Is Joseph Kony hiding in Darfur?

The first rule of news is that any headline ending in a question mark invites the certain response “No.” Otherwise headline would have been “Joseph Kony is hiding in Darfur”.

And when the blog post continues:

Warlord Joseph Kony and his militarized terror group the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) are likely getting shelter from the Sudanese government in Darfur, according to credible reports coming out of Sudan, the Enough Project said…

When you know the source is an organisation dedicated to regime change in Khartoum, which has consistently exaggerated and manipulated the evidence coming out of Sudan, then there’s no need to read any further.

This story crops up every six months. And I’ve yet to see any credible evidence.

My friend went to Africa and all I got was this idea for a lousy T-shirt

A UN-AU convoy forms up before heading to Siliea in West Darfur in 2008.

Kony 2012 is not an aberration. It is the inevitable next step in a trend among charities and advocacy groups trying to connect distant disasters with donors, voters and policymakers in the west. That is laudable. But a consequence is that it has confused causes and effects, spawning a new breed of campaigner that measures success in terms of hits, letters sent, wristbands sold, T-shirts worn, videos watched, tweets retweeted – and untruths spread. It is a form of charity that seems to have become more about salving consciences than actually helping people.

The defence is that such actions raise awareness. True. They do. And it turns a foreign disaster in a faraway land into one that matters in Congress or Parliament. (Foreigners, of course, don’t vote. People who buy their T-shirts new do.)

But what is the point if the simplistic slogan on a dog bowl or G-string is based on a flawed analysis? The danger is that you build a mass movement that writes letters to MPs, builds pressure for a course of action – but the course of action fails because of its basis in a misleading analysis.

Save Darfur is the example I know best. The movement did an incredible job of mobilising popular support, helped have President Omar al-Bashir indicted at the International Criminal Court and pushed for a failing African Union peacekeeping force to be rehatted in United Nations blue. And you know what? Darfur hasn’t been saved. They were the wrong solutions.

All that awareness. All that goodwill. Wasted.

Sadly this has now become the model. Tweets, wristbands and charity singles rule. Will it raise awareness? Yes. Will it make a difference? No. Does anyone care? No. We’ve all shown the world how much we care. And got a nice new T-shirt.

The Drones Club

Could drones – currently used by the CIA for targeted assassinations (just don’t call them that, especially as they often seem untargeted) – be used for good? Andrew Stobo Sniderman and Mark Hanis, co-founders of the Genocide Intervention Network, seem to think so…

Imagine if we could watch in high definition with a bird’s-eye view. A drone would let us count demonstrators, gun barrels and pools of blood. And the evidence could be broadcast for a global audience, including diplomats at the United Nations and prosecutors at the International Criminal Court.

In some ways it is not so very different to what George Clooney is already doing with his Satellite Sentinel Project. And it is not the first time it has been tried with drones. Sam Bell once tried to buy a drone in his hols to fly over Darfur…

The executives offered an old, low-end, limited- range UAV for $5 million. That was still, as Bell puts it, “a bit out of our price range,” but he thought it might be worth splurging–until he and fellow anti-genocide crusader Mark Hanis ran their potential purchase by an expert.

Oh, so Hanis has form. And has already been told once it was bonkers.

Anyway, this time he reckons he has the arguments licked with an interesting mix of good intentions and an appeal to everyone’s favourite freedom fighter…

This sounds a lot like surveillance, and it would be. It would violate Syrian airspace, and perhaps a number of Syrian and international laws. It isn’t the kind of thing nongovernmental organizations usually do. But it is very different from what governments and armies do. Yes, we (like them) have an agenda, but ours is transparent: human rights. We have a duty, recognized internationally, to monitor governments that massacre their own people in large numbers. Human rights organizations have always done this. Why not get drones to assist the good work?

Well, here’s one reason. A black and white, name em and shame em approach to human rights isn’t the only show in town. Lots of organisations have taken a different stand to ensure they retain access to people hurt or imprisoned. You might want to check with the Red Cross and see how they feel about this. But if your aim is to escalate a conflict and ensure aid agencies are prevented from entering, then this is exactly the right course to follow. And then what about the legal status of invading a country’s airspace?

It may be illegal in the Syrian government’s eyes, but supporting Nelson Mandela in South Africa was deemed illegal during the apartheid era. To fly over Syria’s territory may violate official norms of international relations, but governments do this when they support opposition groups with weapons, money or intelligence, as NATO countries did recently in Libya. In any event, violations of Syrian sovereignty would be the direct consequence of the Syrian state’s brutality, not the imperialism of outsiders.

