International Responses to settlement between Darfur-Sudan governments; A Ethnic Conflict Case Study

Introduction

Demographics Profile

Militarization

National Responses

International Responses towards settlement of Darfur-Sudan

United State

China

Europiun Union (EU)

United Nation & ICC

Abstract

Darfur crisis in Darfur is one of the worst humanitarian tragedies in Sudan the crisis in Darfur was started in 2003 when two rebels group JEM (justice & Equality Movement) & the SLA (Sudanese Liberation Army) attacks on the government institute innorthern Darfur. The rebels give explanation of their attacks is economic and political marginalization. Response from the government is severe the Sudanese government label the rebel groups terrorists armed local Arabs & militia against the population of Darfur. The article describes the Darfur crisis in

border way the study include a short background to the crisis in Darfur and examines some of the major actor’s the government, rebels groups and international community. National and International responses to the crisis in Darfur. Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) 2005 and On 5 May 2006 due to the pressure of international community the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) was signed between government and rebel groups.

Introduction; In February 2003 the two rebels groups JEM (justice & Equality Movement) & the SLA (Sudanese Liberation Army) attacks on the numerous police station and the airport in El fisher of North Darfur as well as the rebels attacked on the Government garrison town in Golu and killed the two hundred soldiers. (M.W. Daly, Darfur Sorrow) .The SLA group is mainly consisted on Fur & Massalit tribes JEM is from the Zaghawa tribe & they all are non-Arabs. The rebellion groups gave explanation for their attacks are due to economic and political marginalization & deprivation. The rebels groups also claimed that government systematically targeted African Muslims (non-Arab) ethnic Group in Darfur since the 1990s. The NIF (National Islamic Front) terminate their claims and labeled them terrorist.(William Jeffries ‘’Timeline ofDarfur events,’’)

The response from the government towards rebellions groups was split. Government armed local Arabs & militia against the population of Darfur. The Sudanese government also sends the PDF (popular Defense Force) to hangout the rebels group. In their attacks the Janjaweed destroy the homes, property and torture thepeople, killings, rape, the campaign of terror is against the civilian.(Daly, Darfur’s sorrow, 283-284)

International community condemns the violence, but they strike down how to classify the killings. There is no doubt that the crisis in Darfur is one of the worst humanitarian tragedies in

the world the Darfur crisis explain and obvious challenge to boththe GoS and International community. The UN (United Nation) called the events as ‘’ crime against humanity’’ (human rights watch, Darfur Destroyed) United State declare it Genocide. Human rights watch labelling it ‘’ethnic cleansing. International community, UN. EU, AU play role to resolve this issue and also worked for humanitarian development. Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) 2005 and On 5 May 2006 due to the pressure of international community the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) was signed between government and rebel groups.

The Present study will give an insight of historical background of the issue. In the research researcher analyze the events data and integrated the explanation by which Rebellion groups militarize against the Government. The paper analyzes the Darfur conflict from both local and national/international viewpoints. Eras of neglect and lack of basic governance created the conditions for conflict and the motivation for armed opposition. Researcher aims to take a comprehensive account over the responses of international on the events when they try to resolveit.

Statement of the Problem

Was the breakout of ethnic violence and the international conspiracy to derive Sudan which is rich in mineral recourses areit short sighted of the Sudan government which due to its brutal polices. Escalate the conflict to a level of ethnic violence. Were the Darfur Region deprived to such as extent and were deniedany chances to redress their grievances and they have no alternative to arm struggle. The Present study will give an insight of historical background of the issue.in the research researcher analyze the events data and integrated the explanationby which Rebellion groups militarize against the Government. . The paper analyzes the Darfur conflict from both

national/international viewpoints. Researcher aims to take a comprehensive account over the responses of international on the events when they try to resolve it.

Objectives:

To know about the nature of conflict and international involvements.

To analyze the role of international community and its implications in Darfur Sudan Conflict.

To explore the capabilities of both parties to maintain a peace process.

Demographics Profile

In the early 1970 Darfur province divided into three Darfur state. North Darfur, South Darfur, East Darfur. It is an area of approximately 500,000 Km. Darfur located in western part of Sudan. Before conflict Darfur population is 6 million including Arab and Non-Arab. South Darfur having most populous state with 4million population. North Darfur has 2.2 million and East Darfur1.4 million. Darfur shows a picture of Barren Landscape, overwhelmed by desertification and drought. Darfur is poorest area of Sudan and Arabs & Non- Arabs suffered greatly.

