An Axis of Peace for Darfur

The ENOUGH project, founded by some distinguished veterans of the Darfur advoacy community, has come out with a new report entitled An Axis of Peace for Darfur. This thoughtful policy document outlines the different reasons that China, France, and the United States- the countries with the most leverage in Darfur- have an interest in ending the violence there. Check it out for a fresh perspective on the diplomatic campaign for Darfur, as well as some action items.

One World, One Dream: Keeping China in the Spotlight

China's slogan for the 2008 Olympics sits awkwardly with its support of many brutal regimes, including that of Sudan. Mia Farrow and others have expolited this dark secret to enormous effect with the Olympic Dream for Darfur campaign, as referenced by Elizabeth Milligan in her entry below. China has responded with its toughest stance yet towards the Sudanese government's violence.

Their efforts prove that international public opinion- our opinion- matters to China. Now Congress has gotten into the act. Senate Resolution 203 was introducted on May 16, but has languished in committee for over a month. The resolution calls on China to "use its unique influence and economic leverage to stop genocide and violence in Darfur, Sudan." As a resolution, it does not have force of law, but would send a powerful public signal to the Chinese government that the American people care, and so does their government. It is not anti-China, but simply calls on Beijing to do the right thing. There is no reason not to pass this resolution.

Click here to learn about the bill, and then ask your representatives (especially if they're on the Foreign Relations Committee) to get S.Res. 203 out of committee and start doing good!

Also check out the House version, H.Res. 422

China for change?

The BBC reported today that China is beginning to change its tune in regard to Darfur. China buys over 60% of its oil from Sudan, is working on building roads and bridges there, and sells military equipment to Sudan. The BBC article, though vague in describing China's actions, reported that China did begin to pressure President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan to end the violence in Darfur and encouraged him to allow a hybrid peacekeeping force of United Nations and African Union soldiers into Darfur to protect civilians. Bashir has refused to let such a force into Sudan. Because of China's important economic relations with Sudan, China could possibly use that as leverage to encourage the government in Khartoum to put an end to the Darfur genocide. China could also continue to ignore the violence in Darfur in order to maintain its alliance with Sudan.

The article left me feeling hopeful until I read the following quote from one BBC correspondent, saying, "Thanks to its close ties with Beijing, Khartoum no longer has to worry about what the Western world has to say about the conflict in Darfur."

Mr. Hu Goes to Africa

After the recent African tour of China's president, Hu Jintao, it must be difficult for Omar al-Bashir, his Sudanese counterpart, to contain his glee. Mr. Hu came to Khartoum bearing many gifts, including a free loan to build Mr. Bashir a new palace, and a promise to build two schools. Most delightfully for Sudan's autocratic ruler, however, these gifts come without the good-governance and respect-for-human-rights clauses often insisted upon by Western nations. Indeed, in his only reference to the genocide in Darfur, Mr. Hu declared emphatically that "Any solution needs to respect the sovereignty of Sudan."

China's willingness to support genocidal but resource-rich regimes is extremely worrying. In his whirl-wind eight-nation tour, Mr. Hu dished out gifts and loans, all the while touting their unconditional nature. While this approach avoids the neo-colonial overtones of conditional Western aid, it also bolsters brutal governments and threatens the prospects for good governance in Africa, without which the threat of genocide will remain.

In her post of 5 February, fellow Memory to Action contributor Alexa Woodward makes the case for divestment in order to pressure China to reduce its support for the Sudanese government. Divestment by American universities and companies is undoubtedly an important step towards this goal. Ultimately, however, governments must signal to China that the pitfalls, and consequences, of supporting brutal regimes are greater than the potential rewards. You can help by writing your senator and congressman- click here to find out how.

China and Darfur: Divest!

China has the power to influence the Khartoum government to allow a UN peacekeeping force or an expanded African Union force to protect millions of people in Dafur.


Why China?


China has expansive investments in Sudanese oil, and 80% of Sudan's national profit depends two Chinese companies, Sino Petrol and CNPC. With pressure from the Chinese government, Khartoum may succumb to international pressure to allow peacekeeping forces to operate on behalf of the more than 3 million displaced persons who had fled violence.

So far, China has been the greatest block on the UN security council for the deployment of peacekeepers. We can pressure China by asking our universities to divest from these oil companies (often times stagnant funds are arbitrarily invested through brokers, so many universities do not even know who they are supporting!)

for more info on divestment and to see other cities and states who have divested, visit: www.sudandivestment.org