Destroying all hopes for a long-term peace in Darfur and Sudan does not seem to matter to them as long as they get it their way.

Justice is very important for the victims, post-conflict reconciliation, and the future of Darfur and Sudan.

However, the aim of the international community must be to first bring peace to Darfur and then punish the perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

it is never too late in the day. And my arguments today are no different to six or eight months ago.

I would not be so foolish as to predict any particular outcome. But the risks of something going wrong are significant, and if things go wrong they could go terribly wrong.

A lot of hard political work, from a number of quarters, went into creating the cool response of the Sudan Government in July. But none of the strategies for handling the issue, so as to translate it into substantive outcomes in favour of peace, democracy and justice for Sudan, has worked up to now. The NCP’s cynicism and bad faith has been a big part of the problem but not the only part. The options are now much diminished. And, even an outcome that is “only” a slowdown of CPA implementation puts us on a track towards a crisis within two years.

We know that most Capitals on the Security Council have set upon a course of action decided last year that is unlikely to be hurriedly changed, we know that the key veto holders who might table such a resolution – China and Russia – are loathe to, we know that the only precedent we have was that when the same alarm bells were rung by outside analysts last July they were indeed cited by authorities in Khartoum in their threats to the outside world of calamities to come, but did not in fact prove correct.

One outcome of advocating the position, now, that ‘all hell will break loose and so we should do X quickly’, is that for those desiring X, hell breaking loose has now become a more legitimate and powerful lever. It makes the bar of what is a sufficient ‘threat to international peace and security’ for Article 16 an issue where, in recent months, it has been less part of the equation. I am concerned that the argument Alex makes will only detrimentally impact upon the gunboat and brinkmanship politics that we are no doubt in for.

History might prove the argument right, but the argument may be shaping the story.

I do agree with you that the ICC is biggest threat which is facing the National Congress Party in its 18 years in power and an indictment to President Al Bashir means indictment to the regime as whole. That why it is so serious to them. But a one year deferral will not eliminate the threat which is facing the NCP, and accordingly they will cooperate by honouring their commitments to the CPA and the other agreements which they signed.

As far as the threat of the ICC exist nothing will change and NCP will do anything to stay in power as losing power means the risk of them being handed over to the ICC. Also we don’t know whether Al Bashir is the last person on the prosecutor’s list or whether he is going to ask for indictment of other senior officials.

I do understand the ramifications of indicting a sitting president for the country. He will not be able to carry its duties, and that will paralyse the whole government system, and that will add to the suffering of Sudanese people.

Why are we in this situation, it is because of the NCP policies, and now they are making the Sudanese people to pay for their mistakes.

The NCP might react by suspension all the agreement which they have signed including the CPA and cracking down more on individual freedoms and freedom of expression as they have already started doing. That will not going to resolve the issues. The Sudanese people have nothing to do with the ICC and its decisions. Punishing them for the action of the ICC persecutor will just show how isolated the regime is.

I think the way out should be by genuinely engaging Sudanese people in a proper transition which will lead to true democracy and handling the issue of justice in Darfur through truth and reconciliation process such like South Africa. But the NCP must first allow a true and genuine process, that will not only resolve the issue of the ICC but also address the other problems facing the country and save it from collapsing. If it possesses sovereignty it also holds responsibility and should exercise that properly in the interests of the people.

there is a difference between an arrest warrant and a truce, one being a negotiated agreement and the other being an enforced surrender. But I do agree that a deferral is an unsatisfactory solution which will satisfy nobody. It is is just, i think, the least bad of all the alternatives.

To Khalid, I would add that the ICC has been extremely salutary to the NCP. It has put the issue of accountability on the table and has made the perpetrators of feel a shudder of fear, though not comparable to the terror endured by their victims. The problem is, there is no compromise with the ICC: either one side wins, or the other.

I appreciate your contributions as always, but I do fail to see from it how is that you prove your post thesis that the “the immediate cause of the tension is the expected arrest warrant to be issued by the ICC.”

As you know well, tensions highly increase before a truce is to be implemented, as parties to a conflict give everything they can to destroy as much as possible the enemy. This is a fact, and yet is by no means a good argument against peace or truces, is it? Of course not, because the cause of the violence is not the truce, but the goals of the warring parties.

So in all honesty, while I see how the expectancy on the arrest warrant may explain the violent behaviour of those who feel threatened by it, I do not see how advocating for a deferral may ever be a solution to the real causes of the conflict.

I dont think any Sudanese would want anything different than a democratic transofrmation & democratization of Sudan.

However I again stress the reality check. No one in Sudan has any faith in the upcoming elections or that it will be conducted fairly. Elections are not just the polls; it is a free society, free press, freedom of expression, no fear of reprisal etc.. That it is non-existent now. As it stands now any elections held may actually complicate matters particularly when no one thinks they are fair.

A good example is the census results? WHere are they? They kept postponing and postponing which opens the door for a great deal of speculations. This is almost a year! Why is it taking so long?

Lets took a look at the DPA. I think you will agree with me that the government has reneged on what it signed. This is what Minnawi says day and night. How can Darfuris have faith that this government will honor anything it signs afterwards? If DPA was impelemented and peopel saw the fruits of it things would have been very different now but they arent.

There is a fundamental problem with the NCP Alex. They want to give little concessions and want to stay in power forever. You cant really achieve anything with such a mentality.

The ICC is not a solution to Sudan’s problems and I dont think any sane person would argue that. However it is a positive factor that made the NCP rethink what they are doing even if not tangible outcome ensued. They moved to court the political parties and cooperate with UNAMID and launch an initiative. This is all post-ICC. Before that it was their way or the highway.

Deferral on the other hand is not the solution Alex. What would it achieve? Make the NCP act in more good faith? I highly doubt it. They had plenty of opportunity to come right and they didnt seize it so I think its time they reap what they sow.

I will finish up with one story

Al-Sadiq Al-Mahdi met recently with senior Sudanese officials lately who told him that they are willing to revive their bilateral agreement they signed in May with him. He told them “Its too late now. There has to be a national agreement and broad based coalition government”. Of course we know that the NCP rejected that.

you raise good points. Let me respond to a few.

While it is true that the Sudan Government would like Resolution 1593 nullified, that is a political impossibility. An Article 16 deferral at least lies within the bounds of possibility.

As you imply, we should not underestimate the ability of the Sudan Government to continue as usual, managing the unmanageable. That indeed is the most probable outcome of an ICC arrest warrant. And I expect most people in the government would like things to work out like this. But every now and then there is a game-changer in Sudan, usually for the worse. The arrest warrant introduces an element of uncertainty that could easily lead to an escalation of political confrontation or violence.

A no preconditions deferral would certainly be touted as giving in to blackmail. But there are more important things at stake than posturing in this way.

Lastly, whatever happens, I fear that the people of Darfur, and Sudan as a whole, are going to feel betrayed. Few people have any sympathy for the NCP leaders, and after almost twenty years in power, they have no-one to blame for their plight but themselves. Would an arrest warrant for Bashir, or even his handover to the ICC, change the reality of their lives? I suspect not. The best way to improve the lives of Sudanese citizens is, I argue, to see the steady implementation of the CPA and its measures for democratization and reform.