Sudan: The Crisis in Darfur and Status of the North-South Peace Agreement

Sudan: The Crisis in Darfur and Status of the
North-South Peace Agreement
Updated October 1, 2008
Ted Dagne
Specialist in African Affairs
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division



Sudan: The Crisis in Darfur and Status of the North-
South Peace Agreement
Summary
Sudan, geographically the largest country in Africa, has been ravaged by civil
war intermittently for four decades. More than 2 million people have died in
Southern Sudan over the past two decades due to war-related causes and famine, and
millions have been displaced from their homes. There were many failed attempts to
end the civil war in southern Sudan. In July 2002, the Sudan government and the
Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) signed a peace framework agreement
in Kenya. On May 26, 2004, the government of Sudan and the SPLM signed three
protocols on Power Sharing, on the Nuba Mountains and Southern Blue Nile, and on
the long disputed Abyei area. The signing of these protocols resolved all outstanding
issues between the parties. On June 5, 2004, the parties signed “the Nairobi
Declaration on the Final Phase of Peace in the Sudan.” On January 9, 2005, the
government of Sudan and the SPLM signed the final peace agreement at a ceremony
held in Nairobi, Kenya.
In October 2007, the government of Southern Sudan suspended the participation
of its Ministers, State Ministers, and Presidential Advisors from the Government of
National Unity to protest measures taken by the National Congress Party and to
demand full implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). In
response to these demands and unexpected developments, President Bashir
reportedly accepted a number of the government of South Sudan (GoSS) demands
in late October, except those related to the Abyei issue. In late December 2007, the
new ministers were sworn in office. In May 2008, Government forces burned Abyei
town and displaced more than 60,000 people.
The crisis in Darfur began in February 2003, when two rebel groups emerged
to challenge the National Congress Party (NCP) government in Darfur. The crisis in
Darfur in western Sudan has led to a major humanitarian disaster, with an estimated
2.45 million people displaced, more than 240,000 people forced into neighboring
Chad, and an estimated 450,000 people killed. In July 2004, the House and Senate
declared the atrocities in Darfur genocide, and the Bush Administration reached the
same conclusion in September 2004. On May 4, 2006, the Government of National
Unity and the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army (SLM/A) signed the Darfur Peace
Agreement (DPA) after almost two years of negotiations.
In July 2007, the U.N. Security Council passed Resolution 1769, authorizing
the deployment of a robust peacekeeping force to Darfur. The resolution calls for the
deployment of 26,000 peacekeeping troops to Darfur. The resolution authorised the
United Nations African Union force in Darfur (UNAMID) to take all necessary
measures to protect its personnel and humanitarian workers. As of late July 31,

2008, UNAMID has deployed a total of 9,995 peacekeeping personnel. In July 2008,


International Criminal Court (ICC) Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo accused
President Omar Bashir of Sudan of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war
crimes and asked ICC judges to issue an arrest warrant for President Bashir.
This report will be updated as circumstances warrant.



Contents
Recent Developments..............................................1
The International Criminal Court (ICC) and Sudan....................1
United Nations Peacekeeping in Darfur.............................2
Executive Branch Sanctions on Sudan.............................4
Humanitarian Conditions .......................................5
China and Sudan..................................................5
Recent Developments: Southern Sudan.................................7
Status of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement
Historical Context.............................................9
The North-South Peace Agreement: Background.....................9
Implementation of the CPA.....................................10
The United States and the North-South Peace Agreement.............11
The Darfur Conflict and Impact on Chad and CAR......................12
The Crisis in Darfur: Background....................................14
Darfur Developments: Accountability for Atrocities.................15
The Janjaweed: Background....................................17
The Darfur Peace Agreement and Status of Implementation............19
U.S. Humanitarian Funding.....................................19
Possible Policy Options Concerning Darfur........................21
Engagement .............................................21
Sanctions ...............................................21
Regime Change..........................................22
International Intervention...................................22
Bilateral Targeted Military Measures.........................22
110th Congress Legislation..........................................23
Appendix .......................................................25
Executive Order: Blocking Property of and Prohibiting Transactions
with the Government of Sudan .............................25
Executive Order: Blocking Property of Persons in Connection with the
Conflict in Sudan’s Darfur Region...........................28
List of Tables
Table 1. U.S. Assistance to Sudan...................................20



