Source: ZNet | Africa

Darfur at the Crossroads: Caught Between Western Hypocrisy And Muslim Complicity
by Farid Omar; August 11, 2004

As the humanitarian catastrophe in the Darfur region of Sudan continues to unfold, the United States has seized the opportunity to divert attention from Iraq and Palestine and at the same time, extend its geo-political domination in North Africa and beyond through threats of sanctions and possible military intervention. On the other hand, the Arab League (AL) and the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) are strangely silent on the excesses in Darfur and this has allowed the situation on the ground to spin out of control.

To date, close to one million Darfuris have been driven from their homes, over 30, 000 have been killed while an estimated 170, 000 have sought refuge in neighbouring Chad. While western hypocrisy on the situation in Darfur is really problematic, Muslim complicity in the Darfur mayhem is equally disturbing. The Muslim people and their allies around the world should stand up for Darfuris, denounce and expose western double standards and condemn the AL and the OIC for their inaction and failure to put pressure on Sudan to contain the crisis in Darfur.

The western media has presented the political and humanitarian crisis in Darfur and broader conflict in Sudan as a race or religious war. This is a false paradigm. The conflict in Sudan is NOT one pitting the so-called Muslim- Arab North and the so-called Christian/animist South, or between the Arab Janjaweed militia working in collusion with the Sudanese government and the Black Africans of Darfur. The people of Sudan are all Africans, be they Black-Africans or Arab-Africans.

As noted by some analysts, the race and religious analogy of the conflict is part of the ideological ploy of U.S. imperialism to generate anti-Arab hostility among African-Americans and Black Africans, to win support of African-Americans and Black African Christians for the US Neo-Conservatives/Christian right project against Arab and Muslim Africans, and in particular against Sudanese Muslims. It is also aimed at undermining the long standing Afro-Arab solidarity that has historically striven against the forces of western imperialism, colonialism apartheid and the occupation in Palestine.

Western pundits have also touted Political Islam as being the mobilizational and driving force behind the Sudanese conflict. But contrary to widely-held belief, the reactionary Islamist forces in Sudan do not command widespread support. In its heydays, Sudan's main Islamist party, the National Islamic Front (NIF), has never commanded a significant popular following, and has gained and retained power only through intrigue and coup. In 1989, the NIF conspired with the current Al-Bashir –led military regime to overthrow the democratically elected government of Saddieq El-Mahdi.

Like most other North African and Horn of African states, the real problem in Sudan is lack of democracy, stemming from the prevalence of successive totalitarian regimes through much of Sudan’s post-colonial history. In protecting their ill-gotten privilege, and as means of holding onto power, the ruling class in Sudan has used race and religion to manipulate, divide, exploit and oppress the impoverished masses. The root causes of the Sudanese conflict are primarily political and can be located in totalitarian tendencies that have overtime, suppressed the evolution of popular democracy.

External forces have fanned the protracted conflict in Sudan. For much of Sudan’s civil war, American arms and money, propoganda and other direct support for Sudanese rebels by right-wing evangelical groups in the US, have fueled the conflict that has raged for decades. As much as progressive forces should continue to support autonomy and right of self-determination for the oppressed communities in Sudan, they must denounce and condemn western interference in the internal affairs of Sudan.

In the current crisis, geopolitical underpinnings pose a direct threat to Sudanese national sovereignty. The US preoccupation with Darfur does not constitute an effort to resolve the humanitarian crisis but is in real terms, part and parcel of a broader geopolitical agenda - to militarily dominate the predominantly Muslim and oil-rich Middle Eastern, Central Asian and North African regions. Using the humanitarian crisis in Darfur as a pretex, Bush, Blair, the EU and their Israeli allies, have moved fast to divert the world's attention away from Iraq and Palestine, and instead, focus on an African, Muslim government.

US calls for sanctions on Sudan is no different than its previous calls for support for sanctions on Iraq during the Clinton’s presidency and the subsequent inavsion and occupation of Iraq by the current Bush adminstration. It follows a familiar pattern of imperialist designs aimed at extending US military hegemony globally. As noted by a recent BlackList article, the real issues “are oil in Sudan, furtherance of US/Israeli geopolitical domination in the region and Israeli-U.S. fear that the Sudanese government's support of the Palestinian resistance will increase with its ever-expanding oil wealth. In his recent trip to Sudan, Colin Powell demanded that Sudan cease its support to Palestinian resistance". In pursuit of its hegemonic objectives, the US may orchestrate a Haiti-type coup d'état in Sudan, instigate social unrest in the streets or even embark on a military campaign to invade and occupy Sudan.



While many around the world have voiced their anger and outrage over the ongoing mayhem in the Darfur region of Sudan, one voice is clearly missing - that of Muslim communities who have been so vocal, both globally and locally, in their condemnation of the war in Iraq and the repression in Palestine.



