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.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS