Genocider: Omar al-Bashir’s re-election in Sudan is a farce
► Retweet
Share
By Louise Roland-Gosselin
The international community should not have permitted a man wanted for war crimes to retain power via a rigged poll
Omar al-Bashir has been re-elected in the first “multiparty” elections in Sudan for over 20 years. Many had hoped these elections would hail the beginning of a process finally bringing peace and justice to Sudan. Instead, they have proved to be nothing more than a way for Bashir to entrench his control and to become the first head of state to be elected while facing charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity from the international criminal court (ICC).
To those of us who have worked in Sudan, Bashir’s conduct is entirely unsurprising. As a master of manipulation, rigging elections presents no great challenge. But what is endlessly frustrating is the role that the international community plays in legitimising this behaviour, once again choosing to believe that Bashir will “come right” despite all the evidence to the contrary.
The fact that Bashir agreed to stage elections at all was perceived to be great progress by the international community, marking the first step on the road to peace and justice as laid out by the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement. This agreement ultimately culminates in a referendum on the secession of the south of Sudan, scheduled for January next year.
For months, it has been clear for all to see that these elections would be deeply flawed. Bashir is a skilled diplomat and was never going to accept a real challenge to his authority. Having firstly undertaken a fraudulent census, which severely under-represented the population of southern Sudan and Darfur and limited access to voter registration, Bashir’s National Congress Party escalated their efforts further during the election period, preventing opposition candidates from campaigning, rigging the polls and cracking down on civil and political rights.
With filmed evidence of polling officials stuffing ballot boxes and widespread reports of intimidation of voters, it would have taken a miracle for the NCP not to win. The international community had numerous occasions to speak out, from the manipulated census to the arresting of election observers. But instead, they turned a blind eye, stating that the elections were merely blighted by technical irregularities, yet accepting the results nonetheless.
According to many observers, including Simon Tisdall, the international community’s position is right. Rather than expecting the elections to be free and fair, we should see them as step in the right direction: a “staging post on a much longer journey”. Therefore, rather than ruffling Bashir’s feathers now, we should congratulate him for how far he has come, in the hope that this will make him more conciliatory when it comes to agreeing border demarcations or oil-sharing revenue with south Sudan.
In theory this argument has its merits, but sadly it lacks any basis in reality. Crucially, this approach fails to take into account the character and track record of the Sudanese president. This is a man who, since taking power in 1989 in a military coup, has launched militias against his own people and orchestrated civil war and genocide. More than four million Sudanese civilians have been killed under his presidency. He has consistently promised the international community his regime will adhere to a plethora of peace agreements, only to put them aside at the first opportunity. It is difficult therefore to understand why anyone believes a man of this intent and nature would be willing to allow the oil-rich south to secede from his power, whatever the wishes of the southern Sudanese people.
It is also obvious that by permitting Bashir to openly commit electoral fraud without repercussions, the international community is damaging its own credibility, setting a very concerning precedent for democratic transitions across the world and legitimising the use of violence and intimidation. Far from strengthening its negotiating position, this electoral process has exposed the United Nations, the US and the European Union, and it has demonstrated how far they are willing to look the other way to keep Bashir on side. Neither the arrest warrant from the ICC, nor the Sudanese government launching one of the largest offensives on Darfuri civilians in Jebel Marra since the Darfur conflict began in 2003, have prevented the world from congratulating Bashir for his commitment to democracy in the past week.
Tragically the ultimate victims of this farcical process will of course be the Sudanese people. Speaking to the Sudanese community ahead of the elections it was clear that despite evidence to the contrary, there was still hope that these elections might have provided them with a democratic choice – a right to vote out a man who has systematically murdered their family and friends and destroyed their lives.
But once again the rhetoric of “democratic change” has been meaningless. While the international community now solely focuses on the 2011 referendum, the Sudanese people are left to wonder once again what it might take for the international community to stand up to Bashir and to protect them.