Sudan: The Crisis in Darfur and Status of
the North-South Peace Agreement
Recent Developments
In late August 2008, government forces entered the Kalma IDP camp in South
Darfur and killed over 30 civilians and wounded many more. Government forces
used heavy weapons during the attack in which the wounded civilians lost legs, arms,
and other body parts, according to photographs of the wounded in the Kalma camp.
Moreover, government forces intensified their ground and air attacks against rebel
forces, although the casualties have largely been civilians. In July 2008, seven
UNAMID peacekeepers were killed and over a dozen wounded in an attack by
heavily armed pro-government militia. Another peacekeeper was killed a few days
later.
In May 2008, government of Sudan forces destroyed the town of Abyei,
displaced over 60,000 people, and killed over a dozen. Abyei town was largely1
burned, according to witnesses. In July 2008, the government of Sudan and the
SPLM signed an agreement on “defining and demarcating” the Abyei area. The
parties agreed to refer the Abyei dispute for arbitration. Many of the civilians
displaced by the attacks in May remain in displaced camps and the town of Abyei2
was largely empty as of mid-August 2008.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) and Sudan
In July 2008, the ICC Chief Prosecutor accused President Bashir of Sudan of
genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. The Prosecutor asked ICC
judges to issue an arrest warrant for President Bashir. The judges are expected to
issue their decision before the end of the year. In late September 2008, the U.N.
Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon, the African Union Commission Chairman, Jean
Ping, ICC Special Prosecutor, and other government officials met in New York to
discuss the status of the ICC case against President Bashir.
Special Prosecutor Moreno-Ocampo stated that “We presented a solid case. The
evidence shows that crimes against Darfurians continue today. President al-Bashir
has complete control of his forces, and they are raping women today, they are
promoting conditions in the camps to destroy complete communities and they are still
bombing schools.” Ocampo added that “the judges will decide. Those sought by the


1 Ted Dagne visited Abyei in May 2008 at the height of the conflict and took video and
photographs of the destruction of Abyei.
2 Ted Dagne visited Abyei, Wau, and Agok in August 2008.

court have to face justice. It is an immense challenge for the political leaders of the
world. They have to protect the victims and ensure the respect for the court’s
decisions.”3
The government of Sudan condemned the ICC action, while the African Union
asked for a deferment of the ICC case against Bashir. However, the Chairman of the
African Union, President Jakaya Kikwete of Tanzania, stated at the United Nations
in September that “when we talk about deferment, we should not in anyway be
perceived as condoning impunity. Justice is a matter of essence.” President Museveni
of Uganda stated that "you cannot stand up and say: ‘Don’t touch Bashir because he
is a president.’ Suppose he made those mistakes. If you take that position, you will
be ignoring the right of the victims.”4 Other African leaders also expressed similar
views concerning the ICC case against Bashir.
The SPLM issued a press release stating that “the solution to the crisis is for the
Government of National Unity to forge an understanding with the international
community and to co-operate with ICC on the legal processes.” Vice President Salva
Kiir was appointed to chair a “Crisis Committee” to deal with the ICC process and
other emerging issues. Foreign Minister Deng Alore of Sudan informed President
Bashir that he will not defend him at the United Nations or lobby against the ICC
case. This led to a decision by Bashir to appoint Vice President Osman Ali Taha to
lead a 50-person delegation to the United Nations in September 2008. The Bashir
government is currently actively engaged in lobbying campaign against the ICC.
Senior government officials, who in the past ignored or harassed the international
press, are now giving the international media unprecedented access to senior
officials.
U.S. Special Envoy to Sudan, Richard Williamson, at a briefing before the U.S.
Commission on Religious Freedom in late September stated that “we believe strongly
that there should be no impunity for the atrocities committed in Darfur. The people
of Darfur have suffered for far too long.” He also stated that the United States will
veto any resolution for deferment under Article 16 of the Rome Statue. Secretary of
State Rice reportedly informed Vice President Taha at a meeting in New York that
the U.S. will veto a resolution on deferment.
United Nations Peacekeeping in Darfur
On July 31, 2007, acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 1769. The resolution calls
for the deployment of a hybrid United Nations-African Union force in Darfur
(UNAMID). The U.N. is expected to fully deploy 26,000 peacekeeping troops to
Darfur by mid-2008. As of late May 2008, the United Nations deployed 9,563
peacekeeping personnel to Darfur, Sudan. In March 2008, the United States pledged
$100 million to train and equip African peacekeepers for deployment under
UNAMID. The resolution:


3 United Nations News Wire, September 22, 2008.
4 The Sudan Tribune. Ugandan President Does Not Condemn the ICC, August 3, 2008.

