باقان أموم يستأسد بامريكا

Quote: Peter Lokarlo Marsu Victoria, Australia. Khartoum’s Intransigence And The Long-Standing Legacy Of Dishonesty Manifestly, the issues of Abyei and the border demarcation have now regrettably, become synonymous with the Darfur imbroglio, eluding all endeavours by the Sudan Peoples’ Liberation Movement (SPLM) to have the stalemate amicably resolved in the context of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement reached between the Government of Sudan and the SPLM two years ago. While these irksome questions continue to be contentious and blistering issues on the cards, it has correspondingly become exceedingly an arduous task to deal with the irrational and sadistic stalwarts of the National Congress Party (NCP), explicitly Dr. Mustafa Osman Ismail and Nafi Ali Nafie, both advisors to President Omar Hassan Al Bashir among others. These men have pushed Sudan to a ubiquitous state, fraught with hostility and an established guarantor of permanent bloodbath in the region. It is would be sagacious to have an epigrammatic mental picture of both the Abyei and the border issues in order to comprehend the controversy between the two governing Parties in Sudan’s transitional administration. The Protocol between the Government of Sudan (GOS) and the SPLM on the resolution of the Abyei signed on May, 24, 2004, provides that the Presidency of the Republic of Sudan shall establish an independent Commission to be known as the Abyei Border Commission (ABC) to define and demarcate the area of the nine Dinka Chiefdoms transferred to Kordofan in the year 1905, and both Parties namely, the government of Sudan and the SPLM, consented to the effect that any decision reached upon by the 15-man Commission which included a Panel of five international experts, would be binding on the government of Sudan and the SPLM. The ABC in its findings, established ample justifications and evidence of irrefutable proportions in its final report that Abyei belongs to the Dinka ethnic group and not the Misiriya guests and inhabitants of the area. Omar Al Bashir has always maintained that ABC which was duly mandated and tasked with the Abyei controversial question has exceeded its mandate. No elucidation or attempts by the President and his advisors of what that “exceeding of Mandate” insinuates. There is absolutely no convincing rationale underpinning such unhelpful and disparaging attitude of the NCP’s rulers towards Peace in Sudan; however it would extremely be hard for Khartoum to get audience for such a flimsy argument that lacks substance and political flavour in South Sudan and abroad. The question of the border between the North and South Sudan has been explicitly clarified in the CPA, without any room left for ambiguity. South Sudan comprises the former three Provinces of Equatoria, Upper Nile and Bahr El Khazal. Its precise geographical location and boundaries fall within the definition of the January 1, 1956. Yet Al Bashir’s contretemps with the SPLM and the government of South Sudan apparently appears to be based on oil resource of South Sudan rather than simply a surge of territorial ambition. Khartoum is not keen to claim the Halaeb triangle now under the control of Egypt, because there has so far been no discovery of mineral resource by multinational Companies, and the area remains as unrewarding as Al Bashir and Mustafa Osman Ismail’s political vision for Sudan. Taking stock of Khartoum’s intransigence and the long-standing legacy of dishonesty of all successive governments in Sudan, the following emerging paradigm is worthy of note: (1) Khartoum did deliberately miss out the 9th July troop withdrawal deadline, a visible infringement of the CPA arrangement. It is unlikely that Al Bashir and Company would be willing to relocate the Sudan Armed forces further North behind the January 1, 1956 colonial configuration line as a reciprocal move to counter the SPLM withdrawal from Hameskureib in Eastern Sudan in 2005. (2) The Stockpiling of qualitative weaponry by the NCP does clearly indicate the regimes’ penchant for more woes and bloodletting in an attempt to perpetuate their obnoxious rule in the country, forcing the innocent Sudanese to foot the bill of mayhem. (3) Maintaining of the 3,000 soldiers around the oil fields as announced by Sudan’s Defence Minister, spells out malevolent intentions of the NCP and their grand scheme of calculated strategies. (4) Recruiting and arming more private forces in Kordofan by the government of Omar Al Bashir on the prescription of his wicked advisors is contrary to the hackneyed call or lackluster maxim of “making unity attractive”. Such a move would rekindle a new cycle of conflict, and a consistent pattern of gross human rights abuses ,intentionally targeting innocent civilians The recent call in Cairo, Egypt by the Secretary General of the SPLM, Mr. Pagan Amun, should be construed in terms of reaction to Khartoum’s aggregate lack of political orthodoxy and civilized norms. USA which has so far played a constructive role in Sudan’s Peace alongside members of the IGAD should be reminded that their role as Watch Dogs of Sudan’s Comprehensive Peace Agreement is not yet over. The government of Sudan must be made to understand that it would not pay to subscribe in bloodbath and keep the country on an uphill track Peter Lokarlo Marsu, Victoria, Australia.