The Obama Administration finally unveiled its comprehensive plan to bring peace to Sudan today at an event attended by Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice and Special Envoy to Sudan Gen. Scott Gration. These three administration heavyweights said many good things about their intentions in the news conference, but the question still remains about their implementation.
Many in the activist community have a great deal of concern about what they see as a real gap between the administration’s rhetoric and its day-to-day diplomacy with the Sudanese government. President Obama must be firm in his promise to lead a more urgent multi-lateral peace process. U.S. Special Envoy to Sudan Scott Gration must work to build an international coalition for the meaningful implementation of the North-South peace deal, and implement a policy that creates real consequences for those who continue to attack civilians, block life-saving aid, undermine peace and justice.
For more information on this major development, please check out the following resources:
• View the video of the State Department’s news conference
• View the Washington Post preview article on the Sudan Policy
• View a video response from Sam Bell, Executive Director of the Genocide Intervention Network
• View an op-ed in the LA Times by John Prendergast, Co-founder of ENOUGH!
Take action: Call 1-800-GENOCIDE and urge President Obama to implement his new strategy and keep his campaign promises on Sudan.
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Monday, October 19, 2009
Monday, September 28, 2009
Cookies for a dictator?
In an article in the Washington Post, U.S. Special Envoy for Sudan Scott Gration is quoted as saying, "We've got to think about giving out cookies. Kids, countries, they react to gold stars, smiley faces, handshakes, agreements, talk, engagement."
He said this on the eve of a major Sudan policy review by the new Obama Administration and that comment, among other statements, is raising eyebrows across the Darfur peace movement.
Cookies for a Sudanese government that has repeatedly broken promises? Cookies for a Sudanese government that expelled humanitarian groups, thus endangering the lives of millions, but then insisted on getting a reward for letting these same groups back in?
I believe the main concern from the Darfur peace movement’s leaders is that these Gration statements reflect the Administration's official Sudan policy. Such an apparently "soft" approach flies in the face of the bold statements and commitments to action made by former Senators Obama, Biden and Clinton on the campaign trail.
The leaders of the Enough Project, Save Darfur Coaltion and the Genocide Intervention Network released a statement in response. To quote Sam Bell, the director of the Genocide Intervention Network: “If Washington is going to start taking war criminals at their word, despite the long list of Khartoum's broken commitments, an even larger tragedy will soon unfold.” [Full disclosure: I am a 2009 Carl Wilkens Fellow with the Genocide Intervention Network]
Personally, I want to trust the Envoy. I want to believe that offering incentives is shortest route to ending the suffering of my friends and their families in Darfur. If his tactics have gained him the trust and ear of the Government of Sudan (GoS), then perhaps cookies are what need to be served.
However, the leader of the Darfur Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) rebel group was quoted in the Sudan Tribune on Sept. 28 saying the Envoy “does not have a program or strategy for a solution” in Darfur. This does not give me condidence that Gration has the trust of the rebels, who will be key in ending this mess.
So…is Gration fumbling away a chance for real peace by losing the confidence of a key ally in JEM, or is his strategy of paying attention and giving “cookies” to the GoS the right focus and key to long-term solutions? Let me know what you think.
He said this on the eve of a major Sudan policy review by the new Obama Administration and that comment, among other statements, is raising eyebrows across the Darfur peace movement.
Cookies for a Sudanese government that has repeatedly broken promises? Cookies for a Sudanese government that expelled humanitarian groups, thus endangering the lives of millions, but then insisted on getting a reward for letting these same groups back in?
I believe the main concern from the Darfur peace movement’s leaders is that these Gration statements reflect the Administration's official Sudan policy. Such an apparently "soft" approach flies in the face of the bold statements and commitments to action made by former Senators Obama, Biden and Clinton on the campaign trail.
The leaders of the Enough Project, Save Darfur Coaltion and the Genocide Intervention Network released a statement in response. To quote Sam Bell, the director of the Genocide Intervention Network: “If Washington is going to start taking war criminals at their word, despite the long list of Khartoum's broken commitments, an even larger tragedy will soon unfold.” [Full disclosure: I am a 2009 Carl Wilkens Fellow with the Genocide Intervention Network]
Personally, I want to trust the Envoy. I want to believe that offering incentives is shortest route to ending the suffering of my friends and their families in Darfur. If his tactics have gained him the trust and ear of the Government of Sudan (GoS), then perhaps cookies are what need to be served.
However, the leader of the Darfur Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) rebel group was quoted in the Sudan Tribune on Sept. 28 saying the Envoy “does not have a program or strategy for a solution” in Darfur. This does not give me condidence that Gration has the trust of the rebels, who will be key in ending this mess.
