Obama Administration
-
Is Obama's Man Too Nice for Sudan?
-
The Preemptive Peace Prize
-
Another Human Rights Activist Abducted in Sudan
Khartoum's Spin Zone
Published November 02, 2009 @ 05:31AM PT
Misinformation is the cornerstone of dictatorship -- control of dominate political narratives allows for the manipulation of public sentiment. Those of you familiar with certain cable news programs may know this as "spin."
An intriguing interview from the latest edition from the Sudan Radio Project (an excellent program, if you're not familiar) makes me wonder exactly how the Sudanese government is spinning the Obama Administration's recently-released policy review. In a segment on Sudanese perspectives of the plan, a 27-year-old woman from Khartoum incorrectly states that Obama supports unified Sudan, with "no division between South and North," presumably following the 2011 referendum on Southern independence.
The policy statement, in fact, wisely does not take a stance on the outcome of the referendum, but states the administration's intentions to ensure peace both before, during, and after Southerners head to the polls. It is, after all, not our right to weigh in on what the outcome of the referendum should be -- the vote for self-determination was a key component of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement that ended two decades of war, and the right to chose unity or independence belongs to Southerners alone.
Gration's Good Intentions Gone Awry
Published September 29, 2009 @ 07:32PM PT
I would imagine that, right about now, US Special Envoy Scott Gration is regretting his (post-Senate-hearings-need-to-improve-his-PR) decision to invite press along for his trip to Sudan earlier this month.
As predicted, Stephanie McCrummen's less-than-flattering profile of the envoy in the Washington Post is causing quite a stir, even prompting rather strong statements from senior officials and the press team at the White House, who accused McCrummen of "wildly misrepresent[ing] the policy discussions that have occurred in the White House with quotes that been cobbled together out of context."
But McCrummen isn't covering discussions that have occurred in the White House -- she's covering what has thus far been the only public face of the Obama Administration's Sudan policy, as the much anticipated official policy review still has not been released. We are not privy to White House discussions on Sudan -- our only window is an envoy who, despite his good intentions, is a walking PR disaster.
And, as I've written many times, it does seem like Gration is allowing himself to be willfully duped by Khartoum, as he touts the regime's supposed good will while its leaders continue to undermine prospects for peace. According to McCrummen, Gration was surprised to hear of ongoing problems with humanitarian access -- problems that have been a hallmark of the conflict since the beginning -- telling an aid worker, "I thought that problem was fixed," and then deflecting responsibility away from the central government in Khartoum.
US Envoy on Bears, Honey, and Peace in Sudan
Published September 17, 2009 @ 06:17PM PT
US Special Envoy to Sudan Scott Gration moved his damage control campaign from DC to Darfur last week, where he reportedly (though he denies it) was greeted with no small amount of frustration in the internally displaced persons (IDP) camps.
It is, indeed, critically important that Gration is reaching out to Darfuris. Comments about his conversations with IDPS made by the Special Envoy during an interview with Radio Dabanga, however, are rather concerning:
"I found out that people misunderstand my position. The second thing I found out is that the people thought I said we should remove Sudan from the terrorist list. I never said that."
He continues:
"But if you study my words, ...if you study what I said in the congress, you'll see that my words are exactly as I stated and not what has been reported by other people to the people in Darfur."
Ok, well here's exactly what he said, during his testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in July:
"There's no evidence in our intelligence community that supports [Sudan] being on the state sponsors of terrorism. It's a political decision."
So perhaps Gration is parsing words while accusing others of doing the same: He didn't explicitly say to take Sudan off the list, but the implications of his statement are difficult to deny.
During the interview with Radio Dabanga, Gration also defended his incentive-based approach to Khartoum, arguing that, "You catch more bears with honey than with vinegar." (Seriously.) His broad assertions that such incentives are already having a positive impact with the ruling party in Khartoum -- he neglects to provide any examples -- don't exactly jive with recent reports on the situation on the ground in Darfur and elsewhere in Sudan.
This Week in Darfur: Rebel Rousing
Published August 22, 2009 @ 08:59AM PT
Darfur's fractured rebel movements came under the spotlight this week, as US Special Envoy Scott Gration traveled to the region to push the groups towards a unified platform for peace negotiations. Three of the factions united, but one snubbed the invitation to meet with Gration. (Three out of four, not too shabby.) Darfur's languishing peace process is nearly as much the fault of the rebels as it is the government at this point, as various factions seem to pursue their own interests over the people they claim to represent. (Sean Brooks at Save Darfur gives a great overview of the challenges of rebel fragmentation.)
It's difficult to see, from my vantage point, any coherence, coordination, or direction in the various peace talks currently underway (if they can even be called "peace talks"): In addition to Gration's travels this week, UNAMID held a round table on the 2006 Darfur Peace Agreement, though most consider it D.O.A. because, among many other problems, only one rebel faction signed the document. Meanwhile, the leader of the Justice and Equality Movement presented his plan for peace negotiations to Libyan officials desperate to revive the stagnant Doha peace talks between JEM and the government.
Professional Obfuscator Omar al-Bashir, President of Sudan, met with Muslim clerics in Khartoum, and will travel to Libya in September for a summit on conflict resolution in Africa. (Because he's so good at it?)
Lots of meetings, lots of talking, but where is it leading to?
Sudan a Boost for Obama's Scorecard?
Published August 17, 2009 @ 04:55AM PT
Will Sudan be a relatively easy win for Obama --- "relatively" being the operative word --- or go down in the books as the president's first foreign policy failure?
While not seeking to oversimplify the conflict, Barron YoungSmith argues on The New Republic blog that, when compared to everything else on Obama's plate, Sudan could provide a rare opportunity for a "clear cut" foreign policy victory, with only "moderate presidential attention" needed.
That is, of course, if the Administration can course-correct and steer its own envoy back towards the path of (as Barron so aptly puts it) common sense, and a learned-from-history approach that demands substantive progress before rewarding Khartoum. (Special Envoy to Sudan Scott Gration has fallen out of favor with many Darfur advocates after seeming a tad too comfy with Khartoum.)
I'm not sure I follow Barron's argument completely, but I also hope that he might be right. He points to several examples from the history of US-Sudanese relations that should inform Obama's approach to situation currently at hand (and should warn against being overly conciliatory with the manipulative regime in Khartoum), but Sudan has become an international powder keg with the implications of peace, or the lack thereof, reaching far beyond its own borders. Even more, the Law of Unintended Consequences hangs over each move the Administration may consider.
The real question may be, then, not whether Sudan provides the opportunity for an easy win, but whether or not Obama can balance the many international crises competing for his attention.
Tough Week for the Special Envoy to Sudan
Published August 15, 2009 @ 09:11AM PT
Tougher weeks are yet to come.
I wonder what did Major General Scott Gration expect from women of Darfur in the camps in reacting to his description of the situation in Darfur as "remnants of genocide?"
Magbula may be to the Special Envoy a "remnants of genocide." There are hundreds of thousands women like Magbola in the IDP camps of Kassab, Hasahisa, KarYari, Habila, and in similar camps across Darfur and in Eastern Chad. They want justice before peace.
I believe that, with all the nice words and the good intentions expressed, General Gration is not ready to handle the Darfur problem. It is either you have it or you don't. Al Bashir has underestimated the Darfuri people in this conflict. Today he is a fugitive. In a different take, the Special Envoy might have underestimated the resolve and resilience of the Darfuri people who are confined to crowded camps.
Rush Limbaugh on Healthcare and How Not to Use Your Brain
Published August 14, 2009 @ 07:00AM PT
It's easy to brush Rush Limbaugh aside as an overpaid, trumped up, hypocritical conservative bobblehead --- don't listen to his ridiculous radio program, and he won't interfere with your day. The problem, however, is that others do listen, and take Mr. Limbaugh's baseless rantings as gospel truth.
Case in point: As Martha wrote yesterday, Limbaugh's latest claim to fame is comparing Obama's healthcare plan with Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. Utterly ridiculous, complete fantasy, and egregiously irresponsible.
But watch a clip from Wednesday's Colbert Report, and you see a rather incensed man yell: "It reads like something that was brought up in the early 1930s in Germany!"
Right, I'm sure you read the legislation and came to this conclusion yourself, rather than just regurgitating radio talk show fear mongering. And you know the difference between said fear-mongering and fact-based analysis. Because actually, this is how something from the early 1930s in Germany reads:
"All proposals that include a permanent presence, a permanent regulation of the Jews in Germany, do not solve the Jewish Question, for they do not eliminate the Jews from Germany. And that is what we want to do."
Rush Limbaugh is one thing, but the thousands of lemmings following his lead are the real problem.
