Sudan: Only a Free and Fair Referendum, Not Coercion, can Guarantee a Genuinely United country
The right of people of South Sudan to decide their political future through an internationally monitored referendum, which many Southerners consider to be the cornerstone of the CPA, is now under severe threat. The National Congress Party views the right of self-determination as a curse and a threat to their model of the Sudan, the old Sudan. They feels that the people of South Sudan, if given a chance to exercise their rights in a free and fair referendum, will overwhelmingly vote to secede. Hence, they are resolved to undermine the Referendum, either by legislation or any other mean possible. In this short article I will only concentrate on how the NCP has been trying to use the legislation to derail the referendum exercise.
First, the NCP was reluctant to enact the South Sudan referendum act since July 2007, the time stipulated in the CPA implementation modalities for enacting this act. They hoped to delay the referendum bill as much as possible. The speaker of the national assembly, Ahmed Ibrahim Al Tahir told the UN-radio, Miraya FM, early this year that the referendum bill will be passed only by an elected parliament. That was a very dangerous view as delaying the referendum bill indefinitely till election will also result in NCP pushing for a delay in holding the referendum.
When delay tactics proved to be utterly unacceptable to the SPLM and the international community, the NCP accepted to start the negotiation on the bill but with a new meaning in mind to impede the process. They claimed that on their reading of the CPA, a successful vote for secession is to be made more difficult than a vote for unity, this rather than a choice between two equally viable and acceptable electoral options. They assert that a vote for secession requires 75 percent of votes cast and two-third in favour of separation. It took almost two years of rigorous negotiation coupled with US pressure to bring the NCP to accept a minimum of 60% of votes to legitimize the referendum exercise, and a simple majority for secession to be granted.
To add more obstacles to the bill, the NCP insisted that all Southerners who moved to the North before or during the war should vote in the North. The SPLM was apprehensive about that suggestion because the NCP’s motive is not that it has all of a sudden turned to care about the right of the Southerners living in the North, rather they saw this as an available opportunity to rig the referendum results.
The NCP already disenfranchised these voters in the population census carried out early this year and it will not hesitate to do so in the referendum. They undercounted them by the ratio of 4:1. (NGOs put the number of Southerners living in Khartoum to be over 2 million but the government put their census number to be 500,000). It seems NCP did not want them to make a significant number of constituencies in the forthcoming election. When pressed why there was such different in numbers, Awad Haj Ali, the head of Census claimed that Southerners were refusing to be counted! It is therefore naive to think that the outcome of their referendum vote will be a legitimate representation of their choice. Rather it will be a manipulation by the NCP to suit its agenda.
It is a hope of all Southerners all over the world that their views are represented in the referendum exercise. It is also a wish of SPLM and the Southern parties that the views of all the Southerners are represented. The number of Southerners who are living in the neighboring countries of Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Congo and Egypt is as large as the number of those in the North. It is even larger by UN estimate. All those Southerners have the right to vote wherever they are living if NCP’s provision is the standard. However, it can be very difficult to ensure a free and fair referendum carried out in all those regions including the North. Southern Sudanese voters can accept a daunting task of travelling back to their home area to cast their votes rather than see their votes stolen and their views rigged.
To show good faith to its peace partner and the new American administration which brokered the negotiation, the SPLM accepted this dubious provision by the NCP even though they are aware of how it will affect the referendum exercise.
After all these years of negotiation, the final agreement was reached, or was rather thought to have been reached, in the middle of this month. The bill was expected to be passed on 23 December. However, on this fateful day, the people of South Sudan were again shocked when the NCP decided at the final minute to introduce another obstacle to the bill in the form of amendment in article 27 (3). In this article, the NCP assert that they want a second category of Southerners living in the North to vote. And who is included in this category of Southerners? All the people who can claim their roots to a tribe in Southern Sudan even if they have not been living permanently in South Sudan before or since 1956.
According to the wording of the bill, “all southern Sudanese whose origins are traceable to one of the ethnic groups in Southern Sudan, but who are not permanently and uninterruptedly resident in southern Sudan before or since the 1st of January 1956.”Of course any person in the North, West and East of Sudan can legitimately claim a Southern origin at one point or another in history. Omar Bashir can claim a great great grandmother from a Southern ethnicity. Hassan Al Turabi can claim a great grandfather from Dinka. If the referendum bill is to pass with this article intact, they are Southerners and therefore can vote in the Southern Sudan referendum in 2011. It is because of this fraudulent article that the Southern political parties and the SPLM boycotted the parliament session.
