On the morning of Tuesday 14 December, hundreds of women and men came on the streets in central Khartoum planning to walk peacefully to the Ministry of Justice to hand in a memo signed by a large number of Sudanese men and women protesting against the repressive and humiliating practices and laws constituted by the Sudanese Public Order Regime and to condemn the flogging of women. Prior to reaching the ministry, and while people were still gathering, a wave of arrests took place, with approximately 41 women and five men summarily arrested.

Accompanied by Nomie, a Chinese female translator, Owen Grafham describes interacting with Chinese migrant workers in the Sudanese capital of Khartoum.

Six Sudanese men have been executed for their part in a riot at a refugee camp in Khartoum in 2005. The men were held responsible for killing 13 policemen during the riots in which five civilians also died.

cc In response to Mahmood Mamdani's article

Sudan’s recent legal actions against a militia commander and others accused of war crimes in Darfur hold little promise of bringing justice to victims of serious abuses, Human Rights Watch has said. Human Rights Watch accused the Sudanese government of trying to undermine investigations by the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The Government of Sudan is one of the most unscrupulous governments in the world. And this is no mean ‘achievement’ given the many claimants to this dubious honour. It is so cynical that the words ‘shame’ and ‘sensitivity’ do not exist in its political dictionary and they do not have any equivalent meaning in its diplomacy either. Otherwise how can one explain its persistence in seeking the Chairmanship of the African Union despite its continuing ignoble record in the massacre and Gross Violation of the rights of its own citizens in the Darfur region, a killing field assuming the proportions of industrial mass murder. With the best of good will and efforts from the African Union through AMIS and now jointly with the United Nations through UNAMID the Khartoum government has played games with the lives of its own citizen with impunity.

It has been angling the chairmanship since 2006. However other African states have been so embarrassed by Khartoum that they were unwilling to allow it to be spokesperson of Africa’s premier diplomatic and political institution. It was largely because of Khartoum that the AU abandoned the OAU twin practice of rotation of the hosting of the Summit between the different regions and also the automatic assumption of the office of the Chair of the Union by the host country. Khartoum hosted the Summit in 2006 but did not become chair of the Union. Subsequently Gambia hosted the Summit in July 2007 but its erratic soldier-turned president and more recently mutating as HIV/Aids Doctor, Yaya Jameh, did not become the Chairperson either.

Khartoum has not given up its ambition and it is again one of the contenders for the Chairmanship at the 10th ordinary Session of the Assembly of Heads of state and Governments of the Union holding this week in Addis. The other contender is Egypt though there are also rumours that Tanzania may be a surprise contender to stop Khartoum. From all indications Tanzania may not enter the race unless really pushed. This is a shame because neither Sudan nor Egypt , for different reasons, deserves to head the Union. In Egypt’s case in spite of its status as the most significant of the North African countries in the Union it has always been a reluctant member. Like its other cousins in the Sahara except Libya, it is in Africa but its heart and soul are in the Middle East. I am not sure when the Egyptian President last attended an AU summit. It is supposed to be one of the five pillars of NEPAD but only on paper. It is more interested in the Arab League than any other multilateral body and generally prefers bilateralism with African states and special deals with extra African interests. Egyptian Chairmanship will induce more inertia in the AU for a year and probably sabotage any collective action on Sudan.

While Sudan shares some of the Egyptian Arab-centrism it is one of the most active member states in Pan African affairs however not always for the best of reasons. While its Arabised elite continue to look towards the Middle East it has to face the reality of having huge Negroid population not only in the South but across the country. The dominant elite may be Arabised and Muslim but the people are Africans. Even its name belies its racial claims. Bilad el Sudan means Land of the Blacks! The most obvious character of Sudan is the least talked about. When it serves its interest Sudan plays the Pan African and anti imperialist cards in the AU and the Arab/Islamic cards with Arabs and other Muslim countries.

It used the OAU and is now using the AU platform to fence off Western , mostly Anglo-American isolation campaign against it. Unfortunately the credibility of the west in general and successive US administrations in particular but more so Bush’s 8 years of unilateralism, have created willing ears and sympathy for Khartoum among other African states. Thus the AU has become a shield for Khartoum and it uses it very well. Its strategy is very simple but it continues to hoodwink African states most effectively. On every issue it will initially insist on no intervention at all proclaiming its sovereign rights. After so much controversies and prolonged inane negotiations it agrees to some form of African intervention especially to prevent Western or UN intervention.

