Previously posted on my Facebook page. Not updated.
NEWS: “Violence Rages in Sudan’s Darfur Two Decades On.” And adds: “The resurgence of ethnically motivated attacks in the country’s restive western region has led to enormous displacement and a growing humanitarian crisis.”
WHILE we are busy with our emphatic drama on Ukraine, as the media continually feed us stuff to hate Vladimir Putin the more, bloody violence in Sudan or the Sahel Region hasn’t really subsided. Before Kyiv blew up again, troops pulled out of Afghanistan were simply relocated to 750 U.S. military bases abroad.
Sure, the current tempest in Eastern Europe is hot because Putin is the anti-hero. Geopolitical power play marquee. Meantime, my ice-cold pragmatism insists: Do we really care about what’s going on in Africa? 6 million deaths annually from deadly diseases before Covid? And nonstop violence tooled by Western armory? Do we?
Let’s revisit Darfur or the War in Darfur, a major armed conflict in Sudan that began in early 2003. Apparently, the mayhem out there was overshadowed by the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March that year. The Sudan issue was a war between rebels associated with the Sudan Liberation Movement and the Justice and Equality Movement versus the government of Sudan. Both SLM and JEM accused the Khartoum leadership of ethnic cleansing against Darfur's non-Arab population.
The crisis resulted in the death of hundreds of thousands of civilians and the indictment of Sudan's president, Omar al-Bashir, for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court. Mr al-Bashir was taken out by the military in the spring of 2019. But the horror didn’t end there. 🇸🇩🇸🇩🇸🇩
DARFUR could be the “poster of the macabre” but Sudan per se is in bloody turmoil even after military strongman Omar al-Bashir was ousted via a successful putsch in 2019.
From August 2021, the country was jointly led by Chairman of the Transitional Sovereign Council, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and Prime Minister Abdallah Hamdok. But in Sept last year, a failed attempt at a coup d’état from the military again ensued and led to the arrest of 40 military officers. A month after, another violent hassle rocked again (!) and resulted in the capture of the civilian government, including (now) former Prime Minister Hamdok. The coup was led by general Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (whoa!) who subsequently declared a state of emergency.
The confused craziness wasn’t over. In November last year, Hamdok was reinstated as prime minister after a political agreement was signed by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan to restore the transition to civilian rule, with Burhan retaining control. Apparently, the political animosities don’t easily end. Hamdok resigned as PM in January.
Current tally of darkness: By March, 2022 over 1,000 people including 148 children and 144 women had been detained for opposing the coup, there were 25 allegations of rape and 87 people had been killed including 11 children. But, of course, we don’t really read this kind of news because our mind is all over Ukraine. 🇸🇩🇸🇩🇸🇩
AS the usual case, Washington’s premium interest on Sudan and the region—is to correct it, politically. No interest at all in economics. As armed conflicts rage, refugee resettlement is the focal goal over stabilization via end of wars. Such a template hasn't proven effective in recent years. Policy disagreements mar, delay, or downplay U.S. humanitarian aid to Sudan throughout the last quarter of the 20th century.
For fiscal years 2005–2006, the U.S. committed almost $2.6 billion to Sudan for humanitarian assistance and peacekeeping in Darfur as well as support for the implementation of the peace accord and reconstruction and development in southern Sudan. Yet these haven’t worked so far.
Then there’s the sanctions. Sudan was added to the State Sponsors of Terrorism list in 1993, alleging that Sudan harbored members of the Abu Nidal Organization, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad. As violence in Darfur worsened, larger economic sanctions were handed out in 2007.
However, in Obama time in 2009, the U.S. released new conditions to ease sanctions. But these only resulted into two Sudans: Sudan and South Sudan.
In 2019 or 2020, Trump removed Sudan from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list after Sudan agreed to pay $335 million in compensation to the families of victims of the 1998 United States embassy bombings. And then, here comes another bloody ruckus.
What mystifies, as ever, is the presence of China in the background—of course, by way of economics--while maintaining hands-off politics in Sudan and South Sudan. Politics is Washington’s gig. Beijing certainly doesn’t mind. 🇸🇩🇸🇩🇸🇩
NEWS: “Violence Rages in Sudan’s Darfur Two Decades On.” But Chinese investments don’t seem to mind. While the U.S. puts emphasis on geopolitical cleaning-up of the world as in what remains of Sudan, China ups its trade mojo. Beijing may traditionally say “…nah ah!” when a business prospect country is mired in political strife but Sudan and South Sudan are exceptions, it seems.
