Friday, August 17, 2007

Under Pressure from Activists, Sudan Saves Face

Neela Ghoshal

Khartoum’s agreement to allow Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) leader Suleiman Jamous to travel to Nairobi for abdominal surgery, following several months of activist and diplomatic pressure, should be recognized as a rare nod to basic decency and a notable advocacy success. But it should not be taken to reflect a broader commitment to peace and justice in Darfur – not until Jamous, a respected peace-broker, is actually in good health and at the negotiating table.

Jamous, SLA Humanitarian Affairs Coordinator, was detained and tortured last May by former allies in Minni Minawi’s faction of the SLA after that faction signed the deeply inadequate Darfur Peace Agreement, which Jamous rejected.  The UN negotiated his transfer to a hospital at a peacekeeping base in Kordofan, a province bordering Darfur to the east.  He has been confined there under armed guard until yesterday, under threat of arrest by the Sudanese government.

For months, the UN was complicit in his detention, refusing to evacuate Jamous from Kordofan for fear of reprisals.  (Khartoum retaliated against the UN’s 2006 decision to take in Jamous by briefly halting aid workers’ access to Darfur.) UN officials reportedly told Jamous he was free to leave, but that would mean walking into the arms of the Sudanese government.

A flurry of advocacy in recent months has, it seems, successfully altered Jamous’s situation.  His lengthy detention went largely unreported by the Western media, but articles by Eric Reeves, Jen Marlowe, Julie Flint and Ronan Farrow, written between January and June of this year and calling for Jamous’s release, were circulated widely on the internet. An online petition directed at Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon asked for a stronger UN push to free Jamous.  Initiated on July 8 by National Lawyers’ Guild Vice-President Laurie Traktman, it rapidly garnered over 1000 signatures from countries ranging from Sudan and Saudi Arabia to Bermuda and Brazil.

On July 31, Jamous wrote to Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, asking to be released in order to participate in talks among Darfuri rebel factions in Arusha.  His request was supported by a letter sent to al-Bashir the same day by Mia Farrow, Desmond Tutu, Vaclav Havel, and other high-profile human rights advocates.  Khartoum suggested in response that it would consider lifting its threat to arrest Jamous, but took no concrete steps in that direction.

On August 6, Mia Farrow again wrote to al-Bashir, offering to give up her freedom in exchange for Jamous’s. She explained in her letter, “I am therefore offering to take Mr. Jamous’s place, to exchange my freedom for his in the knowledge of his importance to the civilians of Darfur and in the conviction that he will apply his energies toward creating the just and lasting peace that the Sudanese people deserve and hope for.”

Meanwhile, on a diplomatic level, the AU’s Salim Ahmed Salim urged Jamous’s release in talks with Khartoum.  U.S. Special Envoy Andrew Natsios apparently did the same, but the extent of his efforts is uncertain: a letter from U.S. Senator Russ Feingold commends Natsios for “requesting” Jamous’s release but urges him “to do your utmost to secure Mr. Jamous’ release… and to immediately reiterate and amplify your appeal to the Sudanese Government for Mr. Jamous’ release and for consent to his participation in both informal and formal peace talks,” suggesting Natsios’s initial efforts may have lacked a sense of urgency.

US State Department spokesman Tom Casey branded Mia Farrow’s publicity move as “naïve” and unhelpful.  But it is clear that activism and public shaming altered Sudan’s calculations – probably more so than quiet diplomacy.  Nearly half the Google hits in English for “Suleiman Janous” also include “Mia Farrow,” demonstrating the reach of Farrow’s star-power in creating outcry around an issue.  And it was on August 7, immediately following Farrow’s sensational offer, that Sudan’s Foreign Ministry Under-Secretary Mutrif Siddig stated, “If the international community can guarantee that Suleiman Jamous will undertake only political work and will take part in the political process peacefully and will not return to those holding arms ... we have no problem after that.”

Nor can Jamous’s bold advocacy on his own behalf be discounted.  He failed to make it to talks in Arusha.  But on August 13, Jamous said he would turn himself in to the Sudanese government if the UN would not transport him to Kenya for medical attention by August 16: “If I am detained by the United Nations or the government of Sudan, it is the same.” Following a flurry of diplomacy, the UN reported yesterday that Khartoum will allow Jamous to travel to Kenya and then return to his family without risking arrest on the condition that he not “return to Darfur and fight.”

Jamous, however, has never been a fighter.  As Ronan Farrow points out, “An elderly statesman who has never picked up a gun, Mr. Jamous commands universal respect among the otherwise fractious rebel leaders who control most of rural Darfur.  Because of this, the government of Sudan has aggressively sought to suppress Mr. Jamous.” Jen Marlowe concurs: “Jamous is not a military man, but he may indeed be dangerous” given his “strong ideas about justice in a country whose political leadership ignores the concept.”

It is critical to ensure that Sudan not only permits Jamous to seek medical care, but that it allows him a central role in negotiations, likely to transpire between rebel groups and the government within the next few months.  According to Traktman’s petition, “Jamous’ leadership in Darfur is desperately needed, both to help bring humanitarian relief to the civilian victims of the conflict, and to facilitate peace-making efforts.”

Will Sudan’s recent concession allow him to play this role, or will it serve as a gag order, granting Jamous his health in exchange for his voice in negotiations?  Darfur activists should not let up pressure on Khartoum over the Jamous case until we can rest assured that Jamous will be given space to continue his humanitarian and advocacy efforts.  Jamous has long called on the international community to support the SLA in demanding democracy and political equality in Sudan; now, supporting his freedom is itself a critical space for solidarity.  As Alex DeWaal reminds us in his recent video for 24 Hours for Darfur, “the solution for Darfur lies with Darfurians.  We must support their efforts.”