Of course in Libya there was also the small matter of UN resolution. But anyway, what’s the harm when you mean well?

Death of Khalil Ibrahim

Khalil Ibrahim in North Darfur, May 2009

The government of Sudan has reported the death of Khalil Ibrahim, leader of the Justice and Equality Movement, the largest and most powerful of Darfur’s rebel groups.

I met him two and a half years ago in the desert of North Darfur. I spent five days dodging Antonov bombers which appeared every morning and evening, when the air was at its most still, to hunt Khalil. He was with some of his senior commanders, who had gathered from all across Sudan – including the South and the East, far from Darfur – to prepare strategy for the year ahead.

It was a fascinating insight into Jem and Khalil. This was a sophisticated movement. As we hid out beneath acacia trees I wandered among the technicals – pickups armed with heavy machine guns – chatting to well-educated fighters, many with degrees or who had left decent jobs to take up arms. Among them I met Khalil Mohamed Ahmed, who was running a mobile media centre, uploading video and press releases to the the Jem website.

And I sat for several hours with Dr Khalil himself, who set out his motivation for walking away from Omar al-Bashir’s government and setting up his own rebel army. As we talked he tried to rebut allegations his force used child soldiers and described how his forces were preparing for another push. Much of his rhetoric was familiar to anyone who has read the Black Book, setting out the inequalities that riddle a Sudan run by a small, northern elite. And his analysis was largely Islamist, arguing not for a more secular Sudan – as say the rebels of the Sudan Liberation army might – but for greater equality in line with the Koran. It was clear he remained influenced (and in touch with) that wily old architect of Sudan’s Islamist revolution Hassan al-Turabi.

In some ways, Dr Khalil wanted to overthrow Khartoum not because it was an Islamist government but because it wasn’t Islamist enough.

And the trip was a reminder that in Sudan’s desert war the good guys were far from squeaky clean.

You can read more about my time with Jem, along with my trip into the Jebel Mara on a donkey with rebels from the SLA, in my book Saving Darfur, which is now available for Kindle.

I’ll spare you most of the propaganda that came from Sudan’s information ministry announcing Dr Khalil’s death, and leave you with its account of how he died…

The rebel movement forces, led by Dr. Khalil Ibrahim, had begun moving starting from Wadi Hawar area and across Al-Malha, Um Kadada, Al-Tuwaisha localities, the outskirts of Um Bader locality and Wad Banda locality. The forces of the Justice and Equality Movement attacked innocent citizens at their villages, looted shops and vehicles, destroyed houses and kidnapped a number local youth from the areas that it has looted along with groups working in gold exploration.

The Armed Forces have been pursuing the rebels of the Justice and Equality Movement, which was well armed and moving in more than 140 cars, since December 14th until they were able to defeat them December 25th. JEM leader, Dr. Khalil Ibrahim was killed, alongside 30 others, including leading commanders in the movement.

Yesterday, rebels confirmed his death.

How to Write About China in Africa

KHARTOUM OR SOMEWHERE SIMILAR OR IN FACT VERY DIFFERENT: First up is to pick your major, billion-dollar infrastructure project built by the Chinese. Ideally it will involve oil processing, pumping, prospecting or some such. Failing that, a dam, road or power station will do the trick – but at the very least make sure it has a red lantern hanging from it. (A Chinese restaurant will not past muster.)

This is Africa remember, so the next par should contrast the shiny new oil processing plant with the backwards land all around. Mention the Nile, pyramids, Masai warriors, starving children, Aids, camels, the Congo, cradle of humanity, Jacob Zuma’s wives etc. This year, you have the added bonus of being able to mention the World Cup. For British papers you get a bonus for mentioning Livingston, Gordon of Khartoum or any other Victorian hero.

“Ah yes,” chuckled Mohammed, as he washed his cattle in the waters of the mighty Nile beneath the hot African sun, “by par three you need a quote. So make sure you find a simple local man engaged in a traditional task who can tell you that the Chinese are coming and how he would like a job in the new oil plant so he can sell his cows and buy a Land Cruiser, insh’Allah.”

With the local scene set, it is time to assume that the rest of the continent is much the same as the patch around the luxury hotel where you have vox popped three locals and found your Chinese project. The presence of a new road or oil plant is sufficient to declare a fresh “Scramble for Africa”. It’s OK if you miss this exact phrase as the subs will add it in for you.

