Human Security Group

Africa and the International Court

2009-06-29T13:15:00.000-04:00

By KOFI ANNAN

Eleven years ago when I opened the Rome conference that led to the founding of the International Criminal Court, I reminded the delegates that the eyes of the victims of past crimes and the potential victims of future ones were fixed firmly upon them. The delegates, many of whom were African, acted on that unique opportunity and created an institution to strengthen justice and the rule of law.

Now that important legacy rests once more in the hands of African leaders as they meet in Libya on Wednesday. The African Union summit meeting will be the first since the I.C.C. issued an arrest warrant for Sudan’s president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, on charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes for his alleged role in the atrocities in Darfur.

The African Union’s repeatedly stated commitment to battle impunity will be put to the test. On the agenda is an initiative by a few states to denounce and undermine the international court. In recent months, some African leaders have expressed the view that international justice as represented by the I.C.C. is an imposition, if not a plot, by the industrialized West.

In my view, this outcry against justice demeans the yearning for human dignity that resides in every African heart. It also represents a step backward in the battle against impunity.

Over the course of my 10 years as United Nations secretary general, the promise of justice and its potential as a deterrent came closer to reality. The atrocities committed in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia moved the Security Council to set up two ad hoc tribunals, building on the principles of post-World War II courts in Nuremberg and Tokyo.

These new tribunals showed that there is such a thing as effective international justice.
But these ad hoc tribunals were not enough. People the world over wanted to know that wherever and whenever the worst atrocities were committed — genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity — there would be a court to bring to justice anyone in a government hierarchy or military chain of command who was responsible. That principle would be applied without exception, whether to the lowliest soldier or the loftiest ruler.

Thus the International Criminal Court was formed. It now has 108 states, including 30 African countries, representing the largest regional bloc among the member states. Five of the court’s 18 judges are African. The I.C.C. reflects the demand of people everywhere for a court that can punish these serious crimes and deter others from committing them.

The African opponents of the international court argue that it is fixated on Africa because its four cases so far all concern alleged crimes against African victims.

One must begin by asking why African leaders shouldn’t celebrate this focus on African victims. Do these leaders really want to side with the alleged perpetrators of mass atrocities rather than their victims? Is the court’s failure to date to answer the calls of victims outside of Africa really a reason to leave the calls of African victims unheeded?

Moreover, in three of these cases, it was the government itself that called for I.C.C. intervention — the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic and Uganda. The fourth case, that of Darfur, was selected not by the international court but forwarded by the U.N. Security Council.

It’s also important to remember that the I.C.C., as a court of last resort, acts only when national justice systems are unwilling or unable to do so. There will be less need for it to protect African victims only when African governments themselves improve their record of bringing to justice those responsible for mass atrocities.

The I.C.C. represents hope for victims of atrocities and sends a message that no one is above the law. That hope and message will be undermined if the African Union condemns the court because it has charged an African head of state. The African Union should not abandon its promise to fight impunity. Unless indicted war criminals are held to account, regardless of their rank, others tempted to emulate them will not be deterred, and African people will suffer.

We have little hope of preventing the worst crimes known to mankind, or reassuring those who live in fear of their recurrence, if African leaders stop supporting justice for the most heinous crimes just because one of their own stands accused.

Kofi Annan served as secretary general of the United Nations from 1997-2006 and is now president of the Kofi Annan Foundation.

The Future of the State of Africa

2009-06-11T00:12:00.007-04:00

By Kofi Annan, Graca Machel and Michel Camdessus
Members of the Africa Progress Panel

For the 2009 Africa Progress Panel Annual Report, click here.

Africa's potential is often overlooked. Yet the continent abounds in untapped natural and human resources. The United Nations, for example, estimates that there are over 800 million hectares of unused, cultivable land that could provide the basis for a green revolution in food production -- land which could be used to tackle food shortages in Africa and in other continents.

The remarkable progress that Africa has made in the past decade is also not widely recognized. Across the continent there are numerous success stories. We have seen the spread of free and fair elections, an increase in school enrollment rates and determined efforts to combat malaria. The boom in mobile phones has transformed communication and helped business.

