In his inaugural address, President Obama declared, “To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.” Unfortunately, in the case of Sudan, the hand remains extended, even as the fist remains clenched and poised to strike….It is not too late for President Obama to hold firm to his inaugural promise and declare his administration’s disapproval of politics as usual in Sudan. When the election results are announced this week, he can lead the international community in interpreting their significance. Rather than offering unearned praise, he should state that the administration still regards Bashir as an indicted war criminal on the wrong side of history. If the U.S. fails to stand up for its principles, advocates for democracy around the world will be disheartened, the Bashir government will continue to act with impunity, and the Sudanese people will lose faith in America, even as they face an uncertain and potentially dangerous future. (Read the rest of “Khartoum Dispatch: Assessing the Sudan Elections”)

Good timing for the report to be issued, as the administration’s response has been taking shape over the last 24 hours. My colleague, Robert Lawrence, provides a summary in our election roundup at Save Darfur. In short, the administration denounced the elections as neither free, nor fail – without assigning real blame to any actors in Sudan. The elections apparently were stolen by themselves.

In a short post today, I also reflect on what this means for politics going forward in Sudan over at Change.org:

The elections in Sudan over the last week have given rise to the broadest and most public debate about the governance of the country since before the 1989 coup that brought Omar Al-Bashir and his regime to power. Opposition parties, civil society organizations, and a nascent youth movement have participated loudly in the process — despite ever-present threats of intimidation and repression. These important elements of Sudanese society seized on the first openings of political space, even if many used the opportunity to boycott and denounce the electoral process…

A return, therefore, to purely autocratic politics may not be entirely possible. The chances, however, are more likely in the event that the Obama administration and others in the international community whitewash these elections and explicitly or implicitly confer legitimacy on the Bashir regime.

In response to this line of reasoning, James Traub at Foreign Policy writes on the Obama administration’s handling of the elections, and the advocacy community’s reaction to the administration’s overall policy of engagement. He asks some very relevant questions, such as: will engagement prove more effective this time than it did in the past?

After mildly critiquing the positions of Save Darfur and others for not being nuanced enough, he concludes:

Things could be different this time around. Just as pushing the “reset button” with Russia might have produced an atmosphere more conducive to arm-control talks that the Russians already saw as in their own interest, so the soft line on Sudan may make it easier for Bashir to accept what he already recognizes is inevitable. Does that mean the international community had to let him manipulate the election as he saw fit? No; I think the world could have, and should have, pushed him harder. And Bashir must always be aware that the ICC indictment is a very real Sword of Damocles hanging over his head. But he needs to feel that he can survive partition in order to accept it. Bashir does not deserve to survive, of course; he deserves to spend the rest of his life behind bars. But we will not help Sudan if we insist on treating him and his regime as they deserve.

There is of course a lot of logic to this argument. The main point, however, that I think Traub and many others have missed is that the possible secession of South Sudan next year – that which, he argues, Bashir must “accept” – is not the only game in town in Sudan. No matter the results of the referendum, seventy percent of the country will remain controlled by a small, unrepresentative clique that refuses to loosen their firm grip on the country. This imbalance of power will keep Darfur unresolved and perhaps lead to conflicts elsewhere in Sudan, and perhaps even with a newly sovereign southern neighbor. To “help Sudan” therefore, the Obama team must ensure that engagement convinces Bashir to stop repressing the Sudanese people and to open up political space – and not simply to allow the South escape.

My colleagues Jerry Fowler and Mark Lotwis left Sudan last Friday heading back to Washington.  In order to set up a few more meetings in the South, I stayed on in Juba. Little did we know President Omar al-Bashir and his entourage of advisors and security agents would be coming to town—and staying in the same modest hotel as the Save Darfur delegation, in the very wing where Jerry had been sleeping.

Over the weekend, I had heard that Bashir would be traveling to Juba and a few other towns in the South to campaign.  In my mind, I imagined a quick dash by motorcade from the airport to a rally in Juba and then a few darts by plane to some other choice locations in the Greater Equatoria states.

