Now that the International Criminal Court has called for the arrest and prosecution of Sudan ‘s President Omar Al Bashir, questions arise as to the ‘obsolete’ nature and legitimacy of the former in trying to help solve the aftermath of the Darfur crises and the need to foster further peace in a seemingly united Sudan .

Since the tragedy in Darfur , Sudan ‘s Western region, that began in the year 2003 about 35,000 people are estimated to have died. More than two million in a population of six million have since been displaced and many chose to settle in Chad . The African Union with its ill-equipped military troops were unable to restore peace except for the twelve to twenty thousand UN troops that appeared as ‘military spectators’ with some losing their lives to the gun though the UN’s aim was to put blue helmets on the heads of the AU force. Currently there are about 15 UN peacekeeping missions around the world but the one in Sudan only helped leave many more dead. The UN troop was approximated to be about 10,000 in number then.

On the other hand the Sudanese government in Khartoum had being accused of supporting the Arab militia, the janjaweed, to cause atrocities. The janjaweed had been accused of propagating rape, murder and pillage on ordinary citizens.

Previously the head of the AU mission had accused one of Darfur ‘s two main rebel groups of provoking the violence by attacking a government-held town. It also had claimed to have photographs of government attack-helicopters strafing villages to support the marauding janjaweed. In one sector of Darfur, which is bigger than Italy , about 760 AU infantrymen were supposed to patrol some 12,000 sq km (about 4,600 square miles) but all in vain.

All said and done, the latest stench of arrest of Sudanese President may set a bad precedence to Africa in as far as solving conflicts is concerned. Many wonder why the UN and the United States have deemed it right to bring criminal charges against a President of a rather stable and sovereign state now that the genocide seems to be over. Isn’t the incrimination of Sudans ‘s President a recipe for more instability and chaos similarly to what happened in Iraq under President Saddam Hussein and other leaders?

Not that Africa should condone atrocities against humanity but the ill timing of the President’s arrest brings more doubt and questions about the genuineness of the military pre-occupation of the UN and AU and involvement of Western countries in the Darfur saga.

In fact the UN’s Security Council’s resolution 242 (1967) emphasizes the inadmissibility need of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every state can live in security. It affirms further that, ‘termination of all claims or states of belligerence and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state and their rights to live in peace with secure and recognised boundaries free from threats or acts of force’. It also considers achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem and which Darfur was severely affected.

It seems the President of Sudan may be headed for the courts and jail but what about the fate of the Sudanese State and its people that are at stake and risk of falling into re-organised atrocities against humanity? Should the world punish the Sudanese people ‘again’ when its president as a person violates human rights? Africa ought to stand firm for the sake of the Sudanese people.

Mundia Mundia Jnr

– – –
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 05:01:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: mundia mundia
Subject: SUDAN: OMAR AL BASHIR’S SOUTH-NORTH ‘CRIMINAL’ AXIS