The tragedy is that when millions of Africans believed their countries and continent were finally on the right track, their hopes are being dashed by problems whose roots lie elsewhere. While the global crisis and climate change are creations of the North, it is Africa which is worst affected and least able to cope. The social and political consequences are profound.

Yesterday, the Africa Progress Panel, on which we sit, launched its 2009 State of Africa report in Cape Town. We recognize that the roots of the development crisis often begin outside Africa. But the reality is that the main responsibility for tackling the challenges Africa faces lies with its own leaders.

This does not mean that the rest of the world can walk away. Africa's international partners have a critical part to play in supporting the continent's progress, and share responsibility for tackling imported problems. They also have an interest to do so: social tension and political instability in Africa have clear international costs and consequences.

At a time when other financial flows are dropping, G8 and donor countries have an even greater responsibility to honor their international aid commitments and to ensure that global deals, whether on trade, climate change, intellectual property, illicit drugs, crime or migration, are supportive of Africa's development needs. Aid, effectively used, can leverage other financial flows, strengthen capacities and meet urgent social and humanitarian needs.

But without bold, focused and sustained leadership from African Governments, outside assistance won't safeguard the continent's people or protect the progress already made.

Big problems create the opportunity for big thinking. Africa's leaders, who have already shown what can be achieved, now need to redouble their efforts to guide their continent through these challenges.

They also need the active participation of their citizens. Accountability of leadership is paramount. Holding those in authority to account is a tradition and practice that has long roots in Africa's culture. But in many parts of the continent, it is frayed. There are too many instances of corruption, growing inequality in wealth and opportunity, and the abuse of power.

Alongside determined and accountable leadership at the national level, a strong, united position on the global stage is vital. A forcefully negotiated common African position on climate change, for example, is needed for Copenhagen Summit. We have already seen how effective unity can be. The meeting of African leaders in London ahead of the G20 Summit ensured the needs of the developing world were not forgotten. It played a major role in the G20s funding pledges, including the $100 billion for international development banks to lend to the poorest countries.

Clear-sighted African leadership, supported by effective international partnership, can turn the challenges Africa is facing into an opportunity. The APP believes that Africa can take the lead in pioneering a new, low-carbon development model. The take off of the mobile phone in Africa ended the need for an expensive network of landlines to be put in place. In the same way, the continent can make use of its vast solar, hydro, wind, thermal and biomass resources to drive forward its renewable energy sector, leapfrogging the outdated, fossil fuel based system.

The scope for investment in Africa's infrastructure, agriculture and communications are vast. So are the benefits it could bring. The spread of financial services to the poor has shown the potential for innovative investments. A drive for investment in these sectors will not only create jobs and increased trade in Africa, but also create markets for developed countries in these difficult times.

Africa is enormously rich in potential. Amidst the gloom, there is an opportunity to be seized. If we have the courage and vision to rise to the challenge, it will benefit the 900 million people who live on the continent and create a valuable growth platform for the global economy.

African Civil Society Groups Demand More From Governments and African Union on ICC

2009-06-10T09:04:00.004-04:00

The original posting of this article can be read here.

As a two-day meeting between the 30 original African signatory countries to the ICC draws to a close, the peace-versus-justice debate continues to impact civilians and divide how advocates address and help resolve Africa's conflicts and crises.

This couldn't be any more true than in Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, where peace advocates argue that if it weren't for the International Criminal Court's arrest warrants on Joseph Kony, Thomas Lubanga and Bosco Ntaganda, greater prospects for peace might exist through a viable peace process and stronger support for traditional reconciliation mechanisms. Justice proponents, however, argue that the international judicial mechanisms, absent any legal or judicial system, are necessary to enforce the laws, punish the perpetrators, and implement a peace process.

In my personal conversations with Darfuris and other Sudanese, they felt strongly that the ICC was the only body they could trust to bring justice to their lives. Lacking a viable and internationally-supported peace process for Darfur and a fledgling North-South Comprehensive Peace Agreement, many Sudanese have lost confidence in the ability of the Khartoum government to provide its citizens with any fair or legitimate legal recourse. For them, that means living peacefully, free from harm, with greater representation in government, greater access to wealth and resources, compensation for the damages incurred and punishment for the perpetrators -- including President Bashir.

