Kurt Bassuener October 4th, 2008

As Eric and I have written repeatedly individually and separately for over four years (see the publications on the topic under the DPC banner in the European Voice, Wall Street Journal Europe and the International Herald Tribune), a no-fly zone operated by NATO from bases in Chad could change the dynamic on the ground in Darfur, where Sudanese forces and their auxiliary Janjaweed militia act with impunity, backed by Sudanese airpower.  Last summer the idea had considerable momentum, being supported by both Republicans and Democrats in the race for the White House. 

Then something happened - activists who had written a book on Darfur, “A Short History of a Long War,” Alex de Waal and Julie Flint, came out hard against the idea, stating that it would lead to a cut-off in humanitarian aid and undercut attempts to reach peace, and even subvert the north-south peace deal.  These arguments were reminiscent of those made against forceful intervention in Bosnia circa 1993 and 1994.  And they worked for some years, unfortunately.  In Darfur’s case, the wind went out of the sails of the idea, and it vanished below the radar for the past year. 

The ENOUGH coalition which has worked assiduously to end the genocide didn’t propose a real alternative when it came out against no-fly, giving equal weight to the opinion of a former US Air Force Chief of Staff, Gen. Merrill “Tony” McPeak, who explained how it could be done, and the EU’s chief of military staff, Gen. Henri Bantegeat, a ground commander, who said it was impossible.   Instead they supported monitoring Sudanese flights and attempting to shame them.

In the intervening year, the situation in Darfur continued to deteriorate.

Last night, thanks to a question by moderator Gwen Ifill in the vice presidential debate between Governor Sarah Palin and Senator Joe Biden, we now know that the no-fly zone proposal appears to have support on both tickets.  The relevant segment of the debate’s transcript can be accessed here, but below is an excerpt:

Ifill: Senator, you have quite a record, this is the next question here, of being an interventionist. You argued for intervention in Bosnia and Kosovo, initially in Iraq and Pakistan and now in Darfur, putting U.S. troops on the ground. Boots on the ground. Is this something the American public has the stomach for?

Biden: Yes…I don’t have the stomach for genocide when it comes to Darfur. We can now impose a no-fly zone. It’s within our capacity. We can lead NATO if we’re willing to take a hard stand. We can; I’ve been in those camps in Chad. I’ve seen the suffering, thousands and tens of thousands have died and are dying. We should rally the world to act and demonstrate it by our own movement to provide the helicopters to get the 21,000 forces of the African Union in there now to stop this genocide.

 

Palin:  But as for as Darfur, we can agree on that also, the support of the no-fly zone, making sure that all options are on the table there also…America is in a position to help.

Biden has long been a proponent of a Darfur no-fly zone, and was passionate in last year’s Democratic debates on the issue.  He receives an A+ rating from darfurscores.org.   

Palin added that as Alaska Governor, she pressed for legislation to ensure the public sector of the state was divested of all business links to Sudan, which is laudable.

There is perhaps no more opportune time than now to press forward on the Darfur no-fly proposal, given that the UN/AU Mission in Darfur’s (UNAMID’s) aircraft have come under fire by rebels who believe they are Sudanese aircraft, which are also painted white to mimic the UN and humanitarian aircraft.  Not only has this increased the danger for UN/AU forces, but it has restricted aid distribution:

Aid groups said any further attacks on aircraft in Darfur could have a devastating impact on their work.

“No one wants to use the roads because they keep being shot at,” said Alun McDonald, spokesman for Oxfam in Sudan. “If they are starting to shoot at helicopters now, that doesn’t leave us with many options.”

And what was a major reason Ms. Flint, Mr. de Waal, and many humanitarian aid organizations resisted the no-fly zone?  Humanitarian access… The other main reason - space for peace talks - has also proven empty.  Nothing of consequence has been agreed, and no such agreement is on the horizon, as Bashir sees no reason to relent.  He has bent the international community to his will in a way that would make Milosevic jealous.

I hope that Senators Obama and McCain will follow the lead of their running mates and return to advocating the Darfur no-fly zone.  For if they both do so, then the necessary European - particularly French, as they have the bases needed to mount an air operation with fighter aircraft - cooperation needed can finally start to be mobilized.

• Uncategorized