from Judy Miriga

Daily Nation

Sudan Tribune
Sudan: Kibaki Invites Al-Bashir to Addis Talks on South Sudan Referendum
Murithi Mutiga

13 November 2010

Nairobi — President Kibaki has invited Sudan president Omar al-Bashir to an extraordinary summit on the January 9 self-determination referendum.
The meeting will be held in Addis Ababa to avoid the controversy that surrounded Mr Bashir’s most recent visit to Nairobi during the promulgation of the new Constitution.

Unlike Kenya, Ethiopia is not a state party of the International Criminal Court and is not legally obliged to arrest Mr Bashir who has a warrant of arrest on his head for his suspected role in authorising the atrocities in the Darfur region.
Acting Foreign Affairs minister George Saitoti travelled to Khartoum on Wednesday where he handed the invitation to Sudan’s president.

Overshadow meeting
He also met Southern Sudan president Salva Kiir in Juba and held talks with Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi in Addis Ababa.

Acting Foreign Affairs PS Patrick Wamoto said the government had elected not to hold the summit in Kenya to prevent Mr Bashir’s presence overshadowing the meeting.

“We don’t want to take our eyes off the ball. This is a very crucial meeting and we want to extract a commitment from the main actors in Juba and Khartoum that they will respect the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and that they will play their role in ensuring the referendum goes ahead peacefully,” he said.

Most analysts view the talks in Addis Ababa scheduled to take place within the next two weeks as the best chance to avert a return to war in Africa’s biggest country.

With less than two months to go before the referendum, the two parties are still well apart on a number of issues that were to be settled before the poll under the terms of the CPA.
These include border demarcation, sharing the country’s external debt and the fate of the oil-rich Abyei region.

Ernst Jan Hogendoorn of the International Crisis Group says that the pre-referendum issues can still be settled.

“It is not very surprising that there is still no agreement on these issues. There is a culture of brinkmanship in dealing with difficult political questions in Sudan so it is still quite possible that a deal can be struck.”

Mr Hogendoorn says the role of regional players such as Ethiopia, Uganda and Kenya will be decisive. But he says Khartoum also hopes to get concessions from the US government before the referendum.

“Clearly (Bashir’s) National Congress Party has a number of demands that it has made to the US. The most important thing is lifting of sanctions. They want agreement on how to deal with the country’s external debt including the possibility of cancellation of some of it. But there is also the question of the ICC indictment on Mr Bashir, which makes the whole process quite complicated.”

Mr Bashir has been indicted twice by the international criminal court for his government’s role in financing the Janjaweed militia which waged a campaign of mass displacements, killings and rapes in a large swathe of Sudanese territory in Darfur.

But the dilemma confronting actors in the region is that they have to deal with the Khartoum regime to ensure that the referendum takes place on time.

According to Mr Wamoto, invitations for the summit in Addis Ababa went out in President Kibaki’s name because Kenya chairs the subcommittee on Sudan in the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (Igad).

He said Kenya would have preferred that the meeting be held in Naivasha where the CPA was signed but the risk that Mr Bashir’s presence would provide the main focus of international attention during the meeting forced a rethink.

Kenya: Alarm as Land Militia ‘Re-Emerges’
Bernard Kwalia

12 November 2010

Nairobi — Security officers have been sent to Mt Elgon to hunt for more than 50 armed people believed to be members of the outlawed Sabaot Land Defence Force.
The armed gang was seen early this week in Cheptandan area, Chebyuk Settlement Scheme, a kilometre from the Bannantega military camp.
Residents said they were wearing jungle uniform similar to that of the Ugandan People’s Defence Force and were armed with guns.

Some residents who spoke to the Saturday Nation but declined to be named said the group warned that the so-called land defence force was alive and promised to bounce back in a big way.

“They moved from house to house, terrorising residents on Monday night before disappearing into Mt Elgon Forest,” a resident said.

The people demanded that security officers investigate the matter. They said some leaders were reviving the militia in the area to scuttle the resettlement programme and for political survival.

On Friday, Western provincial commissioner Samuel Kilele held a series of meetings with top Army officers, regular police, the General Service Unit and the Administration Police before going to Chebyuk to address the public.

Speaking on the phone, Mr Kilele denied claims that members of the militia were regrouping to cause trouble in the area again.