Nearly 70 African civil society groups recently organized in Kampala and Cape Town to express their support for the ICC and Darfuri wishes, arguing that the Court plays a necessary role when their governments are unable or unwilling to investigate and prosecute war crimes, genocide, and other crimes against humanity. Recognizing that their governments originally were supportive of the Court's creation, they now demand that those same African countries and institutions, including the African Union, show greater support for the ICC. A number of op-eds stating these positions have been published this week by civil society representatives, including from Uganda Coalition for the International Criminal Court, as well as the Central African Republic.

Just one week after these civil society organizations gathered, nineteen African leaders met on June 8 for the COMESA Summit in Zimbabwe to discuss the economic and political future of the regional bloc. Sadly, rather than heeding their people's demands and cries for justice and legality, the group issued a statement calling for a suspension altogether of the ICC arrest warrant against Sudanese President Omar el-Bashir.

So it seems that despite the people's demands, and the fact that thirty of the original signatories to the Rome Statute were African, African leaders prefer making decisions regarding the ICC and Darfur not based on the people's wishes, but on theirs. Let's hope this week's meeting in Addis Ababa bears a more fruitful result that supports the needs of the Darfuris, Ugandans, and Congolese civilians on the ground.

Semhar Araia is an Africa analyst and consultant living in Washington, D.C.

President Obama's Historic Cairo Speech (Excerpts)

2009-06-05T14:09:00.008-04:00

Below is an excerpt from President Obama's speech delivered in Cairo on June 4, 2009. For the full transcript of the speech, click here.

For the full video of the speech, click here.

"A New Beginning"
June 4, 2009
Cairo, Egypt

I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles – principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground.

Democracy: I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other.

That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election.

But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose.

Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.

Women's Rights: Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity – men and women – to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice.

That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams.

We have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek – a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God's children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together.

Women from Darfur Know What They Want...But Will Anyone Listen?

2009-06-01T14:39:00.030-04:00

A report was released on Sunday by Physicians for Human Rights detailing accounts of sexual violence against Darfuri refugee women. It revealed that almost half of those surveyed were raped, largely by the Janjaweed militia and villagers around the Chadian refugee camps, and continued to live in fear of further attacks.

Eighty-eight women were interviewed from the Farchana refugee camp in Eastern Chad who reported being targeted while running daily errands, such as gathering firewood or herding livestock. These are errands their husbands can no longer do for fear of being killed by armed groups, militia or the Janjaweed. The women are left with no other choice but to put their bodies in harm's way and live with the pain, horror, and stigma of being raped and brutally attacked. One by one, each woman gave their personal testimony and eyewitness accounts detailing horrifying levels of violence, intimidation and isolation they were forced to endure in Darfur and the refugee camps.

Women from Darfur bear the heaviest burden in the camps as they are forced to venture into the deadliest situations only to return home and face severe isolation and punishment. A handful of women, after being publicly beaten and tortured by authorities simply for earning a living outside of the camp, drafted a one-page document known as the Farchana Manifesto, and outlined some of their grievances. They included:

Lack of equal treatment towards women in the camps and surrounding areas
Little to no regard for the life and security of a woman
Restrictions on freedom of movement
Lack of freedom of speech and support for their opinions
Lack of educational opportunities
Little institutional support to address women's concerns

(For the full version of the Farchana Manifesto in English, click here)

When I had the chance to meet with internally displaced women in Darfur, I asked one mother why she did it, why she went out alone to run errands and if she knew what the risks were by doing so. She told me that if the men went out, they would be killed by the Janjaweed or the armed groups. But if the women left, they wouldn't be killed, they would just be raped. "Just be raped".

Time and time again, we learn far too late that the best method to end violence against women is to prevent it. Local and international organizations continue to provide critical services to Darfuri women, such as medical care, counseling, and literacy and job skills training, but it is not enough.

There must be stronger mechanisms for protecting civilians. The international community must do more to aid in the protection and rehabilitation of victims who are forced to suffer alone and in silence. Because women are more likely to be sexually attacked, it is imperative that protection measures are tailored to meet their needs.

