الممثلة الامريكية ميا فارو تعرض علي الرئيس البشير ان تسجن بدلا عن جاموس

Quote: Here is my letter to Omar Hassan al-Bashir, President of the Republic of Sudan: 5 August 2007 Your Excellency: Suleiman Jamous, the humanitarian coordinator of the Sudan Liberation Movement, is in his 14th month of de facto administrative detention in Kadugli. Hopes that he would be permitted to attend the Arusha talks, the first step in a new peace process for Darfur, appear to have been disappointed. Suleiman Jamous is greatly respected by humanitarians like myself for his selfless commitment to the people of Darfur and his respect for human rights. Colleagues in Sudan tells me that his enforced absence from relief work has made access negotiations to volatile rebel-controlled areas less certain and more complicated. As you are undoubtedly aware, Mr. Jamous is in need of a medical procedure that cannot be carried out in Kadugli. His absence from Arusha is an impediment to progress in the peace process to which your government has said it is committed. At the Inter-Sudanese talks in Abuja in 2005, before his seizure, Mr. Jamous played a crucial role in bringing the SLA to the negotiating table and in seeking reconciliation between its divided rival factions. Mr. Jamous, whom I know to be a man of great moral integrity, is 62 years old, with grandchildren in the United States he has never seen. 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. On your most recent visit to Darfur only last month, you said the Sudan Government gives top priority to development in Darfur, believing it will promote security and stability in the region. You said: “We want the displaced persons to return to their home areas and cultivate the land.” I humbly request you to permit Mr. Jamous to participate in this endeavour, for the sake of your citizens in Darfur. I am, Your Excellency, sincerely yours Mia Farrow UNICEF goodwill ambassador 8/5/2007 Paris, France In attempting to understand UN Darfur Resolution 1769 it is helpful to look at the draft as it evolved. Doing so has left me with some worrying thoughts. The fact that the resolution lost some of its sharper teeth early on, combined with Khartoum's history of placing stumbling blocks in front of what has already been agreed upon, gives me concern about the future of this operation/peacekeeping force and especially about its protection aspects. Absent is any reference to the role of sanctions monitoring mechanism, the seizure, collection and disposal of arms in violation of the embargo and the peace agreements, as well as strong language condemning the government for obstructing the delivery of humanitarian aid. It did keep some important protection-related provisions. The final version, however, has reduced them to the following: protect civilians, without prejudice to the responsibility of the Government of Sudan. Completely absent is the reference to the 2005 World Summit outcome document that was included in the earlier drafts ( an implicit reference to Responsibility to Protect ) A Chapter V11 mandate is crucial to the success of the operation but here it is used strangely. Usually in Council resolutions, the formula “Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations” would be a separate line between the preambular paragraphs and the operational part, i.e. before the numbered paragraph 1. But not in the case of this resolution. The reference to Chapter VII is part of paragraph 15. What therefore are the implications for the remaining 24 paragraphs? One indication of what these implications are is the fact that the arms monitoring mandate of UNMID was still under Chapter VII in the second draft (though without seizure and disposal) but it is outside in the final text. Admittedly, Sudan had already manipulated a similar usage of Chapter VII in 1590 when the Council created the UNMIS mandate – but in that instance nobody pretended that the whole mandate was about protection, which is the case here. All the changes in the final version were made as a result of direct negotiations with the Sudanese. In the eight days between the circulation of the second version and the adoption of the final version, the French and British ambassadors had four sessions with their Sudanese counterpart, each lasting over an hour and one on weekend. This obviously was done to ensure Chinese agreement to the draft. China is the big winner here: it got Sudan to be reasonably happy, so its oil deals are safe; it may have got Spielberg to relent on his threat to withdraw from his involvement with the Olympics; and it got to preside over the adoption of Resolution 1769- looking to the outside world –( and certainly to Spielberg and sponsors of the Beijing Olympics) - as one who worked to make it happen This last touch is inexplicable because if the Council waited 20 hours longer, it would not have been Chinese presidency any longer. What was the rush after all these years? And with something that will probably take months if not close to a year to deploy – incidentally probably long enough for China to be done with its Olympics. In terms of what we may