Internal differences, conflicting goals and a lack of coordination among Sudanese rebel groups are obstructing international efforts to reach a peace agreement with the government over Darfur, diplomats and aid workers say.
Two rebel groups launched an uprising against Khartoum early last year and accused the government of arming Arab militiamen to loot and burn villages to stamp out the rebellion.
The conflict has killed 50,000 people, displaced more than 1 million and left about 2 million in need of aid. The UN calls Darfur the worst humanitarian crisis in the world.
International bodies, including the African Union, persuaded the two sides to agree a ceasefire in Chad in April, and to sit down at peace talks in Ethiopia last month, which broke down after the rebels set preconditions that the government rejected.
The rebels have since said they were just requests, not preconditions for talks. But some say disarray among rebel ranks, mixed messages and the different agendas of the two main groups have frustrated efforts to resolve the conflict.
"The factionalism of the (rebel) leadership almost derailed talks in N'Djamena and set back the talks in Addis Ababa," said one African Union official working on the Darfur issue.
A Western diplomat based in Khartoum said: "I doubt they are both reading from the same hymn sheet."
Other analysts say that as international pressure on Khartoum builds, rebels are content to drag their feet in peace negotiations in the hope of winning greater concessions.
The Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), with around 40,000 fighters each, took up arms against Khartoum charging the government had neglected the vast region the size of France.
The government turned to the existing janjaweed militias, drawn from the nomadic Arab population, as auxiliary forces to suppress the rebels and non-Arab villagers considered to be their allies.
MIXED MESSAGES
Khartoum denies supporting the janjaweed but have agreed to try to disarm them under threat of possible sanctions by the UN.
The African Union has moved ahead on a tandem path, proposing another round of peace talks in Abuja, Nigeria on Aug. 23, but there is uncertainty over whether the rebels will attend.
On Thursday the two groups said they would attend the talks, but a JEM official said the date was unsuitable.
The response follows a pattern of often contradictory rebel statements from spokesmen who change frequently.
"It's a dilemma and, as the time for Abuja talks comes closer, I imagine it will get worse," an African Union official said.
"This is particularly a concern with JEM ... SLM is easier to deal with. The problem with them is less acute," he added.
"With JEM we have had splinter groups claiming to talk for the whole group ... it's difficult to know who talks for the group."
Rebel leaders, who have consistently angled for foreign intervention in Darfur, say reports of infighting amongst the leadership were part of a government ploy to discredit them.
"There are mistakes sometimes from some officials who say things that are not our policy," said SLM chairman Abdel Wahed Mohamed Ahmed al-Nur, blaming that on poor communications.
He said he was the overall leader of the group and took the final decision in political matters. But another SLM leader, Minni Arcua Minnawi, had previously told reporters he was the leader of the group, also known as the SLA.
"It is often unclear who speaks for the group or what section of the group they speak for. It is also unclear who speaks for the group at all and who doesn't," said one aid official who deals with SLM leaders on a regular basis.
STRENGTH IN UNITY
John Prendergast, a Sudan expert in Washington, said if Khartoum found the will to make the concessions for peace, including addressing rebel demands for wealth and power distribution, consensus among rebels would become all the more important.
"It is a problem of personality [between leaders], largely driven by how quickly the rebels were made to confront what their agenda will be," said Prendergast, special adviser to the International Crisis Group president for Africa.
If the rebels failed to find internal cohesion they would be unable to negotiate with the government on key issues, Prendergast said. But he stressed the initial responsibility towards finding a political solution was with the government.
The SLM holds territory in Darfur and observers say it is made up of three of the area's main tribes with substantial support among Darfur's settled farming population.
But a recent split is said to have left JEM's Europe-based political leadership with little control over events in Darfur. The government accuses JEM of links to jailed Sudanese Islamist Hassan al-Turabi, who hosted Osama bin Laden in the 1990s.
Turabi was once a powerful figure in the Islamist government of President Omar Hassan al-Bashir but is now one of its most prominent opponents. Khartoum says his Popular Congress has funded JEM rebels, who deny the claim.
The situation is also complicated by outside influences.
SLM and JEM are believed to have received weapons from sympathizers in neighboring Chad with tribal affiliations to the groups. Both movements have recently opened offices in Eritrea's capital Asmara. Khartoum has accused its neighbor Eritrea of supporting the rebels and of training rebels.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS