Internal differences, conflicting goals and a lack of coordination among Sudanese rebel groups are obstructing international efforts to reach a peace agreement with the government over Darfur, diplomats and aid workers say.
Two rebel groups launched an uprising against Khartoum early last year and accused the government of arming Arab militiamen to loot and burn villages to stamp out the rebellion.
The conflict has killed 50,000 people, displaced more than 1 million and left about 2 million in need of aid. The UN calls Darfur the worst humanitarian crisis in the world.
International bodies, including the African Union, persuaded the two sides to agree a ceasefire in Chad in April, and to sit down at peace talks in Ethiopia last month, which broke down after the rebels set preconditions that the government rejected.
The rebels have since said they were just requests, not preconditions for talks. But some say disarray among rebel ranks, mixed messages and the different agendas of the two main groups have frustrated efforts to resolve the conflict.
"The factionalism of the (rebel) leadership almost derailed talks in N'Djamena and set back the talks in Addis Ababa," said one African Union official working on the Darfur issue.
A Western diplomat based in Khartoum said: "I doubt they are both reading from the same hymn sheet."
Other analysts say that as international pressure on Khartoum builds, rebels are content to drag their feet in peace negotiations in the hope of winning greater concessions.
The Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), with around 40,000 fighters each, took up arms against Khartoum charging the government had neglected the vast region the size of France.
The government turned to the existing janjaweed militias, drawn from the nomadic Arab population, as auxiliary forces to suppress the rebels and non-Arab villagers considered to be their allies.
MIXED MESSAGES
Khartoum denies supporting the janjaweed but have agreed to try to disarm them under threat of possible sanctions by the UN.
The African Union has moved ahead on a tandem path, proposing another round of peace talks in Abuja, Nigeria on Aug. 23, but there is uncertainty over whether the rebels will attend.
On Thursday the two groups said they would attend the talks, but a JEM official said the date was unsuitable.
The response follows a pattern of often contradictory rebel statements from spokesmen who change frequently.
"It's a dilemma and, as the time for Abuja talks comes closer, I imagine it will get worse," an African Union official said.
"This is particularly a concern with JEM ... SLM is easier to deal with. The problem with them is less acute," he added.
"With JEM we have had splinter groups claiming to talk for the whole group ... it's difficult to know who talks for the group."
Rebel leaders, who have consistently angled for foreign intervention in Darfur, say reports of infighting amongst the leadership were part of a government ploy to discredit them.
"There are mistakes sometimes from some officials who say things that are not our policy," said SLM chairman Abdel Wahed Mohamed Ahmed al-Nur, blaming that on poor communications.
He said he was the overall leader of the group and took the final decision in political matters. But another SLM leader, Minni Arcua Minnawi, had previously told reporters he was the leader of the group, also known as the SLA.
"It is often unclear who speaks for the group or what section of the group they speak for. It is also unclear who speaks for the group at all and who doesn't," said one aid official who deals with SLM leaders on a regular basis.
STRENGTH IN UNITY
John Prendergast, a Sudan expert in Washington, said if Khartoum found the will to make the concessions for peace, including addressing rebel demands for wealth and power distribution, consensus among rebels would become all the more important.
"It is a problem of personality [between leaders], largely driven by how quickly the rebels were made to confront what their agenda will be," said Prendergast, special adviser to the International Crisis Group president for Africa.
If the rebels failed to find internal cohesion they would be unable to negotiate with the government on key issues, Prendergast said. But he stressed the initial responsibility towards finding a political solution was with the government.
The SLM holds territory in Darfur and observers say it is made up of three of the area's main tribes with substantial support among Darfur's settled farming population.
But a recent split is said to have left JEM's Europe-based political leadership with little control over events in Darfur. The government accuses JEM of links to jailed Sudanese Islamist Hassan al-Turabi, who hosted Osama bin Laden in the 1990s.
Turabi was once a powerful figure in the Islamist government of President Omar Hassan al-Bashir but is now one of its most prominent opponents. Khartoum says his Popular Congress has funded JEM rebels, who deny the claim.
The situation is also complicated by outside influences.
SLM and JEM are believed to have received weapons from sympathizers in neighboring Chad with tribal affiliations to the groups. Both movements have recently opened offices in Eritrea's capital Asmara. Khartoum has accused its neighbor Eritrea of supporting the rebels and of training rebels.
In September 2015, Russia intervened militarily in Syria’s civil war, propping up Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorship as it teetered on the brink of collapse. This was the high point of Russia’s resurgence on the world stage and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ability to tilt the war in al-Assad’s favor helped make him a regional power broker. In addition to enhancing Putin’s stature, the operation led to strategic gains that gave Russia leverage vis-a-vis regional and Western powers. Syria was thus a status symbol for the Kremlin. Putin, who sees Russia as a great power on par with the US and China, attaches
With Washington substantially off-guard in power transition, China’s supreme leader, Xi Jinping (習近平), is intensifying an anti-corruption campaign against the top military leadership. At a glance, the move seems to be consistent with his emphasis on the necessity of enhancing military preparedness for a possible full military invasion of Taiwan, because the military is required to be well-disciplined without corruption. Looking carefully, however, a series of purges of several top military leaders since last year begs the question of what dynamics has worked behind the anomaly. More specifically, general Wei Fenghe (魏鳳和) and his immediate successor, Li Shangfu (李尚福), were removed as People’s
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In the weeks following the 2024 US presidential election, I have received one question more than any other from friends in Taiwan — how will Donald J. Trump’s return to the White House affect Taiwan and cross-Strait relations? Some Taiwan counterparts have argued that Trump hates China, so therefore he will support Taiwan, according to the logic that the enemy of one’s enemy is a friend. Others have expressed anxiety that Trump will put pressure on Taiwan to dramatically increase defense spending, or to compensate the United States for allegedly “stealing” America’s semiconductor sector. While I understand these hopes and concerns, I
RSS