gerson111309

On the homepage

Vikings

Favre's stats put him in MVP picture

Out There

Pardon Board

Petters

Petters jury will resume deliberations Tuesday

Home | Opinion Exchange | Commentary

Michael Gerson: Sudan, a land without law

Marco Di Lauro, Getty Images

By Michael Gerson, Washington Post

Last update: November 13, 2009 - 10:21 AM

Print this story

Follow Opinion Exchange on Twitter

More from Commentary

The genocide in Darfur is no longer a trendy cause. But the women of Darfur haven't gotten the message.

On May 15, a woman near the Al Hamadiya Camp in Zalingei was collecting firewood. Three armed men in khaki uniforms raped her, inflicted genital injuries and left her bleeding. She spent 45 days in the hospital. In 2003, the same woman had been raped and shot while fleeing her village.

Her story is contained in a recent, exhaustive, chilling report on Sudan, written by a panel of experts at the United Nations. A U.N. official told me, "We have not talked to a single woman [in Darfur] who has not stated that sexual violence is their first concern." Prosecutions are nonexistent. Local officials are indifferent.

The Darfur revealed in the report is a heavily armed state of nature. Uniformed troops, janjaweed militias and rebel groups all abuse civilians.

The Sudanese government routinely violates the Darfur arms embargo imposed by the U.N. Security Council in 2004, unloading weapons, according to the U.N. official, "openly, in front of you."

This is not, at present, the active phase of Darfur's genocide, involving mass attacks on civilians. Instead, it is the evidence of a genocide that has already succeeded. The Sudanese regime achieved its policy aims -- targeting disfavored ethnic groups, destroying their way of life and forcing millions into camps. And now it is threatening to forcibly relocate these victims in 2010 -- a plan of Stalinist scale and brutality.

Global attention has been diverted by the complexity of the conflict, the unsympathetic nature of Darfur's fractious rebels, and the threat of renewed war between Sudan's north and south -- a war that would overwhelm the region.

The Obama administration's lengthy review of American Sudan policy culminated in October with more of a whimper than a bang. The administration presented Sudan with a choice between two roads: one path of cooperation, engagement and incentives; the other of defiance, isolation and disincentives. But neither carrots nor sticks were specified.

The Sudanese regime receives small threats with insolence. It views minor American concessions as signs of weakness.

The administration's Sudan policy was produced by an exhaustive, interdepartmental process in which no one won or lost completely. As a part of the previous administration, I saw this kind of process at work -- and it is incapable of producing boldness.

The ultimate carrot would be to offer Sudan's leader, Omar al-Bashir -- currently under international indictment for war crimes -- the legitimacy he seeks, in exchange for the peaceful independence of south Sudan and unconditional cooperation in Darfur.

This approach, however, could not succeed without serious consequences for its rejection -- economic, political and military pressure, by a coalition of willing nations.

No bureaucratic process would produce such ambitious options. Only a president and his secretary of state can insist on boldness. Absent that insistence, America's Sudan policy is in a holding pattern.

The world looks at Darfur and responds, in effect: We can live with that. There are many in Darfur, however, who will not live.

MICHAEL GERSON,

Washington Post

Recent Commentary stories

Miami Herald: Castro brothers, the suppressors - November 13, 2009

Miami Herald: Castro brothers, the suppressors - More

Los Angeles Times: Clinton, Bush should have debated - November 13, 2009

Los Angeles Times: Clinton, Bush should have debated - Debate is a venerable oratorical form, a verbal art, if you will. It's a shame that the modern incarnation of debate -- the anger-fraught, sound-bite, gotcha version -- has so tainted its image that former presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton felt obliged to withdraw from several scheduled appearances together, largely over the use of that word. More

Comment on this story | Read all 4 comments | Hide reader comments

New ideas for the public sector

THERE'S NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME to create a more efficient Minnesota. Facing large budget deficits at the state, county and local levels, Minnesotans are seeing with new clarity that the public sector must adapt to new economic realities. Only the smartest, most strategic reinvention will ensure that our tax dollars are spent on the best programs and services. Read more

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS