ICC TO INDICT BASHIR.

The International Criminal Court is set to indict Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir for crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes. It is the first game-changing opportunity in the Darfur conflict in some time and a chance for the new administration to articulate its policy in the troubled country. Today, I spoke with John Norris, an expert on genocide issues and the executive director of the Enough project, to get some sense of what's going on (questions have been edited):What can we expect after the indictment is issued?

From past experience in looking at Liberia and looking at Serbia and some other places, there is an awful lot of internal stock taking and internal negotiations. I would be surprised if everything blows up the day after a warrant issued. There will be a lot of political machinations [in Khartoum]. For the rebels, they see this as a chance to increasingly internationalize their cause, as an opportunity to get a more robust and credible peacekeeping force on the ground and press their advantage.The chief prosecutor of the ICC was shrewd in targeting this at Bashir directly and not casting too wide a net. That has sent out a message within the [ruling National Party Congress] and to Arab states that they want accountability for the leadership, but this is not necessarily an action by the ICC that is designed to produce whole-sale regime change. ... There are a lot of pragmatists within the NCP in Khartoum who will see Bashir as damaged goods.

How should the Obama administration respond?

The warrant is the biggest opportunity. It will cause a lot of people to wring their hands and tear their hear in respective capitals, including our own, but ultimately my view of this is that it is an opportunity, it is the kind of thing that can serve as a catalyst for fundamentally changing the conflicts in Sudan. What will be key to me is the effectiveness of the administration in putting together a multilateral coalition that establishes some clear red lines about how they're going to approach the Sudanese government.There's a chance for the administration to really use the bully pulpit to make clear that its not acceptable to deal with a leader who is facing an arrest warrant. [The U.S. should] articulate to the parties to the conflict what a road map towards talks and implementation and agreement would look like, with some very adroit both public and private diplomacy.We don't know how exactly it's going to play out. As long as the administration is really resolute and consistent on the issue, it will begin to ramp up a lot of international pressure on Basihr and I think ultimately that will lead to his downfall. ... The single most important thing is that they move beyond simply being reactive and piecemeal. That's really been the approach, of not just the previous Bush administration but administrations going a ways back, to Sudan, and certainly other allies in the international community. You have to look at Sudan as a whole; the reason there is a crisis and a genocide in Darfur is the reason that [the same as the conflict between North and South]: the reluctance to embrace power sharing in Khartoum. ... There is an opportunity to steadily ramp up pressure on Sudan, to make clear that this administration and its allies are willing to work with pragmatic people in the NCP, set some clear red-lines for the rebels, not going to give them carte blanche to do what they want on the ground.

What about people in the administration who have been outspoken on genocide issues in the past?

[U.N. Ambassador] Susan Rice was very outspoken about Muhajiriya. [Samantha Power] brings a very important voice, she clearly has the president's ear on this issue. Her biggest challenge will be getting fully up to speed on the bureaucratic machinery of how all these processes work. Every bureaucracy's got its own style and figuring out the inner workings of the NSC and how the NSC is relating to state and U.S.-U.N. at a time when Jim Jones is bringing in a new style and approach for it... [She has to] turn her good instincts and good ideas into effective action. ... There are a lot of competing voices [in the administration] that say this is too hard, don't do it now. I think who carries the day will say a lot about where this administration is going.

Will China play the spolier again during efforts to make progress in Sudan?

In some ways, again, this is a good example of some effective diplomacy the administration could do. Beijing's ultimate goal is stability. They like oil coming out of Sudan, it's important to them, it's probably a little less important since the global economy has taken a beating; they worry about the reach and scope of the ICC. If the administration can demonstrate that Bashir is a force for instability at this point, rather than stability, and that a lasting comprehensive peace agreement that deals with North-South, Darfur, revenue sharing with oil, would produce a more stable Sudan in the long run, that lines up pretty well with China's self-interest. I think it's important to really convey arguments in ways that make sense to Beijing, There's an awful lot of politicians and bureaucrats in China that really still don't get the impact of being on the global stage. It's still a very new experience for a lot of them. ... There is a cost for being seen as Bashir and Mugabe's defense lawyer, and that is not something that is in the long-run interests of China.

Related: Enough's report on the indictment.

-- Tim Fernholz