Sudan historians can agree that the above mentioned figures truly have Southern blood in them. All the self-proclaimed Arabs in North Sudan are hybrids of indigenous Africans (most from the South) and the Arab immigrants who have interacted and intermarried in the long historical processes which took place in the riverain Northern Sudan. They can claim Southern origin but according to the CPA they are not Southerners. A South Sudanese according to the CPA is a person whose parents or grandparents were living in the South on 1 January 1956 and thereafter.
As a matter of facts there were few South Sudanese living in the North before or on January 1, 1956. Sudan historians and experts like Alex de Waal and Douglas Johnson can attest to that fact. There was the infamous policy of the Closed District Ordinance in 1920s, 1930s and 1940s which effectively closed the Southerners off from working and living in the North. In the few months of 1955 leading to 1 January 1956, only Southern politicians who represented Southern constituents in the parliament were staying in the North. All of them and their families came to live in the South after that.
Despite this open intention by the NCP to sabotage the outcome of Southern Sudan referendum, the SPLM still conceded to give this group of Northerners who claims Southern origin a benefit of doubt. What is required of them is that any person who claims an origin from a Southern ethnicity before 1956 should go back to the South, trace the location of his or her original tribe and then case his or her vote there comes 2011.Therefore, if Ghazi Salahuddin Atabani or Usman Mohamed Taha claims the origin of his great grandmother amongst the Toposa tribe of South Sudan, he must go back to Toposa land in Riwoto, and be confirmed by his local relatives that he is truly a Southerner. If that condition is not put in place as an oversight, then all the people in North Sudan will claim Southernness on the referendum day.
As I noted earlier, the aim of the National Congress Party is to abrogate the right of self-determination of the people of South Sudan, and subsequently the entire CPA. By imposing this article into the bill despite earlier agreement, the NCP seek to save their overall agenda of impeding the implementation of the major component of the CPA, especially now that the interim period is waning out. It is difficult to know which of these, and other, proposals NCP truly expects to be included in the final referendum bill; but the sheer number of obstacles the NCP is attempting to create, some clearly contravening the terms of the CPA, is a sign of its resolve to block the referendum exercise.
Yong Deng is a South Sudanese student studying in Canada and an active member of the SPLM youth wing.
The basic premise of this article is absolutely correct: only a truly free and fair vote can provide a legitimate referendum on self-determination, whether it is a vote for unity or for secession. It is also clear that many in the NCP leadership regret their decision (taken in stages between 1997 and 2005) to accept that southern Sudanese are entitled to self-determination, with the options of unity or secession. Had it not been for their confidence in the unionism of the late Dr. John Garang, it is probable that the secession option would not have been accepted.
But the situation is complex. The position that only an elected government can preside over a legitimate referendum is not only the position of the NCP, it is the position of the international mediators at Naivasha. There are many in northern Sudan who would dispute the legitimacy of a separation, undertaken by an elite deal between the two leaderships in Khartoum and Juba. For example, it could be seen as a compact in which the NCP won an Islamic state in the north in return for southern separation. In turn this could be an invitation for the opponents of the unelected northern government to overthrow that government and challenge the separation.
The scenario we now face is one in which President Bashir cannot afford to lose in April (because of the ICC), and so the scenario anticipated in Naivasha cannot come to pass.
The issue of the southerners in the north shows, I think, that the NCP lacks a single strategy for the referendum. If the NCP were determined on the kind of strategy that Morocco has used in the Western Sahara, it would be registering as many southerners as possible in the north, rather than diminishing their number.
Meanwhile, the SPLM still needs a strategy for the next thirteen months.
Neither the NCP nor the SPLM hold legitimacy to determine the fate of the people of Sudan. Let’s not forget that Omar Al-Bashir came to power via a coup d’etat and John Garang was appointed the president of South Sudan after the CPA was signed and was succeed by Salva Kiir and again without election. A legitimate referendum can only take place once a legitimate government chosen by the people of Sudan is installed.
The author of this post seems to be naive and ignorant of the dynamics of the people of North Sudan and is building some of his arguments on hypothetical impossibilities. People like Omar Al-Bahir, Al-Turabi, Ghazi Salah-Aldin …etc would trace their parental roots (like the majority of other Sudanese) to the prophet Mohammad, and as such it is highly unlikely that North Sudanese will be migrating in droves to claim their right as Southern Sudanese and derail the referendum.
