World problems and contemporary challenges

¶ … Darfur Refugees

The conflict in Darfur has been ongoing for some time. It is located in the Darfur region, which is in the western Sudan, and the problems have been mainly between those that are non-Arab and the Janjaweed, which are a militia group that come from the tribes of local Arabs (Morrison, 2006). Because of this, many refugees are leaving Darfur and moving to other places to attempt to escape the fighting. This is a serious world problem, and it is important here to understand not only the refugees, but the conflict that has made them flee, as well. The government of Sudan has denied publicly that they are supporting the Janjaweed, but they have also provided assistance and arms to this group, and also participated in some joint attacks since the conflict began in February of 2003 (Darfur, 2006).

Since the conflict began, it has been estimated that approximately 400,000 people have been killed in that region, but estimates have ranged from just 50,000 in 2004 to 450,000 in April of this year (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006). The 400,000 figure is the average number believed killed, and has been stated by the Coalition for International Justice. In the mass media, the conflict has been said to be 'genocide' and/or an 'ethnic cleansing.' The United States Congress, as well as the Bush Administration have agreed that it is genocide, but the United Nations has not gone as far as to make that statement.

As for the refugees that are leaving Darfur, the largest majority of them are Africans that are non-Arab, and they are running from the attacks of the Janjaweed Arabs. However, there have also been perpetrators of these attacks that are non-Arab as well as victims that are proclaimed Arabs. The individuals on both sides of the fighting are generally black, and the distinction that is seen in the news media between those that are Arab and those that are non-Arab in disputed by a great many people, as well as the Sudanese government. It is believed by these disputants that the Western world and the Western media do not really understand the difference, and therefore get the distinctions wrong quite often. The labeling of Arabs and non-Arabs has also been criticized due to the fact that it makes the conflict appear to be purely racial in motivation, and experts say that there are other important reasons for the conflict, such as the competition that is seen between the nomadic cattle-herders and the farmers, because they are both fighting for resources that are very scarce in the region (UN, 2006).

The general consensus throughout the international community appears to be that the targets of the violence in Darfur have been ethnic groups, and therefore these come under the heading of crimes against humanity. However, the idea that genocide has actually occurred is still being hotly debated. An article that was seen on May 7th from the BBC indicated that "a UN investigation team sent to Sudan said that while war crimes had been committed, there had been no intent to commit genocide" (Darfur, 2006). Despite this, however, there were several organizations that were not governmental that decided genocide was the correct term, and the government of the United States also decided that the word was appropriate for what was taking place in the country of Darfur. However, none of the international governing bodies have decided that genocide is an appropriate term for what is taking place there.

How many people have actually died in Darfur since the conflict began is also a point of contention, and these numbers have been very difficult to get, because the government in Sudan does not like journalists. That government generally censors and intimidates any journalists that come to the country in an attempt to cover the conflict, get answers, and see what it actually taking place where the refugees are concerned (de Wall, 2005). The World Health Organization stated in September of 2004 that it believed there had been an estimated 50,000 deaths since the conflict began 18 months previously. Most of these deaths had taken place not from fighting, but simply from starvation. In October of 2004, the same organization (WHO) updated their estimate to say that, between March and October of 2004, it believed that there had been 70,000 deaths from both disease and starvation (Refugee, 2004). There was much criticism of these estimates, however, because they did not figure in the numbers from violent deaths, and because they were over such a very short period of time. A report from the British Parliament that is more recent set the number of deaths at 300,000, and others have judged that it is much higher (Flint & de Wall, 2006).

In March of 2005, the Emergency Relief Coordinator for the United Nations stated that there were an estimated 10,000 people dying each and every month in Darfur, and that these deaths did not take into account the death toll from the ethnic violence that was taking place there (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006). It was also estimated at that time that approximately 2 million people had been forced from their homes, and that they generally sought refuge in camps set up within the major towns of Darfur (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006). Another 200,000 people that had been forced from their homes had decided to leave Darfur completely, and had fled to the neighboring country of Chad (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006).