Two years ago, the militia was crushed by the Army after they caused the death of more than 1,000 people and displaced 50,000 others. The group’s commander Wycliffe Matakwei was killed while others were arrested and charged.

Recently, a Bungoma court acquitted brokers and others who had been accused of collecting money from the public, promising them land at the controversial scheme.

Some militiamen were not captured in a list of beneficiaries in Phase III of the settlement scheme during vetting as they were fighting. They have threatened to disrupt the programme unless they are considered.

Donors Fear Instability Over South Sudan

Concerns are growing that a secession by South Sudan could trigger turmoil and instability beyond Sudanese borders, and some members of the donor community would like for Southern Sudan to postpone or drop its bid for independence in the referendum next January.

Sudan: Don’t Break Away From Sudan, West Tells South –
comment:
(It is time for the South Sudan to achieve their Independence so they can manage their wealth free from interference and intimidation from Al-Bashir – I wonder what Kibaki is up to? I dont trust Kibaki and Moi and team anymore…Watch out !)
Michael Wakabi

22 March 2010

Nairobi — Donor circles want Southern Sudan to drop its bid for independence in the referendum next January, as concerns grow that a rushed secession could trigger turmoil and instability beyond Sudanese borders.

In 2005, President Omar al-Bashir’s National Congress Party and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement, led by the late Dr John Garang signed a Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) that ended 22 years of war between the North and South.

That CPA left the door open for the South to break away from the union if 60 per cent of voters decide so in the 2011 plebiscite.

Although the United States, which is considered to have a vested interest in the outcome of Sudan’s peace process says it “takes no position on what the outcome of that referendum should be,”

The EastAfrican has separately learned that key Western democracies and institutions, fearing that independence for the South in its present state could see the area slide into anarchy, have quietly urged President Salva Kiir’s government to go slow on secession.
“Independence for the South should be put off for a few more years primarily because of lack of capacity in the South to run a stable and secure state,” said a source privy to Western analysis of the evolving situation in Sudan.

He added: “There is no institutional infrastructure to support a state, so there is a high chance that the country will degenerate into a Somalia-like situation. This would open a ‘corridor of terror’ across the region that could be infiltrated by Al Qaeda and its associates to create instability that would run counter to Western interests.”

The West is spooked by the prospect of sudden independence for a fragile state — with a corrupt and fractious national leadership, a nearly non-existent civil service, a poorly established local police and professional military — immediately disintegrating into a civil war.

This could draw the international community into a costly intervention to rebuild a state that few countries want to underwrite in the current economic climate.

With new discoveries of oil in both Uganda and Sudan and the likelihood of further discoveries in the northeast of the Democratic Republic of Congo, peace in the region is essential to the exploitation of these resources.

Western strategists believe that even under the best of circumstances, the absence of institutional infrastructure in the South and independent communication links to the outside world mean Juba would remain hostage to Khartoum, making it difficult to get energy and other exports to outside markets.

Such a scenario would deny the infant state the resources to deliver to the population the promised benefits of independence, leading to high levels of discontent that could result in a breakdown of law and order, said one analyst.

Other fears revolve around the fact that the South is far from homogenous and united, with a real risk that it could spiral into uncontrolled violence as the different regions jostle over resources.

Apparently, the West would like to see some slack factored into the timeline for Juba’s independence ambitions, while the shaky alliance between the SPLM and al-Bashir — who has largely been “contained” by the ICC warrants against him — is propped up until such a time that institutional capacity and critical infrastructure have been developed in the South.
Apparently, Kenya and Uganda, which have separately announced plans to build key road and railway links to Juba, are partly implementing this strategy.

While it denies any direct interest in the outcome of the referendum, the United States says it is concerned about peace and stability in Southern Sudan and is working with both the SPLM and the NCP to “prepare for the 2011 referendum, and working with the parties to ensure that the process is fair and credible and that the will of the people, as expressed through the referendum, is respected peacefully.”

Lagging behind
Responding to enquiries by this newspaper, Joann M Lockard, public affairs officer at the US embassy in Kampala, said, “The United States is concerned about peace and stability in South Sudan. The parties in Sudan are behind in the implementation of the most contentious provisions of the CPA, which is why we have worked so hard in 2009 and will double our efforts in 2010 to implement the agreement before it expires in 2011.”
For their part, while officially professing the position of the Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development (Igad), which is to encourage the parties in Sudan to make unity as attractive as possible, Kenya and Uganda are pursuing a two-track strategy.