now expect from the Sudanese, one worrying aspect is the odd formulation regarding UNAMID’s protection of civilians. Though it was not part of the official statement the Sudanese ambassador made outside the Council following the adoption of the resolution, he then went to the press floor and told reporters the wording of the Resolution was such that UNAMID would have to ask the Sudanese government for permission. So we push on my friends. We have a long way to go. 8/4/2007 Paris, France [From an extensive interview published by the Yorkshire Post (UK) of June 3, 2007. Jonathan Henry, project director for Doctors Without Borders/Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) in Muhajariya, South Darfur, spoke with blunt honesty in describing a situation he says “has worsened since he arrived in 2005”:] "‘It is still a massive humanitarian disaster and the level of suffering has become dramatically worse. We were the only agency in Muhajariya when I left because the other organisation had evacuated because of security.’ The town has come under heavy attack from government-backed forces. But as is so often the case in times of war, it is the innocent who suffer most. ‘When I left, 90 per cent of the patients in our 60-bed hospital were women and children under five,’ says Henry." "‘There's a lot of severe malnutrition, with children having lost nearly half their body weight because they can't access food, and they can't go and farm the land because it's too dangerous. We are seeing an increase in water-borne diseases like diarrhoea and respiratory infections. Malaria is endemic in Darfur, we saw outbreaks of meningitis and measles, and mortality rates are in creasing.’” "The effects of uncontrolled violence are st"‘We had staff abducted and seven were beaten despite them all wearing the MSF T-shirts.’ When Muhajariya was attacked last October, its population was about 47,000, but this has dwindled to 13,000. It is a situation mirrored throughout Darfur where the number of indiscriminate attacks has escalated. ‘These so-called militia on camels with AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades go into towns and torch them shooting men, women and children.’” “Henry warns the situation is becoming increasingly chaotic with many refugees flooding into already over-populated areas. Many of the camps, some spread over a 15-mile radius, consist of nothing more than a sea of makeshift tents, with no protection from the elements or local militia. ‘Many of these refugees are dispersed among bushes in the middle of the desert. They drink muddy water from pools full of bacteria that carry water-borne diseases. They have no food because they've had to abandon their land, they have no shelter in 50 degree heat [110 degrees Fahrenheit] and no health care.’” "‘I think we're going to be there for a while to come. But unless the agencies get improved access, it's going to be very difficult to keep delivering this medical response. There is massive fear and massive insecurity in the everyday lives of these people,’ says Henry.” These people will not be convinced that its mainly Krtm's soldiers and Janjaweed who've died over the last year. 8/3/2007 Paris, France China actually did something! If the Gov of Sudan blocks the deployment of peacekeepers , it will be easier for the UK and US to get sanctions. It is a good strategy. This is one small victory on the long road toward protection and peace for Darfur's people . Eric Reeves, Sudan researcher and analyst says the following about UN Resolution 1769, in The Guardian: "This is no argument against urgent deployment of 1769 as far as is practicable. Indeed, there should be an emphasis on early deployment of civilian police elements contemplated in the resolution - with adequate military protection - particularly to the most unstable camps, such as the enormous Gereida camp in south Darfur or the camps in the Tawilla and Kutum areas of north Darfur, or outside el-Geneina in western Darfur. Key civilian interlocutors among camps leaders and village sheiks should be identified on both sides of the ethnic divide. The command structure should be clarified as much as possible, and the specific tasks to be undertaken under the chapter seven mandate should be decisively identified for all troops." Alex de Waal sent me these points about UN Resolution 1769: China doesn't have complete control on what Khartoum says or does. Partly this is because of internal rivalries in Khartoum, where relations with China are handled by Bashir and Awad al Jaz, and others are jealous of that and so try to undermine what they are trying to do. Also China is a bit confused, surprised and naive about how some of the UNSC politics operates, so isn't always as scheming/systematic as we might surmise. The mandate issues are secondary to what the Force Commander actually wants to do--the mission plan. The list of activities in the AU/UN report of June paras 54-55 is quite impressive and wide ranging. It doesn't include forcible disarmament but that, frankly, couldnt be done without a force much bigger and tougher than UNAMID is