A report that came out in April of 2005 from the Coalition for International Justice contained some of the most significant and comprehensive analysis of the statistics that were collected, and it indicated that there had been a total of 400,000 deaths in the Darfur region since the beginning of the conflict (de Wall, 2005). Since this report was so comprehensive, most humanitarian and human rights groups are using this figure now. However, in April of this year, Dr. Eric Reeves argued that "extant data, in aggregate, strongly suggest that total excess mortality in Darfur, over the course of more than three years of deadly conflict, now significantly exceeds 450,000," but there has yet to be any kind of report that independently verifies this number (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006).

In order to understand why this conflict is so significant and what the refugees are really running from, it is also necessary to understand how the conflict was started. There are two distinct and separate groups within the population of Darfur. These are the non-Arab blacks such as the Masalit, Zaghawas, and Fur tribes, and the Arab tribes that are called Baggarra (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006). These tribes are also black based on the standards of non-African individuals. These tribes settled the region beginning in the 13th century, and both groups are Muslims. Throughout history, the relationship between the two groups has been very strained, and the differences in economic needs between the groups has also led to many different clashes. Some groups are involved in agriculture, and other groups are involved with herding (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006). These herders are generally nomadic, and wander to various places within the region. Many of the disputes and problems that have appeared between the two groups in the past have come from surface water access and land access.

Since 1958, Sudan has gone through a series of military dictatorships, and when they first gained their independence in 1956 the government became largely Arab, which caused difficulties for those that were not Arabs (Darfur, 2006). There was a civil war in 1955 which did not end until 1972, and another civil war in 1983 which continued until 2005 (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006). In 2003, while the second civil war was still ongoing, the Sudan Liberation Movement and the Justice and Equality Movement, both of which were rebel groups, accused their government of the oppression of those that were non-Arabs in favor of those that were Arabs (Morrison, 2006). There were many individuals jailed, although they generally denied plotting coups or aggravating an already tense situation. In December of 2004, the government dropped the charges against these individuals (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006).

As for the American officials and their opinions as to the conflict being genocide, this began with then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, who traveled in 2004 with the Sudanese to the refugee camps in Darfur (UN, 2006). The Bush Administration, however, are not the only ones that stated that the Darfur conflict was genocide. Senator John Kerry and others shared that opinion. In July of 2004, the United States Congress made it official by stating that the Sudanese government and the militias that they were using by proxy were definitely committing genocide. There has been speculation, because of these claims, that there is some kind of international involvement, such as the peace keeping forces from the United Nations being sent to Darfur, and the possible involvement of the International Police (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006).

The military forces of the African Union that are already in Darfur have had little to no effect, and the problems that they have had with a lack of expertise and little logistical support have shown to be very effective in deterring these forces from accomplishing very much where peace-keeping is concerned (UNSC, 2006). Since this has been the case, there have been others that have called for the United Nations to deploy their Western European military forces to Darfur, as well as for the United States, whose military forces would also be seen to fall under the jurisdiction of the United Nations, to send troops that could be utilized in helping to stabilize Darfur, but so far this has not taken place (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006).

Even though the United Nations seems hesitant to involve themselves in Darfur's problems and help the refugees, a peace-keeping resolution for Darfur was unanimously passed by the United Nations on the 16th of May of this year (UN, 2006). According to this particular resolution, an assessment team must go to Sudan to prepare it for the United Nations, which will then take control of a peace-keeping mission that is already over there and is currently being led by the African Union. Originally, Sudan's government had stopped the team from entering the country, but decided that it would allow the team to come in because it is important that peace be made, and this is a way to begin that process.

The resolution that was passed by the United Nations came only two days after the African Union decided that it would allow for a transfer of authority of the 7,300 members of its peace-keeping force in Darfur at the end of September, or that the transfer could take place earlier if the United Nations felt that they were ready to take over the mission (Flint & de Wall, 2006). The United Nations Security Council is therefore urging any groups that have not yet signed the peace agreement to do that right away, and stated that it would "consider taking, including in response to a request by the African Union, strong and effective measures...against an individual or group that violates or attempts to block" the peace agreement that is now being addressed (UN, 2006).

