to adopt an election-season cquse that can appeal, simultaneously, to fundamentalist Christians, the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People, multilateralist liberals and the altruistic 'left' may now be too tempting to pass up." ("Enough Imperial Crusades", The Guardian, 18 August 2004.) 667 "Too Close to Calli Maybe", Newsweek, 6-13 September 2004. This was notlost on outside observers. The Germany newspaper,Berliner Zeitung, fur ex~ple, editorialised to this effect on 11 September 2004: "The U.S. election is the real reason for the verbal escalation of the Darfur diplomacy." 668 "Fierce Fighting Returns to Sadr City as Mahdi Army Battles US Troops", The Guardian (London), 8 September 2004; ((Worsening Security Hampers Reconstruction Efforts in Iraq", The Financial Times (London), 9 September 2004; "Aid Agencies Say That They Might Pull Out of Iraq", The Guardian (London), 9 September 2{)04. 669 "US Military Death Toll in Iraq Hits 1,000", The Guardian (London), 8 September 2004. 670 Rehecca Hamilton and Chad Hazlett, "'Not on Our Watch": The Emergence of the American Movement for Darfur", in Alex de Waal (editor), War mDarfur and the Search for Peace, Global Equity Initiative, Harvard, and Justice Africa, 2007, p.34l. 671 "Stop the Killing in Sudan", remarks of Frank R. Wolf in the U.S. House of Representatives, 108th Cong., 2nd sess., Congressional Record !50, 2 April2004, E 518. 672 U.S. House, "Declaring Genocide in Darfur, Sudan", 108th Cong., 2nd session, 2004, H. Doe. 467; U.S. Senate, "Declaring Genocide in Darfur, Sudan", !08th Cong., 2nd session, 2004, S. Doe. 133. One of the few voices of dissent within the United States Congress with regard to Sudan and Darfur has been Texas Congressman Ron Paul. Speaking in the US House of Representatives on 23 July, be warned that in calling for military intervention in Sudan the resolution was ~'incredibly dangerous legislation" and that his colleagues should "not fooled by the title of this bill, 'Declaring genocide in Darfur, Sudan.~ Representative Paul stated that_'(this resolution is no statement of
445 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 36/44 CB PT
Darfur: The Road to Peace humanitarian concern for what may be happening in a country thousands of miles from the United States. Rather, it could well lead to war against the African country of Sudan." Paul also pointed to the underhand way in which the resolution was passed: "This resolution was never marked-up in-the House International RelatiOns ~_ommitte~, on which I serve. Therefore, Members of that committee had no opportunity to-_;trnend it or express their views before it was sent to the Floor for a vote. Like too many highlY controversial bills, it was rushed onto the suspension calendar (by House rules-reserVed for (non-controversial' legislation) at the la~tminute. Perhaps there was a concern-th3.t : if Members had more. time to consider the bill they would cringe at the resolution's call for US military acrion in Sudan- particularly at a time when our military is stretched to the breaking point." (Ron Paul's comments are available at
446 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 37/44 CB PT
Notes
685 Alex de Waal, Who are the Darfurians l Arah and African Identities, Violence and Exremal Engagement, Justice Africa, 23 August 2005, p.15 available at
White House1 virtually excluding any significant intelligence lnput~ see Seymour Hersh, "Annals of National Security: The Missiles of August", The New Yorker, 12 October 1998, pp.34-4l. 691 "'Foot in mouth' prize for Rumsfeld", News Item by CNN, I December 2003. · 692 This was a point made by the Sudanese Foreign Minister, Dr Mustapha Osman ' Ismail, shOrtly after Powell's "declaration": ('LOok at what is going on in Iraq. The United States kept saying there were weapons of mass destruction. The same thing as genocide. After six months, it will say" there is no genocide (in Sudan)" ("Sudanese FM US Stance on Darfur Issue", News Article by Xinhua News Agency, 13 ·.September 2004.) ·.. 693 Fora-record of PowclYs allegations, see "Transcriptof_Powell's U.N. presentation", News Article by CNN, 6 February 2003, avqilable at
447 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 38/44 CB PT
Darfur: The Road to Peace