For instance, there should more opportunities for women to earn a living near the camps, increased funding and support for protection of civilians and prevention of gender-based violence must be given to MINURCAT and UNAMID peacekeeping missions, more women peacekeepers must be trained and deployed, and the perpetrators of the attacks must be brought to justice through traditional and legal mechanisms.

Specifically:

Women should be able to take care of their families and earn a living without having to leave far from the camp. Organizations still operating in Darfur and in Eastern Chad should invest more in women's job skills training, continue to provide alternatives to firewood, and create micro-enterprise opportunities for women to work from the camps
UN Member States must provide more funding to support MINURCAT and UNAMID. Funding should go to training and capacity building for more equipment, troop training on mandate interpretation and responding to gender-based violence, and more law enforcement, health, and social sciences civilian peacekeeping personnel
Similar to India's 2007 deployment to Liberia, more UN Member States should recruit, train, and deploy women peacekeepers and all-female contingents in accordance with UNSC Resolution 1325 to patrol the camps and the surrounding areas and counsel victims
Chad should establish mobile courts and military courts to address the violations in the eastern part of the country
The ICC should integrate Darfuri rape victim's demands for justice, accountability, and compensation into the court proceedings against Ahmed Haroun, Ali Kushayeb, and Sudanese President Omar el-Bashir

Darfuri women spoke up and are demanding that the world listen. The Farchana Manifesto is just one of many examples that show these women are not helpless or weak. They are using their own voices to tell the world what they need to live with the peace and security so many of us elsewhere take for granted. It is the responsibility of the Chadian government and the international community to prioritize their needs and provide greater support and protection before more civilians are attacked.

Semhar Araia is an Africa analyst and consultant living in Washington, D.C.

Mandate Darfur Forced to Cancel Civil Society Conference

2009-05-09T09:25:00.012-04:00

How disappointing.

Thanks to the Government of Sudan's refusal to support and work with the organizers and participants of the Mandate Darfur conference, the Mo Ibrahim Foundation has been forced to cancel the event altogether.

As explained in its press release:

“After many months of working with Darfurian civil society to build a mandate for peace, we regret to acknowledge that the Sudanese government is obstructing the safe passage of Darfurian delegates from Sudan , forcing us to cancel the conference.

“We believe that their coming together will help to find a way forward in the peace process. There is no element of this conference that could or should have been perceived as acting against the interests of the Sudanese government.

“Despite numerous attempts at engagement with the Sudanese government, including sending a delegation to Khartoum and inviting senior figures to address the conference, we were greatly disappointed that Sudanese security services harassed our delegates, confiscated passports and threatened the conference coordinators in Sudan. Ultimately, the government has refused to grant exit visas to the delegates making it impossible for the conference to proceed.

“We are saddened and disappointed that the government of Sudan did not take advantage of this opportunity to forward the cause for peace and allow civil society to engage constructively."

Responses from the international community have already started to trickle in, including from the European Union and notable voices on Darfur like Nick Kristof.

Truthfully, one cannot be surprised by this development, regardless of how disappointing it is. Sudan has a lengthy record of saying one thing and doing another.

For years, Sudan has placed restrictions on travels and refused the passage of Sudanese and foreigners throughout the country despite the numerous peace agreements and rhetorical pledges its made for peace. Just last month, President Bashir said peace in Darfur was in the hands of the Darfuri people, but then one month later refused them the permission to participate in the Mandate Darfur peace conference.

The United Nations, regional and local organizations, and foreign governments have reported on the government's tactics and refusal to grant their delegates entry and exit visas, restrict movement in the country, and deny permission to Darfuris to travel to Khartoum and elsewhere.

So while the conference is canceled, it raises the important question of how peace in Darfur and in Sudan can ever be realized if the government isn't willing to seize opportunities for such a peace. Hopefully, the Foundation and other non-state actors will find it upon themselves to continue pushing for such an opportunity.

Semhar Araia is an Africa analyst and a consultant based in Washington, DC.

