Within hours of the International Criminal Court’s decision to place a warrant on Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, the beleaguered leader opted to expel international aid from his country, making an already terrible situation into more rubbish.
For much of this decade, government backed militias have engaged in brutal attacks on largely innocent bystanders in the Darfur region of Sudan. More than 400,000 people have been killed in the conflict, which continues to be, in essence, genocide.
The ICC’s decision to issue a warrant for al-Bashir was based on the fact that the leader continues to sponsor the Janjaweed gunmen who carry out the bloodshed and the lack of power within Sudan to stop him.
The easiest solution would be for the Sudanese people to rid themselves of al-Bashir. Yet, given the protests and show of support for the president following the warrant’s announcement, this seems unlikely.
The second thing would be to get African leaders to put pressure on al-Bashir to resign or to stop financing the genocide.
So far, African leaders have been ineffective at stopping regional disputes. Most notably, President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe could not be convinced to step down following a crooked presidential election.
So that leaves the international community. The only country that could immediately put pressure on Sudan is China, which has invested billions of dollars in Sudanese oil development. China has been reluctant to do anything except ‘encourage dialogue.’
It is no surprise that it only expressed regret and concern following the warrant. According to the BBC, China has even been training Sudanese pilots to engage in bombing runs.’ There have also been Chinese army trucks that have turned up in Darfur.
When confronted about Darfur, China has acted petily. Such instances include when Steven Spielberg dropped his committment from the 2008 Beijing Olympics and when it cut Spielberg’s few moments on screen during’ its broadcast of the Academy Awards.
All this obviously does not bode well for the Darfur victims, 2.5 million of whom are in refugee camps, according to Amnesty International, and lack basic supplies. This combined with the expulsion of international aid should send signals to western leaders that a stronger option needs to be utilized.
Sudan has already been hit with some economic sanctions, but clearly this is not enough. If NATO were to threaten the use of its military muscle against Sudan, no doubt this would cause Sudan to rethink its position on Darfur.
NATO is already stretched out due to Afghanistan, not to mention the U.S. and the U.K. are still in Iraq. If nothing is done, it sends the signal to other leaders, such as North Korea’s Kim Jong-Il, that the international community is powerless to help people in need.
War should always be the last option, and after six years it appears that it needs to be seriously discussed in order to prevent further bloodshed.
Saloman Fuentes is a communication junior and may be reached at [email protected].