So far so good, but this is Africa and we need a healthy dose of fear, despair and human rights abuses in order not to leave our reader confused and disorientated. Thankfully there is a whole industry of commentators in London, Washington and New York employed to condemn China and reinforce stereotypes. “China’s rapacious demand for resources is harming all the excellent work done by well-intentioned Western donors,” said a man who has never been to Sudan. “China is propping up dictators and despots by building roads and buying oil. They have no regard for human rights, undermining our own efforts to topple their leader.”

You may be tempted at this point to introduce some examples of development aid driven by Western donors by way of comparison. Don’t. Those are generally best forgotten. However, by this stage most people will have turned the page so feel free to improvise. Ideally quote a fat local politician proclaiming his fondness of the Chinese because their money doesn’t come with strings. But leave the reader in no doubt about whether or not this is a good thing by ending on either a description of the politician’s shiny Mercedes or the cattle-washing local who has no chance of ever buying that car.

Anyway, all of this is to say that there is another way of seeing China’s role in Africa.

And a massive debt of gratitude to the excellent Inanitites (and it goes without saying Binyavanga Wainana)

Bashir and the ICC

My opinion piece is running in The Daily Telegraph today. It is a round-up of the thesis in my book but also points out, with an election days away for which Bashir is a shoo-in, how the international campaign has backfired. This is likely to be the most contentious claim…

Then, last year, the campaign won its second big victory, when the ICC issued a warrant for the arrest of Bashir on war crimes charges. But that, too, is backfiring. Before he was indicted, Bashir told regional leaders and his confidantes that he was ready to step down: after 20 years in office, he was ready for a holiday, and retirement to a smart new villa in the north of Khartoum. Now, fearing arrest by a new regime, he has promised his inner circle that he will fight on. He is not a man to bow to pressure – nor is he the monster of popular imagination. He is certainly a war criminal, but he has shown that he can be pragmatic, as when he signed a ceasefire with rebels in the south in 2005.

I’ve been sitting on this for a while and have debated it several times with different Darfur watchers. It came from three different sources, including Bashir’s inner circle and, second-hand, via a head of state. It may be that he was never going to step down. It is impossible to know exactly what would have happened in different circumstances. However, the sources I spoke to are rock solid on this and I believe it’s another example of how going to the International Criminal Court was a mistake. Bashir has no choice now but to fight on.

What’s Going on in Sudan?

Confusing and depressing news from Sudan, where the main opposition parties have withdrawn their candidates for this month’s presidential election, following the SPLM’s decision to withdraw last night.

There is no doubt the elections will not be free and fair. The International Crisis Group report earlier this week made clear that the rigging had already been done. So maybe the opposition is boycotting the ballot to draw attention to the flawed process.

However, where Sudanese politics is concerned you can be sure that few actors are making decisions based on principle. The real reasons remain shrouded in mystery. Anyone who tells you they know what is going on is a fool.

So I’ll speculate: For my money, there is something pretty shabby going on.

• The NCP of President Bashir needs to win the presidential elections. A resounding victory is the best way of heading off the International Criminal Court and cementing Bashir’s shaky legitimacy.
• The SPLM doesn’t want the presidency of a united Sudan. It wants the referendum next January and secession.

This way both sides get way they want – while the Sudanese people wonder what sort of democracy it is that leaves them with bit parts in the political process.

.

Taking the G-Word out of Darfur

Interesting developments at Save Darfur. Robert B Lawrence, director of policy and government relations at the Save Darfur Coalition, has railed against commentators who accuse the lobby group of being stuck in the past and not helping the cause of millions of Darfuris stuck in miserable aid camps. He argues that the coalition has actually moved a long way in adapting to the unfolding crisis by developing a campaign that takes account of nuance and complexity on the ground.

This argument has held little water in the past, as the coalition stuck to misguided calls for International Criminal Court arrest warrants and pursued the deployment of peacekeepers at the expense of a negotiated peace. Such policies were the outcome of an apocolyptic analysis that bore little relation to what was happening on the ground – as I have argued in my book, Saving Darfur.

But now, could things – beyond the rhetoric – actually be changing?

I recently pointed out that members of Save Darfur had finally made it to Darfur where they found a distinct absence of genocide, or even war. Now it seems their press releases have been changed.

