Darfur, China, Olympic Games

In 12 months the Olympic Games will begin in China. This international event has a history of bringing together the world for a few weeks of solidarity, in which athletes become envoys for peace and our common humanity. Athletes stand shoulder to shoulder, under a kaleidoscope of colorful flags, national anthems play, winners and losers cry, and spectators breathe in an atmosphere of good-will and cooperation. This is the way it is supposed to be. But unless there are immediate Chinese foreign and economic policy changes, the 2008 Olympics will be more appropriately called the “Genocide Games.”

This all stems from China’s support of the Sudanese government through purchasing oil, providing weaponry and continually posturing on the UN’s Security Council (where China is a permanent member) to block any resolutions aiming to resolve the ongoing systematic extermination of non-Arabs in Darfur.

Here is a political summary of what is at play: China is an emerging economic and political giant with an insatiable need for natural resources and raw materials to sustain its growth. Sudan, with previous terror links to Al Qaeda and Osama, an abominable human rights record over the 20 year war against southern Sudan and 4 years of atrocities against non-Arabs of Darfur, has turned into pariah nation. Many foreign corporations refuse to do business with the Sudan government due to its human rights record. However, China and Sudan find common ground in their subjugation of vulnerable minorities. This, of course, is an unstated truth, for both countries are diplomatically savvy. (See: http://www.du.edu/gsis/cord/Homeless%20Initiative/opinions/murphy.html for the author’s 2002 assessment of China’s presence in Tibet with reference to winning the Olympic bid). China approaches Sudan like it approaches the rest of Africa: We are here to do business and will not intervene in your internal affairs or impose on your sovereignty as a nation. We do not have an imperial or colonial history in Africa like many western nations. We are your new best friend. This has come as a huge relief to many African nations, including Sudan, who are subject to economic sanctions, trade embargos and conditionality on IMF and World Bank loans. China then comes on the scene and essentially says, in sugar-coated diplomatic speak:

Fight your wars, take your cuts and kick-backs, run elections that are not free and fair – we don’t care, we are China and we respect your sovereignty to run your nation as you please... as long as... you sell us oil, timber, minerals and buy our cheap manufactured goods and guns.

And so China has become the defender of Sudan’s actions, while vetoing Chapter 7 of the UN Charter (which sanctions the “use of force”) for a “hybrid” peace-keeping force in Darfur. Sudan doesn’t want the hybrid force or Chapter 7, so, by political default, neither does China. (“I scratch your back, you scratch mind.”) Sudan has no weight on the UN Security Council. China is a permanent member with veto powers.

For China and Sudan, profits, access to oil and resources, construction contracts, and arms deals continue to take precedence over protecting human security. China can turn a blind-eye to Sudan’s atrocities in Darfur if oil continues to flow. This is exactly what has happened and continues to happen in Tibet - the subjugation of a people and culture for access to land and resources.

None of this, really, would be all that extraordinary, or out of line with the historical “ways of the world,” except that by some strange twist of global politics – Beijing was awarded the 2008 Olympics. Some argue that China got the Olympics as an incentive for the country to clean up its act. The world would be watching so, China, surely, would be on good behavior. Nope. Sorry. Maybe next time. Nice try. This hasn’t happened. This never would have happened. What has happened is that China continues to flout the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, by subjugating its own people and systematically erasing all things Tibetan. Additionally, with its new money and political relevance, China has developed a “non-interference” diplomatic policy with Sudan, that, among other things, allows the carnage to continue in Darfur. China, if it wanted to, could quickly change the Sudan government’s actions in Darfur. With China’s urging, the Darfur genocide would end. The U.S. can’t do that. Neither can the UN, EU, or AU. China can, but China refuses.

As Darfur peace activist Eric Reeves (www.sudanreeves.org) says in regards to the Beijing Olympics, “The moment of truth is at hand.” Will China change its diplomatic course over Darfur in the 12 month run-up to an event that symbolizes peace and good-will? If it doesn’t, what will the world do and say? Will a rowdy group of shaggy peace activists line the streets of Beijing with placards? Or will we, like China, turn a blind-eye on the victims of Darfur as athletes smile, flags flutter, and anthems play?

The political relevance of the next 12 months can not be squandered or underestimated. This is, in a very real sense, a prime window of political opportunity. The world must know about these direct Chinese links to human atrocities. The world must not remain mum. Athletes, spectators, organizers, and governments must be frank about the fact that an Olympics is about to be hosted by a government with blood on its hands. There is time for China to address these issues. There is time for China to restore its tainted reputation. It won’t happen without immediate popular action and pressure from individuals around the world. Individuals like you.

Letter(s) to Congress

Use something of this nature to send to your elected officials:

You can get the addresses of your representatives by going to this website and entering your zip code: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home.

...[T]he genocide has been going on for too long, and I am of the opinion that the world is suffering from “Darfur-fatigue.” We can not let this happen. Sadly, I think some leaders around the world are tired of hearing of the Darfur crisis and reason that if the situation hasn’t improved yet, then it’s not going to improve. This is a dangerous logic that we must avoid. Contrary to that, there is no time like the present to engage with the ruling National Party Congress (NPC), as well as the various rebel factions in Darfur that compose the major players in this conflict.

The United States, in particular, has an important role to play in working to end this civil war and protect the vulnerable people of Darfur. At this stage it is imperative that the U.S. and the European Union, in conjunction with the African Union and a multilateral United Nations delegation, immediately engage in high level negotiations with both the NPC and Darfur rebel groups. In order for this to be effective, unification of the various rebel groups is required, facilitated by a respected diplomatic team.

Intrinsic to this peace process, is the establishment of what might be called a “Road Map for Negotiations.” This document should have clear benchmarks and concrete steps for disarming rebel groups and Janjaweed militias, as well as the deployment of a robust African Union-led peace-keeping force of at least 20,000 troops.

The United States, in conjunction with other key players, greatly facilitated the negotiations between the government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) which ultimately resulted in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in January of 2005. This deal, for the most part, ended the north-south civil war that had been going on for over 2 decades. This successful peace-process should be replicated to similarly resolve the situation in Darfur.

The United States must lead the way in imposing targeted sanctions on the National Party Congress and Darfurian rebel leaders, who are uncooperative in negotiations. These sanctions should be through the U.N. Security Council and should target specific individuals and companies who are responsible for perpetrating war crimes. I strongly encourage you to urge President George W. Bush to push for these punitive measures.

Additionally, I ask you to support the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007, which was introduced in January by Representative Barbara Lee of California. Also, I request that you support Senator Richard Durbin’s legislation known as the Sudan Divestment Authorization Act of 2007.

I appreciate all that you are doing and I look forward to your response on these important matters.