Comments on: A Disaster in the Making

By: Ahmed Ali

Ahmed Ali — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:05:47 +0000

What the anti Sudan lobyist do not fully appreciate is that if there is a regieme change in Sudan it will be to the worse. The military of Sudan view President Bashir as too soft when it comes to dealing with internal insurgencies and too responsive to international pressure. Some blame the signing of the CPA with the south of the country as the start of trouble. They see it as surrender of sovreignty because it accepted two administrations and two armies in one country. Moreover it is percieved as a factor that caused the very conflict in Darfur by encouraging ethnic and territorial demands which seemed to be achievable by armed rebellion. In the unlikely event of a military coup taking place as hoped by anti Sudan bloggers, it is unlikely that a more lenient leadership will emerge. As one Save Darfur activist put it , it seems the solution is not in ousting Bashir but rather in conquering Sudan!

By: The Sudanese Thinker

The Sudanese Thinker — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 17:48:10 +0000

It’s issued. Question is, will the international community simply issue verbal support or will it actually enforce the warrant.

I fear it’s the former.

And if that’s the case, then we could be in for a ride of instability, which would suck big time.

Would love to see the bastard go down but not at the risk of watching my country descend into chaos and instability. The last thing we want is another Somalia-like scenario.

By: Amr Abdelmoneim

Amr Abdelmoneim — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 18:33:47 +0000

5 million dead in the Congo. Fighting has been taking place even before the Darfur crisis had started in Feb/2003. But Still Darfur is the # one crisis in the World with 200 thousand dead.

Placing Darfur as a priority seems suspicious.

Would the Western world consider Darfur still a priority, if a non Muslim was the President in Khartoum, not an extremist Muslim President like Al Bashir.

By: Hein Goemans

Hein Goemans — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 00:05:32 +0000

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:
I am sorry you completely failed to see the forest for the trees.

By: Deborah Ruiz Verduzco

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 22:31:45 +0000

Hein Goemans:
I am attracted to our side of the argument looking at how leaders have ended in 188 countries, yet your claim that “Bashir now has no incentive to quietly go into the night” presumes that Bashir is ready to leave.
Before the indictments, did Bashir had any incentive of leaving power?
You are missing completely the point of what the peace agreent in Sudan ment is trying to achieve, which is not a change of regime. Regardless of the actors’ positions on regime change in Sudan, it is not the current issue on the table, nor it is the purpose of the indictments of the ICC. It may well be a consequence in the long future but your argumentation is flawed and not serious by linking these three aspects to the way leaders end up.
Also, a question I would be interested in hearing on the basis of your research, and is not where do they end up either in exile, imprisonment or death, is why, what forced them to their end?
Finally, you also miss the main point of criminal justice which is not punishment, it is actually bringing the individual accountable, if found guilty for his/her acts, allowing victims for justice, and ensuring these crimes do not happen again. And this is achieved not through the manipulation of justice for political means (be that legitimate or illegitimate), but the fulfillment and upholding of rules. If you stick to the rules, then there is certainty, the certainty that gives room for the peace negotiations to happen, for development to happen, which are all uncertain processes. Without that certainty, there is really no hope.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 06:15:04 +0000

Thank you to Mr. Natsios for sharing his informed thoughts.

While the legal-political tension of the ICC’s pending indictment was to be anticipated, this whole debate sadly misses a few key points.

First, Mr. Natsios is correct to base his analysis on what happens to the long suffering Sudanese people, a concern which I share having worked in Sudan. However, the system of international criminal justice (of which the ICC is a part) is not being constructed for the Sudanese people alone. Had it been in place – and more efficient – decades ago, the Sudanese people might not now be suffering, because the perpetrators would know they were acting under the threat of prosecution. So, it is not only the Sudanese people that the indictment may help; it is all potential future victims of State-sponsored crimes. It is important to keep this in mind. The Rome Statute was not drafted to try Bashir.

Second, this is not a human rights issue. It is an international criminal law issue. When commentators and journalists understand that important distinction, the debate will become more meaningful.

Third, neither the UN Security Council nor the ICC are responsible for what is happening in Darfur. It is the Sudanese government; end of story. Critics of the UN, the ICC, the nebulous “international community”, China, and all the other usual accused should be prepared to direct some of their criticism towards the true culprit. If Khartoum had met their obligations as a representative of all the people of Sudan instead of serving their tiny, aristocratic ruling clique, most of us would never have heard of Darfur.

Thanks for reading…

By: Kizzie

Kizzie — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:46:32 +0000

Hein Goemans,

I have heard this from a few Sudanese.
“If Bashir stepped down and allowed the formation of a transitional government, he could be granted amnesty”.

By: Hein Goemans

Hein Goemans — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:30:35 +0000

I study leaders and have collected data on all leaders in 188 countries between 1875 — 2003. Fully one quarter of all leaders faced some punishment, e.g., exile, imprisonment or death, within one year after they lost office. It is clear that the fear of post-exit punishment does fundamentally affect the policy choices of leaders. In the current context, it is clear that Bashir now has no incentive to quietly go into the night. ON the other hand, other and future leaders must now take into account that they might be held to account by the ICC, which will also fundamentally affect their policy choices. In some cases, this will make such leaders more ruthless, in other cases, however, such leaders will be deterred from pursuing policies which might lead them before the ICC. On balance, I strongly suspect, the deterrent effects will outweigh the dangerous “gambling” effects, although this make take a decade or more to become visible. Current criminal leaders, think Mugabe, Than Shwe and others, will resort to every available means to prevent transitions to democracy or any form of government that might extradite them to The Hague. Future leaders, however, especially if leaders such as Bashir really are made to feel the costs of the indictment (which does not necessarily require they are put in the docket in The Hague), are likely to behave more responsible to the international standards of law and human rights.

By: M.W. Daly

M.W. Daly — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:02:50 +0000

While Mr. Natsios’s predictions may prove correct, the fact that an indictment necessarily focuses on an individual or individuals may ironically help to break the logjam in Khartoum.

Those unindicted Sudanese government officials who have carried out the regime’s policies in Darfur and, more to the point, those army officers awaiting an opportune moment to break with the regime, may well now find Field Marshal Beshir expendable. As an ex-president he, together with other ex-officials, would be easy for a successor government to blame for the atrocities; the international community’s willingness to support such a new government (however noxious) in an announced attempt to open new talks, cooperate with the peacekeepers, and so forth, would help it to solidify its position in Khartoum.

In any case, what is the alternative to an indictment? The prosecutor and the court have credibility to maintain. And the ability of Beshir (or anyone else) to stay in power should not depend on the rest of the world’s fear that he might lash out against his own people if an indictment were handed up.

By: Khalid AlMubarak

Khalid AlMubarak — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:38:49 +0000

Andrew Natsois (an honest academic and politician) is like ex-president Carter
who dared to say what he really thought only after leaving office and no longer fearing the wrath of the poweful lobbies! To his credit Natsois was heckled while in office by what he called extremist advocasy groups.
He deserves respect for meeting Ocampo and trying to persuade him not to proceed along a destructive path.
What Ocampo and those behind him are after is not justice ;but the very chaos which Dr Natsois fears. Their actions are a result of dismay because the Elections Law has been adopted and because the Abyei confrontations are over . They would like to see the CPA unravel and collapse .
More disappointment awaits them .The rebels will be encouraged ; but Sudan will continue seeking peace in Darfur and moving towards pluralism and more stability .