On one track, fearing to set a precedent that could lead to a ripple effect with sections of their own populations agitating for secession, Uganda and Kenya are not officially breaking ranks with proponents of a unified Sudan.
Uganda is still wary of what a split of Sudan would mean for its restive north, while Kenya has for years kept a wary eye on its northeastern regions bordering Somalia.
“In international law, it is very rare to find a country openly calling for the partition of another country because it sets a precedent that could come back to haunt them; in the case of Uganda, you must have heard Norbert Mao (chairman of Gulu District Local Council in northern Uganda) suggest that the north should break away from Uganda,” said Uganda’s Junior Minister for Foreign Affairs, Henry Okello Oryem.
According to independent sources however, Uganda and its EAC partners believe that despite the challenges the South faces, Juba is better off breaking away from its unproductive marriage with Khartoum.

Refugees International (Washington, DC)

Sudan: No Time for ‘Business as Usual’
25 March 2010

KEY CONSIDERATIONS FOR CONTINGENCY PLANS

Although operational agencies in Sudan are best placed to determine the specifics of what must be included in contingency plans, there are some key considerations that should be addressed.
* Clarify the roles of agencies with respect to internally displaced persons (IDPs). There is currently a geographic division of labor between UNHCR and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) which sometimes results in ad hoc support. It is unclear which organization would lead on humanitarian protection activities for new internal displacement. UNHCR should take on this role and be given the requisite resources.

Preposition emergency items to the extent possible. Some prepositioning occurs yearly in anticipation of the rainy season. Humanitarian organizations should take advantage of the 2010-2011 dry season (November to March) to increase prepositioning in the south and the transitional areas in anticipation of possible post-referendum conflict. Prepositioned items should include safe birthing and post-rape kits, which are lifesaving items for women, in addition to traditional food and non-food items. Donors must provide funding early enough to ensure this timeframe is met.

Reinforce OCHA staff in the south. OCHA staff has been significantly scaled back in south Sudan due to the shift towards recovery and development, and currently has no staff outside of Juba. There is widespread belief among the humanitarian community that the reduction in staff was premature. If conflict does increase, most organizations will look to OCHA to play its traditional coordination role. Recent small increases in staff in Juba have been helpful but do not make up for the lack of staff outside the capital.

Support gender-based violence (GBV) programming. Sexual violence was a very common phenomenon during the north-south war, particularly in the transitional areas. Women in Southern Kordofan expressed fears to RI that they would be vulnerable to such abuse if conflict broke out again. There is a major gap in GBV programming in the transitional areas and the south; few GBV survivors have received assistance and minimal work has been done on prevention. UNFPA has established some positive GBV work in Southern Kordofan, particularly on clinical management of rape with the Ministry of Health, but these efforts are limited by funding constraints and need to be extended within and beyond this state.

Continue returnee tracking and monitoring. Given the current political uncertainty, it is critical to maintain structures that track informal population movements and monitor the protection of returnees. These structures could also be used to track and monitor new displacement. Without sufficient data, assistance interventions often do not get organized, even for basic UN World Food Programme (WFP) food rations. NGOs that were monitoring protection of refugee returnees for UNHCR have had to stop since the end of 2009 due to the unavailability of funding and now plan only to resume limited operations.

Ensure flexible funding. A number of donors and UN staff expressed understandable reluctance to divert funding from current needs towards potential problems that may never arise. However, having money already in the pipeline that can be quickly reallocated is the ideal strategy. The UN Common Humanitarian Fund (CHF) in south Sudan currently maintains an emergency reserve of 10% and RI was told that consideration was being given to raising this to 20%. The 2010 forecast for CHF funding is $112 million, roughly the same as in 2009, which is inadequate. Donors should fund the CHF generously — and early — in order to take full advantage of the reserve. If the reserve amount is increased to 20%, donors should increase their overall CHF funding in order to avoid a de facto reduction to other humanitarian programs. The U.S. is not currently a CHF donor and so must commit to fully funding the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) requirements for south Sudan this year, notwithstanding the crises in Haiti and elsewhere, and be prepared for maximum speed and flexibility if reallocations need to be made.