Darfur region is mix of ethnic groups some groups claim that their roots trace back to African Kingdom the (Fur, Zaghawa, Masalit) and Arab claims that their roots trace back to ancient Arabs(Rizeigat ,Misseriya ,Sharafa , Taisha) and many, many that are mix of two. (Flint,Julie, and Alex De Waal. Darfur: A Short History of a Long War.) The relationship between the ethnic groups is sphere sometime due to resources and drought and lessening natural resources.

The cultural of Darfur is hybridization of all the custom Tradition and religious beliefs of different tribes in Darfur.

Official language is Arabic and English in Sudan. In Darfur eachtribes has its own language, unique art form and dances. Languageis mainly important aspect of Darfurian culture both Arabs and Non-Arabs speaks Arabic but Non- Arabs Darfurian also speak theirtribe Language.( De Waal, A. 2005.)

Islam is the Common Belief system in Darfur and they celebrate almost same celebrations and ceremonies. Darfurians are 15% of the total population of Sudan and they just have 3% representative in the National assembly.

South Darfur economy based on agro-pastoralism. Arab Darfurian are nomadic they herds animal ,often crossing into eastern Chad &the central African Republic Non-Arabs Darfurians are former they cultivate crops and sell in the rainy season. Downgrading and isolated from the Government of Sudan economy is disabled from reaching its full production and trading potential. Unevenlydeveloped transport infrastructure effect the economic development there is lack of transport limitation toward remote area. (De Waal, A. 2005. )

The Darfur crisis in Historical Background

Sudan gets Independence from British in 1956. Sudan is located inthe region where conflict is uncertain, Egypt and Libya in the North, Chad and Central African Republic in the West, Ethiopia and Eretria in the East, Uganda and Democratic Republic in the South. All these countries involved in Interstate and intrastate conflict in the past. Darfur is not encompassed in British colonyuntil 1916. Darfur had an own sense of identity for hundreds of years in the past. The British Government as well as the Government of Sudan they do not take any step for the developmentof the Darfur or they had lack of interest for the development ofDarfur.( Al-Mubarak, M. 1995 )

Sudan faces the first civil war soon after its independence. A South-Based rebel Group fought for the independence of the south from the Northern Government. This conflict ended in 1972 throughthe Addis Ababa agreement that granted the South Qualified Autonomy. (Enough (2008) “Abyei Sudan’s)

In the 1983 the 2nd North South War broke out once again. When the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement /Army (SLM/A) has sought to expel the Northern rule from the South since the early 1980.SPLM/A is the main rebel military opposition to the government and also active as a main factor of continued civil war between south-north. .( Al-Mubarak, M. 1995 )

The Government tried to impose Islamic Law in 1983 as an official law across Sudan and in all those areas where the majority is not Muslims. The implementation of Islamic law also afactor of civil war. The oil discovers in Sudan 1983 also complicated the relation between south and north and play a majorrole in Sudanese civil war in 1983(.Flint Julie and De Wall). In 1980 president Numeiri make a division between north and south and make a unity state in which he allocated the oil rich area toNorth. This plan was rejected by south laeders.in these way governments control the oil rich area and deprived the south fromoil in Addis Ababa agreement southern regional government had right on the all profit on export from the region. .( Flint,Julie(2007)

Environmental degradation that began in Darfur in 1970 & become serious 1980 is one of another critical factor which increases the severity of these conflicts.( De Waal Alex (2007) No step was taken by the side of Government for the reform of these problems and livelihood of the population in the region. People come from neighboring country increased the population in Darfur and situating pressure on the already fright resources. The less resources and many drought in the area increased the chances of Violence and lead towards the level of fighting.

Another factor which is important for the understanding of the current conflict situation in the Darfur is the continuously marginalization in the region from the time of independence. In 1960 the consciousness increased in the region. Ahmed Ibrahim Draige founded a movement with the name of Darfur Resistance Front. The demand of this movement is more representations for the Darfur and they also claim that the Government did not pay attention on the voices of Darfurians. The representation of Darfurian in parliament was very low in during both military ruleand democratic rule the movement also demands more resources for Darfur. In the same years two other movements also emerged in west Darfur with the name is sooni and seconds is Red flame both movements trying military coup and using violence to change the situation in Darfur but their plans was not come into practice. These movements important for exhausted a sense of marginalization in Darfur.