BEFORE
February 22, 2010

The Save Darfur Coalition – an alliance of more than 180 faith-based, advocacy and human rights organizations – raises public awareness about the ongoing genocide in Darfur and mobilizes a unified response to the atrocities that threaten the lives of people throughout the Darfur region.

AFTER
March 18, 2010

The Save Darfur Coalition – an alliance of more than 190 faith-based, advocacy and human rights organizations – raises public awareness about the ongoing crisis in Darfur and mobilizes a unified response to promote peace throughout the Darfur region and all of Sudan

Well done Save Darfur. This is not just a question of semantics. The hysterical attitude of the Darfur movement and its apocalyptic language have pushed us towards ill-considered interventions that have done little to address the underlying causes of Darfur’s multilayered crisis. Dropping the word genocide is the first step to a more mature debate.

Eight Myths About Darfur

Rebels of the Justice and Equality Movement in North Darfur

Despite my best efforts, there is still plenty of guff being written about Sudan and Darfur. Some is written through simple ignorance. Never has so much been written about a place by so many people who have never been there. At the same time, there are lots of campaigners who should know better. For anyone thinking about writing Darfur in the next weeks as we approach important elections, here is my simple guide to some myths and realities about the place:

1. Darfur is the size of Texas or France - A far better comparison is Spain (or Turkmenistan, if you want to be really pedantic)
2. The conflict in Darfur is between Muslims and Christians – It is not. They are pretty much all Muslims
3. The conflict is  about oil – Nope. There is no oil in Darfur
4. The Arabs are the bad guys – While some Arab militias have joined the Janjaweed, most Arabs stayed out of the conflict altogether but have still wound up as victims
5. The rebels are the good guys – It would be nice if they were. But Africa is full of rebels who seized power only to repeat the abuses of the regimes they replaced. In Darfur, they use child soldiers, hijack aid and have been one of the barriers to peace
6. Foreign Arabs have settled in villages vacated by persecuted tribes – There are plenty of reports, but little evidence. In some cases the Arabs have been described as foreign because hundreds of years ago their ancestors arrived from other countries. But today they are Darfuris
7. The Arabs are light-skinned – it is nigh-on impossible to identify many people calling themselves Arab simply by skin colour. Some come from “African tribes” and adopt the name Arab to reflect their nomadic status. All Darfuris are black and African
8. President Omar al-Bashir is a crazy, genocidal monster – he is a war criminal, yes, but he has pursued a clever – and at times pragmatic – strategy to hold on to power. That is how we should deal with him

Save Darfur Goes to Darfur

Jerry Fowler, the soon-to-depart head of the Save Darfur Coalition, thinks I have been unfair to his campaign. His point is that I have misrepresented its case and have based my criticism on things they used to say, years ago. All of which strikes me as a little unfair when his press releases carry the following message…

About Save Darfur Coalition: The Save Darfur Coalition – an alliance of more than 180 faith-based, advocacy and human rights organizations – raises public awareness about the ongoing genocide in Darfur and mobilizes a unified response to the atrocities that threaten the lives of people throughout the Darfur region.

Anyone who has been to Darfur knows this is arrant nonsense. There are lots of bad things going on, but I have seen no evidence of an “ongoing genocide”. Even “atrocities” seems to misrepresent the prosaic, daily drip-drip-drip of death. The good news is that Jerry Fowler has now actually been to Darfur and, erm, this is what he found…

…an uneasy situation – “neither peace, nor war,” we heard a number of times. From IDPs we consistently heard expressions of fear and a pervading sense of insecurity. Clashes between the government and rebels are happening in some areas, but such organized fighting is not widespread. Nor is there systematic violence against civilians. But neither is there a sense of stability, security or peace. Quite simply, nothing is resolved. And a large portion of the civilian population remains extremely vulnerable.

Guess what? Things are quite so clear as they seem from thousands of miles away. Not even “systematic violence against civilians”. Over at Brains Like a Shoe, Sean Brooks has a similar revelation…

For now, I can say that having visited Khartoum, the three capitals of Darfur and Juba, one cannot help but be struck by the depth of complexity to the immediate crises and issues at hand.

So does this mean an end to the apocalyptic, over-simplified language favoured by the self-appointed saviours of Darfur that has done so much to prevent progress? Let’s hope so. And maybe they’ll be more receptive to the argument I make in Saving Darfur. Anyway, I for one will be watching to see how Save Darfur’s position develops.