(London), 4 May 2006, available at 448 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 39/44 CB PT Notes 714 See, "President Bush Participates in United Nations Security Council Meeting on Africa", News Release by White House, Office of the Press Secretary, Washington DC, 25 September 2007. 715 "Powe11 'Disappointed' US Stands Alone on Darfm Genocide Determination", News Article by Agence France-Presse, 29 September 2004. 716 "No Genocide in Sudan, Annan Says", News Article b.y Deutsche Presse-Agentur, 17 June 2004. 717 Communique of the 12th Meeting of the Peace and Security Council, The Peace and Security Council of the African Union~ Meeting in its 12th hieeting, at ministerial level, PSC/ /MINI Comm. (XII), para. 2, 4 July 2004. 718 "Nigeria's Obasanjo Unconvinced on US Call of 'Genocide' in Darfur", News Article by Agence France-Presse, 3 December 2004. 719 See, for example, "EU Mission Sees Abuses, But Not Genocide, in Darfur", News Article by Reuters, 9 August 2004; "EU Mission Finds No Evidence of Darfur Genocide", News Article by al-]azeera, 10 August 2004. 720 See, for example, "Israel to rurn away Darfur Refugees", News Article by Associated Press, 19 August 2007. 721 Report of the International ComJnission of Inquiry on Darfur to the United Nations Secretary-General, United Nations, January 2005. 722 See, for example, ('Doctors Without Borders/Medecins Sans Fronrieres Challe:nges US Darfur Genocide Claims", Mediamonitors, 5 October 2004, available at 449 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 40/44 CB PT Darfor: The Road to Peace Tine, Iriba and Guereda."- "We are looking at a second catastrophe", Darfur feature article on MSF Australia Website, 450 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 41/44 CB PT Notes 742 Wiesel has been very active on behalf of the Save Darfur movement, and has spoken at a nmnber of meetings. See, for example, "Groups Plan Rally on Mall To Protest Darfur Violence. Bush Administration Is Urged to Intervene in Sudan", The Washington Po,, 27 April2006. 743 Nor man Finkelstein, The Holocaust Ir.dumy: Reflections on the Exploitation ofJewish Suffering, Verso, New York, 2000. 744 See, "The Israeli government put pressure upon [Wiesel] to drop the Armenian genocide. They allowed the others, but not the Armenian one. He was pressured by th~ government to withdraw, and being a loyal commissar as he is, he withdrew ... That gives an indication of the extent to which people like Elie Wiesel were carrying out their usual function of serving Israeli state interests" in Noam Chomsky, Chronicles of Dissent, Common Courage Press, Monroe, ME, 1992. Wiesel has been criricised on several occasions for his support -for Israel. See, for example, Christopher Hitchens, "Wiesel Words", The Nation, Washington-DC, 19 February 2001, available at 451 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 42/44 CB PT Darfur: The Road to Peace 751 "US 'Hyping' Darfur Genocide Fears", The Observer (London), 3 October For a critique of USAID and Natsios' previous involvement in- Sudan, see USAJD . Chi'ef Natsios on Sudan: Inept and Partisan, European-Sudanese Public Affairs Council' London, November 2001, available at 452 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 43/44 CB PT Notes 765 Peter Quayle, "Grave Crimes", The World Today, Volume 61, Number 1, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, London, January 2005. 766 Michae1 C1ough, "It's hell in Darfur, butis it genocide? The Sudanese government has targeted vi11agers, but not a whole race", The Los Angeles Times, 14 May 2006. 767 Ibid. 768Ibid. 769Ibid. 770 "Darfur rebel group leader offers o1ive branch to foes", News Article by People's Daily Online, 9 November 2005, available at 453 ICC-02/05-171-Anx13 15-01-2009 44/44 CB PT Darfur: The Road to Peace Darfur", Human Rights Watch, 7 May 2004 and "Ethnic Cleansing Blights Sudan", News Article by BBC News Online, 27 May 2004. 789 "Bashir Sets Up Panel to Probe Human Rights Abuses in Darfur", News Article by PANA, 9 May 2004. . 790 "Interview with UN's Jan Egeland on the Situation in Darfur", News Article by UN Integrated Regional Information Nerworks; UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Nairobi, 5 July 2004. 791 "Sudan 'Neglecting' Darfur Crisis", News Article by BBC News Online, 8 June 2004, available at 454