These examples show that the idea of using military ways is not new for changing the situation of Darfur. Three common events of the 1980s that are enough for understanding the present Darfur conflict. The Drought and famine of the 1984-85 (2) the creation of new ideology of Arab supremacism (3) the Arab-Fur war in 1987-89.

The famine in 1984-85 changes the entire situation of social (De Waal Alex (2007). Economic and political landscape in Darfur in many ways as it faster continuing changes. These situation is worse due to Governmental neglect they were not giving support tothem.

UN secretary General Ban Ki Moon stated; “Amid the diverse social and political causes, the Darfur conflict began as an ecological Crisis, arising at least in part from climate change”.(Ki-Moon, Ban (2007)

Its mean that drought and famine change is the cause of migration and maintenance changes and creating hidden actual thatlater on focus of the armed conflict. In 1987-88 different Darfurian leaders of Arab Descent formed the Arab gathering. (Kamal el-Din (2007). The ideology clearly shows in their documents in racist point of view that Arab leaders consider him more civilized as compare to Africans.

Government supports the different Arab ethnic groups in their common conflicts which are continued in 1980 and throughout the 1990 and one important event happened in the end of 1980s Fur Arab war .In the med the Fur Arab war sized when new Government National Islamic Front (NIF) took power in Khartoum the reason behind this halt they thinking about that with the change of government in the regime may be give any change. But soon they realize the new Government pursues the interests of specific ethnic groups and they once again re-emerged. In 1994 Government divide the Darfur in Three different regions this is one of strategy of (Tubiana, Jérôme (2007) government to split the Fur in North Darfur, South Darfur, and West Darfur which reduce theiroverall power.

In 2001 a clash broke again between Arab & Zaghawa in which 70 Zaghawa was killed this attack led by an Arab Awad Zeil and government is also involved. These attacks happen near the important water sources used both Arab and Zaghawa but after the clash the regular army stops the Zaghawa for using the water. These incidents clear the support of government to Arab (Flint, Julie 2007). In 2001 all the three tribe join together Fur, Massalit & Zaghawa they all have viewed that GoS behind their problums.in early 2001 the organization of three tribes organize more and more and in 2003 they attacks on the government position.

Militarization

The term ‘militarization’ is used in a variety of ways. It is used as a legal concept, or to describe a security concern, humanitarian issue, or political objective. A Libyan Chadian warin 1980s is the prominent feature of weapons depot in Darfur thatincludes automatic rifles and subs machine guns (Flint,Julie 2007). According to an estimated 1.9-3.2 million weapons are in circulated in Sudan .20% (UN survey 2005) has GoS two third heldby civilian and reminder GoSS (Government f Southern Sudan).

Sadiq al-Mahdi while prime minster took decision to give arms to the Baqqara of southern Darfur that they defend themselves against the Sudan People Liberation movement the militarization of the crisis has grew in the mid of 1980. Before the conflict of2003 regional networks provide weapons from Eritrea and Sudan people Liberation Movement and from local supporters. Uganda support SPLA/M in 1983 against GoS (AI (Amnesty International). 2002. Eretria 1990 Beja National Congress, Eritrea once again in 2000-6, National Democratic Alliance 1994-present, justice equality movement in 2003-present. Ethiopia Anyanya Sudan 1960s, Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army Sudan 1983–2002 , Sudan Alliance Forces Sudan 1990. Chad SLA/tribal militias Sudan 2005–present

The GoS was responsible for providing the lot of quantity of weapons, to affiliated military and to national military the rebel get arms through attacks and from market. (Flint,2007, p. 147).

National Responses towed Darfur Crises

The response from the GoS was plain. The GoS armed local Arab known as (Janjaweed or men on horses back) and send them against the population of Darfur. Deployed the (PDF) Popular Defense Force for hanging out the rebels group. (Flint,Julie (2007) TheJanjaweed attacks on the villages surprisingly, forcing the population to flee, systematic destruction of homes and property,

executions, and force relocation while they have full military air support and transportation.