envisaging. After Mogadishu/Black Hawk Down no troop contributing country would contemplate taking on a fearsome and numerous militia on its own territory. But a bold Force Commander can interpret the mandate imaginatively. Gen Okwonko did that in 2004 (ironically under UN rules it's much harder for a UN commander to do that than an AU commander). Most importantly, good peacekeeping in these circumstances is much more about gaining the confidence of the communities and doing local diplomacy than it is about using force. There's a fine example of how a dozen unarmed ceasefire monitors can do a much better job than an armored battalion from Kordofan (I'm just posting that as an entry on my SSRC blog right now). The UN peacekeeping operations staff are all familiar with this and are actually very frustrated at the way in which the role of coercion has been elevated at the expense of peacemaking, local politics etc. (It's noticeable that the military pundits who talk about Darfur on TV never have any peacekeeping experience) 8/1/2007 Paris, France To my respected friends in China: Many of you have contacted me to ask what you can do about the on-going genocide and immeasurable suffering in Darfur. As China prepares to honor the victims of the Rape of Nanking, I am reminded of the mass atrocities and violations of human rights you have endured. You know your country in ways that I cannot. I can only suggest that you educate yourselves, your families and your friends about Darfur as much as possible. In my family we have a saying: "with knowledge comes responsibility". I send you my deepest respect and solidarity. I trust you will find your own way to help the people of Darfur. With hope, Mia 7/30/2007 Paris, France Suleiman Jamous is a man of indisputable moral integrity who has provided life-saving humanitarian access through volatile rebel territories. He is responsible for saving tens of thousands of lives. The head of a prominent aid organization, who asked that he not be named, said "There is no doubt that Suleiman Jamous was very important to humanitarian agencies." He described Mr. Jamous as a champion of "humanitarian principles and human rights." He said," There is no doubt that not having him in Darfur has made access negotiations less certain and more complicated." For 13 months Suleiman Jamous has been deprived of liberty by the Government of Sudan. His presence is sorely missed by aid workers who cannot reach one million displaced people-an unprecedented number. UN doctors in Kadugli where he is being held say the elderly Mr Jamous is in poor health and in need of a stomach biopsy. Suleiman Jamous is respected across the rebel divide. President Omar el Bashir is well aware that the detainment of Mr. Jamous will undermine efforts to create peace and unity between rebel groups. This letter asks Omar el Bashir to release Suleiman Jamous, the elder statesman, a rebel who never picked up a gun. ----------------------------------- Open Letter to President Omar Al Bashir 30 July 2007 Dear President Bashir, We are writing to petition you to allow Mr Suleiman Jamous to travel freely to obtain urgent medical attention. In our different capacities, we have come to know and respect Suleiman for his humanitarian work in Darfur and his commitment to the wellbeing of the people of Sudan. He exemplified the best tradition of civic activism in Sudan including personal piety and self-sacrifice in the cause of providing essential assistance to those in need. For one year, Suleiman Jamous has been confined to a hospital in Kadugli, South Kordofan. He is suffering from an abdominal complaint and needs urgent medical attention he cannot get in Kadugli. Without this attention his condition is deteriorating. We fully appreciate the complexities of the circumstances that led to Suleiman being taken to Kadugli and kept there. Commenting on these political circumstances is beyond our collective concerns. However we believe that it is not appropriate for an individual Sudanese citizen in need of medical care to be confined in this way because of such considerations. First and foremost, Suleiman Jamous is an individual with all the rights that a Sudanese citizen should enjoy. It is within your power to enable him to travel to obtain the treatment he needs. We respectfully ask you to do so. Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu Mia Farrow, goodwill UNICEF ambassador Juan Mendez, president of the International Centre for Transitional Justice and former UN Special Advisor to the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide Richard Holbrooke, former US ambassador to the United Nations Vaclav Havel, former president of Czechoslovakia Chibli Mallat, Lebanese presidential candidate and Professor of Law and Politics of the Middle East, University of Utah Jody Williams, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Alex de Waal, fellow of the Global Equity Initiative, Harvard University Julie Flint, independent writer and researcher Bahey El-Din Hassan, Secretary General of the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights 7/28/2007 Paris, France