The author is also self contradicting by asserting that giving the referendum right of vote to Southerners living outside the South is a ploy from the NCP to delay and make it difficult to hold the referendum but at the same time asserting that the same people have the right to vote. Make up your mind.
It is the right of any Southern Sudanese to cast their vote. Let’s not forget that there has been a war in the South that displaced people from their homes. These same people found refuge in the North and surrounding countries and for the decades that the war raged they formed families which they can not just up root and move to a South that is still developing. The signing of the CPA does not automatically mean that Southerners will migrate to the South. There would be a number that will not be able to travel from their part of the world to the South to cast their vote for any number of reasons but their rights must be preserved. A fair referendum will ensure measures are made to ensure these votes of Southern Sudanese in the diaspora are captured.
Here is different take of the matter at hand, possibly far fetch, nevertheless a different point of view. The separation of the South has already taken place. The government of the north does not seem to have a say on matters of economy and security. The ruling Southern elite wish to legitimise their hold but know that the south is tribally fragmented. Denying the vote for Southerners in the diaspora will ensure that the sample size voting for the referendum is the one that remained during the war in the South and felt the smite of the Northern forces, and also ensuring the sample size remains small and controllable. Winning the vote will legitimise the separation, and the current government will assume absolute power over the south and continue as normal.
There are loud voice that talk about the separation, but there aren’t any Southerners voices talking of what will happen after.
And finally, Don’t people in the North have the right to a referendum for separation from the South?
Alex,
I am too still pondering what the NCP’s strategy for the future of Sudan is if not war and destruction. From the professed view of all the senior members of NCP, it seems they want unity to be the option of the South Sudanese voters. However, the means they are employing to achieve this are utterly absurd.
The people of South Sudan and other marginalised areas went to war more than once because they resist the Sudan where policies of hegemony and economic, social, racial and religious discrimination are practised. They have been resisting this system since independence and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.NCP knows it because it has been a major participant of those destructive wars.
When the CPA was signed, most of us in the south felt that the new era of economic, social and political transformation has dawned on our country. After CPA, we were expecting an all-inclusive Sudanese state in which all Sudanese are equally stakeholders irrespective of their religion and race. It was a shock to most South Sudanese especially us who did not grow up in the Old Sudan. Besides the economic and security situation in the South, the current religious and racial discrimination in Khartoum is a situation most Southerners did not expect at the post CPA Sudan.
Now that the interim period is coming to an end and the people of South Sudan seemingly more disenchanted with the Government of National Unity, the NCP feel that they can only ensure unity by either abrogating the right of South Sudanese to self-determination or rigging the referendum results. If the NCP cadres genuinely want a united Sudan, they can make unity attractive to Southerners which was the position adapted in the CPA. They have the political and economic might to make unity an attractive option to the people of South Sudan, rather than resorting to vote rigging and coercion.
NCP should know that all these dubious strategies cannot help a united Sudan. Rather, they are provoking a negative respond amongst Southerners. Now, the separation option is growing more popular each day. Even the former unionists in the SPLM are either getting inclined to separation or getting isolated amongst their constituents. The Southern politicians who have been serving the NCP for over 20 years are now quitting their once dearest party.
What NCP is doing is what Dr John Garang used to call “A war and a separatists moduleâ€. If NCP continue in this path, the ultimate fate of the Sudan will be either a disintegration or another destructive war.
Ahmad,
You have either not read the article properly or decided to respond out of contact. I would like to shed light on some of your concerns.
First, I am not objecting to the fact that an elected government should execute the referendum exercise. It is part of the CPA and I support all the CPA provisions. However, CPA has a fixed time frame. The interim period was set to be 6 years, and now only one year is left. The peace partners can not afford to delay the referendum legislation beyond this remaining year without compromising the implementation of the rest of the peace process. When the NCP pushes for the delayment of this legislature, they know exactly that its implication is to abrogate the CPA.
Second, I am not claiming the African origin of Omar Al Bashir or Hassan Al Turabi. I was trying to explain the possible translation of article 27(3). I am very much aware of the excessive proclamations and obsession of North Sudanese with being Arabs. People like Hassan Al Turabi would most likely proclaim parental origin to Prophet Mohamed although their skin colour and history would always betray that claim.