1. Reaffirms its commitment to stop the suffering in Darfur, and to work with the
government of Sudan toward this end.
2. Commends Sudan’s acceptance of a hybrid operation to be deployed in Darfur
and the ongoing efforts of the African Union Mission in Sudan, AMIS.
3. Refers to the Addis Ababa Agreement that the hybrid operation be predominantly
comprised of African troops.
4. Expresses concern about ongoing attacks on civilians in Darfur and the security
of humanitarian aid workers in the region.
5. Welcomes the appointment of the AU-UN Joint Special Representative for
Darfur, Rodolphe Adada, and Force Commander, Martin Agwai.
6. Calls on all parties to facilitate the full deployment of Light and Heavy Support
Packages to AMIS and preparations for UNAMID within 30 days.
7. States that UNAMID shall establish an initial operational capability for its
headquarters by October 2007, in addition to the management and control
structure of the operation.
8. Decides that by October 2007, UNAMID shall assume command of all Light
Support and Heavy Support personnel as may be deployed by October.
9. States that by December 31, 2007 at the latest, UNAMID will have fully
implemented all of the elements of its mandate and will assume authority from
AMIS.

10. Calls for a unity of command and control provided by the United Nations.


11. Demands an immediate cessation of hostilities in Darfur.


12. States that UNAMID is authorized to take the necessary actions to protect its
personnel and humanitarian workers. The resolution also calls for the
protection of civilians, “without prejudice to the responsibilities of the
government of Sudan.”
As of late July 2008, an estimated 9,995 UNAMID troops have been deployed.5
In late December 2007, UNAMID officially assumed command and control from the
African Union peacekeeping force. The United Nations continues to face serious
obstacles in force deployment in large part due to restrictions imposed by the
Government of National Unity (GoNU). The Government signed the Status of
Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the United Nations in February 2008.The
Government, however, continues to reject non-African countries, including offers
from Thailand, Nepal, and Norway.
According to Jean-Marie Guehenno, Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping
Operations, “authorization for the deployment of six helicopters to El-Fashir had not
been obtained as yet, and UNAMID had not been given permission to fly at night.”6
The government of Sudan continues to insist on having the authority to “temporarily
disable the communications network” of UNAMID during Government security
operations. The Government is also demanding that UNAMID provide advance
notification of movements. UNAMID also faces logistical difficulties, in part due to
lack of helicopters.


5 [http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unamid/facts.html]
6 Under-Secretary General for Peacekeeping Operations briefing of the U.N. Security
Council, November 27, 2007.

In January 2008, a UNAMID supply convoy was attacked by Sudanese
government forces in West Darfur. The United Nations and the United States
condemned the attack.7 In January 2008, President Omer Bashir of Sudan appointed
Musa Hilal, a leader of the Janjaweed, as Advisor to the Minister of Federal Affairs.
In April 2006, the United Nations Security Council imposed a travel ban and asset
freeze on Musa Hilal. Bush Administration officials have criticized the appointment
of Hilal.8 President Bashir argued that Hilal is an influential leader in Darfur and that
his government does not accept the allegation against Hilal. The appointment of
Hilal is seen by observers as another obstacle to peace in the Darfur region.
Executive Branch Sanctions on Sudan
On May 29, 2007, the Bush Administration imposed new economic sanctions
on two Sudanese government officials (Ahmad Muhammed Harun, Sudan’s State
Minister for Humanitarian Affairs and Awad Ibn Auf, head of Sudan’s Military
Intelligence and Security), a leader of the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM),
Khalil Ibrahim, and 31 Sudanese companies. According to Administration officials,
“Harun and Auf have acted as liaisons between the Sudanese government and the
government-supported Janjaweed militia, which have attacked and brutalized
innocent civilians in the region. The two individuals also have provided the
Janjaweed with logistical support and directed attacks.”9 Of the 31 companies
sanctioned, 30 are either owned or controlled by the government of Sudan and the
other, the Azza Air Transport Company, violated the arms embargo in Darfur. These
companies are banned from doing business within the U.S. financial system and with
U.S. companies, and U.S. citizens are restricted from doing business with these
companies.
The Administration’s objective in imposing new sanctions is to increase
pressure on the government of Sudan to end the violence in Darfur. President Bush
also announced plans to consult with U.S. allies on the United Nations Security
Council about additional multilateral sanctions to be imposed on the government of
Sudan. Some of the proposed sanctions include an expansion of the existing arms
embargo, a prohibition of offensive military flights over Darfur, and improved
monitoring and reporting of violations. Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte
also urged European allies to impose financial sanctions to match those of the United
States.10 On June 25, 2007, at an international conference on Darfur in Paris, France,
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asserted that sanctions must be maintained to
discourage the Sudanese Government from reneging on its acceptance of a larger
peacekeeping force in Darfur. Rice stated that, “We can no longer afford a situation
in Darfur where agreements are made and not kept. Until Sudan has actually carried