For PDF, Print , Twitt or Share. EthioSun
: Omar al-Bashir’s re-election in Sudan is a farce
► Retweet
Share
By Louise Roland-Gosselin
The international community should not have permitted a man wanted for war crimes to retain power via a rigged poll
Omar al-Bashir has been re-elected in the first “multiparty” elections in Sudan for over 20 years. Many had hoped these elections would hail the beginning of a process finally bringing peace and justice to Sudan. Instead, they have proved to be nothing more than a way for Bashir to entrench his control and to become the first head of state to be elected while facing charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity from the international criminal court (ICC).
To those of us who have worked in Sudan, Bashir’s conduct is entirely unsurprising. As a master of manipulation, rigging elections presents no great challenge. But what is endlessly frustrating is the role that the international community plays in legitimising this behaviour, once again choosing to believe that Bashir will “come right” despite all the evidence to the contrary.
The fact that Bashir agreed to stage elections at all was perceived to be great progress by the international community, marking the first step on the road to peace and justice as laid out by the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement. This agreement ultimately culminates in a referendum on the secession of the south of Sudan, scheduled for January next year.
For months, it has been clear for all to see that these elections would be deeply flawed. Bashir is a skilled diplomat and was never going to accept a real challenge to his authority. Having firstly undertaken a fraudulent census, which severely under-represented the population of southern Sudan and Darfur and limited access to voter registration, Bashir’s National Congress Party escalated their efforts further during the election period, preventing opposition candidates from campaigning, rigging the polls and cracking down on civil and political rights.
With filmed evidence of polling officials stuffing ballot boxes and widespread reports of intimidation of voters, it would have taken a miracle for the NCP not to win. The international community had numerous occasions to speak out, from the manipulated census to the arresting of election observers. But instead, they turned a blind eye, stating that the elections were merely blighted by technical irregularities, yet accepting the results nonetheless.
According to many observers, including Simon Tisdall, the international community’s position is right. Rather than expecting the elections to be free and fair, we should see them as step in the right direction: a “staging post on a much longer journey”. Therefore, rather than ruffling Bashir’s feathers now, we should congratulate him for how far he has come, in the hope that this will make him more conciliatory when it comes to agreeing border demarcations or oil-sharing revenue with south Sudan.
In theory this argument has its merits, but sadly it lacks any basis in reality. Crucially, this approach fails to take into account the character and track record of the Sudanese president. This is a man who, since taking power in 1989 in a military coup, has launched militias against his own people and orchestrated civil war and genocide. More than four million Sudanese civilians have been killed under his presidency. He has consistently promised the international community his regime will adhere to a plethora of peace agreements, only to put them aside at the first opportunity. It is difficult therefore to understand why anyone believes a man of this intent and nature would be willing to allow the oil-rich south to secede from his power, whatever the wishes of the southern Sudanese people.
It is also obvious that by permitting Bashir to openly commit electoral fraud without repercussions, the international community is damaging its own credibility, setting a very concerning precedent for democratic transitions across the world and legitimising the use of violence and intimidation. Far from strengthening its negotiating position, this electoral process has exposed the United Nations, the US and the European Union, and it has demonstrated how far they are willing to look the other way to keep Bashir on side. Neither the arrest warrant from the ICC, nor the Sudanese government launching one of the largest offensives on Darfuri civilians in Jebel Marra since the Darfur conflict began in 2003, have prevented the world from congratulating Bashir for his commitment to democracy in the past week.
Tragically the ultimate victims of this farcical process will of course be the Sudanese people. Speaking to the Sudanese community ahead of the elections it was clear that despite evidence to the contrary, there was still hope that these elections might have provided them with a democratic choice – a right to vote out a man who has systematically murdered their family and friends and destroyed their lives.
But once again the rhetoric of “democratic change” has been meaningless. While the international community now solely focuses on the 2011 referendum, the Sudanese people are left to wonder once again what it might take for the international community to stand up to Bashir and to protect them.
