24 Aug 2006: ISS Today: UN Condemns Killing of African Peacekeepers in Darfur

24 August 2006: UN Condemns Killing of African Peacekeepers in Darfur
IRIN News

 

The United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) has condemned the killing of two African Union (AU) peacekeepers in the Darfur region, calling it a serious violation of international law.

 

A fuel convoy of the AU Mission in Sudan (AMIS) travelling from El Nahud to El Fasher in North Darfur State was ambushed in the Kuma area by an unidentified group of armed men on Saturday. Two Rwandan soldiers were killed in the attack, while three were wounded.

 

"UNMIS calls on all parties to the Darfur conflict to respect the neutral and impartial status of AMIS," the UN mission said in a statement on Sunday. Any attack against AU personnel deployed in Darfur constituted a breach of existing ceasefire agreements and contravened the relevant resolutions of the UN Security Council, it added.

 

Commentary

 

The most recent killing of the African Union troops in Sudan’s western Darfur region brings into sharp relief the level of deterioration of security in the area. Not only are these fatalities a blow to the morale of the African Union Mission (AMIS) troops, but they are indicative of the increasing hostility to the regional force in the months since the signing of the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA). As is known, the DPA was signed on May 5 this year after some eight rounds of negotiations between the three main rebel factions, (the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), the Sudanese Liberation Movement (SLA)-Minnawi and the SLA faction of Abdel Wahid Nour) and the Government of Sudan (GoS) with the mediation of the African Union and international observers. The agreement is divided into power sharing, wealth sharing and security arrangements, modelled on the historic Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) signed between Northern and Southern Sudan last year. However, the document was eventually only accepted by the SLM under Minni Arkoi Minnawi, and rejected by the majority of the belligerents. Since then, it has been opposition to the deal that has in fact been the primary common factor in the majority of security related incidents, which have increased over a 100 percent on the number reported in 2005. It is thus evident that the dejure ceasefire, which was signed into an agreement in 2004, has been violated on innumerable occasions by both the government and the rebels, raising the issue of the mandate of the African Union force deployed. With the AMIS mandate limited to monitoring the ceasefire and with a lack of resources to implement even this mandate, the current overt fighting in major areas across the three Darfurian states is set to continue. Moreover, punitive strategies employed to deal with the non-signatories such as their most recent suspension from the Ceasefire Commission (CFC) and the Joint Commission (JC) on 15 August, are likely to further inflame the rebellion. The CFC and the JC are both bodies tasked by the initial ceasefire agreement and then enhanced by the DPA to monitor and develop plans for and disengagement of the belligerents and the creation of buffer zones for the return of civilian populations to areas of origin.

 

The African Union argues that the decision was taken in consultation with international partners after the Government of Sudan declared the rebel National Redemption Front (NRF) a “terrorist” organisation and informed AMIS that it cannot guarantee the security of the personnel of the non-signatory parties in the Ceasefire Commission. The suspension effectively reduces the Commission to representatives of those from the government and the Minnawi faction, and has been criticised by the rebel movements like the JEM, who see this as the abandonment of AMIS neutrality and a siding with the government in the conflict. One rebel group has described the action to be ‘open provocation of war’.

 

Leaving aside the obvious diplomatic problems that the suspension raises is the practical security-related concern for troops deployed in areas dominated by the non-signatory militia. In addition to this development is the concurrent lack of movement on plans to disarm the notorious collection of tribal militia - or Janjaweed - responsible for a range of acts of banditry and human rights abuses. According to the DPA, it was the responsibility of the state to disarm the Janjaweed/tribal militia by 20 July, based on a plan reviewed by the Ceasefire Commission. At the same time, a draft resolution on a UN takeover of AMIS put together by the UK is currently being analysed by the UN Security Council. The draft builds on the Secretary General’s recent report that emphasises the need for the UN to assist AMIS in the period leading to the end of its mandate at the end of September, with a view to taking over in January 2007. The Government of Sudan continues to reject any UN deployment in Darfur for reasons that are more to do with the domestic legitimacy of its policies than anything to do with its foreign policy.

 

In the meantime, Darfurians will continue to live in a state of post-Agreement war.

 

Mariam Bibi Jooma, African Security Analysis Programme, ISS Pretoria