So I was quite surprised when early Monday afternoon, I was confronted by a newly erected roadblock in front of my hotel.  Initially, the mix of police and security officials told me that I could not pass. When I explained that I was staying at the hotel beyond their checkpoint, they quickly scanned my backpack and then gave me strict instructions on how to walk to the next crowd of security personnel suddenly stationed in front of hotel gate.  After another round of negotiations that involved coaxing hotel staff out to verify my claims, I was finally permitted to enter the foyer—where I was promptly urged by a security guard to take my room key and, like a misbehaving child, go straight to my room.

About an hour later, I returned to reception to ask about the “protocol” and restrictions in place due to the arrival of the special guest from Khartoum.  The staff assured me that the security had overreacted in the first few hours and gave me a stamped pass that would allow me to go and come as I please. Thus far, I have not faced any further issues – other than that inescapable locked-down feeling of any setting where men with guns sit and stand around every entrance and exit, looking all-too-bored for any by-stander’s comfort.

Ironically enough, I did not have to leave the hotel to watch Bashir’s political rally. My window afforded a partial view of the stadium.  I could not make out the words of his speech, but at times I could hear the crowd break out with a chant of “Salaam, Oyay” (Peace, Yes!).

Maggie Ficke of the ENOUGH Project was inside the stadium and reported on the climate.

Papers the next day quoted Bashir as making an economic case for unity. He argued that Sudan’s economy could expand by a higher percent if all efforts are exerted to end political tensions:

“that have encouraged nothing than regional wars and displacement of inhabitants…To experience real growth and success in the war against poverty, we must get our act together on two fronts…[O]ur politics must promote political stability and public confidence in the future of our country.”

Bashir, dressed down in a short sleeve shirt, treated the crowd to some interesting campaign rhetoric, such as “We will cut off every hand attempting to disrupt peace.” He also promised to celebrate with the people of the South after the referendum, whether they chose unity or secession.

In my conversations though in Juba thus far, it’s clear that Bashir’s last stab to make unity attractive will fall mostly on deaf ears. People are gearing up for the elections to contest leadership within the Government of South Sudan, but with a keen eye on the referendum. As for those in Darfur, very few trust these most recent promises from Bashir and his National Congress Party (NCP) – and, thus, confidence in a durable political resolution emerging from the Doha negotiations remains low.

With my flight out of Juba soon to depart, I hope to have more time to write about the many interesting conversations that we have had in Sudan over the last four weeks.  For now, I can say that having visited Khartoum, the three capitals of Darfur and Juba, one cannot help but be struck by the depth of complexity to the immediate crises and issues at hand.  Peace, prosperity and development for all Sudanese – the slogans of Bashir’s campaign – can be realized over time, but first a profound and dramatic shift in the mentality of those in power and those who dominate politics through fear and violence must occur.

Sudanese women registering to vote

First posted at Save Darfur…

A new report by the Carter Center on Sudan’s elections expresses grave concerns about recent security crackdowns. The report should serve as an urgent wake-up call for the international community that the necessary conditions for free and fair elections currently do not exist in Sudan. Instead, the lack of political freedoms and the gross registration violations, especially in Darfur, shed clear light on the ruling National Congress Party’s intentions for these elections: a fraudulent process designed to legitimize its undemocratic, repressive and genocidal rule.

Jerry Fowler, Save Darfur’s president, stated in a press release today:

The Carter Center’s report came as no surprise. Sudanese civil society and opposition leaders for the last two weeks have been speaking out loudly about the gross human rights and elections violations of a repressive regime. By and large, the international community has remained quiet while these activists and opposition leaders have been threatened, harassed, and beaten throughout Sudan. The situation, as the Carter Center report acknowledges, is even more severe in Darfur. The heavy military and intelligence presence at the registration sites and the lack of even the basic freedoms make it impossible for the people of Darfur to participate in a credible elections process.

Given the alarming nature of the Carter Center’s report, Save Darfur has urged the U.S. Special Envoy to Sudan, General Scott Gration, to work with his international counterparts and demand answers from the Sudanese government on the following issues:

Lack of Basic Freedoms. Several recent incidents – such as the crackdown on protesters in Khartoum and the beating and detentions of journalists – have clearly demonstrated the lack of political rights and freedoms in Sudan necessary for free and fair elections.

