New Liberalism

No, not in Darfur. In Khartoum. The power sharing agreement signed earlier this year in Kenya between the SPLM and the Government is the most important thing going in the Sudan these days- no matter what you hear from the Darfur-warriors in the United States and Europe. The conflict in Darfur is tragic and offensive and brutal, and, to be sure, there are people who should pay for their part in it, but the Sudan has bigger problems.

If the power-sharing agreement doesn’t stick, you can forget about Darfur because there won’t be a power structure inside the Sudan to resolve the situation. And, despite making overtures in January, the power-brokers inside Khartoum are now showing their true colors:

Sudan’s ruling elite looks unwilling to share power with former southern rebels, despite agreeing to do so in a January peace deal to end Africa’s longest civil war, analysts and diplomats say.

"It seems at the moment that they might be trying to set up a shadow government as advisers inside the presidency," a western diplomat in Khartoum told Reuters. "The signs aren’t good that they are serious about power-sharing."

There can’t be a “shadow government” inside the “real” government. That would wreck any good will that now exists between the “North” and the “South.” The civil war would restart, though it would look like a lot different from the one that began in the mid-1980’s. The Government has all the territory in needs to monopolize the natural resource wealth, and it is unlikely the rebels in the south would be able to take any territory. But one problem the government would have would be the population of southerners who have moved to Khartoum- numbering, by some estimates, 3-4 million. That is a potential 5^th column, and it would have the potential to destabilize the capital- albeit from an encircled position.

So the important thing to do is compel the Sudanese government to honor the pledge it made in January. How? Well, sanctions won’t work because 1) We don’t have much economic leverage in the Sudan and 2) Any divestment strategy would only push Khartoum closer to Beijing, which has already said it doesn’t give a damn about the internal politics of its African gas station. So, if sticks won’t work, we’ll have to use carrots. My biggest suggestion would be offering a thaw in existing trade barriers with the West, and promising economic aid to rebuild the wasted Northern cotton industry in return for more accountability in the peace process and more transparency in the Sudan’s government. This is something that wouldn’t be expensive at all, and could go a long way towards helping a troubled nation build a national trust in Sudanese politics. Additionally, by viewing the United States and the West as contributing to the economic revitalization of the Sudan, the Sudanese people would be less likely to turn to Islamism.

But if you have ideas, by all means let me know in the comments section. The Sudan has been neglected, irresponsibly, by Western governments since the end of the Cold War. Let's get some dialogue going and try and fix that.

# posted by Mayflower @ 3:53 PM