Who Really Cares for Darfur?

Last week I was invited into a seminar about Darfur. The Seminar was organized by a group called STAND- a Student Anti-Genocide Coalition. This group advocates for prevention of genocide around the world with special interest in Darfur. Along their media advocacy, at this time they are working on a Divestment program from Sudan. Divestment refers to taking away investments from companies that make business with the government of Sudan. The group claims divestment was effectively used to fight apartheid in South Africa during the apartheid era, and is hoping for the same result for Darfur crisis. So the seminar was about their divestment program in Sudan.
The process of divestment works like this. STAND has identified 27 companies as a target for the program. These are the companies, which are making business with the government of Sudan (GOS), and thereby helping the government to finance the genocide. Almost all the companies are China and Southeast Asia companies. STAND first asks these companies to stop their business with the GOS. If they didn’t stop, then they go into the next phase of the process. They advocates for states, universities, union organizations and other associations who have large investment funds to withdraw their investments from these companies. If they succeed in convincing many investors to withdraw their investment from these companies, the stocks of these companies will fall and this will hurt the profitability of the companies. So far, 52 universities and 13 states have divested from companies that operate in Sudan. Eventually, this is expected to force these companies to withdraw their operation from Sudan. In turn, the government of Sudan will lose its source of revenue and will be forced either from office or make peace deal to stop the genocide. This is in summary of the process.
My first observation is that I was surprised by the interest of the young students who took the case seriously and commit them selves to help the people of Darfur. This kind of movement is only available in the so-called western world, and I consider it a very positive part of their system. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the Chinese’ students form the same coalition?
My second observation is that out of some over 50 students in the conference, we were only two black students. I have now learned that black students prefer to avoid seminars about Africa, because invariably, they portray an ugly image of Africa only.
My third observation is that this is not the best solution for the Darfurian. This process is very slow. It took 11 years in the case of South Africa. It will be unbearable pain for the Darfurian displaced from their land to wait for the process to resolve their problem. It would be better for STAND to come with a different program.
The most effective way to solve the problem of the Darfurian, is to deploy a peace keeping force in Darfur and bring the people to their homes from the refugee comps. The problem to this process is the politics between Sudan and the west, especially US and UK. Sudan has demanded any peacekeeping force should come only from Africa and rejected any western forces in the peacekeeping force. The west, on the other hand has insisted in sending their force. And here is where the question comes. Why is the west insisting in sending their soldiers? The official reason is that African forces are not fit to handle the situation in Darfur. Sudan says otherwise. Sudan has explained its suspicion of western forces. It sees it as a neocolonial attempt to control over its huge resource.
The African union, the Arab league and neighboring countries have supported the position of Sudan.(It is possible though, these countries are supporting Sudan from their own interest with out regard to the issue of Darfurian). Sudan’s suspicion has some ground behind it. One has to ask “are African forces really not qualified to handle the situation in Darfur?” And why is the west insisting in sending their forces for two years now, despite the urgency of the situation? Darfur rebels and the janhuwit are not among the most well organized rebels in Africa. They are poorly trained and equipped to challenge a formal force. One has also to remember that the United States is mobilizing an African peacekeeping for Somalia. Every one knows the warlords in Somalia are more fierce than the Janjuwit or Darfur rebels.(a western led peacekeeping force was forced out from Somalia in 1993 by the warlords). If the United States believes an African Force is fit to handle the situation in Somalia, the argument that African forces are not fit for peacekeeping in Darfur is weak. Add to that Sudan’s suspicion: its bad relation with the west for the last 20 years, that all of its oil is exported to china and the west doesn’t get any share of it, that the US is arming and training the South Sudan army (another problem in Sudan), and that China and the west are in fierce competition for African oil, one wonders if the west’s ordeal in the name of Darfur is genuine.
And perhaps, the African force is fit enough to keep peace in Darfur. The Darfurians don’t care whether it is white or a black peacekeeping force, as long as they got their homes safely and quickly. And if the west had accepted that idea of African peacekeeping, the Darfurians may have already been returned to their home. And may be STAND has to asks their government (US) to accept the proposal of sending African force.