Last week, Mark Goldberg had an important piece here at TAP about the current situation in Darfur, site of a genocide and an on-going ethnic conflict and humanitarian crisis, which argues that the Obama administration is about to confront its first opportunity to change the dynamics of the conflict there. The International Criminal Court will deliver its indictment of Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir in the next few weeks, and al-Bashir in turn is signaling an uptick in military violence against refugee camps. The new administration can gain concessions from Bashir in exchange for a delay of the indictment, or it can let this opportunity slip away. Today, Goldberg notes terrifying new developments in the region that are being compared to the run-up to Srebrenica.
All of which raises the question: What is the new U.S. policy there, and who will implement it -- in the recent spate of foreign envoy announcements, why no new envoy for Darfur? The current U.S. representative, Richard Williamson, is a low-bore Bush administration hang-over. For months, the peace process has been stuck in an unfortunate status quo while humanitarian relief efforts are stretched to the limit. Meanwhile, the U.S. has been supporting efforts like this failed radio broadcast; ProPublica reports that the Sudanese editors at the U.S.-funded program censored then fired a news reader from Darfur.
Right now, Obama's foreign policy hands are no doubt focused on the complex hand-over of portfolios like Iraq, Iran, Russia, China, etc. and unfortunately Darfur does not come high on that list. Though it is a good sign that supporters of an aggressive Darfur policy like Susan Rice and Samantha Power have found their way to high-level administration positions, the time is fast approaching for clearly articulated policy positions, and someone to take the lead on making clear U.S. intentions in the region and bringing relevant regional and international stakeholders to the table. A failure to take advantage of this rare opportunity to move this conflict toward resolution will be a failure of leadership, especially after our current president was willing to speak honestly about the issue as a senator:
This should be a swift and clear-cut decision. It is not only an issue of saving lives in the Sudan. It is necessary to support our interests in the region. And, our action and leadership will show who we are as a nation and as a people.
Just words?
-- Tim Fernholz