For PDF, Print , Twitt or Share. EthioSun
► Retweet
Share
By Louise Roland-Gosselin
The international community should not have permitted a man wanted for war crimes to retain power via a rigged poll
Omar al-Bashir has been re-elected in the first “multiparty” elections in Sudan for over 20 years. Many had hoped these elections would hail the beginning of a process finally bringing peace and justice to Sudan. Instead, they have proved to be nothing more than a way for Bashir to entrench his control and to become the first head of state to be elected while facing charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity from the international criminal court (ICC).
To those of us who have worked in Sudan, Bashir’s conduct is entirely unsurprising. As a master of manipulation, rigging elections presents no great challenge. But what is endlessly frustrating is the role that the international community plays in legitimising this behaviour, once again choosing to believe that Bashir will “come right” despite all the evidence to the contrary.
The fact that Bashir agreed to stage elections at all was perceived to be great progress by the international community, marking the first step on the road to peace and justice as laid out by the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement. This agreement ultimately culminates in a referendum on the secession of the south of Sudan, scheduled for January next year.
For months, it has been clear for all to see that these elections would be deeply flawed. Bashir is a skilled diplomat and was never going to accept a real challenge to his authority. Having firstly undertaken a fraudulent census, which severely under-represented the population of southern Sudan and Darfur and limited access to voter registration, Bashir’s National Congress Party escalated their efforts further during the election period, preventing opposition candidates from campaigning, rigging the polls and cracking down on civil and political rights.
With filmed evidence of polling officials stuffing ballot boxes and widespread reports of intimidation of voters, it would have taken a miracle for the NCP not to win. The international community had numerous occasions to speak out, from the manipulated census to the arresting of election observers. But instead, they turned a blind eye, stating that the elections were merely blighted by technical irregularities, yet accepting the results nonetheless.
According to many observers, including Simon Tisdall, the international community’s position is right. Rather than expecting the elections to be free and fair, we should see them as step in the right direction: a “staging post on a much longer journey”. Therefore, rather than ruffling Bashir’s feathers now, we should congratulate him for how far he has come, in the hope that this will make him more conciliatory when it comes to agreeing border demarcations or oil-sharing revenue with south Sudan.
In theory this argument has its merits, but sadly it lacks any basis in reality. Crucially, this approach fails to take into account the character and track record of the Sudanese president. This is a man who, since taking power in 1989 in a military coup, has launched militias against his own people and orchestrated civil war and genocide. More than four million Sudanese civilians have been killed under his presidency. He has consistently promised the international community his regime will adhere to a plethora of peace agreements, only to put them aside at the first opportunity. It is difficult therefore to understand why anyone believes a man of this intent and nature would be willing to allow the oil-rich south to secede from his power, whatever the wishes of the southern Sudanese people.
It is also obvious that by permitting Bashir to openly commit electoral fraud without repercussions, the international community is damaging its own credibility, setting a very concerning precedent for democratic transitions across the world and legitimising the use of violence and intimidation. Far from strengthening its negotiating position, this electoral process has exposed the United Nations, the US and the European Union, and it has demonstrated how far they are willing to look the other way to keep Bashir on side. Neither the arrest warrant from the ICC, nor the Sudanese government launching one of the largest offensives on Darfuri civilians in Jebel Marra since the Darfur conflict began in 2003, have prevented the world from congratulating Bashir for his commitment to democracy in the past week.
Tragically the ultimate victims of this farcical process will of course be the Sudanese people. Speaking to the Sudanese community ahead of the elections it was clear that despite evidence to the contrary, there was still hope that these elections might have provided them with a democratic choice – a right to vote out a man who has systematically murdered their family and friends and destroyed their lives.
But once again the rhetoric of “democratic change” has been meaningless. While the international community now solely focuses on the 2011 referendum, the Sudanese people are left to wonder once again what it might take for the international community to stand up to Bashir and to protect them.
