HRW, Oxfam say new Security Council resolution on Darfur weak

The non-governmental organisations (NGOs) Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Oxfam have criticised the latest UN Security Council's resolution on Sudan, saying it did not go far enough in trying to pressure the Sudanese government to stop the violence that has spawned a major humanitarian crisis in the western region of Darfur. The Council's resolution 1574 - adopted on 19 November, the last day of a two-day special session in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi - demanded that the Sudanese government, rebel forces and other armed groups in Darfur cease all violence and ensure that their members comply with international humanitarian law. It also endorsed the commitment of the government and the rebel Sudan People's Liberation Army Movement/Army (SPLM/A) to reach a final peace agreement on the conflict in the south before the end of 2004. "For the south, it [the resolution] is a step forward," Jemera Rone, HRW's researcher for East Africa and Sudan, told IRIN soon after the resolution was adopted, but added, "the Security Council resolution on Darfur is very weak and is a step back from the two prior resolutions." "It specifically does not repeat what the Security Council said before, that the government has to disarm and prosecute the Janjawid [militias). There is not a word in there about that in those terms. There is general reference to human rights abuses being committed without saying who is responsible, but it does not say anything about the government's specific duty and promise to prosecute the Janjawid and to disarm them." The Council's resolution demanded that the government and all armed groups in Darfur to "immediately cease all violence and attacks - including abduction, refrain from forcible relocation of civilians, cooperate with international humanitarian relief and monitoring efforts, ensure that their members comply with international humanitarian law, facilitate the safety and security of humanitarian staff, and re-inforce throughout their ranks their agreement to allow unhindered access and passage by humanitarian agencies and those in their employ". "I am afraid the government will take this as some kind of a pat on the back by the Security Council because that is the way the government operates diplomatically," said Rone. "They will disregard the two prior resolutions and they will take this resolution and show it to all their friends and say, 'Look they didn't really say we did anything in Darfur, they didn't condemn, they are not threatening sanctions," Rone said. She said that Khartoum was likely to see the resolution as the Council "turning a blind eye and they will be encouraged to continue to persecute the civilians of Darfur". Rone said the Council seemed to be "operating under the mistaken assumption that if they go soft on Darfur, then the government will sign the North-South peace deal". She said the countries that were pushing for an end to the conflict in the south last year had at that time also failed to pressure Khartoum to stop atrocities in Darfur, leading to what she said a "vicious ethnic cleansing campaign" in the region. Oxfam's spokesman Brendan Cox also welcomed the Council's efforts to move the peace process in southern Sudan forward, but said the resolution would have no impact on the crisis in Darfur. "People are dying in Darfur - people are dying in Darfur today. There are 200,000 people that we can't currently reach because of the security situation," Cox told IRIN in Nairobi on Friday. "This resolution is going have absolutely no impact on the people of Darfur. "What we would have liked to see is that some of the countries like the US and the UK, who were supporting a strong resolution - we would have liked them to come out fighting a little bit stronger, perhaps to really push this forward. Instead, they have agreed on a compromise resolution - it seems they have gone backwards rather than forward and that is condemning the people of Darfur to death," Cox said. Earlier, John Danforth, the US Permanent Representative to the UN and the president of the Security Council for the month of November said that "chaos and cruelty remain the order of the day" in Darfur and urged parties to the conflict to heed the Council's message to end the violence. The European Union (EU) also expressed concern that the Sudanese government had not fulfilled many of its obligations under two previous Council resolutions on Darfur, particularly its promise to disarm the Janjawid militias and bring the perpetrators of human rights abuse to justice. "At the same time, the rebel groups, by stepping up their attacks, have contributed to an escalation in insecurity and human suffering," the EU said in a statement delivered to the Council by the Netherlands ambassador to Sudan, Adriaan Kooijmans. "The EU will continue to exert pressure on both sides," he said. "The EU will take appropriate measures, including sanctions, against the government of Sudan and all parties if no tangible progress is achieved in this respect." In his address to the Council on 18 November, Sudan's First Vice-President Ali Uthman Taha described the conflict in Darfur as a "political war involving local powers backed by foreign circles that profit from the local contradictions in Darfur". He said the problem there had been exacerbated by drought and desertification.