The Muslim World has its share of blame for paying a blind eye to the mass slaughter in Darfur. The Arab League (AL) and the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) purpot to represent the interests of the Muslim and Arab worlds. But the majority of the AL and OIC member states are flagrant violators of human rights within their own jurisdictions. As a result, they do not command the moral authority to reign on the excesses of Sudan, a member state of both the AL and the OIC.



The Arab League reluctantly sent a low-key mission to investigate the mass killings in Darfur. It reported “gross human rights violations” in a member state but quickly retracted its statement under pressure from Sudan. In the wake of threats of sanctions from the UN, some AL and OIC members have worked behind the scenes to protect the Sudanese government from any impending sanctions or military intervention.



While UN-led sanctions would only serve to destabilize Sudan, AL and OIC countries like Egypt, Algeria and Pakistan have nevertheless, openly opposed the imposition of sanctions and instead, called upon the UN to give the Sudanese government more time to bring the situation in Darfur under control. But this is a futile proposition given the fact that the Sudanese government either has no interest in resolving the crisis or lacks the capacity to do so.



In terms of international affiliations, Sudan is primarily a member state of the African Union. Unlike the AL and the OIC, the AU has taken some proactive steps to defuse the situation in Darfur. The AU is actively seeking an African solution to the problem. But the 300 Peace Monitors it has deployed in Darfur is grossly inadequate. While there is possibility of Nigeria and Rwanda sending 1000 peacekeepers each, the overall mandate needs to be expanded to include full-fledged peace keeping and peace enforcement. The UN and other members of the international community who want to lend support should back the AU effort, not set up parallel initiatives. Darfur is Africa's problem and the AU must take leadership role in resolving the crisis.



Like the AL and OIC, the Muslim and Arab media have also maintained a strange silence. In sharp contrast to events in the Middle East, coverage on the horrific Darfuri scene by Al-Jazeera and other leading Arab Satellite Televisions such as the Dubai-based Al-Arabiya is dismally marginal. Failure by Muslim and Arab media to adequately cover the grisly events in Darfur smacks of complicity. Equally missing is the voice of Muslim civil rights organizations, religious leaders, scholars, Mosque establishments and other leading Islamic institutions that have routinely lambasted western abuses in the Muslim world but strangely remain silent on the plight of fellow Darfuri Muslims.



In the international arena, the AL and the OIC have frequently denounced the Israeli occupation in Palestine and in some circles, voiced open opposition to US invasion in Iraq. From Iraq to Palestine and from Bosnia to Afghanistan, the Muslim and Arab streets were alive with massive protests, demonstrations and rallies and yet in the wake of the Darfuri killings, the same streets are virtually empty and there have been no show of solidarity for the co-religionists in Darfur. As noted by Najam Aziz Sethi of Pakistan’s Friday Times, Muslim inaction over Darfur poses a moral dilemma for the community: “The OIC is in the habit of being outraged when Muslims are being done to death by a non-Islamic state. Yet when it comes to the accountability of an Islamic regime or state, it is strangely silent. Moral outrage should cut both ways” Sethi adds: “Muslims are outraged by the shameful acts of “infidels” but blind to the bloody transgressions of their own faithful followers.”

The AL and the OIC should be held accountable for the Darfuri mayhem. They should be forced to pay reparations to the people of Darfur for condoning the bloody actions of the Janjaweed militia working in collusion with the Sudanese government. The perpetrators of the Darfur slaughter should be indicted for war crimes and face prosecution at an International War Crimes Tribunal for Sudan. If the Muslim community doesn’t wake up to the cries of the terrorized Darfuris, they risk alienation from the global community and could loose the support and sympathy of people of goodwill around the world who have stood up for Muslims in all their struggles, be it in Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan and beyond.

Western intervention would not resolve the ongoing political and humanitarian crisis in Sudan but only serve to entrench imperialism further. The masses in the Arab and Muslim worlds should re-think the role of AL and OIC and should mount serious opposition to their human right violations in all member states. Genuine democratic forces must reject and oppose any attempts by the US and other western powers to intervene in Sudan.
The crisis in Sudan can only be resolved through a sustained international campaign calling for a peaceful transition to democracy. The real solution lies in the empowerment of the social movements in Sudan and by creating an environment that will allow the popular sectors stage peaceful protests and strikes and engage in other forms of civil disobedience to force the Al-Bashir government hand over power to an interim, all-inclusive, national consensus government, representative of all sectors of Sudanese society, with the sole mandate of organizing free and fair democratic elections. This should not be an elite-driven process, but rather, a non-violent people-directed action relying on popular and grassroots support, and free from external interference.