7 [http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2008/jan/98954.htm]
8 [http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gvhevbfJOD4I9EAeZ5OxHyHtkPUw]
9 [http://www.treasury.gov/press/releases/hp426.htm]
10 [http://www.state.gov/s/d/2007/85716.htm]

out the commitments it’s taken, I think we have to keep the possibility of
consequences on the table.”11
Humanitarian Conditions
Conditions in Darfur continue to deteriorate, according to United Nations
officials and non-governmental organizations. In March 2007, two African Union
peacekeepers were killed in Graida, Darfur. According to the U.N. Secretary
General’s February 23, 2007 report to the Security Council, “the security situation
in Darfur has been characterized by increased violence during the reporting period.”
The same report stated that tension along the Sudan-Chad border remains high.
Humanitarian workers have also seen an escalation in violence against NGOs
throughout Darfur. More than 400 humanitarian workers have been relocated to
other locations on several occasions because of security concerns. Over two dozen
trucks have been taken from NGOs and properties damaged. According to the U.N.
Secretary General’s December 24, 2007 report, “In October alone, more than 20,000
civilians were displaced by armed clashes between Government forces and non-
signatories to the Darfur Peace Agreement and among Darfur movements
themselves.”12 According to the same report, “violence and tensions persist in camps
for the displaced. The raids of Government forces and police into camps, as well as
conflicts in and around the camps, have led to lose of life, destruction of shelters and
the arbitrary detention of civilians.” In July 2008, eight UNAMID peacekeepers were
killed in an attack by pro-government militia in Darfur.
The United Nations Mission in Sudan announced after a four-day visit to the
southern Darfur town of Gereida in mid-June that the security situation had not
improved and that Janjaweed attacks against civilians, especially women, continue.
UNMIS also reported that attacks against humanitarian convoys in Darfur persist, and
that a number of NGO vehicles have been shot at, car jacked, or robbed. In May
2007, two health service NGOs withdrew from Tawila, North Darfur, due to
insecurity and news of recent attacks on humanitarian convoys. Meanwhile, Darfuris
continue to flee to neighboring Chad and the Central African Republic (CAR). Both
countries are still experiencing cross-border attacks by the Janjaweed, and the World
Health Organization (WHO) stated in a recent assessment that refugees in both
countries are at significant risk for health. A press release given by Amnesty
International on June 26, 2007 expressed concern that rising insecurity in the CAR
is going unnoticed by the international community due to the continued emphasis on
Darfur and eastern Chad. According to the United Nations, twelve humanitarian
workers have been killed and 15 wounded in 2007.
China and Sudan
Relations between China and Sudan are warm. In the 1990s, political, economic,
and military relations between Sudan and China expanded, and China became a key


11 [http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-06-25-darfur_N.htm]
12 [http://www.unmis.org/english/en-main.htm]

