Closing Ranks in Regional Crises

Doesn't it invariably happen? That closed communities, or organizations, or ethnic groups, or rarefied and esteemed professional groups will close ranks when criticism or outrage born of perceived political, social or professional infraction is made public? There is a collective reputation, honour, to be upheld. There is a situation of guilt, or besmirching by association. Accuse one doctor or lawyer or politician of malpractice and his fellows will stand to attention.

In the larger landscape of human interaction and dynamics, there is the instance of religious groups standing in unity, in defence of one another. And then, there is the undeniable instance of regional geographic or continental association. Just as a family stands together in unison of purpose and defiance of outside criticism, despite their internal disagreements, so too will a geo-ethnic, religious or political group close ranks to protect one of their parts.

Egypt, in this particular instance, bridges the divide between the Arab and the African dynamics. Because Sudan has been accused by the United Nations and the Western world in general, of abusing a particular proportion of its population beyond mere control of unruly and secessionist groups, it has earned the censure of much of the world. This is where the Arab League and the African Union coalesce.

Through a deliberate campaign of fear and intimidation resulting in the murder of hundreds of thousands of its black population as a result of black tribal anger at their economic and civic needs being ignored, Sudan is deemed guilty of genocide. A program of mass rape, murder, and social dislocation has resulted in two and a half million Darfurians fleeing for desperate refuge within the country and beyond its borders.

It's estimated that three hundred thousand Darfurians were murdered over the space of five years, while the government of Sudan was busy putting down a black insurrection. Even though the United Nations has attempted time and again to persuade Sudan's president, Omar al-Beshir to call off his troops and Sudan's proxy Janjaweed militias which have been preying on Darfurians even in their squalid refugee camps, there has been no amelioration of the situation.

The African Union agreed to assemble a poorly-armed and trained combined militia to try to intervene and prevent further atrocities, but they have been largely ineffectual. The agreed-upon addition to the AU troops of UN-affiliated troops has never quite materialized, as Sudan's president has brought up one excuse for postponement after another. During which time Sudanese government troops have continued bombing Darfurians, even in the refugee camps.

Now, the International Criminal Court has taken the initiative to prosecute Sudanese political and military leaders, including the president, for war crimes. Representing the first time the ICC has accused a current leader of a country of committing crimes against humanity. Which led the Arab League to hold "crisis talks" on Sudan at its headquarters in Cairo, with the African Union.

For its part, the African Union's Peace and Security Council has "expressed its strong conviction that the search for justice should be pursued in a way that does not impede or jeopardize efforts aimed at promoting lasting peace". Rather a confusing statement, given the facts on the ground. How other can the search for justice and peace be pursued than to apprehend an obviously criminal government, to ensure it can no longer pursue its agenda of mass murder?

But the African Union is committed to unity within its membership. And it is expressing grave concern that Africa and African leaders are being held to a standard that is clearly, to their way of thinking, discriminatory. The AU's Peace and Security Council expressed it's position by "reiterating the AU's concern with the misuse of indictments against African leaders." Those same African leaders who unerringly move to brutalize their population at the first indications of social unrest.

This is no mere speculation; that the Sudanese government has orchestrated a criminal assault against a large segment of its population on a truly horrendous scale is manifestly undeniable on the evidence. Observers and human-rights groups, along with humanitarian assistance groups have verified the scale of the atrocity. As though that's not sufficient to indict the government, a former high-ranking commander in the country who had been tasked with arming and leading Janjaweed militias has come forward to attest to the veracity of the claims.

He has claimed publicly that he directed attacks on hundreds of villages in Darfur at the command of his government. The military commander, Arbab Idries, interviewed on a British television program, admitted that he was instructed by a senior government authority to recruit Islamic Arabic groups from Sudan's northern regions, and that he personally led five thousand horsemen in the resulting murderous campaign against black southerners.

"We were attacking villages where there were only the blacks", admitted this man. "These people were civilians. They had no weapons." Nor do the United Nations personnel located in Sudan, and they have now been evacuated, for their own safety, as expectations for a violent backlash against foreigners comes front and centre with news confirming the president's indictment. UN peacekeepers have been killed and wounded as Sudanese militias ambush UN convoys.

Aid groups attempting to deliver badly-needed humanitarian aid to Darfurians are increasingly coming under attack. These attacks will most certainly increase in the coming days, as Sudanese militias demonstrate their fury over the dishonour meted out to their present by the ICC. The country has no intention of surrendering any of its commanders or government officials previously indicted, to the International Court.

Much less would it contemplate seeing its president stand trial for war crimes. And should the ICC attempt to arrest President Omar al-Beshir if and when he attends sessions at the United Nations, as a sitting head of state, all hell would break loose, inevitably pulling other African states and their Arab state colleagues into the brew of anger and defiance at Western interests whose only goal, according to the AU, is to dishonour African countries.