The national response toward the present issue has been doubtful and complacent throughout the crisis. The main response to the GoS denial of the conflict, lack of seriousness, and depreciatingthe crisis in Darfur. Even though the Sudanese government classification the conflict is between former and nomads. This description continual for a long time before it was too clear that it cannot be continued anymore. Government hold the nationalmedia it’s not shows the crisis as what is going on there it’s even hardly shows images of destruction appear. (El-Battahani, A. 2004 ).Even the independent newspaper doesn’t touch the crisisin a meaningful way. Before this conflict occur some official wise voices called the Government for resolving the problems of Darfur One of the governor of Northern Darfur, General Ibrahim Suliman, was amongst a few members of the ruling party who advised the government to adopt a more flexible and open political approach to the problem.

International Responses towards Darfur Crisis

China Oil is main interests of china in Sudan china buys two-third of oil that Sudan exports. China is main provider of weapons to Sudan. (LeRiche, Matthew, 2008 ). When conflict is happened china did not pay much attention it china adopt the policy of neutrality and gave statement that was happed in Darfur is not a ‘racial genocide’ but an internal conflict between different tribe who compete for resources. In august Chinese Lv Guozeng special representative visit the Sudan he argued that china provide 5 million Chinese Yuan value material as humanitarian assistance for Darfur Crisis. He also confirmed the AU and Leagueof Arab in dealing with Darfur crisis. (Wang Yaping,2007) .In 2006 Chinese Government support the resolution of UN 1706 Chinese

president talk with Bashir comprehensively cooperate with international society and implements the UNs resolution and Darfur peace agreement. Since 2006 china is more active to resolve the issue by three ways First pressing Sudanese Government to accept UN resolution. Promoting to build joint peacekeeping troops; and coordinating with international society.(Wang Yaping, 2007) In May 2007 china is special representative Liu Guijing visited Africa two time talked with Sudanese Government, the AU, and some western powers, coordinating with them to resolve the Darfur crisis through political dialogue .

In March 2008 china supports the UNs resolution 1769 which decided to appoint UN peacekeeping troops in Sudan. China contacted with the South Sudan leaders of the rebellion groups. In Darfur crisis resolution process China played special role on the basis of special interests. China has deep economic ties withSudan and China does not want to destroy the bilateral relationship by join the international society against Sudan in initial crisis.( Economist (2006)

After that when situation turned in humanitarian crisis china put more international pressure and change its policy of neutrality. Because this violence could destroy the Chinese enterprises interests. China approach toward resolving the issue based on is political dialogue and diplomatic means.

United State

The response towards United States has dual relationship when it intervenes in Sudan. Sudan is a partner of US War in Terrorism and they have counterterrorism deal with Sudan. On 9th September 2004 US secretary of state Colin Powel declared that Massacre hadbeen committed in Darfur.( CNN. 2004)

In 1993 America declared Sudan terrorism sponsoring state put diplomatic & comprehensive trade sanction on Sudan in 1996.

United states adopt aggressive polices toward Sudan one importantaspect of these polices was the prevention of Sudan to exploit its oil wealth.

After few months CPA (Comprehensive Peace Agreement) was signed with the full involvement of US. The US government seriously pushed by the different interests group in both declarations Darfur as genocide and involvement in negotiation of CPA.

Osama bin Laden live in Khartoum in 1991 untill1996 United State suspected for long time Sudan for supporting terrorism. (“The Answer to Darfur How to Resolve the World’s Hottest War” by John Prendergast p.3)

After the great pressure from US and Egypt Sudanese government expel Osama Bin Laden but US government still believe that Sudan support the terrorism & in 1997 Clinton administration imposed comprehensive sanction on Sudan US has very strict policy against Sudan. . (MSNBC (2007 ”FAQ: Osama binLaden”)

The US Sudan’s relation has become change after 9/11 attacks in New York & Washington because Sudan governments start to co-operate with US against terrorism. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said:

“In the last few weeks since the attacks in New York and Washington, we have had some serious discussions with the government of Sudan about ways to combat terrorism” (BBC (2001-09-28) “UN lifts sanctions on

Sudan”) Colin Thomas-Jensen, an Africa expert at the International Crisis Group states

“that the US is reluctant to put heavy pressure on the Sudanese governmentbecause of counterterrorism and Washington’s approach in the war on terrorism”

Thus the intelligence cooperation between the Sudan government and US continued despite a Slaughter committed in Sudan.

Sudan also helps US in Iraq War Sudan stop the militants who joinanti America, many Islamic Militant travelling to Iraq and Pakistan pass through Sudan and it’s easy for Sudan to put spies into Iraq on these anti-American fighters and Sudan intelligence services helps America.( The Guardian (2005) In May 2007 US imposed sanctions against Sudan’s 31 companies and on three businessmen doing business in US.

John Prendergast senior advisor to International Crisis Group stated these, sanctions ‘’Window Dressing’’ designed to look tough but in reality US not fully pressurize the Sundae government because US do not to lose his intelligence cooperation.( Los Angeles Times 2007 )

The Save Darfur Movement Pressuring the US to take stronger action against Khartoum and many people in US administration support the south Darfur because majority of Christian present insouth Darfur and also Religious organization In US support the Christian in south. (New York Times 2006)

Despite all these interests US involve in giving humanitarian aidto Sudan. US give US$ 2 million on humanitarian assistance in Sudan & have contributed 85% of the world food programs in Sudan.US president also meet with the Sudan vice President for the fullimplementation of CPA and the rebellion leader Mini Minawi the only leader sign the DPA.

African Union

AU (African Union) come 1st try to stop the violence because

after 2year there is no strong reaction taken place on Darfur

crisis from international community.AU actively engaged in

negotiate with the Sudanese government and the rebellion groups.

In April 2004 African Union actively participate in ceasefire

between Armed Movements and Government of Sudan in Chad.

AU sends several hundred unarmed troops to monitor the situation

after the ceasefire. In January 2006, the African Union stated

that transforming AMIS (African Mission In Sudan) into a United

Nations force is acceptable to the AU in principle. In March, the

AU agreed to accept a United Nations peacekeeping mission for

Darfur.

European Union (EU)

The EU mostly active in Darfur for humanitarian assistance. EU

contributed I billion funds in 2007 these funds used for food

aid, for refuges, and for political process and African Union

Mission in Darfur. (‘European Union Response to the Darfur

Crisis).EU plays an important diplomatic role for the creation of

CPA & DPA between North and South. EU also supports the AMIS in

Darfur and provides logistical aid.EU don’t put any sanction on

Sudan it was also strong promoter of deployment of UNAMID. (Cohen

2005).

United Nation & ICC

Initially, the UN attitude to the conflict in Darfur was marked

by considerable hesitation to take action and a tendency towards

little steps for peacemaking. Darfur association tried to

convince United Nations attention toward the disaster and it was

first voiced in the UN by humanitarian officials in conversations

and meetings in 2003. The first time the situation was formally

brought to the attention of member states was most likely in

December 2003 when, during an open debate of the Security Council

on the protection of civilians in armed conflict and UN mentioned

the 600,000 displaced people in Darfur and his serious concerns

about a growing humanitarian disaster there (UNSC, 2003). After 1

year when the conflict and violence destructed the Darfur

miserably United Nations Security Council agreed that Darfur was

an issue which could no longer be ignored, other offices of UN

behaved as courageously.

During this period, the General Assembly, the body composed of

all UN members, made a feeble and wholly unsuccessful effort at

addressing the Darfur crisis. In autumn 2004, a resolution on the

human rights situation in Darfur was blocked from even being

voted on by a procedural move known as “a no-action motion”, a

highly effective tactic which had previously been used in similar

politically sensitive human rights cases. In addition to

defeating the resolution, this tactic blocks any discussion of

the substance of the matter. Arab states uniformly supported this

motion. This scenario played itself out again in 2005.

After 2005, the General Assembly approach was dropped. During

2004 and 2005, the Security Council received monthly reports

about violence on the ground, involving the burning of villages,

massacres of civilians including women and children, rape, and

forced displacement (UNHCHR, 2004). United Nations took a step

that would set off the chain of events leading to the Security

Council’s referral of Sudan to the International Criminal Court

in March 2005, and the subsequent condemnation by the ICC of

several Sudanese leaders, including, in March 2009, of its

president. UN Members were largely in agreement that atrocities

in Darfur were unacceptable. Most were willing to express this

sentiment in statements and resolutions. But as far as taking

measures went, significant differences quickly surfaced.

