Stop a war before it starts

Stop a war before it starts
 
STANFORD – Well, we’re in it now. What we do best. Diplomacy. The  White House
has dispatched Senator John Kerry to Sudan with a proposal  for peace between
the North and South. It’s a giant step toward avoiding  the kind of bloodshed
that killed more than two million people in  Sudan’s previous 20-year
North-South civil war, which ended only in 2005  – and is threatening to erupt
once again.

In recent months, President Barack Obama has stepped up his own  involvement and
that of senior figures in his administration in support  of a peace strategy for
Sudan. On his behalf, Kerry has delivered a  package of proposals designed to
break the logjam that has brought the  North and South to a dangerous
crossroads.
We have written a memo that spells out some of the essential elements  of what a
grand bargain for peace in Sudan could look like. If you’re  interested in the
specifics of a possible peace deal – and in actions  that you can take to
support it – go to www.sudanactionnow.org.
There is little time to waste. On January 9, 2011, the people of  Southern Sudan
will vote for independence from the North, taking with  them up to
three-quarters of the country’s known oil reserves and  placing millions of
civilians in the direct path of war.
The government in Khartoum (the capital in the North) is led by Omar  al-Bashir,
whose accomplishments, which include overseeing war crimes  during the previous
North-South war and engineering the atrocities in  Darfur, have brought him
arrest warrants for war crimes and genocide  from the International Criminal
Court.
And yet renewed war in Sudan is not inevitable. A complex but  workable peace
can be brokered if all interested parties become more  deeply involved. The
current moment requires robust diplomacy – the kind  that can leave a bad taste
in your mouth, but that gets the job done.  We believe that Kerry is a skilled
emissary and can help the parties  find the compromises necessary for peace.
Any agreement preventing a return to war would necessarily involve  the National
Congress Party, representing the North, and the Sudan  People’s Liberation
Movement, representing the South. But it would also  involve the United States,
whose post-referendum relationship with the  two parties will have enormous
influence over whether a deal gets done.
We believe that a grand bargain to lay the foundation for lasting peace between
the North and South would oblige the parties to:
·        hold the Southern Sudan referendum on time and fully respect and
implement the results;
·        reach a mutually satisfactory agreement concerning the territory of
Abyei, a key disputed border area;
·        craft a multi-year revenue-sharing arrangement in which the  oil wealth
of Abyei and key border areas could be divided equitably  between the North and
South, with a small percentage going to the Arab  Misseriya border populations
for development purposes;
·        demarcate the uncontested 80% of the border and refer the remaining 20%
to binding international arbitration;
·        create serious protections for minority groups, with  consideration of
joint citizenship for certain populations, backed by  significant international
consequences for attacks on southerners in the  North or northerners in the
South.
The US role as the invisible third party to the agreement involves a  series of
incentives offered to the regime in Khartoum to ensure  agreement and
implementation of a peace deal. In exchange for action on  the North-South and
Darfur peace efforts, the US would implement a  clear, sequenced, and binding
path to normalization of relations.
This would involve – in order – removal of Sudan from the State  Sponsors of
Terrorism list, exchange of ambassadors, lifting of  unilateral sanctions, and
support for bilateral and multilateral debt  relief, together with other
economic measures by international financial  institutions. Conversely, the US
must be prepared to lead international  efforts to impose severe consequences on
any party that plunges the  country back into war.
Peace and security in Darfur should be an essential benchmark for  normalized
relations between the US and Sudan. The Obama administration  should hold firm
on this through the coming rounds of negotiation, and  should appoint a senior
official to help coordinate US policy on Darfur  in order to ensure that peace
efforts there receive the same level of  attention as the North-South efforts.
What is needed now is political will – and not only in the US – to  sustain this
diplomacy. The European Union and Sudan’s neighbors – in  particular Egypt,
Ethiopia, Kenya, and Uganda – will also need to play a  robust role. And China’s
diplomacy in Sudan, where it has invested  massively in developing the country’s
oil resources, will be a test of  whether or not it intends to be a responsible
stakeholder in Africa and  the wider world.
Ensuring that governments work toward peace is where you come in.  Keep the
pressure on them. Support the peace process. Your voice can  prevent a war. Not
guns. Not money. Just our voices.

The way to peace in Sudan is not simple, but it is achievable.  There are hard
choices to be made. We can make those choices now, or we  can persuade ourselves
that peace is too hard or too complex, and then  look on resignedly from the
sidelines as hundreds of thousands of  innocent men, women, and children
needlessly die. It’s up to us.
George Clooney is an actor and co-founder of the NGO Not On Our Watch. John
Prendergast is co-founder of the Enough Projectand co-author of The Enough
Moment: The Fight to End Human Rights Crimes in Africa.

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2010.
www.project-syndicate.org

اترك تعليقاً

لن يتم نشر عنوان بريدك الإلكتروني. الحقول الإلزامية مشار إليها بـ *