BUILDING COMMUNITY RESILIENCE TO REDUCE POTENTIAL CONFLICT

Because nearby towns and villages are likely to be the first port of call for people fleeing any conflict in the future, it is essential to increase these communities’ access to basic services, as well as job and agricultural opportunities, in order to minimize the humanitarian fallout. Such reintegration support is especially needed for displaced people who are returning home and rebuilding their lives and will maximize a community’s ability to absorb newly displaced people. As competition over access to basic services is often a source of conflict, USAID’s new local conflict mitigation program in south Sudan is a positive step.
As with previous Refugees International field visits in 2008 and 2009, the first concern that communities reported was the lack of basic services – especially education, health services and water. Furthermore the lack of rain this year has hit local towns and villages as hard as returnees. The impact of drought has meant a much larger population struggling to access food, with WFP dramatically increasing its target beneficiary numbers in the south from 1.1 million to 4.3 million. In some areas of Southern Kordofan, local authorities told RI that the majority of returnees have gone back to where they had previously fled due to lack of basic services.

Most women told RI that their priority need was for trained midwives, as south Sudan’s maternal mortality rate is one of worst in the world (2,054:100,000). Donors should support programs that reduce maternal mortality, especially training of midwives and traditional birth attendants. With UNFPA assistance, the Ministry of Health has assessed the initial cost of reducing maternal mortality by 25% in the south at $107 million. Donors must also insist that all proposals encourage women’s participation and examine any new program’s impact on women. USAID should advance its work in this area by developing a Sudan-specific gender policy.
The USAID-funded BRIDGE project is aimed at building the capacity of state-level government agencies to provide services and should be supported by other donors. The project has made some good progress in the four states in which it is operating in the south, but it has been seriously delayed in the transitional areas by the NGO expulsions in March 2009.
Virtually all provision of transport to help displaced people return home has stopped. Funding ended for most IDP returns in 2008 and hardly any refugees have chosen to return so far in 2010. But IOM estimates that 161,500 internally displaced people and refugees returned to the south and Southern Kordofan spontaneously in 2009 and they project that this may increase in 2010 due to the elections and run up to the referendum. There is still insufficient funding directed to the reintegration of returnees, especially in livelihoods support, as international donor interest seems to have waned.

CONCLUSION: LOOKING BEYOND JANUARY 2011

If south Sudan opts for independence in 2011, as looks likely, there will be a considerable need for donor governments to support the Government of Southern Sudan to ensure that its structure and leadership are capable of successfully delivering services to its people and protecting them. Yet political sensitivities are preventing donors from clarifying what the post-2011 aid architecture will be and from engaging in a robust advanced planning process with implementing partners. This risks a situation where preparations are left to the last minute, when urgency will end up trumping the need for thorough coordination and consultation. The international witnesses to the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement between the north and south have already accepted in principle the option of southern independence. It is not unreasonable, therefore, that they should be planning to support its implementation, if the voters so decide.

Melanie Teff and Jennifer Smith traveled to south Sudan and Southern Kordofan in February to assess the humanitarian community’s ability to respond to potential conflict in the run-up to and aftermath of the 2011 referendum on independence.

press release

The next two years will be critical in determining Sudan’s future. The country faces national elections in April, the first multi-party elections in 24 years, and a referendum on southern independence in January 2011.

While the U.S. and others must do everything possible to ensure that the governments in north and south Sudan reach agreement on outstanding issues before the referendum, the humanitarian community must simultaneously prepare to respond if conflict erupts around the upcoming political events. Decades of responding to crises in Sudan has created a complacent “business as usual” attitude among some humanitarian agencies and donors that must be overcome.

UNCERTAINTY AND FEAR
Sudanese people in a number of locations in the south and Southern Kordofan shared with Refugees International (RI) their concerns over upcoming events. In Upper Nile, communities told RI that they were uneasy about the elections in case they led to violence, as competition between candidates and their supporters might spill over to politicize and exacerbate existing tensions between communities. In Southern Kordofan, communities expressed a direct fear to RI that, should the south secede, southern-aligned communities in the Nuba Mountains would be isolated and targeted by proxy groups armed by the north in an effort to remove them from their land.
Almost all of the community representatives that RI spoke with said that if conflict broke out they would be very reluctant to leave again or go far from home. Many people who had gone to Khartoum during the north-south war said they would not go north again. In Southern Kordofan, many people said they would flee to the surrounding mountains, and some said they were already preparing houses there.