But it had no intention of cooperating to end the suffering of its people. Several years down the line after so much haggling and zig zags it agreed to a hybrid of AU and UN. Thanks to the dithering of the powerful countries in the UN and the humanitarian-driven approach to Sudan with a not so hidden agenda for regime change even the hybrid force cannot take off immediately. African states have shown their readiness to deploy more troops but UN Security Council politics is delaying things all to the benefit of Khartoum and its killer allies in Darfur.

It cannot be right that a country and a government that kills its own people is allowed to be spokesperson for Africa. Khartoum should be disallowed from assuming the chair of the Union. If this means that Egypt takes the seat so be it but the best option should have been to have another state . Were Nyerere alive he would have had no hesitation in coming to the rescue. Even at this late hour one hopes that Tanzania and President Kikwete will come forward to save the Union from being chaired by an indifferent Egypt or a cynical Sudan.

*Dr Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem writes this syndicated column as a concerned Pan Africanist

*Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

As someone who believes in ‘African solution to African problems’ I should be excited as everyone seem to be about the so called break through between the African Union and the UN on the one hand and the Government of Sudan on the other, on ending the genocidal war in Darfur. But I am not excited at all. I am not excited because we have been down this road several times before.

Khartoum has been taking everyone for a ride for so long that we take every sign of compromise as a breakthrough even if it will lead to yet another road bloc.

Khartoum has perfected the art of talking while continuing to kill its own citizens either directly or indirectly through its Janjaweed militia.

The timing of this latest breakthrough is very significant. An African Union summit is only three weeks away. The UN human Rights Council is sitting in Geneva and the Bush Administration has recently announced a raft of ineffectual sanctions.

Khartoum has played the Pan Africanist card very well, insisting on an ‘African only’ troops which satisfies our Pan Africanist instincts but knowing fully well that logistical, political and other technical challenges may make it ineffectual. It believes that an African force is more amenable to its delay tactics than a force that included other armies and with a UN command. It has exploited the understandable anti–American sentiments across the world and in Africa especially to hoodwink people into believing that any UN involvement will mean a proxy American war in yet another ‘Muslim’ , ‘Arab’ or ‘poor Third world’ country. It needs the shield Africa and the AU in order for it continue to fend off a more effective international involvement. It can also count on other shields in the Arab League and Muslim countries and in diplomacy with other Third world countries.

In proclaiming African solutions Khartoum has been counting on African incapacities as evidenced from the various challenges that the AU Force has been facing since its deployment. It has a very restricted mandate that limits it to ‘protecting civilians’ many of whom it can only reach after the Janjaweed and Khartoum forces have done their worst. Even on occasions when it had had early warning about impending attacks on innocent civilians it had been slow in responding or unable to do so.

The situation has not been helped by many of the rebels who seem to be more interested in their own egos and exaggerated political importance than the suffering of their own people. Their clamor for ‘international’ force (which in their colonial mindset means US or other western intervention) has consistently played into the hands of Khartoum. It helps Khartoum’s image laundering as an African country standing up for African solutions and sovereignty portraying the rebels as ‘agents’ of extra continental powers. The rebels have not learnt from the bitter lessons of the MDC in Zimbabwe whose struggles have been made difficult among many Africans because of the West’s support for them.

Just check your diary and see how many times Khartoum has looked very reasonable before an AU summit and only to return to its belligerency soon after. I am not sure this is not yet another of such deliberate rising of false hopes of a peaceful settlement.

Khartoum has been talking to any body that cares to talk about Darfur. That is why it has been involved concurrently in half a dozen of peace initiatives!

The problem with these talks is that they do not stop Khartoum and its allied killers in Darfur from continuing their violence against the people of Darfur but they hold those involved in the talks in check. You cannot be advocating tougher measures against a government that you are negotiating with. In the face of a fractious and faction –ridden opposition and rebel movements the government become reasonable and many peace brokers become more sympathetic to it as their frustration against the rebels grow.

However there is a wider issue relating to the mandate of the peace keeping force itself on which the Khartoum government has been giving the whole world a merry-go round. AU forces on the ground are not delivering not just for technical and logistical reasons or lack of numbers alone. There is no peace to keep since neither the government Janjaweed and the rebel factions have in practice committed themselves to ceasefire for any length of time.