The Carter Center reported:

• [T]he Center…expressed serious concerns about incidents that undermine political rights and fundamental freedoms in Sudan, including: arrests, detention and harassment of civil society and political party members for constitutional and peaceful activity in Khartoum and other cities by security services, and attacks on the National Congress Party (NCP) premises in Wau and Rumbek.
• The Center is gravely concerned by the recent action of the security forces in Khartoum to restrict legitimate activity related to the exercise of freedom of assembly, association and speech. The Center urges the Government of Sudan to cease arbitrary arrests and to release persons detained while conducting peaceful political activities.
• According to a directive issued by the Ministry of Interior on September 17, 2009, notification by a political party of intention to hold a rally is sufficient for such an event to go ahead. The Ministry should urgently clarify procedures for the holding of political rallies and events. In addition, the Ministry and other officials should take immediate steps to ensure the necessary authorizations for such public events. The Government of Sudan should take all necessary steps to investigate claims of police brutality and take swift action against officials who are found to have perpetrated or permitted unwarranted acts of violence against civilians. If the police are to be perceived as a credible and neutral force in managing elections security, constitutional standards and freedoms must be respected.
• In Southern Sudan, the Government of Southern Sudan should take action to ensure that political party pluralism is fully protected. This must extend to the activities of all parties, including the NCP in Southern Sudan. The arson of the NCP’s office annex in Wau and the looting and attempted arson of the NCP’s premises in Rumbek are criminal acts. The Government of Southern Sudan should pursue the perpetrators without delay to the full extent of the law. Obligations in public international law lay out the need for investigation by the government and redress in any cases of violations of human rights.

Limitations/Obstruction/Intimidation in Darfur. The Carter Center observers were not able to fully assess the registration process due to several security limitations. It is reported that many Darfuris chose not the register due to the presence of Sudanese government armed forces at numerous registration sites, in addition to the wariness about a free and transparent election process.

The Carter Center reported:

• Due to security limitations in Darfur, Carter Center observers were not able to travel as widely as would be necessary to fully assess the quality and inclusiveness of the registration process throughout the region…State elections committees in Darfur were not able to access all areas of the region, particularly those not under government control, and the armed movements did not encourage registration activity. State elections committees did not and were not able to visit all IDP camps, which partially accounts for the relatively low rate of registration in the three states. Registration is a voluntary exercise and some IDPs in Darfur chose not to participate.
• In areas visited by the Carter Center mission, observers reported that Sudanese Armed Forces military units, Sudanese police, and agents of the National Intelligence and Security Service (NISS) were present at registration centers. Electoral authorities confirmed the presence of NISS agents at many registration centers. In some instances, NISS agents were actively engaged in the registration process, e.g. by laminating voter registration receipts, a practice which undermined the independence of the electoral management authorities, and which raises questions about the role of NISS in the electoral process. In North Darfur, Center observers reported the presence of vehicles with heavy mounted weapons (technicals) outside of registration sites, in a show of force that may have intimidated registrants.
• Given the possibility of heightened tensions in the run-up to the elections, the NEC and state elections committees in Darfur should take immediate action to ensure that the presence of security forces is sufficient to ensure public order, but limited to their appropriate role. The security services should not execute tasks that are the specific responsibility of the elections committees.
• Most importantly, political actors must take immediate steps to build the foundations of a genuine political settlement in Darfur in advance of next year’s elections. The state of emergency and extreme limitations on freedom of assembly and association stifle a free and open campaign process. The NEC and GONU must take urgent steps to implement broad civic education programs, lift restrictions on the freedoms of assembly and association, and ensure that civil society organizations can fully participate in the electoral process. These steps are critical to ensuring that the citizens of Darfur can meaningfully participate in Sudan’s electoral process, as required by Sudan’s national and international obligations.

Accreditation for Election Observers. The lack of clarity in procedures has placed an undue burden on domestic observer groups in applying for accreditation, as well as on registration officials in allowing observers access to the process. It is critical that no Southern or Northern Sudanese government officials interfere with the election monitoring process.

The Carter Center reported:

• The lack of clarity in procedures placed an undue burden on domestic observer groups in applying for accreditation, as well as on registration officials in allowing observers access to the process. The NEC should take steps to facilitate simple and fast accreditation procedures for domestic observers for the remainder of the electoral process, as the right for domestic observers to participate in Sudan’s electoral process is a key component of both national laws and international obligations.

Suspicion of Voter Intimidation: Alarming reports from the Carter Center may point to a larger plan to rig the elections or intimidate voters on election day.