Mandate Darfur Creates More Space for Sudanese Voices

2009-05-06T08:54:00.006-04:00

Next week, political leaders, international peacemakers, advocates, and civil society organizers will convene in Addis Ababa to discuss the quest for peace in Darfur and the role of Darfuri civil society in realizing that peace.

Hosted by the Mo Ibrahim Foundation, an African foundation committed to good political governance in Africa, the goals of the Mandate Darfur conference are to facilitate a Darfuri-led initiative to "bring together civil society representatives of every community in the region, in order to build a mandate for peace."

Invitees include stakeholders from Sudan and the international community, including Darfuri traditional leaders, community organizers, lawyers, women and youth, along with rebel group representatives and Sudanese government officials. International non-governmental organizations and foreign diplomats are invited to attend purely as observers and will not participate in the discussions.

Perhaps the most unique aspect of this conference is the void that it seeks to fulfill. Taking lessons drawn from previous and ongoing Darfuri diaspora led initiatives, which I have had the opportunity to participate in an observer, the conference could be a tremendous vehicle to help facilitate and amplify civilian voices from Sudan, both within the country and out in the diaspora.

Unlike previous official and unofficial efforts for peace in Darfur, this would be the first time that non-armed Darfuri groups are consulted at the same time as armed rebels and government officials to determine their own fate. It would be the first time that the terms of the discussion are set by the civil society. And it would be the first time that the commitments and mandate for Darfur are drafted with the input and leadership from civil society organizations directly affected by the insecurity and instability on the ground.

Depending on the broad interpretation and application of the term "peacebuilding" -- whether it means stabilization and reconstruction, reconciliation, development, transitional governments, or traditional justice --- the quest for that peace has typically been secured through state-to-state negotations between governments and diplomats, not through comprehensive and inclusive talks that included the unarmed groups with the armed groups. Once those peace agreements are signed, the building of that peace and its implementation is often predominately developed by international humanitarian organizations whose immediate and primary goal is to provide relief and assistance to the people on the ground.

The Mandate Darfur approach creates a new space for the people most affected to speak and participate in a more inclusive dialogue for peace. If it goes well, their priorities, demands, expectations and concerns of the average Darfuri should be clearly identified and presented in a unified voice. If it doesn't, then Mandate Darfur at a minimum sets the stage for the international community's future efforts at examining and supporting civil society's crucial role in peacebuilding. One can only surmise how the rest of the stakeholders will react when they see and hear the demands of the people seated directly across from them at the same table.

Semhar Araia is an Africa Analyst and consultant based in Washington, DC.

Statement by Johnnie Carson at Confirmation Hearing Before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee

2009-04-30T08:11:00.006-04:00

The following is an excerpt from the statement of Ambassador Johnnie Carson, nominee for United States Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, in front of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on April 29, 2009 in Washington, DC. For the full statement, please click here.

Africa is important to the United States for a number of reasons. Our history and our heritage are directly linked to Africa. Over thirteen percent of America's population is of African origin, including our current president. But our interests and concern in Africa reach far beyond ethnicity and national origin and are based on our fundamental interests in promoting peace and stability, democratic rule and good governance and sustained economic growth across the continent – the absence of which invariably impacts the United States. We also see Africa as a major trading partner, especially in the area of hydrocarbons. Fifteen percent of America's oil comes from Africa and the continent supplies the majority of the liquefied natural gas consumed by the eastern United States. Africa's economic potential is vast and its importance as a trading partner will continue to grow.

As we near the conclusion of the first full decade of the 21st century, the greatest moments in Africa's long history have not yet been written. Fifty years after most African states achieved their independence the continent is still striving to realize its enormous potential and to play a more significant role on the world stage. I am optimistic about Africa's long term future and believe the continent has the capacity to overcome its past problems and meet its current challenges.