Despite the challenges of working in a war zone, China dominates what analysts have assessed as the third largest oil reserves in Africa. Boom.
By now we know that China’s success in Africa—or in other regions—comes from its tendency to ignore stuff like human rights and international law. Such an approach aids Beijing’s foreign policy blueprint via the Belt and Road Initiative, a project designed to expand China’s sphere of influence in the Global South.
International Crisis Group, Brussels: “In the wake of Sudan’s partition, Beijing has accelerated a re-orientation of its engagement in the resulting two states, most significantly through a new courtship in Juba. China’s historical support for Khartoum left a sour legacy in the South, but the potential for mutual economic benefit means a new chapter in bilateral relations is now being written. Balancing new friends in Juba with old friends in Khartoum, however, has proven a delicate dance.”
Which the Dragon doesn’t mind. Apparently. 🇸🇩🇸🇩🇸🇩
SUDAN has a population of almost 44 million. The country’s GDP growth rate is within the region’s average of 3.4 percent, that is low per global standard. The ideal GDP growth depends on the country and its economic expansion cycle, which means 2 percent in the U.S. is considered “healthy.” Anyhow, no matter how high the economic spike is, if goodness doesn’t benefit the people but its few wealthy, what is the point?
Sudan’s unemployment rate of 17.10 percent is almost 3 times the Africa’s average of 6 percent. Although the country has formidable economic chips: Oil, cotton ginning, textiles, cement, edible oils, sugar, soap distilling, shoes, petroleum refining, pharmaceuticals, armaments, automobile/light truck assembly, milling. The country’s top trading partners: United Arab Emirates, China, Saudi Arabia, Egypt—with the Chinese rapidly gaining.
Meanwhile, Sudan and South Sudan’s conflict reminds us of Ukraine and Russia vis a vis Kyiv’s Naftogaz and Moscow’s Gazprom.
Upon independence in 2011, South Sudan secured three-quarters of the oil held by the once unified nation which immediately caused a number of disputes, cross-border violence, and failed negotiation attempts. In order for the oil from South Sudan to be exported, it had to first travel to refineries in Khartoum and be transferred to port terminals in Port Sudan.
The price of this transportation was unsettled before the separation of the state which caused disputes that escalated in January 2012 when the Sudanese government claimed that Juba owed $1 billion in unpaid fees. South Sudan countered that Khartoum stole $815 million worth of oil from their territory. And so on and so forth. You may google the rest but the two Sudans “agreed” somehow.
Then there’s China in between as an economic mediator, kinda. 🇸🇩🇸🇩🇸🇩
IN August 2017, it was reported that Chinese investments in Sudan's oil sector had surpassed $15 billion and that both countries remained committed to cooperating with each other as Sudan was ready to overcome any obstacles in further Chinese investment and China was ready to face challenges regarding Sudan's debt and consequences from the separation of South Sudan. There you go, right?
The inflow of China's foreign direct investments (FDI) in Sudan (before the separation) began in 1996 and was primarily driven by oil investments. Even non-oil FDI which was directed towards the service sector and light manufacturing seemed to follow closely with investments in the oil sector.
Prior to the split, Chinese investments or FDI’s in Sudan between 2000 and 2008, excluding money bankrolled for oil interests, were equivalent to $249 million and bilateral trade between the two countries rose from $103 million in 1990 to $9.7 billion in 2007. By 2010, China became Sudan's largest trading partner and these investments had direct impacts on the economic prospects of the country as its revenue rose exponentially between 2002 and 2008.
Overall, China's FDI has had a double effect of expanding the export sector and reducing Sudan's dependence on imported key oil products. The CNPC's investment in the domestic refining capacity of the country has contributed to import substitute industrialization (ISI) which is an economic policy that replaces foreign imports with domestic production and, thus, has given rise to other processing industries based on oil, specifically in plastic products and road construction.
Even as Sudan went two-ways, China didn’t relent. South Sudan boasts 3.5 billion barrels’ worth of crude oil in proven reserves, and petroleum geologists will likely find more in the two-thirds of South Sudan that they have yet to explore. Of course, Beijing is there. And so as the U.S. willingly tries to fix the political tempest in Sudan, China awaits while watching the NBA playoffs. But business happens as usual. 🇸🇩🇸🇩🇸🇩
[Photos: World Council of Churches. SAT-7 UK. Reuters.]