For PDF, Print , Twitt or Share. EthioSun
: Omar al-Bashir’s re-election in Sudan is a farce
► Retweet
Share
By Louise Roland-Gosselin
The international community should not have permitted a man wanted for war crimes to retain power via a rigged poll
Omar al-Bashir has been re-elected in the first “multiparty” elections in Sudan for over 20 years. Many had hoped these elections would hail the beginning of a process finally bringing peace and justice to Sudan. Instead, they have proved to be nothing more than a way for Bashir to entrench his control and to become the first head of state to be elected while facing charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity from the international criminal court (ICC).
To those of us who have worked in Sudan, Bashir’s conduct is entirely unsurprising. As a master of manipulation, rigging elections presents no great challenge. But what is endlessly frustrating is the role that the international community plays in legitimising this behaviour, once again choosing to believe that Bashir will “come right” despite all the evidence to the contrary.
The fact that Bashir agreed to stage elections at all was perceived to be great progress by the international community, marking the first step on the road to peace and justice as laid out by the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement. This agreement ultimately culminates in a referendum on the secession of the south of Sudan, scheduled for January next year.
For months, it has been clear for all to see that these elections would be deeply flawed. Bashir is a skilled diplomat and was never going to accept a real challenge to his authority. Having firstly undertaken a fraudulent census, which severely under-represented the population of southern Sudan and Darfur and limited access to voter registration, Bashir’s National Congress Party escalated their efforts further during the election period, preventing opposition candidates from campaigning, rigging the polls and cracking down on civil and political rights.
With filmed evidence of polling officials stuffing ballot boxes and widespread reports of intimidation of voters, it would have taken a miracle for the NCP not to win. The international community had numerous occasions to speak out, from the manipulated census to the arresting of election observers. But instead, they turned a blind eye, stating that the elections were merely blighted by technical irregularities, yet accepting the results nonetheless.
According to many observers, including Simon Tisdall, the international community’s position is right. Rather than expecting the elections to be free and fair, we should see them as step in the right direction: a “staging post on a much longer journey”. Therefore, rather than ruffling Bashir’s feathers now, we should congratulate him for how far he has come, in the hope that this will make him more conciliatory when it comes to agreeing border demarcations or oil-sharing revenue with south Sudan.
In theory this argument has its merits, but sadly it lacks any basis in reality. Crucially, this approach fails to take into account the character and track record of the Sudanese president. This is a man who, since taking power in 1989 in a military coup, has launched militias against his own people and orchestrated civil war and genocide. More than four million Sudanese civilians have been killed under his presidency. He has consistently promised the international community his regime will adhere to a plethora of peace agreements, only to put them aside at the first opportunity. It is difficult therefore to understand why anyone believes a man of this intent and nature would be willing to allow the oil-rich south to secede from his power, whatever the wishes of the southern Sudanese people.
It is also obvious that by permitting Bashir to openly commit electoral fraud without repercussions, the international community is damaging its own credibility, setting a very concerning precedent for democratic transitions across the world and legitimising the use of violence and intimidation. Far from strengthening its negotiating position, this electoral process has exposed the United Nations, the US and the European Union, and it has demonstrated how far they are willing to look the other way to keep Bashir on side. Neither the arrest warrant from the ICC, nor the Sudanese government launching one of the largest offensives on Darfuri civilians in Jebel Marra since the Darfur conflict began in 2003, have prevented the world from congratulating Bashir for his commitment to democracy in the past week.
Tragically the ultimate victims of this farcical process will of course be the Sudanese people. Speaking to the Sudanese community ahead of the elections it was clear that despite evidence to the contrary, there was still hope that these elections might have provided them with a democratic choice – a right to vote out a man who has systematically murdered their family and friends and destroyed their lives.
But once again the rhetoric of “democratic change” has been meaningless. While the international community now solely focuses on the 2011 referendum, the Sudanese people are left to wonder once again what it might take for the international community to stand up to Bashir and to protect them.
For PDF, Print , Twitt or Share. EthioSun
No comments:
Post a Comment