Initially, the situation in Darfur was largely seen as a campaign

by the government and its allies against the civilian population

of the region in which the rebel movement played only a marginal

role (Ferris, E. 2008). Gradually, however, developments in

Darfur started being seen more as a classic, symmetrical conflict

for which mediation would be the most appropriate tool, and a

peace agreement the ultimate goal, with accountability becoming a

much less central issue (Waal, A. 2007). In March 2006, it agreed

“in principle” (AU, 2006) but soon started showing signs of a

change of heart. In June the AU transmitted a report to the

Council from an assessment mission in which it stressed the need

to strengthen the AU mission (Grono, 2006), that many actors on

the ground objected to the transfer, and warning that there could

be negative consequences stemming from the deployment of a UN

force in Darfur (UNSC, 2006). All of this was obviously due in

part to vigorous diplomatic activity by Sudan within the AU and

strong voices against the proposal from some Arab Group members.

Some AU politicians probably saw it as a useful entry point into

a new type of a relationship with the UN. The situation in Darfur

during this period deteriorated considerably. Showing clear signs

of frustration with the constant delays, and notwithstanding the

AU’s demurrals, in late August the Council adopted resolution

1706 in which it decided to expand the existing operation in

Sudan, UNMIS, into Darfur, and to deploy by October 1, 2006

(UNAMID, 2008). The implications in creating this hybrid

operation go way beyond Darfur, and will probably have an impact

on future UN peacekeeping and its handling of security issues.

This in itself is a serious challenge for peacekeeping. When at

the end of the summer 2009 the head of UNAMID departed, the post

remained vacant for many weeks. Furthermore, UNAMID is an anomaly

of sorts: Sudan is the only country with two separate UN missions

active at the same time, creating a set of unique logistical and

operational challenges.

The ICC declared the Security Council, announced his intention to

indict the Sudanese president in the middle of 2008. Some

governments, in particular the African and Arab states, argued

that the Court was undermining the peace process and that the

Security Council should ask the ICC to suspend work on any

Sudanese cases (UNSC, 2009). At the time of writing, the Security

Council has refrained from taking such a step, but the ICC March

2009 indictment of the Sudanese president nevertheless has had a

serious impact both on the dynamics within the Council, and on

the situation on the ground. In retaliation, Khartoum expelled

more than a dozen international NGOs which collectively provided

the bulk of humanitarian assistance to the population of Darfur,

leading to fears of a humanitarian disaster. That this did not

fully materialize is probably to the credit of the international

community, which reacted swiftly and decisively and, for once, in

unison. The overwhelmingly negative international reaction

probably caught Khartoum by surprise. The UN Secretariat, in

particular its humanitarian machinery, played a critical role by

immediately engaging in tough negotiations with the government

which resulted in arrangements which filled the vacuum left by

the expulsions to some extent.

Conclusion;

The crisis in Darfur is one of the worst humanitarian disasters

in which millions of people lost their lives, homes, property and

their loved ones. Darfur crisis now settled through different

peace agreement but after the lot of destruction and killings.

Government of Sudan’s pessimism, international confusion (and

lack of will too), and complex local level dynamics

contributed to the acceleration of the crisis in Darfur.

The government is not open to deal sincerely with the root causes

of the crisis. a reasonable distribution of political power

and economic resources, and just development are some of

the issues that the government is not really willing to

discuss. History shows that government of Sudan not properly

addresses the problems of southern Darfur and some of its

policies fuel the ethnic conflict e.g. Arabism and sharia law. A

Darfur crisis was a complex political crisis human rights

activist, civil society organizations and worldwide media bring

the attention of the world toward this human disaster.

The international community is holding the stick from the middle

especially America and China International community has their

own interests in Sudan they just threaten the Sudanese government

not put any hard sanctions on it. On the one hand, they

declared genocide occurred in Sudan and On the other, the

Sudan government is compulsory government with which the

international community must do business.

Refresances

M.W. Daly, Darfur’s sorrow: A History of Destruction and Genocide (Cambridge University Press,2007), 281

M.W. Daly, Darfur’s sorrow: A History of Destruction and Genocide (Cambridge University Press,2007), 281

William R Jeffries, ‘’Timeline of Darfur Events,’’ in The Darfur Crisis ed.

Flint, Julie, and Alex De Waal. Darfur: A Short History of aLong War. London: Zed Books, 2005.

De Waal, A. 2005. “Who are the Darfurians? Arab and African identities, violence and external engagement,” African Affairs, 104 (415): 181-205.