You can increase the numbers of troops but without enlarging the mandate the butchering of Darfurians will continue. What everyone is now calling a breakthrough has been on the cards right from the start. Even the limited AU mandate envisaged an African leadership but did not exclude collaboration with the UN and contribution of troops from outside Africa. But Khartoum bogged everyone down in logistical issues for several months. Everyone is feeling so guilty at the horrible pictures from Darfur that we become desperate for any sign, no matter how vague that Khartoum is about to relent. Hence we are now supposed to jump that the government of Omar Al Bashir has agreed to a ‘hybrid force’. What is inherently good in a hybrid force? What is so new about it anyway? Any Peace keeping force is by definition ‘hybrid’. The people of Darfur have been under the attack of a hybrid of Sudan’s regular forces and their Janjaweed killers. Africa and the UN must really stand up to Khartoum and say : enough is enough, we will do everything possible to stop you from further killing your own citizens. It is peace making, peace enforcement before talking of peace keeping.

* Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem is the deputy director of the UN Millennium Campaign in Africa, based in Nairobi, Kenya. He writes this article in his personal capacity as a concerned pan-Africanist.

* Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

The women of Somalia have a critical role to play in laying the foundation for sustainable peace in their war-torn nation by acting as a bridge between rival political movements and clans, says Asha Elmi, a member of Parliament of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG).

The Sudan Organisation Against Torture reports that on 12 June 2006 at 12:30pm, five men allegedly working for the security forces detained Omar Altaj Al-Nageeb, (25 yrs), a recent medical graduate from Omdurman Islamic University, Omdurman. Mr. Al-Nageeb was detained whilst distributing flyers in support of students suspended from the University for Non Payment of tuition fees.

Sudan has begun a campaign to keep African Union troops in Darfur and prevent a UN force from taking over efforts to restore peace in the conflict-wracked region, the top UN envoy in Sudan said Tuesday. Jan Pronk said an anti-UN climate is heating up strongly in the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, with threats and warnings that handing over to a UN force would put Sudan "in the same situation as Iraq a couple of years ago."

* See http://platform.blogs.com/passionofthepresent/2006/03/from_darfur_to_.h… for the latest news from Sudan.

You are cordially invited to participate in a 2-day parallel civil society forum on the 21 and 22 of January 2006. The forum will be in advance of the Heads of States Summit in Khartoum - Sudan, and will be an opportunity for civil society to address Peace and Security issues on the continent. The Peace and Development Platform (PAD), a programme of ACTION for Conflict Transformation network is organising this forum with the aim of bridging gaps and forging partnerships between grassroots and policy makers.

Tajudeen Abdul Raheem visits Khartoum for the first time in eleven years. In 1994, Sudan was at the height of Islamist rule, but now the hotel halls are filled with international NGO staff and Southern rebels struggling to change from their battle fatigues to fancy suits. There are many challenges ahead for peace in Sudan – not least of which are the expectations of the masses – and the new order will have to go beyond a change of uniform or the swapping of army camps for fancy hotels.

I was in Khartoum last week attending a conference of the regional organisation, Inter Governmental Agency on Development (IGAD), on building consensus around a peace and security strategy for the sub region. It was a follow up to a previous meeting early this year conveyed by IGAD with the support of the Addis based Inter Africa Group.

For many years IGAD has been synonymous with two of Africa's long running conflicts that have now been negotiated: Somalia and Sudan. Both have taken several years but IGAD leaders, supported by the African Union and other international actors have been very patient and persistent.

That patience paid off in the formation of a Government of National Unity for Somalia but unfortunately the government is yet to take the full reins of power in Mogadishu. The prospect for lasting peace in Somalia is also seriously in doubt given the increasing consolidation of self-rule in Somaliland.

However the Sudan negotiations, through Machakos and Naivasha, culminated in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between the Sudan Peoples Liberation Army / Movement (SPLA/M) and the Government of Sudan and the inauguration of a Government of National Unity with power sharing between the South, North and Centre and some representation for other parties.

While there is a lot of confidence that the peace may hold despite the unfortunate death of the charismatic 'strong man' of the SPLA, John Garang only three weeks after assuming office as the first vice president of Sudan, there are continuing concerns that Sudan's peace is not comprehensive enough given the continuing death and suffering in the Darfur region, where the Government of Sudan continues to aid and abet its Janjaweed militia allies in their attacks on mainly Black African Darfurians.

So both peace agreements that IGAD is justifiably proud of are not perfect. However this alone should not deny the organisation cautious optimism about its capacity to be a collective regional instrument for promoting regional integration and development and to be a forum for peaceful resolution of peace and security issues concerning the peoples of the region.

The conference was an attempt to document the often informal processes that led to the peace negotiations, reflect on the experiences and build consensus on a vision for the future. The conference can claim a modest success on this initial sharing of perspectives. The consensus document agreed after the three-day meeting - that brought together academics, think tanks, CSO activists, policy makers, diplomats, and foreign friends of IGAD –points to continuing engagement by IGAD within a framework of a people-driven and people-friendly regional integration vision.

