ICC and Al-Bashir: A Question of Politics?

smc
Islamonline.net The unprecedented arrest warrant of the International Criminal Court (ICC) against the Sudan's sitting President Al-Bashir has provoked experts to question the legality of such a warrant and its underlying political motivations. While many countries headed by the United States label the situation in the Sudan's Darfur "catastrophy", "genocide", "ethnic cleansing", and "wide-scale atrocities", the Sudan's government — backed by the Arab League and the African Union— asserts that the conflict in Darfur was politicized for the benefit of the United States. The question is whether the ICC's arrest warrant against Al-Bashir will bring about a permanent solution to the Darfur crisis, or it is just a tactical maneuver aiming to force the Sudan to make political concessions. IslamOnline.net's Politics in Depth section has interviewed Dr. Hani Raslan, Head of the Sudan and Nile Valley Unit at the Ahram Center for Strategic and Political Studies, who discussed how the ICC's arrest warrant is very much politicized. IslamOnline.net(IOL): Why did the International Criminal Court ( ICC) issue the arrest warrant against President Al-Bashir? Dr. Hani Raslan: The International Criminal Court (ICC) is one episode of much foreign intervention in the Sudan. The United States intervened in the South-North problem by appointing US special envoy Ambassador John Danforth. The United States intervened in the Sudan under the pretext of providing humanitarian assistance and ending the suffering of the warring parties in the Sudan— albeit favoring the South. Nowadays, there is a change of US policy in the Sudan, especially Darfur. When George W. Bush assumed office, the US State Department asked the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) to reconsider the US policy towards the Sudan. CSIS was chaired by Sudanese-born Francis M. Deng, a Sudanese politician, academician, former minister of state for foreign relations, and former ambassador of the Sudan to the United States. CSIS's findings about the Sudan underscored that the US policy in the Sudan aimed at toppling Al-Bashir's regime by exerting mounting external pressure. According to CSIS, it is better to shift the US policy— albeit the goals remain the same— to pragmatically support political settlement of the civil war, creating two separate entities out of the Sudan. It is planned that a settlement will gradually overthrow the current regime of the Sudan. ICC is a kind of international intervention aimed to topple the Sudan's regime as the ICC's decision to issue arrest warrant against President Al-Bashir was preceded by 26 UN Security Council resolutions and two Security Council presidential statements. Furthermore, international media organizations over-focused on and over-exaggerated the situation in Darfur, providing inaccurate numbers and statistics about the humanitarian situation there. Many American NGOs and lobbies, like Save Darfur Coalition, which actively pushes the United States to intervene in Darfur, have interests related to the the Zionist entity (Israel). Many regional and international countries supplement armed groups in Darfur with weaponry and financial assistance besides providing them with access to the international media. Similarly, each of the abovementioned actors has a certain agenda which does not necessarily go in tandem with the others' thereby complicating the situation even more. As a result, the internal dimension of the conflict was marginalized vis a vis the external one. ICC's arrest warrant was politically motivated by the Security Council, which takes care of the narrow interest of only the dominant powers. The way Luis-Moreno Ocampo is behaving and the arrest warrant itself were politically motivated. Ocampo did not study the accusations well; he just issued the indictment and the arrest warrant bit by bit as he sometimes accused one person, then two, then three, and in the future he will probably accuse others according to what he thinks. More ominously, there are interwoven relations between the crisis in Darfur and the ability of the Sudan to maintain its authority which could collapse any moment as a result of these mounting external pressures. IOL: Many intellectuals have labeled the ICC's warrant a political one, while others have affirmed that the court is an independent international legal body. What do you think? Raslan: Actually, the Sudan is one of four resource-rich regions in the world that have not been exploited yet, beside Canada, Brazil, and Australia. The Sudan has no less than 200 million feddans (acres) of arable lands, as well as uranium, oil, economic minerals, all kinds of water (artesian, mineral, spring, rain, and river water), and a significant strategic location. When oil was explored and its revenues were used by the Sudan's government to finance its developmental polices, the United States began to pay its attention to the Sudan and its pan-Islamic agenda. So, the US plan is to destabilize the Sudan, dismember it, and separate it from the Arab and Muslim world. Before the Nivasha Agreement, the Sudan had 25 federal states, but Nivasha Agreement cut the country into two pieces, leaving the central government of the Sudan with 15 federal states. South Sudan— which assumes more or less independence within the Sudan— established its government, assumed certain, defined portion of the Sudan's wealth, and above all preserved the right of declaring self-determination in 2011. The goal was to make South Sudan a barrier to the Sudan to directly communicate with Africa. Nowadays, the crisis in Darfur— with its 3 federal states— is misused in order to further divide the Sudan and to separate Darfur from the Sudan, making it a separate province in the fashion of South Sudan. As a consequence, many other provinces will call for secession, so the scenario of having united, developing the Sudan is not feasible, especially since many "cantons" will engage in fighting each other and fighting the central government. The United States wants to dismember the Sudan, making the African portion of it separated from the central government. The United States does not consider the Sudan part of the Arab or the Muslim world: it considers the Sudan part of the Greater Horn of Africa. IOL: Do you think that the indictment and the arrest warrant of Al-Bashir aims at replacing him with some "figures" acceptable to them, or at pushing for a certain regime change? Raslan: The regime is totally unacceptable to the American administration. It is not about the person of Al-Bashir, because the indictment aims at toppling the Sudan's regime structure, bureaucracy, and its legitimate base. So, replacing President Al-Bashir with other figures is not the main goal, especially since one notes that the Sudan has to hold democratic elections in the second half of 2009. All estimates showed that the National Congress Party will comfortably succeed in any democratic elections even monitored by international supervisors. So, the ICC kills any internal settlement for Darfur and forestalls any serious democratic reform. In addition, the court puts the Darfur crisis on par with the problem of South Sudan so as to make Darfur secede from the Sudan. Israel provides financial assistance, weaponry, and indirect political support to Abdel Wahed Nour— the head of one rebel group— who visited Israel two weeks before the ICC issued its arrest warrant for Al-Bashir. John Garang, the ex-president of the government of South Sudan, had an alternative project of a new secular Sudan to the Hadari Islam one currently adopted by the central government. The idea is that the periphery (south, west, and east of the Sudan) shall cooperate and ally in order to wrest authority from the central government. Arab and Muslim Sudanese populations are concentrated around the Nile in the center, while non-Arab Sudanese are scattered all over the Sudan. John Garang accused the government of discriminating against Christians and non-Arabs. When he signed Nivasha Agreement, he began to speak about all people who are on the "periphery", including Muslim populations. But, this scenario of the periphery taking over the center is now weak when it comes to practicality. IOL: What are the steps that the Sudan's government will take in order to solidify its position vis a vis the court with the cooperation of the African Union, the Arab League, and the Organization of Islamic Conference? Raslan: Actually, the internal situation is the main problem as there is some sort of internal political polarization amidst the coming presidential elections and the self-determination referendum for South Sudan. Although many domestic powers support the President, this support will not continue in the future as many problems are expected to erupt and political positions will change, especially since external pressure will continue. IOL: What will be the government policies reaching out to the different warring factions and solving the political quagmire in Darfur? Raslan: Armed factions in Darfur are very weak and the central government could have ended it long time ago, but because of the international pressure carried out by international media agencies and NGOs, the government cannot use force. These armed groups are now scattered over many areas, with Justice and Equity Movement bases its headquarters in Chad from where it launches its guerilla attacks against the Sudan. If these armed groups and the "international community" really cares about human rights, they would not choose to delay the process of political settlement and prefer to dismember the Sudan. In fact, the problem of Darfur will grow more complicated in case the current regime of the Sudan collapses. IOL: How do you assess the humanitarian situation in Darfur? Raslan: The humanitarian situation is stable as there are no diseases or epidemics while refugee camps are increased because of the influx of people who have left their lands and resorted to refugee camps in order to gain free assistance given to refugees— though they are not refugees. Although people in camps live in stable conditions, they have become the locus of recruiting and training militias fueling the tension in Darfur. When the government intervened in order to stop this chaos, fierce fighting erupted between the government and the militia which caused many casualties, mainly civilians. IOL: What are the feasible solutions for the Sudan now? Raslan: There are restless efforts to freeze the arrest warrant and to hold an international conference aiming at solving the issue of Darfur, because ending the conflict will mean that the ICC has no justification to intervene in the Sudan. Egypt tries to reach middle-ground solutions aiming at supporting the state of the Sudan. However, the Sudan vehemently refused the Egyptian proposal for holding an international conference on Darfur, because the Sudan's government wants Abuja agreement to be the unequivocal framework for any future agreement pertinent to Darfur. In addition, many armed groups in Darfur principally refused to negotiate, pinning hopes on external pressure to topple the current regime of the Sudan.
Last Updated: 01/08/2009

Photo & Video