clear

Subscribe

Recent Posts

clear

Categories

clear
Tuesday, 31 March 2009
American versus Israeli Geo-Political Objectives in the Struggle for a Free Sudan
Share
clear

by Jerry Gordon (April 2009)


Background
The issuance of an arrest warrant on March 6, 2009 by the International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague for Sudan strongman President Omar Al-Bashir has further complicated American foreign policy interests in multilateral humanitarian solutions in this largest African country. Sudan is deeply riven by tribal and religious domination by an Islamist regime. The country has been traumatized by a long internecine Jihad war perpetrated by Arab Muslims in the North against Christians and animists in the south and African nominal Muslims in the Darfur region and Nuba Mountains. Over two million have been killed, hundreds of thousands enslaved and millions made into internal refugees by the religious conflict. Added to that are the complications over land border disputes and control of Sudan’s oil reserves located largely in the South. This article presents background on the interminable and roiling jihad war, the parlous state of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Act between the central government and the Sudan People Liberation Movement (SPLM), and the conundrum facing the Obama Administration endeavoring to resolve this humanitarian crisis. It also presents the surprising story of Israeli geo-political interests in the Sudan and support of Sudanese regional secularist interests in combating the existential threat to Israel from the Iran-Sudan-Hezbollah–Hamas terrorist axis.  more>>>
clear
Posted on 03/31/2009 5:49 PM by NER
Comments
12 Apr 2009
Elliott A Green

Jerry, this is an informative and helpful article. However, I think  that  you overlooked the destructive role played by Britain --which has long had a pro-Muslim policy throughout its empire-- in setting up the independent Sudan as a unitary state ruled by Arab and Arabic-speaking Muslims. The Sudan could have been made independent either as a federation or confederation --in which case each distinct territorial entity could have had a separate armed force-- or as two or more independent states. That is, instead of one unitary Sudanese state, there could have been separate states of the north and south, or the north, south, and west [= Darfur]. This would have obviated most likely the horrendous genocide and mass murder that has taken place over the last 53 years.  You might look at my article on Sudan on the Think-Israel site. I have somewhat different figures on the numbers murdered and killed there over the years. See link:

http://www.think-israel.org/green.sudan.html