While peace and security issues are of utmost importance, participants agreed that they are not just for inter state relations of governments or armed groups alone: The vision must be broadened to embrace human security and wider engagement of all stake holders. IGAD has to look at other aspects of regional integration that can promote wider peace in the region: regional citizenship, promotion of democratic governance, protection of human rights, informal linkages through social groups, students, women, youth, education, development of regional infrastructure, etc.

While the IGAD meeting was the reason I was in Khartoum, my main interest also included seeing for myself how the transition is shaping up - especially since the death of Comrade John Garang. The last time I was in Khartoum was 11 years ago. I had gone there to persuade the original NIF government of Dr Hassan Al Turuabi and General Omar Al Beshir to participate in the 7th Pan African Congress. They were angry with us for inviting Dr Garang and 'treating him like a head of state' when they considered him then a 'dangerous rebel'.

Arriving in Khartoum I could not help recalling the Chinese prayer 'May you live in interesting times'. If Garang was not dead I would have met him, holding court in the Khartoum Hilton, as the Vice President of the country with the same people who did not even want him at a Pan-African gathering a few years before. By coincidence it was the same hotel I was put in by the Government in 1994. Of course the atmosphere now and then were completely different.

In 1994 Sudan was at the dizzy heights of its Islamism, the NIF government reveled in its pariah status in the west and even considered it some kind of chivalry for Allah. The composition of those then milling around the Hilton was different. I remember there was a big American delegation of the Muslim-Christian Council led by Nation of Islam people, and other Islamist delegations from one country or the other across the world, all guests of the government.

But now the Hilton is dominated by: BINGOs, RINGOs, UN types, consultants, business wheeler-dealers and other assorted vultures of peace out for a grab of the peace action. But the most important residents in the hotel are the new SPLA/M elite looking every inch out of place. They reminded me of Miles Collines Hotel or Meridien in Kigali in 1994 after the defeat of genocide or the Intercontinental Hotel in Kinshasa after the exit of Mobutu.

You see the new rebel elite, recently made ministers in cities they had left several years earlier or never entered. The ones that fascinate me most are the former rebel commanders, in their new suits, usually ill-fitting because they are more used to their jungle fatigues. It is always amusing to watch these commanders trying to become civilians. Soldiers do not walk they march! So you see these big guys in their fancy suits and many of them with bulging inside pockets. There is also the problem of learning the new pecking order because you do not want to offend the new Big Men (and their few Big Women) who have become Honorable this, Excellency that, etc.

But beyond all this it was mixture of 'sadness and joy' returning to Khartoum. Sad that John Garang who had done so much to bring about this change was not there, but happy to see his colleagues continuing the struggle. Everyone I spoke to and commiserated on the death of our dear comrade left me with those comforting words "aluta continua'. They need this spirit if they are to make peace meaningful for southern Sudanese people and the generality of Sudanese.

Peace dividends must go beyond the exchange of military uniforms for smart suits; or from make-shift camps to the comfort of 5 star hotels and ministerial villas. There are just too many challenges ahead. First, there are the huge expectations of the masses that now that their 'boys' are in power their conditions will improve. This is a tricky one because the South has known only war and therefore the only industry is crude military-industrial in nature.

Two, many Southerners displaced by the war in northern cities, especially the millions in Khartoum, are hoping to escape the indignities of second class status in the north for the south where the SPLA and allies will be in charge. What work will they do? Where would they live?

Three, those remaining in Khartoum will need symbolic and practical measures that will begin to reduce their feelings of second class stature and apartheid type discrimination. How can one explain why most of the manual laborers digging around Khartoum in the many construction sites in a booming newly enriched oil country are Southerners? Why are most of the waiters, bellboys, cleaners etc in the Hilton of Negroid extraction? These are uncomfortable questions but they cannot be avoided if peace is to make sense to all these marginalized peoples.

Four, as it stands now the peace deal seem to be mainly between the north and the south with the assumption that both Beshir's wing of the NIF (a.k.a National Congress Party) and the SPLA/M will remain firmly in power both in Khartoum and Juba. So what will happen to other marginalized groups such as SPLA/M 's former allies in the NDA, rebel groups in Darfur and others that may also restart hostilities?

There are many other challenges but one vital one I have to mention is the question of a referendum due half way through the six year transition. I have no doubt in my mind that an overwhelming majority of southerners will vote for independence. Indeed one has the feeling that Dr John Garang was probably the only person left in the movement who still believed in a united 'New Sudan'. His death meant that the last ‘one nation’ Sudanese southerner has died and the road now (no longer if but when) leads to an independent Southern Sudan.