trading partner, investing billions of dollars in Sudan’s oil sector. China reportedly
imports an estimated 64% of Sudan’s oil and China’s National Petroleum
Corporation is the largest shareholder (47%) in the two biggest oil consortiums in
Sudan, Petrodar and the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company (GNPOC). In
addition to the oil sector, China is an important player in other sectors of the
Sudanese economy. In February 2007, China signed a $1.2 billion agreement to
upgrade the railway between Khartoum and Port Sudan. China is also an active
participant in power generation, the arms industry, and other major infrastructure
projects. China built the 1000-mile oil pipeline used by Sudan to move its oil from
the oil fields in South Sudan to Port Sudan.
China is an important supplier of weapons to the Government of Sudan. Sudan
also produces significant quantities of weapons itself and is the third largest arms
manufacturer in Africa, after South Africa and Egypt. Human rights groups and other
observers accuse the Chinese government of being the principal supplier of weapons
in violation of a U.N. weapons embargo on Sudan. In 2005, China reportedly sold
Sudan $24 million in arms and ammunition and $57 million worth of spare parts for
aircraft and helicopters.13 In July 2008, a BBC Televison report presented evidence
of Chinese army trucks and several A5 Fantan fighter planes in Darfur. In February
2008, Fantan fighter planes were used to bomb the town of Beybey in Darfur in
which a number of civilians were reportedly killed. In June 2008, the BBC acquired
satellite photographs of two Fantan fighter planes at Nyala airport in South Darfur.14
China provides important political and financial support to the Government of
Sudan. As a Permanent Member of the Security Council, China has threatened
several times to veto U.N. Security Council resolutions or has influenced the Council
either to withdraw or amend statements. In July 2008, a British-drafted Presidential
Statement was withdrawn because of Chinese opposition. China also has abstained
on resolutions 1556, 1591, 1593, and 1706 relating to Darfur. In 2007, China forgave
$70 million in debt and provided $13 million in interest-free loan to Sudan to build
a new Presidential Palace.
Advocacy groups in the United States and in other parts of the world have
engaged in a campaign to highlight Chinese support to the Sudanese government and
link that support to the upcoming Beijing Olympics. The advocates refer to the
Beijing Olympics as the “Genocide Olympics.” These advocates argue that the main
purpose of the campaign is to “shame” China into using its influence over Sudan in
order to bring an end to the crisis in Darfur. The campaign does not advocate
boycotting the Olympics or targeting the athletes, although these groups have called
on world leaders to boycott the opening ceremony in Beijing. The pressure on China
has yielded some results. The Chinese government appointed a Special Envoy for
Sudan and has also deployed an estimated 315 engineers to take part in the U.N.
peacekeeping mission in Darfur.


13 Amnesty International. Sudan: Arms Continuing to Fuel Serious Human Rights
Violations in Darfur, May 2007.
14 BBC News. China is Fueling War in Darfur, July 13, 2008. Ted Dagne spoke with the
reporter on a number of occasions, in preparation for the BBC Television report, which was
aired on July 14, 2008.

Recent Developments: Southern Sudan
In October 2007, the Government of Southern Sudan suspended the
participation of its Ministers, State Ministers, and Presidential Advisors from the
Government of National Unity to protest measures taken by the National Congress
Party and to demand full implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement
(CPA). The Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) has been complaining
and urging the Sudanese government to implement key provisions of the CPA and
to consult the First Vice President on key issues. They complained that President
Omer Bashir has been taking important decisions with little or no consultation with
the First Vice President since the signing of the peace agreement in 2005. On Darfur,
President Bashir has been waging war and deliberately sidelining the SPLM on key
decisions. For example, the Eastern Sudan Agreement was negotiated and signed
between the National Congress Party and the Eastern rebels without serious
consultation with the First Vice President. According to the CPA, “the President
shall take decisions with the consent of the First Vice President on declaration and
termination of state of emergency, declaration of war, appointments that the president
is required to make according to the peace agreement, summoning, adjourning, or
proroguing the National Assembly.” A request by the First Vice President to reshuffle
Southern Ministers in the Government of National Unity was held up for several
months by President Bashir in large part due to Bashir’s opposition to the proposed
change of the Foreign Minister.
In October the SPLM leadership submitted a number of demands to President
Bashir. In a letter to President Bashir, First Vice President Salva Kiir wrote:15
“At this critical juncture of the history of our country, the Sudanese people, the
region and the international community at large, do follow with concern the
evolving situation in our country. In particular, they follow closely with concern
what both of us, and the parties we lead, are doing to enhance and consolidate
peace in our country. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) is the corner
stone of that peace. It is with this spirit that I am addressing you today on behalf
of the SPLM, and on my own behalf as a partner in peace.
The SPLM was encouraged by the creation of bilateral permanent mechanisms
for the resolution of outstanding issues on CPA implementation as well as for the
enhancement of cooperation and partnership between our two parties. Despite the
progress made on several issue areas, critical flash points remain. Thereby
giving rise to the impression that the mechanisms we have created were mere
vehicles for public relations exercises and not meant to help the parties in
resolving critical differences.
The above impression was reinforced by recent provocative actions emanating
from authorities within the Government of National Unity (GONU) of which we
are part, indeed the major partner to the NCP. The height of these provocations
was the raids in Khartoum on SPLM premises and the Mess of SPLA senior
officers in the Joint Defense Board (JDB). The JDB is the highest military organ
created by the CPA and INC to oversee the smooth implementation of Security
Arrangements. Those indecorous acts were compounded by the unrepentant