Al-Mubarak, M. 1995 (second edition) Tarikh Darfur al-syasi (the political history of Darfur). Khartoum: Khartoum University Press.

Enough (2008) “Abyei Sudan’s ‘Kashmir’”by Roger Winter and John Prendergast http://www.enoughproject.org/files/reports/aneyi%2029-1.pdf

Flint, Julie(2007) Darfur´s armed Movements in de Waal (ed) War in Darfur and the Search for Peace p.142

De Waal Alex (2007) “Is Climate Change the Culprit for Darfur”posted at the SSRCblog Making Sense of Darfur 2007-06-25

Ki-Moon, Ban (2007) “A Climate Culprit In

Darfur”http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/15/AR2007061501857.html

Jok Madut Jok (2007) Sudan: Race, Religion and Violence p. 138-139

Kamal el-Din (2007) “Islam and Islamism in Darfur” in deWaal (ed) War in Darfur and the Search for Peace p.05

Tubiana, Jérôme (2007) “Darfur: A Conflict for Land” inde Waal (ed) War in Darfur and the Search for Peace

UN Comtrade data, see Small Arms Survey (2005), pp. 99–100, Box 4.1.

AI (Amnesty International). 2002. ‘Germany, Small Arms and Africa.’ Terror Trade Times. No. 3. June. <http://web.amnesty.org/

El-Battahani, A. 2004 The relationship between the region and the centre: the

status of Darfur region in light of Naivasha protocols. Conference paper.

LeRiche, Matthew, PhD-candidate at the Department for War Studies at Kings College London, mail-conversation 23 January 2008 .

(Wang Yaping, China and Darfur issue Spetember2007) .( Economist (2006-12-09) “Glittering towers in a war zone – Sudan”

Economist (2006-12-09) “Glittering towers in a war zone – Sudan”

CNN (2004-09-09) “Powell calls Sudan killings genocide” MSNBC (2007-05-24) ”FAQ: Osama bin Laden”

The Guardian (2005-04-30) “Sudan becomes US ally in ‘war onterror’

Los Angeles Times (2007-06-11) “U.S. Relies on Sudan DespiteCondemning it”

New York Times (2006-10-24) “War in Sudan? UNSC. 2003. “Security Council 4877th meeting”. Held on 9

December 2003, S/PV.4877 UNHCHR . 2004. “Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human

Rights Report of UNHCHR Mission to Chad”, April 2004. http://www.unhchr.ch/pdf/chr60/ ECN420053.doc.

Ferris, E. 2008. “Internally Displaced Persons in Darfur: Taking Stock”, Brookings. http://www.brookings.edu/speeches/2008/0507_darfur_ferris.aspx.

Waal, A. 2007. “War in Darfur; And the Search for Peace: TheComprehensive Peace Agreement and Darfur”, by Adam Azzain Muhamed, Global Equity Initiative, Harvard University Justice Africa, London, p.199.

AU. 2006. “African Union Peace and Security Council, 45th meeting Communiqué, 12 January 2006, PSC/PR/Comm.(XLV).

Grono N. 2006. “Darfur: The International Community’s Failure to Protect”. African Affairs Journal, Vol. 105, No.421, September 30, 2006. http://afraf.oxfordjournals.org:80/cgi/reprint/105/421/621.

UNSC. 2006. “Letter dated 28 June 2006 from the Permanent Representative of the Congo to the United Nations”. The addressed to the President of the Security Council, S/2006/461

UNAMID. 2008. “Putting People First: The Protection Challenge Facing UNAMID in Darfur”, The Darfur Consortium; An African and International Civil Society Action for Darfur. http://www.darfurconsortium.org/darfur_consortium_actions/reports/2008/Putting_People_First_UNAMID_report.pdf.

UN Security Council. 2009. “Report of the UN Secretary General on the Deployment of the African Union -United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur”. http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/296/28/PDF/N0929628.pdf?OpenElement

List of Abbreviation

JEM Justice and Equality Movement

SLA/M Sudan People Liberation Army/Movement

UN United Nation

GoS Government of Sudan

EU European Union

AU African Union

CPA Comprehensive Peace Agreement

DPA Darfur Peace Agreement

AMID African Mission in Darfur

UNAMID United Nation African Mission in Darfur

SPLM Sudan People Liberation Movement

PDF Popular Defense Force

NIF National Islamic Front