Third,the SPLM and the Southern parties do not want to exclude their people from the electoral process. Quite the opposite, NCP does. The SPLM worked very hard so that the Sudanese in Diaspora could be allowed to register in the recent voter registration. Now all the Sudanese almost all over the world can vote in the 2010 election.
The apprehension about the referendum taking place in the North was the result of open rigging of census numbers by NCP. It is unbelievable that the NCP would reduce the official number of Southerners living in Khartoum from 2 million to 500 000. That alone indicates that the referendum result of these people will again be doctored.Despite all this, SPLM has accepted to include all those Southerners in the referendum.
The recent showdown about the referendum right of Southerners who lived in the North before 1956 is just but a sham on the part of the NCP. There is no such category of people. No Southerners lived in the North before 1956.
For now, I will not respond to your other tirades about tribal fragmentation, right of Northerners to determine the future of South Sudanese, Southern elites etc.
“People like Hassan Al Turabi would most likely proclaim parental origin to Prophet Mohamed although their skin colour and history would always betray that claim.” -Yong Deng
Yong Deng,
We northerners have a right to call ourselves Arabs as much as we have a responsibility to assert that we are Africans. You cannot deny any northerner this right to claim both, no matter how dark skinned he is. You can be as black as obsidian glass and still be called an Arab. And you can be as light as a Nubian and be called an African. Both groups of people (African and Arabs) have historically been an inclusive peoples, despite the infectious Zionist propaganda that may temporarily blindsight you and temporarily promote your agenda. The very peoples that influence this trademark racism that you espouse give praise to the notion of white purity and exclusivity. The concept of races, skin color, and skin tones is a colonial-European paradigm perpetuated by the modern-day fashion-industry and global media. You should question your fundamentals with regards to this subject. If you take a brief look at the history of Arab migration, you will see that the ancestral Arabs were a highly civilized and compassionate peoples. And they settled and intermixed with the local nubians as well as nilotic African peoples to produce the present-day northerner. Stop the hate.
-Jamal
Jamaledin,
I do not discriminate against the Sudanese people based on skin color, origin or religion. Neither am I trying to deny anybody a right to claim parental origin.
If you can read the article carefully, I acknowledged both the Arab and indigenous African origin of the North Sudanese. Read paragraph 10 again:
“Sudan historians can agree that the above mentioned figures (Bashir and Turabi) truly have Southern blood in them. All the self-proclaimed Arabs in North Sudan are hybrids of indigenous Africans (most from the South) and the Arab immigrants who have interacted and intermarried in the long historical processes which took place in the riverain Northern Sudan. They can claim Southern origin but according to the CPA they are not Southerners. A South Sudanese according to the CPA is a person whose parents or grandparents were living in the South on 1 January 1956 and thereafter. ”
In the sentence that you quoted and took out of context. I was responding to Luai Ahmad who asserted that I was being naive and ignorant to suggest that North Sudanese would claim African origin. I understand the point of view of people like Luai Ahmad and my respond was to acknowledge his argument. The whole prophet Mohamed thing are his own words, not mine. Read the 2nd paragraph of Luai Ahmed’s response:
“The author of this post seems to be naive and ignorant of the dynamics of the people of North Sudan and is building some of his arguments on hypothetical impossibilities. People like Omar Al-Bahir, Al-Turabi, Ghazi Salah-Aldin …etc would trace their parental roots (like the majority of other Sudanese) to the prophet Mohammad, and as such it is highly unlikely that North Sudanese will be migrating in droves to claim their right as Southern Sudanese”
Therefore, Brother Jamal, it is unfair to accuse me of hate toward the Arab Sudanese.
The problem of the Sudan is not that a certain group of people define themselves as African, Arabs or Turks. Nobody has ever gone to war in the Sudan because he doesn’t like the way the other defines himself. The problem of the Sudan is that ruling elites instituted policies of social, racial and religious discrimination and injustice.
Sudan is a country of great diversity in terms of people, languages, races, religions and even resources. We can only tap that greatness if we learn to appreciate the diverse nature of the Sudan and institute and an all-inclusive Sudanese state where all the Sudanese people are equally stakeholders irrespective of religion, race or place of origin.
Dear Yong Deng
I think you have made very strong points in your argument, especially when you mentioned the NCP attempt to use legislations to make secession difficult or play their usual delaying tactics until the term of the current parliament finished so they can escape the blame of being the people whom fired the final shot on the body of the current sudan and killed it. Ms Badria Suliman made it clear that they want to make unity attractive by legislations I am sure you are aware that she is behind changing article 27 (3) which trigger the recent wrangling in the National Assembly and led to the presidency intervention to resolve that, I really find it very cynical to try and force some people into unity by legislation and if that the case the NCP has the power to pass legislation which make voting for secession unlawful. You make unity attractive by building trust and understanding to persuade the southerners to believe they have stake in the current Sudan and want to continue to be part of it not by forcing them to be part of it.
Most of the elites in northern Sudan used to claim some ancestor relation in the Arab Peninsula and linking their family roots to prophet Mohamed tribe (Goruish), I think for some of them to claim that their ancestors were from the south and link themselves to a south Sudanese tribe is something new, but I hope that genuine and not for political propaganda to convince the southerners to vote for unity and if that is the case I don’t think it will work.
The truth is most of southern Sudanese , in south, the north or diasporas want to vote for secession , simply because they had enough and the last chance to keep Sudan intact , is been wasted by a narrow minded political opportunism
Yong Deng,
No, I am sorry. It is not I who is quoting out of context. It is you who is quoting your passage out of context in defense of a truly racist undertone you have displayed. There is no spinning and defending your words to Luai Ahmad. Only apologizing is acceptable, lest ego prevents this. If you want a viable independent state living under peace, then invite a peaceful spirit. I leave you with the quote again:
“People like Hassan Al Turabi would most likely proclaim parental origin to Prophet Mohamed although their skin colour and history would always betray that claim.†-Yong Deng
-Jamal
Yong Deng,
“…the NCP’s motive is not that it has all of a sudden turned to care about the right of the Southerners living in the North, rather they saw this as an available opportunity to rig the referendum results….
All those Southerners have the right to vote wherever they are living if NCP’s provision is the standard. However, it can be very difficult to ensure a free and fair referendum carried out in all those regions including the North. Southern Sudanese voters can accept a daunting task of travelling back to their home area to cast their votes rather than see their votes stolen and their views rigged.” -Yong Deng
To paraphrase what you are saying: ‘oh the Southern Sudanese are being denied the right to vote in the North… but in any case we cannot guarantee that their vote will not be sabotaged so its best they travel to the South.’ So do you want Southern Sudanese outside of Southern Sudan to have a chance at voting during the referendum? Which is it?
-Jamal
Jamal,
I will not argue with you again over the referendum legislation because the agreed version is passed by the parliament today. The South Sudanese people living in the North (whom NCP diminished the number to just 500,000) are already allowed to vote. It will be up to the NCP to disenfranchise them again or allow them to exercise their right freely and fairly.
The so-called second group of Southerners who lived in the North before 1956 never existed. It was a sham used by the NCP to sabotage the referendum. Rational thinkers would not allow the so-called article 27(3) to be passed as NCP wanted.
It is apparent that you want to keep the racism argument even when it did not have any place in my article. I have never and will never look down upon any group of people in Sudan based on their skin colour. If you are racially sensitive as you seem to be, there is more than systematic racial and religious segregation in Sudan and we can talk about it on a different occasion.
There are people who called others ‘Abid’ (slaves) in Sudan because of their skin color. Those are the people to apologise to. The whole tv shows play a very racially charged skids in Khartoum to portray dark skinned people as slaves and second class.
The Southerners, Nuba people and Darfurians who are treated as outcast by the racist government in Khartoum are the ones who need to be apologised to. They are confined in the dirty areas outside Khartoum for the last twenty years. Those areas are locally called “Al Hizam Al aswat” — literally “Black Belts†because most of the inhabitants are dark-skinned from the South and Darfur. That is the racism that need to be eradicated and the people who practise it hold accountable.
There are people who flog others in Khartoum for dressing differently just because they think it contradict their religion. Those are the criminals against human rights who need to be hold accountable and condemned,let alone apology.
As you keep repeating my statement just to suit your motive. Remember that it was Luai Ahmad who made the following statement before I responded:
“People like Omar Al-Bahir, Al-Turabi, Ghazi Salah-Aldin … etc would trace their parental roots (like the majority of other Sudanese) to the prophet Mohammad, and as such it is highly unlikely that North Sudanese will be migrating in droves to claim their right as Southern Sudanese”
To Dong, Jamal, Hafiz,
“So Hagar bore Abram a son, and Abram named his son whom Hagar bore Ishmael”
Genesis :16:15
Hagar is the Nubian (or Egyptian Girl) that Abram who is (Abraham),or Ibrahim ,and Ishmael is Ismail, the ancestor of all the Arabs.
