What is Bush's end-game in Sudan?

DATELINE USA

Just as the Machakos peace treaty between Khartoum and the South was beginning to take effect, US President George Bush took everyone by surprise by rushing through the Sudan Peace Act which is designed to do everything bar ensure peace. Why this sudden volte-face? MILAN VESELY provides some answers.

The signing of the Sudan Peace Act which automatically triggers sanctions against the Sudanese government if US President George Bush thinks the Khartoum regime is not serious in its negotiations with the SPLA rebels, caught most State Department observers by surprise. "Why?" they asked, "is the Bush administration signing legislation that is sure to drive a wedge between the warring parties at a time when an agreement to halt all fighting has just been signed in Machakos, Kenya; the first glimmer of hope in a civil war that has killed more then two million people since 1983?"

An even more perplexing question: "Why is the administration suddenly backing out of its commitment to be an honest broker in resolving this long-running conflict? After all, it was only as recently as September 2001 when President Bush had said he was `seeking sanity' between the Arab north and the African south, appointing the respected Senator John Danforth as his peace envoy to broker a peace deal between President Omar al-Bashir and the SPLA's John Garang"

"Is one to believe that the Bush administration had never been serious in its intentions?" they ask. "This certainly seems a onesided thing to do at this time of a ceasefire breakthrough."

Press reports indicate that some State department officials were even more critical. "It's almost as if the President of the US opened a five minute dialogue between the warring parties, only to slam it shut with no apparent reason for doing so in sight," some Africa desk watchers in Washington claimed.

CHANGING THE EQUATION

The signing of the Sudan Peace Act raises the question of whether the US government is serious in its stated intent to bring peace to the war-torn Sudanese nation. "Is it serious, or is it simply stalling for time while the SPLA rearms after the recent heavy fighting?" many now question, "is the issue of recent oil discoveries in the south changing the equation?"

Perplexed by the Bush administrations actions, many observers wonder how the Khartoum government can be expected to negotiate in good faith when the SPLA itself is under no penalty if it breaks the cease-fire, nor even under threat of any such sanctions. "What is good for the goose must surely be good for the gander," they insist.

Under the Sudan Peace Act, 12 Sudanese companies are listed as potential sanction targets. These are; The Sudan National Broadcasting Corporation; Sudan Radio and TV; Sudan TV; Coptrade Engineering and Auto Services; National Cigarettes; National Electricity; Posts and telegraphs Corporation; Sudan Tea; Sudanese Free Zones and Markets Company; Sudanese Petroleum; Sugar and Distilling Industries, and the SFZ Company.

All the 12 firms named in a bulletin issued by the US Treasury Office of Foreign Asset Control (Ofac) have also had their American assets frozen, their names being added to an existing list of `specially designated nationals' with whom it is illegal for US citizens to conduct business. The most prominent of these is the Sudanese owner of the pharmaceutical factory destroyed in 2000 by 13 US cruise missiles on the orders of President Bill Clinton for allegedly making chemical weapons for Osama bin Laden. As is well known now, this proved totally erroneous information, with the owner suing the US government in US courts.

ANGRY SUDANESE REACTION

The reaction to this surprising US about-- turn generated an instant response from Khartoum. Visibly angry, Foreign Minister Mustafa Ismail said that President George Bush's resolution was putting undue pressure on the al-Bashir authorities, thus hindering the peace process instead of promoting it. "It will lead to no result if the US means the resolution as a weapon of pressure and intimidation," he stated categorically. "It certainly won't lead to peace."

As if to paraphrase his words, the SPLA immediately attacked and captured the strategic southern town of Torit, only to lose it a few days later when government forces counter-attacked, both military actions needlessly postponing the final signing of the cease-fire agreement while resulting in a large loss of life on both sides.

Asked about the freezing of the 12 company's assets in the US, Foreign Minister Ismail had this to say: "I am confident that most of the organisations, if not all of them, have no assets in the US market that the American authorities can get hold off." Still fuming he referred the media to President Omar alBashir's remarks issued during the drafting of the resolution, and while it was still before the U.S. Congress for consideration.

"The US administration should understand that the Sudan is not one of the states of the US," President Bashir warned in a speech broadcast on Sudanese radio and TV. "We will not be forced into an unfair peace agreement at the Bush administration's say-so."