Next President Must Act On His Promise To End Genocide In Darfur

If Sudan's genocidal president, Omar al Bashir, was watching the recent presidential debate, he was probably not happy with what he heard. Both candidates affirmed their belief that in the case of genocide, and specifically the Darfur genocide, the United States has a moral responsibility to act.

During the debate, this crucial topic was raised by moderator, Tom Brokaw. "Let's see if we can establish tonight the Obama doctrine and the McCain doctrine for the use of United States combat forces in situations where there's a humanitarian crisis, but it does not affect our national security," he stated.

According to John Norris, Executive Director of Enough, the project to end genocide and crimes against humanity, the candidates responses on this subject were "encouraging," especially in contrast to that of our current president to this same topic eight years ago. In the 2000 debate against Al Gore, Bush's stance was that the Rwandan genocide, which killed over 600,000 people, had not merited intervention, a position which "shocked the consciousness of a lot of people," stated Norris. In contrast, he said, "these candidates recognize that sovereignty doesn't allow nations to terrorize its own citizens without consequences."

Next week, Norris's organization, Enough, together with the Save Darfur Coalition and Genocide Intervention Network will release a strategy paper titled, "Letter to the Next President: Peace Surge for Sudan." The paper will outline recommendations for the next administration to turn this strong talk into concrete action to bring peace to Darfur and the entire country of Sudan.

During the debate, both presidential candidates acknowledged the moral imperative of acting in the face of genocide. "We may not always have national security issues at stake, but we have moral issues at stake," stated Obama. "If we could have intervened effectively in the Holocaust, who among us would say that we had a moral obligation not to go in? If we could've stopped Rwanda, surely, if we had the ability, that would be something that we would have to strongly consider and act. So when genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening somewhere around the world and we stand idly by, that diminishes us. And so I do believe that we have to consider it as part of our interests, our national interests, in intervening where possible."

Similarly, McCain stated, "The United States of America, Tom, is the greatest force for good, as I said. And we must do whatever we can to prevent genocide, whatever we can to prevent these terrible calamities that we have said never again." Later, he added, "I may have to make those tough decisions. But I won't take them lightly. And I understand that we have to say never again to a Holocaust and never again to Rwanda."

In the vice presidential debate, both candidates had also expressed zero tolerance for the genocide in Darfur. Biden voiced his support for a no-fly zone, US leadership of NATO action, and a US "movement" to provide the UN/AU joint peacekeeping mission there with the desperately needed helicopters that the international community has been unwilling to supply. Palin concurred with Biden's remarks and specifically supported the no-fly zone.

She also stressed the importance of state divestment from companies that help to fund the genocide in Darfur saying that "as individuals, and as humanitarians and as elected officials, we should do all we can to end those atrocities in that region of the world." Palin now supports legislation in Alaska to prevent the state's pension money from underwriting this genocide. If her state passes such legislation in its next session, it will become the 28th state to divest from Sudan.

The VP candidates' comments apparently struck a nerve within the genocidal Khartoum regime, since it quickly turned up the volume on its propaganda efforts and sharply criticized Biden and Palin for supporting a no-fly zone over Darfur. If Bashir thought that this PR offensive would subdue the anti-genocide campaign rhetoric, he was wrong. Admirably, McCain and Obama kept up the pressure during their next debate.

Now, the challenge for either candidate, if elected, will be to follow this encouraging rhetoric with action. According to Eric Cohen, chairperson of the Massachusetts Coalition to Save Darfur, there are a wide range of key issues which will need our next president's immediate attention. "They should specifically address issues such as the no-fly zone, UNAMID support including helicopters, multi-lateral sanctions, divestment, and support for the ICC indictment of Bashir," stated Cohen.

Norris, at Enough, concurs that these are among the many Sudan-related issues which the next administration will face. "The overarching objective is to advance the peace process to achieve a peace deal for Sudan as a whole. To do this we will need to commit diplomatic, political and perhaps even military resources to achieve a durable peace." Detailed recommendations for the next administration will be covered in the Enough strategy paper to be released next week.

In recent months, the situation in Darfur has become increasingly grave. The government of Sudan has launched repeated attacks on civilian camps for internally displaced persons. Additionally, the UN's World Food Program announced that escalating violence may force it to stop food deliveries leaving millions without assistance.

The recent onslaught of government-sponsored violence seems likely to continue unabated since civilian protection is Darfur is nearly non-existent. In spite of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1769 which approved the first joint UN/AU force and the UN's largest peacekeeping mission (UNAMID) on July 31, 2007, the mission there remains woefully understaffed. Perhaps even worse, contributing countries, including the US, have not provided the urgently needed helicopters and other equipment which could make surveillance and protection a reality.

The Darfur genocide recently entered its sixth year. Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed there, even by the most conservative estimates. The United Nations puts the death toll at roughly 300,000, while the former U.N. undersecretary-general puts the number at no less than 400,000. Up to 2.5 million Darfuris have fled their homes and continue to live in camps throughout Darfur, or in refugee camps in neighboring Chad and the Central African Republic.

Follow Susan Morgan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/susanmorgan

Comments

[chrishmael]

Although it is heartening to hear strong statements form the presidential candidates about what they believe should be done to stop the human horrors played out every day in Sudan, to anyone who has even glimpsed the depth of suffering in Darfur it seems amazing that the very columns and walls of Washington do not regularly cry out with passionate determination to see America live up to its duty to respond forcefully to the systematic cruelty of genocide. Yet, as chronicled in Samantha Power's magisterial history of inaction in the face of crimes that shock the conscience, "A Problem From Hell," this country has persistently refused to act in the face of the greatest crime against humanity wherever it has occurred in the world in this century. America simply does not follow through on its rhetoric; and the words "Never again," seem to die in the throats of Presidents and cabinet members who must put their careers on the line and commit the force of American might to prevent the extermination of entire peoples..
Now, the two candidates for the nation's highest office have taken positions that seem to imply a determination to move beyond rhetoric into concerted action to intervene on behalf of children, mothers, fathers whose lives are torn in the machinery of destruction wielded by the Bashir regime in Khartoum. Will their promises prove less empty than those of their predecessors?
We can only hope. But hope comes hard in the face of our history.