During the past decade Africa has made great progress in democratization, economic policy reform and the reduction of violent conflict. The greatest progress has been made in the area of democracy and governance. Africans support democracy and the values that underpin it. The two most recent examples of this are to be found in Ghana and South Africa. On January 3rd of this year, Ghanaians went to the polls and selected John Atta Mills as their new president, marking the fourth successful presidential election in that country over the past fifteen years and the second time the ruling party has been replaced by the opposition. And on April 22, over 13 million South Africans – blacks, whites and coloreds -- went peacefully to the polls to elect a new president, Jacob Zuma. Mr. Zuma is South Africa's fourth president since the end of the apartheid era. These recent elections in Ghana and South Africa are not unique and represent an aspect of Africa's unfolding democratic history that is often overlooked. Since 1998, dozens of African countries have embraced democratic rule. Today, 12 of Africa's 48 states are regarded as full democracies while 23 others are regarded by Freedom House as partial democracies. This is a remarkable achievement given that thirty years ago military dictatorships and one party states predominated across the continent.

Mr. Chairman, despite these very meaningful achievements, Africa still faces serious challenges in all of the areas that I have just discussed. Africa's democratic gains cannot be taken for granted. Democratic institutions across the continent remain fragile and vulnerable to authoritarian leaders and ambitious soldiers. In the past twelve months, African militaries have intervened illegally and unconstitutionally in four different countries – Madagascar, Guinea Bissau, Guinea (Conakry) and Mauritania. And deeply flawed elections in a number of countries, including Kenya, Nigeria, and Zimbabwe, have caused deep concern at home and abroad.

Africa's strong decade-long economic performance is also in jeopardy because of the current global financial crisis. Although Africa accounts for less than five percent of the global economy, it has not avoided the negative effects of the current economic situation. The steep rise in fuel, food, and fertilizer costs last summer and the wild swings in commodity prices threaten to erode some of Africa's recent economic gains. With declining export earnings and foreign exchange reserves, Africa's poorest nations run the risk of falling backward into new indebtedness and deeper poverty.

To read Ambassador Johnnie Carson's entire testimony, please click here.

African First Ladies Forge New US Partnerships

2009-04-28T10:24:00.019-04:00

Last week, I attended the first African First Ladies' Leadership Health Summit in Los Angeles, California where over 400 participants from the private sector, public sector and Hollywood came together to discuss maternal health and child survival, HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria, and girl's education. The event was hosted by African Synergy and US Doctors for Africa.

To say it was impressive is an understatement. For two days, we sat through panels, luncheons, and in-depth breakout sessions that ended with an extravagant evening gala and a sense of accomplishment with actionable goals and pledges for new commitments. For the first time, a summit was held focusing on the role of the First Ladies and the international community towards improving Africa's development. Various high-profile speakers delivered remarks, including the First Ladies, as well as Melanne Verveer, the US Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues, Sarah Brown, wife of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Zainab Salbi, founder and CEO of Women for Women International, actress and activist Maria Bello, and the First Lady of California Maria Shriver.

This historic gathering went above and beyond the expectations of many with a balanced mix of policy expertise, pomp and circumstance, and constructive engagement on serious issues. It was an important first step towards the kind of global exchange that is needed. What most impressed me was the passion and conviction that each First Lady spoke with. One by one, they introduced their own country's policies and new approaches to improve women's health, such as Mozambique's drafting of gender equity laws and Nigeria's "Mama Kit".

It's even more important, however, that this dialogue be expanded to include more African voices, particularly from civil society and the diaspora in future exchanges. To improve the health and well-being of women and girls in Africa, all stakeholders must be at the same table, to the same summit, with the same opportunity to participate in these discussions. Civil society's role in peace and development cannot be overemphasized. It is my hope that at the next African First Ladies Leadership Health Summit, the First Ladies will have the opportunity to meet with more African civil society organizations from Africa and the diaspora and engage with them on the most critical issues affecting their beloved Africa.

To view more pictures from the Summit, click below:

African First Ladies Health Summit April 2009

Semhar Araia is an Africa analyst and consultant living in Washington, DC.

Darfur Debate Ends With More Questions Than Answers

2009-04-16T09:24:00.046-04:00

In no less than 24 hours since the much anticipated Mamdani-Prendergast debate on Darfur at Columbia University on April 14, bloggers have run amok with all kinds of biased summaries of the event. Reading the Twitter and blog posts, it really sounded like there wasn’t any substantive discourse on the issues and that Darfur activists really were “under fire”.