I know this conclusion is difficult to accept for many Pan Africanists but we have to ask ourselves what kind of unity we are building if citizens cannot feel or be treated equally in their own country. An optimistic half way house may arise if the Government of Sudan can demonstrate through genuine good will, real remorse and real actions during this fist phase in the transition that it has indeed changed. I am not naturally a pessimist but I have my doubts if the extremist core of this regime really wants peace in the Sudan or wish to devour their enemies in phases. It may be the case that the transitional period offers opportunity for a trial separation with a certain divorce after the referendum.

* Dr Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem is General-Secretary of the Pan African Movement, Kampala (Uganda) and Co-Director of Justice Africa. ([email protected] or [email][email protected])

* Please send comments to [email protected]

On 12 June 2005, the English language daily 'Khartoum Monitor' was served with a suspension order by the Press Council General Secretary, Dr. Hashim Mohamed Salih Aljaz. In a letter to the acting editor of the Khartoum Monitor, Dr. Hashim attached the decision of Judge Ismat Suleiman Hassan sitting at Khartoum North Panel Court dated 12 June 2005, ordering the withdrawal of the newspaper license. In justifying the decision, Judge Ismat's decision cited a High Court decision dated 12 July 2003, which ordered withdrawal of the license of the paper.

A top militia leader says the Sudan government backed and directed Janjaweed activities in northern Darfur, according to a videotape released by Human Rights Watch. Widely regarded as the top Janjaweed leader in Darfur, Musa Hilal was interviewed over the course of several hours by Human Rights Watch researchers in Khartoum. The Sudan government has said that any atrocities in Darfur are the fault of Janjaweed "bandits" and are the result of recurring ethnic clashes in Darfur in which the government is "neutral." "We now see that the two parties responsible for crimes against humanity in Darfur are pointing the finger at each other," said Peter Takirambudde, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch's Africa division. "Musa Hilal is a dangerous man for the Sudanese government. His testimony could be very interesting to the International Criminal Court."

The Sudan government has agreed to end military flights over Darfur and has signed a peace deal to end 20 months of hostilities with rebels from the western region. After three weeks of difficult talks sponsored by the African Union (AU) in the Nigerian capital, Abuja, the parties to the conflict late Tuesday signed a series of breakthrough agreements touching on security and humanitarian issues.

On 23 September 2004, the National Security Agency (NSA) arrested two University of Khartoum students and took them to the NSA political section offices at Khartoum North. It was alleged that they were beaten and punched all over their bodies for an hour, as they were questioned about the activities of the Darfur Student Association. Abd Alrahman Mohamed Abd Alrahman (27 yrs) was released the next day, Friday 24 September 2004, at 4pm. Faisal Dawood Abd Alrahman's (26 yrs) current whereabouts are not known.

Sudan's government is set to meet rebels from the Darfur region, in a bid to end the conflict described as the world's worst humanitarian crisis. Pro-government Arab militia have forced more than a million people from their homes and killed thousands. A ceasefire in Darfur was signed in April, but the fighting has continued. Khartoum, once accused of backing the Janjaweed militia, has vowed to disarm it. But the UN is concerned by reports of the forced relocation of refugees.

Reporters sans frontières (RSF) has called for the immediate release of Islam Salih, the Qatar-based television news network Al-Jazeera's Khartoum bureau chief. On 10 April 2004, Salih was convicted of "disseminating false news" and sentenced to one month in prison and a one million Sudanese pound (approx.US$3,800; 3,200 euros at the official rate) fine. He faces another month in prison if he does not pay the fine. The organisation also urged the Sudanese authorities to lift their news blackout on the tragic situation in the Darfur region, which is the underlying reason for Salih's arrest and imprisonment.

Reporters sans frontières (RSF) has called on the Sudanese authorities to stop harassing the daily "Khartoum Monitor" and allow it to resume publication at once, in line with a recent court decision. The English-language newspaper's publishing licence was cancelled on 12 July 2003, but this decision was struck down on appeal during the week of 8 September, and the National Press Council said the paper could resume publishing.

Dar Four rebels, in Western Sudan, said this week they are ready to sign a ceasefire with the Sudanese army after an initial agreement concluded with the Sudanese government during secret negotiations held in Chad. Sudan's liberation movement was established in August 2001 under the name of Dar Four liberation movement. It has been launching since February attacks against the Sudanese army in various areas of the almost desert areas of Dar Four. The rebels get logistic support from the main rebel movement in Sudan, the Sudan People's Liberation Army, which is deployed in various areas of southern Sudan.