[Jirair Ratevosian - Huffpost Blogger]

Susan: Thank you for another great piece. It’s unthinkable that the genocide in Darfur has entered its six year. When will “never again” truly mean “never again” ?? Oil or no oil, as Obama said, sometimes we have a moral obligation to intervene, regardless of national interests. One of the first tasks of our new President should be to ensure that the perpetrators of this genocide are brought to justice by the International Criminal Court. The nations of the world, including the United States, cannot allow President al-Bashir to snub international justice. Similarly, Al Bashir's threat against justice cannot be allowed to intimidate governments or undermine life-saving humanitarian assistance. These are all the more reason to speed and support the FULL deployment of UNAMID forces.

[sftraveler]

I agree with MHaskell that Obama/Biden will be candidates most likely to fulfill their promises regarding Darfur.

[SD leaker]

Dear Ms. Morgan; Noam Chomsky would say that it takes a good education to miss the oil factor when talking about Darfur. Why don't you say the truth? That the US should stop funding terrorist that combat the Sudan government, so US corporations will be in control of Darfur's oil.

[Susan Morgan - Huffpost Blogger]

SD,

While I don't agree with some of your views expressed here, I do agree that oil is a big part of the equation. It is, in fact, Chinese oil companies that are largely funding the genocide in Darfur by lining the pockets of the genocidal Khartoum regime with revenues which are the used to fund the Janjaweed militia and military equipment.

I along with other Darfur advocates at Investors Against Genocide are involved in trying to cut off this flow of money to Khartoum by encouraging Americans to avoid investments in companies which help fund genocide. To learn more, please visit http://investorsagainstgenocide.googlepages.com/

[MHaskell]

I believe Obama will do more to help the people of Darfur than McCain. I want us to elect Obama and THEN immediately do further advocacy for Darfur. Perhaps Obama can appoint Samantha Power to a position of power to work on the Darfur Genocide.

[Susan Morgan - Huffpost Blogger]

MHaskell,

I agree that Samantha Power would be a fabulous appointee to address the issue of the Darfur genocide and the broader issues of genocide intervention and genocide prevention by the next administration.

[WLRosenfeld]

That the issue was discussed at all, given the many other pressing concerns and possible questions, is a tribute to the activists that pushed hard for consideration of the Darfur genocide. We need to continue to organize and keep the issue front and center.

[mwk8]

Yes, the next President must do more. And, the world's financial situation cannot be used as an excuse not to do so. Establishing the office of a fulltime Presidential envoy to Sudan, with proper staffing and funding, does not come with a big price tag. The necessary diplomacy to further peace talks, support the Sudanese people in realizing free and fair elections,provide the necessary helicopters, equipment and logistics to UNAMID, and support of the ICC process represent expenses that would barely be noticed in the current environment. The next President can lead the international community to help bring peace to Sudan at far less cost to the U.S. taxpayers than providing the humanitarian aid, which is currently necessary, but will never solve the problems underlying the humanitarian crisis.

[Susan Morgan - Huffpost Blogger]

Mwk8,

You raise an excellent point regarding the importance of staffing and funding for a full-time envoy to Sudan. We need to stop being penny-wise and pound-foolish when viewing the cost-benefit analysis of proactive spending to end or avert a humanitarian crisis rather than reactive spending to mitigate the catastrophic effects of one.

[jtm1247]

That all four candidates have publicly acknowledged the enormity of the crisis in Darfur is a significant victory. However, regardless of which party wins the upcoming presidential election, the onus is still on us, those working hard to expose Darfur genocide. Campaign promises all too rarely become active issues on a new administration's agenda. Instead, the top two or three domestic and foreign issues that affect us directly will consume the White House. The battle for attention and decisive action for this cause continues. Thank heavens for such passionately devoted individuals and organizations as the author of the article posted above. But we are only halfway there. The other half, the administration taking action, begins the day after the inauguration.

[Susan Morgan - Huffpost Blogger]

JTM,

I completely agree that that we must stay vigilent after the election to ensure that this campaign rhetoric evolves in to substantive action by the next administration. One program, initiated by the Save Darfur Coalition, is already laying the groundwork for that ongoing pressure. Click here to read more about it and "add your voice:" http://www.addyourvoice.org/

[bts1230]

As part of a STAND chapter, I know that there were many personal letters sent to the moderators of the debates telling them that Darfur is an extremely important issue to us. I am very happy to see that our letter writing campaigns actually produced solid results.

I think that it is truly tremendous that all four candidates can agree on the fact that we need to do more than we have been to end the genocide in Darfur. However, I have noticed that Barack Obama and Joe Biden seem to be more serious about ending the genocide and offer more specific and thoughtful answers.

I believe that no matter who is chosen we will need to keep pressure on them to act on their promises

[Susan Morgan - Huffpost Blogger]

Advocacy groups like STAND, Genocide Intervention Network and Save Darfur Coalition, as well as grassroots organizations across the country are to be commended for exerting pressure on the candidates and debate moderators to cover this important topic during the debates. As you noted, it is thanks to the efforts of thousands of concerned citizens that Darfur has become an important issue in this campaign.