RI heard a wide divergence of views on the likely humanitarian impact of the elections and referendum. While many international observers felt that the country would “muddle through” with only limited outbreaks of fighting in border and oil-rich areas, others felt that south Sudan was heading towards total collapse with an explosion of inter-ethnic tensions. A key concern was that a gradual ratcheting up of tensions rather than all-out war would mean no “CNN moment” to attract worldwide attention and funding.
Given the exceptional political events of the next two years and the unpredictability of the scenarios, it is critical that the humanitarian community quickly put comprehensive contingency plans in place, in case a return to major conflict occurs.

MAKE CONTINGENCY PLANNING COUNTRY-WIDE

As many international humanitarian workers argue, south Sudan is already in a state of emergency. Last year over 390,000 people were displaced and 2,500 killed according to the UN, and drought has caused major food insecurity. The emergency response architecture in the south largely remains following decades of conflict and humanitarian response (with the notable exception of the much scaled-back OCHA presence). This is a potential advantage in terms of capacity to manage future crises but it is also leading to a “business as usual” mentality among some humanitarian actors, who believe that if necessary the response system would kick in automatically. Politically, the next two years will be anything but business as usual and the cost of reacting at the last minute to potential conflict will be greater than that of preparing in advance.

For many humanitarian actors, contingency planning was seen as sensitive and controversial and some did not want it publicly known that they were creating such plans. Given its sensitive nature, contingency planning must be a system-wide effort led by the UN that includes NGOs, donors and Sudanese and south Sudanese government agencies, rather than a series of individual initiatives that could expose organizations to political risk. A whole-of-Sudan process is also critical to ensuring coordination takes place should the plans ultimately need to be implemented.

The Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) in south Sudan has just initiated a contingency planning process, with a senior UN staff member assigned to lead and coordinate among UN agencies and with external actors. However, while everyone is talking about scenarios and planning, there is no blueprint yet. This initiative must move quickly from theoretical discussions to putting concrete plans on paper, with the understanding that plans will be a work-in-progress that will need constant updating.

The contingency planning process is far less established in north Sudan than in the south. RI was told that individual plans existed for certain geographical areas in the north but there did not seem to be a strategy for developing a single contingency plan for the north. Even more concerning is the lack of coordination between the UN in north and south Sudan, which will be especially important for the transitional areas, where populations in former SPLM-controlled areas may face harassment or violence after separation. The vulnerability of the people will be compounded by the fact that access to the transitional areas is still difficult for international humanitarian staff. At the moment, it is unclear how contingency plans being developed in Southern Kordofan will fit into wider north/south planning.

International NGOs largely felt they did not have much capacity for contingency planning as they were already struggling to respond to existing humanitarian needs due to lack of resources. Furthermore, the current UN 2010 consolidated appeal for Sudan (US $1.9 billion) is only 23% funded so far. Meeting existing needs is critical as planning processes continue.

CONSULT WITH COMMUNITIES AND SUPPORT THEIR EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
RI found no evidence that communities were being directly consulted in the preliminary phase of the contingency planning processes. Some international organizations said that their field staff would simply know the issues in the community, making consultation unnecessary. There may also be a well-intended desire by some humanitarian agencies not to create panic. However, gaps in information on security issues can also create fear and panic.

NGOs are better structured than UN humanitarian agencies to run community consultation programs, especially in partnership with local networks, to share information and to help communities develop early warning systems and local self-protection strategies. This must involve the UN peacekeeping mission in Sudan (UNMIS) in the places they are deployed, but protection by UNMIS will not be the only strategy that communities will have to rely on. Such consultations should target a broad community audience beyond just traditional leaders, and should begin with flashpoint areas. A particular focus on involving women is critical. Donors must accept that consultations will be time consuming but are essential, and so will require specific additional funding. In areas where UNMIS is deployed, its substantive sections should be conducting community consultations on protection strategies.
In Southern Kordofan, RI was informed of a proposal for community-based early warning systems in which women would help set up local protection strategies. The system would be implemented by a consortium of UN, international and national organizations. Given the widespread community concerns about security and the uncertainty of upcoming events, such proposals warrant funding and senior UN institutional support.

During discussions with local government authorities in Juba, Upper Nile and Southern Kordofan, RI found that there was less reluctance to discuss these issues than expected. Officials were very open about their concerns over conflict erupting, and they were forthright in saying that they would need and expect the international community’s support. In fact, both communities and local officials said openly that they expected that the U.S. would send military protection forces to south Sudan in case of conflict with the north.
There is clearly room for more dialogue between local government officials and the humanitarian community on emergency preparedness, beyond closed-door discussions at senior levels. Donors should be willing to facilitate this openness through workshops at the national and state levels involving government officials, civil society representatives and the humanitarian community, aimed at ending the “taboo of silence.” The Government of Southern Sudan should be brought into the contingency planning processes and should also be assisted in reaching out to communities to discuss upcoming events.

Sudan: Libya Pressed to Block Bashir From Attending 3rd Africa-EU Summit – Report
12 November 2010

Khartoum — The European Union (EU) expressed its objections to Libya over the possible attendance of the Sudanese president Omer Hassan Al-Bashir at the 3rd Africa-EU Summit that will take place on November 29th, according to a newspaper report.
Bashir received the invitation to participate from his Libyan counterpart Muammar Al-Gaddafi last July who dispatched his personal envoy Mohamed Sayyala to Khartoum at the time.

An unnamed African diplomat told the Qatar-based Al-Sharq newspaper that the EU has expressed reservations over the attendance of the Sudanese leader who faces an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes and genocide allegedly committed in Darfur.
The diplomat said that the EU alluded to Tripoli that Bashir’s attendance could impact their representation level at the summit. He added that the likely way out from this deadlock is to ask Sudan to send another official instead of Bashir to attend.
A similar incident occurred this year when Paris decided to change the venue of the France-EU summit after Egypt, the original host, insisted on inviting Bashir.
Both Egypt and Libya have strongly backed Bashir against the ICC indictment.

allAfrica.com

Sudan: Obama Issues Tough Conditions On Resumption of Relations
Fred Oluoch

22 October 2010

Nairobi — In a rare diplomatic concession, the Obama administration has offered to resume diplomatic relations with Sudan provided Khartoum meets some conditions.
Among the conditions include; the full implementation of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), the assurance that the referendum in the south will be held on January 9 as scheduled, the commitment to reach agreement on pending issues of CPA, and a comprehensive resolution for peace in Darfur.

These conditions were given by the US Assistant Secretary for African Affairs, Mr Johnny Carson at a major press conference on Sudan of Friday, that was also attended by President Obama’s Special Envoy to Sudan, Scott Gration.
Apart from the indictment of President Omar al-Bashir by the International Criminal Court (ICC), and the economic sanctions that US maintains against Sudan, Washing ton list Sudan as among the countries sponsoring terrorism.
A normalisation of relations would have to take into account all these, even though the Obama administration—through Mr Gration — has been deploying the policy of constructive engagement with Khartoum rather than wielding a big stick.
This approach has elicited numerous criticism from the Western civil society, who believe that Sudan should be treated as a pariah state.

The U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Johnnie Carson, has laid down the conditions under which the Obama administation would renew diplomatic ties with Sudan.

The question is whether the US having failed over the years in Somalia will get it right this time in Sudan to help avert a relapse into war after the 2011 referendum?
Mr Gration was put to task at the conference to explain whether the current US diplomatic engagement is starting too late in the day to ensure a peaceful referendum.
He conceded that the US diplomatic efforts might appear rushed but maintained the US has always remained engaged with Sudan since the signing of the peace agreement in 2005, but which have been intensified with the advent of the Obama administration.
“Intensive consultations have been going on at high level but it is true that time is running out with only 79 days remaining. But is upon the NCP and the SPLM to make tough decisions that would ensure peace,” he said.