The Carter Center reported:

• Some parties, principally the NCP, collected voter registration receipts, and/or recorded the registration numbers and corresponding identifying details of registrants. While not in violation of the electoral law, party agents did not appear to explain that this practice was not an official step of the registration process, resulting in confusion for many registrants. Carter Center observers also observed representatives of the SPLM and NCP laminating registration slips and directly participating in registration activities. Such organized political party activity in close proximity to registration centers was problematic. In the future, political parties should ensure that their members do not engage in activity that could undermine public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process. For the polling period, the NEC should consider specifying a minimum distance from which political parties are allowed to operate, and should clearly delineate activities that are not permissible within the vicinity of polling centers (though allowing the activity of accredited political party agents).

Five news items in the last week and today highlight the precarious security condition for Sudanese living in Darfur and South Sudan.

In the first, Frank Nyakairu at Reuters explores whether the resurgent Lord’s Resistance Army is now receiving financial or military support from elements in Khartoum.  Last week, the UN Deputy Special Representative and Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator for Sudan, Ms. Ameerah Haq, expressed grave concern about the increasing number of deaths due to the escalating attacks by rebels of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) against civilians – mostly women and children – in Southern Sudan’s Western and Central Equatoria States.

Suspicions abound that an old relationship has now been reborn.  A Ugandan intelligence official, for instance, notes: “They are estimated to be about 2,500 (strong) and operating in two languages, Acholi and Arabic.”  The use of Arabic points to possible renewed cooperation between the LRA and Sudanese intelligence (however, since the LRA recruits Sudanese – usually by abduction – this could also be a less troubling explanation).   With all this in mind, there is still no smoking gun and therefore an International Crisis Group expert concludes:

“We have heard the LRA appears to be better armed than it has been in the recent past…but we have no evidence to substantiate those allegations that Sudan is supporting the LRA.”

Another article this week explores the root causes for recent tribal violence in South Sudan. This year has been the bloodiest since the end of the civil war.  More than 1,200 people have been killed “in a wave of violence that has targeted villagers as often as cattle herders and women and children as often as men.”  Skye Wheeler at Reuters investigates the causes for the violent clashes, pointing out that many southerners see scary resemblances to the inter-ethnic violence of the early 1990s that was often encouraged and instigated by Khartoum.   He writes:

Senior officials from the south’s dominant Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) have openly accused northern politicians of once again arming tribes and militias to destabilise the south ahead of the referendum. Khartoum denies the accusations.

Again, these claims still remain only suspicious rumors as there is yet no hard evidence to connect Khartoum to the recent wave of violence. The situation certainly though cries out for greater vigilance and further investigation.

Similarly, the drivers of continuing conflict and even the existence of continuing conflict in Darfur have been hotly debated over the last month.   As I wrote in an early posting, with or without active war, Darfur remains a dangerous and unpredictable place.   And recent figures from the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) confirm this .  In 2009 alone:

Seven national humanitarian staff and three UNAMID staff have been killed.

12 humanitarian staff and 10 UNAMID staff have been wounded or injured.

11 humanitarians (seven international) have been kidnapped.

26 humanitarians and three UNAMID staff have been physically or sexually assaulted and 10 UNAMID staff have been wounded or injured.

11 humanitarians (seven international) have been kidnapped.

26 humanitarians and three UNAMID staff have been physically or sexually assaulted.

18 humanitarians and 11 UNAMID staff have been abducted during carjackings.

44 humanitarians and 12 UNAMID staff have been arrested or temporarily detained by the Government of Sudan.

64 humanitarian vehicles and 31 UNAMID vehicles have been hijacked or stolen.

There have been 103 assaults or break-ins on humanitarian agency premises, and 22 on UNAMID premises.

Given these statistics, it comes as no surprise that UNAMID announced this morning that it will increase patrols. And finally this morning we are receiving fresh reports about a Darfuri rebel splinter group attacking three Sudanese policemen which then resulted in Sudanese police and army activity around and inside three IDP camps.

As we continue to state, a peace process in Darfur and the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement are the only routes to long-term peace and security for conflict-weary Sudanese.  At the same time though, these stories and reports reveal that all of these negotiations are taking place in an environment of troubling violence and looming threats.   Since feelings of insecurity usually preclude comprise, the international community must ensure that investigating attacks and providing protection to civilians remains a constant priority.