So…is Gration fumbling away a chance for real peace by losing the confidence of a key ally in JEM, or is his strategy of paying attention and giving “cookies” to the GoS the right focus and key to long-term solutions? Let me know what you think.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Strong, balanced policy needed for Sudan
It’s been nearly seven years since the Darfur genocide began. Fortunately, the conflict continues to garner much-needed attention worldwide. This is in large part due to the unprecedented number of Americans and dedicated elected officials like U.S. Representatives Brad Miller and David Price who have refused to give up on the people suffering there.
President Obama stated on March 18th that “Sudan is a priority for this Administration,” yet the Administration has failed to demonstrate the sense of urgency and executive attention that is necessary to distinguish Sudan as a true priority. The Administration has yet to release a long-overdue policy review of Sudan and has appeared focused more on rewards for the Government of Sudan instead of a balanced approach that includes punitive measures for continued intransigence. The release of an appropriately balanced policy review would help to alleviate fears that the United States will squander its leverage on continued broken promises from Khartoum.
As Senators, President Obama, Vice-President Joseph Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were three of the strongest advocates for Sudan, but now that they are in the Administration we have yet to see them live up to their promises to prioritize peace in Sudan.
Sudan Now, an ad campaign coming out this week in several major news outlets, calls on Obama, Biden and Clinton to keep the promises that they’ve made to the people of Sudan. The release of the policy review on Sudan is expected within days. Obama, Biden and Clinton must take this opportunity to become a part of the process; weighing in to ensure that the policy matches up with their rhetoric. More information on the campaign can be found by visiting www.SudanActionNow.com.
President Obama stated on March 18th that “Sudan is a priority for this Administration,” yet the Administration has failed to demonstrate the sense of urgency and executive attention that is necessary to distinguish Sudan as a true priority. The Administration has yet to release a long-overdue policy review of Sudan and has appeared focused more on rewards for the Government of Sudan instead of a balanced approach that includes punitive measures for continued intransigence. The release of an appropriately balanced policy review would help to alleviate fears that the United States will squander its leverage on continued broken promises from Khartoum.
As Senators, President Obama, Vice-President Joseph Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were three of the strongest advocates for Sudan, but now that they are in the Administration we have yet to see them live up to their promises to prioritize peace in Sudan.
Sudan Now, an ad campaign coming out this week in several major news outlets, calls on Obama, Biden and Clinton to keep the promises that they’ve made to the people of Sudan. The release of the policy review on Sudan is expected within days. Obama, Biden and Clinton must take this opportunity to become a part of the process; weighing in to ensure that the policy matches up with their rhetoric. More information on the campaign can be found by visiting www.SudanActionNow.com.
Monday, December 01, 2008
Secretary of State: Change Darfur Needs
Today, President-elect Barack Obama chose Hillary Clinton to lead our State Department. Although I have some personal reservations about Sen. Clinton, this nomination bodes well for our efforts to bring an end to the genocide in Darfur. Obama, VP-elect Joe Biden and cabinet members Clinton and potentially Bill Richardson all expressed strong support for helping my friends in Darfur while they were on the campaign trail. [Check out a previous post after one of their debates: click here] Now that they are off the trail and not seeking election, it’s time they stepped up to the plate and put actions behind their rhetoric.
Here, in her own words, is what Sen. Clinton feels should be done in Darfur:
“There are three things we have to do immediately. Move the peacekeepers--that, finally, the United Nations and the African Union have agreed to--into Sudan as soon as possible. In order for them to be effective, there has to be airlift and logistical support, and that can only come either unilaterally from the United States or from NATO. I prefer NATO. And finally, we should have a no-fly zone over Sudan because the Sudanese governments bomb the villages before and after the Janjiwid come. And we should make it very clear to the government in Khartoum we're putting up a no-fly zone; if they fly into it, we will shoot down their planes. Is the only way to get their attention.” ~Clinton at the June 28 2007 Democratic Primary Debate.
OK Clinton - now you have the power. Let's make it happen.
Here, in her own words, is what Sen. Clinton feels should be done in Darfur:
“There are three things we have to do immediately. Move the peacekeepers--that, finally, the United Nations and the African Union have agreed to--into Sudan as soon as possible. In order for them to be effective, there has to be airlift and logistical support, and that can only come either unilaterally from the United States or from NATO. I prefer NATO. And finally, we should have a no-fly zone over Sudan because the Sudanese governments bomb the villages before and after the Janjiwid come. And we should make it very clear to the government in Khartoum we're putting up a no-fly zone; if they fly into it, we will shoot down their planes. Is the only way to get their attention.” ~Clinton at the June 28 2007 Democratic Primary Debate.
OK Clinton - now you have the power. Let's make it happen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