Prior to the earthquake in the Indian Ocean that took place in 2004, the United Nations had stated that the conflict in Darfur and what was happening to the refugees over there was seen as the worst current crisis in the world on a humanitarian level. The United Nations giving any serious intervention in that conflict, however, is still unlikely because the governments that operate the key members of the United Nations Security Council feels that they are constrained, both ideologically and pragmatically, in what they can do to show a response to this particular conflict (Morrison, 2006).

Part of the reason that the United Nations does not want to become involved is that the countries that make up this governing body have their own problems as well. In Russia, the government has a weakened economy, and it had difficulties with the internal security that it needs to stop the continuing conflicts along its borders. The United States has too many of its troops already deployed to Ira q to be able to send many troops to Darfur and still have enough troops at home in case problems would arise on American soil (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006). There is also difficulty with the United States becoming involved with the process, due to the fact that it has already committed to the peace process that came from the second civil war in Sudan, and it does not want there to be problems with this peace-keeping effort (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006). There are also no-fly zones around Darfur, very little infrastructure when it comes to airbases in neighboring countries, and problems with airspace rights when it comes to flyovers of the Darfur area from the other neighboring countries and regions (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006).

In addition to the problems that these nations have, other countries such as France and Britain have very strong lobbies against intervening in any country that has internal strife which is not related to the interest of their own nation (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006). This came about from the losses that America and France suffered in Vietnam and the losses that those countries also suffered in Algeria and Somalia. More recently, an example of this type of problem would be the lack of a peace-keeping foreign force during the Liberia and Rwanda crisis (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006).

It is likely that individuals that commit crimes against humanity and war crimes will eventually be held to be accountable for these crimes (Prunier, 2005). However, there has still been no decision made as to whether this will take place from a provisional tribunal, or form the International Criminal Court. Currently, the Bush Administration does not agree with the International Criminal Court approach and instead supports the tribunal (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006).

The conflict that is so severe in Darfur today actually started in 2003 when rebels attacked both government forces and government installations (Sudan, 2004). The government was clearly caught by surprise and did not have very any troops in the region to help ward off the attack. In addition to this problem, the government, which was Sudanese, had many Darfurian soldiers, and the government generally did not trust them during this period of time (Sudan, 2004). To respond to the problems that were seen with the rebels, the Sudanese government created a campaign whereby they held an aerial bombing attack which was also supported by ground attacks that were carried out from the Arab militia - the Janjaweed - which had been recruited from the local tribes and given weapons from the government (Sudan, 2004).

Despite the weapons that were given to them, however, the government of Sudan states that is it not connected in any way to the Janjaweed militia, and says that this militia force is full of "thieves, gangsters, and crooks" (Sudan, 2004). The conflict that is taking place in Darfur and forcing so many refugees out has a political basis overall, but it has also been seen to acquire many ethnic dimensions over the course of time (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006). In this ethnic dimension, civilians have been targeted deliberately by the militia based on solely on what ethnicity they are, and the fight over land and water between the pastoralists, that are generally Arab, and the farmers, that are generally non-Arab, has also been seen to exacerbate what is already a serious problem for the country and the refugees that have been fleeing from their homes (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006).

In 2004, the neighboring country of Chad started negotiations in N'Djamena, which led to the Humanitarian Ceasefire Agreement of April 8th between the government of Sudan and most of the rebels (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006). However, there was a splinter group of rebels that left one of the groups, and called itself the National Movement for Reform and Development (Sudan, 2004). It did not involve itself in the cease-fire talks that took place or the agreement that was reached. Since the cease-fire, however, attacks from rebels and Janjaweed individuals have continued. The African Union then created a Ceasefire Commission in order to help monitor the agreement that was reached on April 8th, but there have been mixed results on this issue (Lacey & Polgreen, 2006).