But my non-Columbia affiliated perspective took away much more from the debate than what’s been posted so far and I think it's time for a more thorough overview and analysis of the evening.

First, let’s be clear. The purpose of the debate was simple and outlined by the moderator, Columbia University Law School professor, Peter Rosenblum. It was to discuss the problem in Darfur and to identify ways forward for Sudan.

These questions were intended to reveal just how in-depth and thought provoking the debate was supposed to, despite the flashy questions on the event flyer regarding the definition of genocide and the role of activist organizations.

The debate was also organized to let the public listen to a healthy and vigorous exchange from two of the most vocal and notable Africanists on Sudan, Columbia University Professor Mahmood Mamdani and John Prendergast, Co-Chair of the Enough Project.

One, an academic. The other, a practitioner. Now, I know and have worked with Prendergast and I follow Mamdani’s arguments regularly. So for Sudan junkies like myself, it was just too good to be true.

I sat nervously waiting for the verbal bloodshed and onslaught that was about to happen. But it never did. Gone were the inflammatory remarks, finger pointing, and short tempers. (Maybe not completely, but you get the idea.)

Instead of a huge collision, we watched a race that was slow to start and ended on two completely different roads. Not surprisingly, both panelists walked away thinking they won the debate!

Question 1 – What is the Problem in Sudan?

Prendergast: Prendergast answered with a narrative of a displaced Darfuri woman fearing for her life since the Government of Sudan expelled the humanitarian aid groups last month. He raised Sudan's colonial history, its nation building challenges, the North-South's war and its fragile peace and finally, Darfur and the Government of Sudan's use of militia and brutal violence to quash the rebels. It was not a history lesson, nor did it claim to be. It was a review of the real challenges Sudan and its people are facing today and have faced for the last fifty years.

Mamdani: Mamdani explained where his fascination with the Darfur advocacy movement stemmed from and why he focused on mortality rates released by groups like Save Darfur and the World Health Organization. He provided a historical overview of the origins of the civil war in Darfur, his concerns with Save Darfur and its messaging, the ICC arrest warrant for Sudanese President Bashir, and emphasized the de-escalation of mortality rates in Darfur since 2005.

Question 2 - What Is the Way Forward for Sudan?

Prendergast: Prendergast presented five opportunities for peace in Sudan and emphasized that Africa remains a place full of hope and strength, with solutions for its own future. He proposed possible political, humanitarian, economic and military measures that could be undertaken by the Sudanese and the greater international community. He also examined the role of the Government of Sudan, the rebels, Sudanese civil society, permanent members of the UN Security Council, and global activists in the United States and abroad.

Mamdani: Mamdani stressed that justice should not be the driving motivation for the international community and Darfuris should use their own voices for justice. He argued that regional organizations and Sudan’s neighbors should help solve the problem in Darfur, not the international community. He said the public was being misled on the crisis in Darfur and blamed media for the sensationalized stories we hear today. Mamdani also dismissed the notion that China and Russia had a critical role to play in helping achieve peace in Sudan.

Instead of providing new solutions for Darfur, Mamdani diverted the discussion from examining the actual problems in Sudan to the external problems affecting Sudan. How unfortunate during this critical time, he chose to focus his energy on messaging, statistical analysis and semantics, when 2009 has wracked the people of Sudan with the harshest realities on the ground imaginable.

Question & Answer Session

Darfuris, other Africans, and even some brave Columbia students, used the Q & A session to challenge Mamdani on the fallacy of his arguments, his factual errors, and seemingly apologist rhetoric on behalf of Khartoum.

For over an hour, audience members directed heated questions and comments to him, holding back their anger and confusion over his repeated dismissal over what so many Darfurians have been saying for years.

Ultimately, Prendergast’s proposals seemed to fall on the deaf ears of Mamdani and a majority of the audience. Clearly many came with their minds made up and chose to focus on Save Darfur and all its activist baggage - not on Darfur and its crisis.

So sadly, just as it began, the debate ended as if on two separate roads and the original purpose was again drowned out by the flashier, sexier side of who’s really to blame for Africa’s problems.

Semhar Araia is an Africa analyst and consultant living in Washington, DC.