Darfur crisi

Hello, this is the delegate of Sudan, I would like to know each nations position upon the Darfur crisis and its relation to the ICC and your country.

Being an ally to peace, the Republic of South Africa greatly objects to the darfur conflict.
Since its official beginning in 2003, this conflict has caused the displacement of nearly 2.5 million innocent citizens and the death of millions. This conflict clasified by the USA as a genocide has been a reason for sufering for the Sudanese population and to the international community itself. This conflict has been greatly strengthened by the goverment who has throughly tried to hide proofs and has even declared to treat the UN peace troops as invaders if they enter the country.
South Africa also believes that the president removal will not put an end to this conflict. Furthermore, the removal of the president may feed the conflict and make it unstopable.
For this reasons South Africa believes that this conflict has to be resolved as soon as possible but in a definite and secure way.

Hello,

The Darfur Crisis has caused destruction to African countries. Fighting among various factions has killed hundreds of thousands of people and displaced more than 2 million, most escaping to larger towns where they stay in camps for "internally displaced people," and some crossing the border into Chad, where they live in refugee camps, straining local resources. Attacks on civilians during the conflict have been brutal and include burning homes, killing and rape.

Zimbabwe

Delegate Mana,
the International Criminal Court must investigate the issues in the Republic of Sudan due to the fact that it is a genocide and it affects other countries (Chad). the Darfur conflict is a very serious issue. millions of people were displaced. people live in squalid conditions. corrupt government. government militias raiding down towns and cities. HUMAN RIGHTS OVER NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY.

I'm not sure if you guys have access to this topic, so I chose to copy and paste it here. Take a look please.
"The International Criminal Court

Justice or expediency in Sudan?
Jul 17th 2008
From The Economist print edition

In an imperfect world, there is still a need to weigh the demands of both

ReutersALL that is needed for evil to prosper is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke’s familiar motto is a useful place to start when judging this week’s decision by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to request an arrest warrant for the president of Sudan, Omar al-Bashir, so that he can be put on trial for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur. A dreadful evil has indeed been perpetrated in Sudan’s western province these past five years: mass killing, mass rape and the deliberate uprooting of millions of people. No decent person can fail to hope for an end to the suffering and for those responsible to be brought to justice.

The prosecutor’s decision, however, also lays bare a familiar truth. In many cases, these two desires—for an end to suffering and for justice to be done—come into conflict, necessitating a hard choice. Worse, the choice must sometimes be made in a fog of uncertainty. In Darfur, for example, nobody can be sure of what will happen if the ICC’s judges now agree to indict Mr Bashir and if the UN Security Council decides not to exercise its right to stay the court’s hand (see article).

Will he take revenge, by co-operating even less with aid and peace efforts and ramping up the violence? Will he just huff and puff and do nothing? The only certainty is that justice, if it is done at all, will not be done quickly. Popular in Khartoum, supported by China and the Arab world, Mr Bashir is not meekly going to stand down and report to The Hague for trial. He will work harder to stay put. The precedent of Slobodan Milosevic, carted off to the dock after falling from power in Serbia, has not been lost on the world’s bad men. Some people say such indictments prolonged the tyranny of Charles Taylor in Liberia and are now obstructing chances of peace with the murderous Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda.

The spectacle of justice thwarted is hard to stomach. But in the argument between justice and expediency, both must have their say. It would be wonderful if the perpetrators of the slaughter in Darfur were brought to justice. The heart demands it, and to some degree the head demands it too. Ever since the trials in Nuremberg after the second world war, the hope has been that if heads of government and their lieutenants learn that even they are not above the law, fear of punishment will one day deter the powerful from committing great crimes. That, it is not too pompous to say, would in the long run be a marvellous advance in the human condition.

In the immediate press of events, however, the moral calculation often pushes the other way. Only this week Indonesia and Timor-Leste published a report blaming the Indonesian army for the atrocities committed in the former East Timor. But, to keep the peace, there is no hint of bringing anyone to trial. None of the big shots who oversaw apartheid ever faced serious punishment. Till recently, dictators who ordered thousands of “disappearances” in Latin America’s dirty wars were allowed to slip into easeful retirement. Terrorists in Northern Ireland and Palestine have been forgiven their crimes in return for desisting. Such decisions are never easy: just ask the victims. But the hunger for peace will occasionally trump the appetite for justice if forgiveness and amnesty are the only way to end wars or move societies from dictatorship to democracy.

Give justice her sword
Where does that leave the high hopes that accompanied the creation of the ICC ten years ago? Still strong, we believe. Examples of justice denied do not mean that this noble enterprise is doomed to fail. On the contrary, the trials in various courts of Milosevic, Mr Taylor and perhaps eventually Mr Bashir too might indeed deter the war criminals of the future. But international law is not like domestic law. At their best, national laws enjoy the legitimacy conferred on them by accountable legislatures. National courts operate inside established systems of law-enforcement. The international system of law and order, by contrast, remains highly imperfect.

The case of Darfur is especially hard. A UN Security Council so divided that it could not even pass mild sanctions on Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe has spent five years dithering over the genocide in Sudan. The ICC must now issue its indictment against Mr Bashir if the evidence warrants it. That is its job. But the main work of ending the suffering in Darfur belongs to the Security Council and its members. They should use their power to suspend the court’s indictment as an extra form of leverage on Mr Bashir—but, crucially, they must add the threat to use force if Sudan refuses to make a deal. A court on its own cannot bring either peace or justice. "
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11750485

The organization of Humans Right Watch would be of great help to get informations...

http://www.hrw.org/doc?t=africa&c=Darfur

according to the HRW Sudan's government has supported the Janjaweed militia and its government supports genocide and refugee camps are sometimes worse than outside because the soldiers rape the woman and children and beat the men. Also the government doesn't invest enough money for this refugees because many of them are starving or dyeing of thirst while the government buys more weapons for its army and its politician buy expensive things for themselves. The Janjaweed militia has also made raids on poor vilages taking everything from Chad innocent citizens

Dear Sudanese Delegate,

China would like to show its full suppport and appreciation towards the end of the Darfur Crisis. We have been aiding your nation, economically for more than 20 years, especially with your capital, Khartoum, which has boosted in a growth of nearly 10%. We belive that with China´s influence in Sudan, the "after crisis" issues will be resolved rapidly.

The delegate of Kenya argued that many of Sudan's citizens have been runnin to chad, truee, butis the delegate also aware that Chads rebel groups have been the ones attacking the refugees in Chad and these same rebels have been invading sudan and commiting atrocities and human right abuses as well, in which the ICC claims it is Sudan's fault?

Hello Delegates!
The conflict in Darfur affects Chad and the Central African Republic. The Sudanese government and rebel groups signed a peace agreement in May, but violence in Darfur has increased since then. “We have kept people alive, but we haven’t protected them,” Chief Jan said. There are some 218,000 refugees from Darfur in twelve camps in eastern Chad. The region also have 90,000 internally displaced Chadians, and some 46,000 refugees from the Central African Republic in three camps in southern Chad.

Delegate Mana,
it is Sudan's fault. the government totally lost control of the government.
Sudan must ask for UN and AU peacekeeping troops in order to guarantee the security of the citizens. UN and AU troops must be positioned in Sudan's border with Chad in order to avoid chadian militias to invade sudan.
thanks

The warrant of arrest for Sudanese President Omar Bashir for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in Darfur, has created a major dilemma: remove Bashir from power and risk a failed state in Sudan or let a man accused of committing war crimes continue governing the war- torn nation?The president has refused to hand over the government minister, Ahmad Harun, and Janjaweed commander, Ali Kushayb, against whom warrants were issued in April 2007, and has been accused of fueling a conflict that has put over 2 million civilians in need of aid, by supporting Janjaweed forces. According to the Western community: “the Sudanese governing regime has until now utterly failed in its responsibility to protect its own people”. While the West is in favor of the warrant, the Jeddah-based 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has called the International Criminal Court (ICC) indictment of Sudanese President Omar Bashir on genocide charges “unwarranted and unacceptable.” Their argument is that “in accordance with the Rome Statute, the ICC can only be complementary to national legal systems which have the primary responsibility of investigating or prosecuting cases over which the ICC has no jurisdiction”. Whether or not the persecution of a head of state by the ICC is legal is a topic that has more than one side, but it’s a fact that the warrant has contributed to peace in one way- it is motivating the president to put more effort into putting an end to the ongoing violence.

Delegates,

Many survivors are now living in crowded camps, or on the edges of towns, in Darfur and neighbouring Chad. Some of the camps are the size of small cities.

People live in constant fear of further violence. Most arrive with nothing. More people arrive each day, in search of shelter, food, water and safety.

The conflict is also affecting those who remain in their villages. Around four million people, more than half the region’s population, are now dependant on humanitarian aid.

African delegates,
The Darfur crisis has come to France's deep concern and the recent prosecution of the president Al- Bashir has become a polemical issue. It is based on the will to promote peace, that France supports the ICC demands, not only because it will ensure justice, but how can the international community leave a president who has been accused of crimes against humanity in power? This would go against all our principles. It is of the ICC's right under the Security Council resolution, to take action in Sudan, independent if the nation has ratified or not the Rome Statute. The president through out the years has shown his lack of competence to solve the crisis and for this reason France believes it time for change. We disagree with Sudan's attempt of deferring the warrant unless the government proves to comply with past UN demands and shows a clear change of its attitudes. France is a great defender of justice and believes that is the only way to achieve peace.
Therefore, France believes that it would be more plausible to stand in behalf of the ICC and go against Sudan’s attempt of escaping proper justice.
Merci.

Sudan points out that the ICC prosecution of the sudanese president wouldnt be polemical if it would deal with both the peace and justice spects of the crisis as the Freanch delegate stated. The ICC proseution is an attempt to reach a unexistant justice (for Omar-al Bahir is not guilty) by the price of peace. This because removing the president of a fragile country as Sudan can lead to unpredictable situations which include a rebellion by both parts which would end in the complete aniquilation of one of the sides, the UNPKO would stad in the middle of such combat and would surely be exterminated.

The UNSC is the one hich establish the ICC's rights, it only has the power to indicate the crise which the ICC will be dealing with. The 2002 Rome Statute is the one defining all of the ICC's rights and according to such document the ICC's rights t invade a country's sovereignty only exists if the country is doing nothing to resolve the crise. Obviously Sudan has been trying to sove the crisis and results (even if minimal) makes the ICC prosecution illegal according to its own statute.

The freanch delegate place itself once again in a confortable zone of neutrality, how can the french delegate state it would be in favor of the deferral if Sudan started to show change in attitude? The sudanese delegate can only ask himself how could Sudan sow change if the deferal is not accepted and time for change is given to Sudan. The french delegation should also be careful when exposig this position for it goes against the french resolution which is clearly asking for the increase of ICC actions.

Sudan would also like to point out that iit has changed, even if little, and struggles to change hae been big. Therefore it os asking for the total removal of the ICC proseccution to Bashir and the deferal should not even be mentioned since it doesnt appear in neither of the resolutions related to the topic.

Bye

"Sudan would also like to point out that iit has changed, even if little..." [quote]

sorry delegate, but "little" is not enoguh.

Hello Sudan Delegates,

Can you state some of your solutions to solve the following problems?

Hello delegates!
The United Nations said that Sudan and Chad must overcome their violent relationship to help solve the ethnic conflict in Darfur. “Without a relationship of trust and cooperation between Chad and Sudan, peace will be elusive for the people of Darfur,” said Jan Eliasson, the chief UN mediator in the Darfur conflict. “The absence of such a relationship is also damaging the cohesion and cooperation among our regional partners.” The African Union representatives are having peace talks to try to end the conflict in Darfur. The representatives have been talking in Sirte, Libya, to the end the Darfur conflict, which has killed more than 300,000 people and made more than 2 million refugees since 2003.

Delegates,

Overthrowing a president, arresting the president of a country like Sudan
with humongous worldwide problems will even more create instability of the country and more insecurity to the population. The International Criminal Court or the ICC can invade a countries sovereignty, IF nothing is being done by the government. It is clear the the Sudanese government want's to end such crisis.

President Bush labeled Darfur as a genocide, even though the European Union the United Nation and the former US president Jimmy Carter, whose charitable foundation worked to established the ICC, said that there is a legal definition of genocide, and Darfur doesn't meet that standard.

Thank you

Actually, france delegate, little is in fact enough for the gignatic crisis happenoing in Darfur. With this little development happening in darur many lives can be saved and justice rached. In fact the Sudan's poeple initiative is all about democracy and asks the people to cooperate with the forum and give idas of how such problem can be fixed. Not just that, but a 2011 referendum, and an election will take place in 2009: DEMOCRACY
Little is enough! It may all start small, but the solution dar delegate, seems to be growing every day, and really fast

Also dear delegatyes of chad, I'm not sure if you heard about it, but recent news says that Sudan and Chad restored diplomatic ties recently by exchanging embassadors, so there can be a peaceful way to reach a solution regarding the darfur crisi. Just a daily update!