One of the major concern in Sudan is the issue of the oil-rich Abyei that is supposed to hold its own referendum the same day to decide whether they belong to the north or south. Khartoum had earlier suggested that the Abyei referendum be delayed but this suggestion has been strongly opposed by the south.
As it is, the Abyei Referendum Commissions is yet to be constituted, while at the same time, there is the dispute whether the Misseriya Arabs–who consider themselves northerners but water their cattle in the south for sic months in a year–are likely to take part in the referendum in the absence of a recognised north-south border.
Mr Carson insisted that the US position is that the referendum is held on time, peaceful and reflects the wishes of the southerners.

To ensure this, Mr Carson revealed that Washington has given high level attention to Sudan, adding that there is a meeting at the White House every week to discuss the developments. President Obama is also briefed on Sudan everyday.
To help galvanise international support for Sudan, President Obama has assembled a high-level team comprimising Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Vice-president Joe Biden to help in the task. So far, Norway has been helping with technical advise on oil revenue sharing, while the UK has been advising on debt relief and border demarcation.
The main objective of the intensified diplomatic efforts with respect to Sudan is that for the fist time, the US is keen to be pro-active and help prevent an outbreak of war rather than react later.
In the past one month, the US has expanded its diplomatic presence in all the provincial capitals in the south.
Secondly, the US has been in constant tough with the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (Igad)–that brokered the Sudanese peace deal–and other regional countries that have a stake in the referendum such as Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia and Egypt.
Mr Gration conceded that there is a great concern of what will happen to southerners in the north and northerners in the south, should the southerners vote for separation.
This is particularly so given the series of rhetoric regarding citizenship coming from both Juba and Khartoum.

“Again is tis upon the two parties to reach agreement on this issue. For the US, we are waiting to take them to account on their commitment to protect the rights of all citizens,” said Mr Gration.
On the other hand, Mr Carson argued that the US would like to see an independent south that lives in harmony with the north, because countries in the region have proven that Muslims and Christians can live in harmony, or countries that are predominantly Muslim have co-existed with neighbours that are predominantly Christian.
But the issue of normalisation of relations with Sudan remains a tall order. During the recent UN High Level Meeting on Sudan in New York, the Sudanese delegation carried with them three conditions that would enable Khartoum ensure a democratic and legitimate referendum.
They included; the US to lift economic sanctions against Sudan, the US to remove Sudan from the list of countries sponsoring terrorism and for Washington to help influence the deferment of the ICC warrant of arrest against President al-Bashir.

Sudan: AU-UN Talks On Sudan Begin in Ethiopia
6 November 2010

Addis Ababa — Officials from the United Nations (UN) and the African Union (UN) on Saturday commenced talks at AU headquarters in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa to discuss the upcoming referenda on south Sudan independence.
Sudan is only 66 days away from holding a crucial referendum vote on whether its semi-autonomous region of south Sudan should gain full independence from the north, a vote likely to split Africa’s largest country in two.

North and South Sudan are deadlocked over another referendum vote due to take place at the same time in January 2011 on the future of the oil-producing central area of Abyei. The previous round of Addis Ababa talks failed to yield a consensus on this issue.
The two plebiscites are the final phase of a 2005 peace deal that ended decades of civil war between north and south Sudan.
The AU commissioner for Peace and Security, Ramtane Lamamra, addressed the opening of the meeting and underlined the urgency of the tight timeframe.
“There are just 66 days to go before the referendum in southern Sudan, and nine days before the registration of the voters will begin. There is no time to waste,” he was quoted by AFP.
Sudan’s foreign minister Ali Karti is attending the meeting which is also devoted to discussing the situation in Somalia.
The chief of the UN’s peacekeeping operations, Alain Le Roy, said that the two sides needed to compromise on issues of dispute and urged the government to address the situation in the troubled region of Darfur.

“The government must commit to significant concession in the negotiation, and in the meantime implement measures inside Darfur including addressing the problem of informal militias, arbitrary arrests, excessive powers afforded under the emergency law,” Le Roy said.
Former South African president Thabo Mbeki is attending the talks. Mbeki is also the head of the AU Panel on Sudan.
A large AU-UN peacekeeping mission known as UNAMID is stationed in Darfur region , where a seven -year conflict between rebels and the Sudanese government brought the region’s name to the fore of international agendas.
The UN and the AU have the largest hybrid peacekeeping operation in the world stationed in Darfur region, known as UNAMID.