This then is the relation between Arab and African. But this is not my issue.
2) With all due respect to Dong,there are people from the South who settled in the North before 1956,the most famous among them is Ali Abdel Latif of the 1924 Uprising against the British.
3) Luai is right,neither the NCP nor the SPLM,represent all the people of the Sudan,be it in the North or the South.
4) I agree with Dong that we need a free, fair and transparent referendum, in the South,however and according to the terms of the CPA,must be conducted by a duly elected parliament and government, probably those who drafted the agreement were aware of the gravity of the issue at hand,It is too critical for the country, to be left to two Parties who both are not elected and who do not represent the whole Sudan.
5) I tend to look at the bickering between the two parties as political posturing and not an attempt to undermine the Referendum or block it.
6) To-day,there is sense of fear,fear of a court far more powerful than the any other court in the world,the ICC included. It is a court that need no Security Council Resolutions, nor Prosecutors. It is the Court of History. And clearly the NCP would be the first culprit, if the South secedes, and I am afraid it will not be the South alone, the statement of the SLM/Abdel Wahid refers,will be the NCP (in fact the National Islamic Front), even if some of it’s former leaders distance themselves from the NCP.
7) History may not look favourably on the SPLM/A too albeit to a lesser degree. Should it give up all that it struggled for? Didn’t the SPLM/A start by fighting against the separatists in the South and didn’t through its leader declare that it will fight against the attempts of the extreme Islamists who wanted the South to separate? People die, principles don’t die. The people of South Sudan still have a stake in the Sudan,despite the prejudices,the stereotypes, some of which, I painfully read in the comments on Dong’s article.
8 ) The Sudan, is the microcosm of Africa. Africa the origin of the Arabs and the Africa where 80% of the Arabs live, in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania, they are all (except Morocco) members of the African Union and the League of Arab States, and so is the Sudan, a member of IGAD, of Comessa, the Sudan which is part of the East African Region, one of the five regions of the African Union.
9) If we talk about some seeking to establish an Islamic State in the North, it can also be said some seek to establish a Christian State in the South. The SPLM/A has always espoused the separation of Religion and State, n this it commands a wide support in the North.
10) In such difficult situations, it is only the Sudanese themselves,all the Sudanese, who can address their problems, heal their wounds, and chart their course for the future. Let us pray that common sense prevails in our country.
Will self-determination be one of the Issues in Darfur?
The recent wrangling between the two parties of the CPA on the issue of the referendum bill shows how such issues can be very divisive, especially when the most likely outcome of that exercises going to be the secession of part of the country, and the ramification of that on the rest of the country.
The spokesperson of the SLM- Abdel Wahid, Yahia Bolad said in a press statement on the 30 December 2009 that they will demand the right of self-determination for Darfur people, saying Darfur was an independent Sultanate up to 1916. That is true Darfur joined the current Sudanese state in 1916 after signing agreement with the colonial power at the time. I have spoken to Mr Bolad this morning asking him about his statement and he made it clear to me that they will start a serious debate on this issue, and most probably will consider it as one of their options in any coming negotiations.
That is not the first time for this issue to be raised by one of the leaders of Darfur armed movements, in 2004/05 during the negotiations of the Declaration of Principle (DOP) Abdel Wahid Nour (SLM Leader) demanded a clause clearly stated the unity of Sudan must be voluntary and when I asked him to explain to me what he means by that he said it is the right for self-determination. Dr Khalil (JEM Leader) mentioned that many times in 2006.
I think the elites in the centre must take this very seriously and try to move the peace negotiations quickly with a genuine attempt to resolve this issue before it is too late.
There are no fixes in international politics and if the suffering of the people of Darfur continues for long the international community might consider this new proposition.
This is just a personal opinion within the movements but might be a policy if time goes by, in the current climate of distrust.
The Darfur peace negotiations are going nowhere. I don’t see any prospect of a genuine peace in the near future and any forced peace will not work, with the DPA as clear example and as Minni (Senior Assistant to the President) said last week only 5% of it is been implemented, I think that is a discouraging after and will not help the current peace process in the region. Dissolution and hopelessness will hold to such demands.
Instead of fighting for what self-determination law we passed we better resolve this problem in a way which end the suffering of the people of Darfur, sustain peace and get the IDPs back to their villages.