15 Government of Sudan source.

reaction by their perpetrators to SPLM’s protest. The perpetrators include NCP
Ministers and officers in the law enforcement agencies who are duty-bound by
the INC to steer away of politics. It became clear to us, however, that the
provocations reflected a pattern of behavior intended to humiliate the SPLM. The
SPLM, therefore, should not be expected to take that behavior lightly. Indeed, the
situation called for a pause and a deep reflection on the way and spirit with
which we are handling the implementing of CPA.
To that end, the SPLM Interim Political Bureau (IPB) met in Juba from Octoberthth
4 — 11 2007 to assess and evaluate the status of CPA implementation and
draw concrete actions for the way forward. In that evaluation, the IPB identified
CPA violations and enumerated unacceptable deliberate actions demeaning to the
SPLM and its leadership. I am enclosing herewith copy of the IPB’s resolutions
encompassing violations to the CPA as well as actions to which the SPLM takes
serious exception. In presenting these resolutions, I am confident that you shall
address, with wisdom and statesmanship, the serious issues raised therein. Truly,
those violations and actions constitute a major challenge to the sustenance of
peace and consolidation of unity in our country. On my part, I remain committed
to the full implementation of the CPA and I do not wish for a moment to
contemplate the collapse of the CPA, let alone take part in that collapse.
Furthermore, the IPB expressed deep concern with Your Excellency’s inaction
on the reshuffle of SPLM Ministers in GONU which, in the spirit of collegial
decision-making, I proposed. In doing that, I was exercising my constitutional
rights and prerogatives as the Chairman of the SPLM to effect the
recommendations of my Party. In view of the perception that this inaction
amounts to an encroachment on the First Vice President’s constitutional powers,
the IPB recalled all SPLM Presidential Advisors, Ministers and State Ministers
in GONU and they have been directed to stay away from their duties till
considerable progress is seen in addressing the issues raised in the attached
resolutions. In order not to paralyze the work of GoNU, I am again presenting to
your Excellency our new list of ministerial changes in GONU. I am confident
that you shall address this matter together with other pressing issues contained
in the resolutions of IPB with due regard to the risks inherent in the present
stalemate. This stalemate, if left unresolved, may degenerate into a crisis which
none of us wants. It is our political duty and national obligation to avert actions
that might endanger the CPA. It is also our moral and constitutional
responsibility to provide the necessary leadership so that our country is enabled
to enjoy peace, stability, democracy and unity based on the free will of its
people.”
In response to these demands and unexpected developments, President Bashir
reportedly accepted a number of the Government of South Sudan (GoSS) demands
in late October, except those related to the Abyei issue. According to senior SPLM
officials, the acceptance of their demands by President Bashir does not resolve the
crisis. They would like to see a timeline and a roadmap for implementation of their
demands before they return to government. President Bashir accepted a new list of
ministers submitted by the First Vice President, although he deleted the name of one
senior official who was appointed as a Presidential Adviser, according to Sudanese
sources. In late December 2007, the new ministers were sworn in office. Former
Minister of Foreign Affairs, Lam Akol, was replaced by Deng Alore, a senior
member of the SPLM.



Status of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement
Historical Context
In 1956, Sudan became the first independent country in sub-Saharan Africa,
having gained independence from Britain and Egypt. For almost four decades, the
east African country, with a population of 35 million people, has been the scene of
intermittent conflict. An estimated 2 million people died over two decades from war-
related causes and famine in Southern Sudan, and millions more were displaced. The
sources of the conflict were deeper and more complicated than the claims of most
political leaders and some observers. Religion was a major factor because of the
Islamic fundamentalist agenda of the current government, dominated by the mostly
Muslim/Arab north. Southerners, who are Christian and animist, reject the
Islamization of the country and favor a secular arrangement. Social and economic
disparities were also major contributing factors to the Sudanese conflict.
Former President Jaafer Nimeri’s abrogation of the 1972 Addis Ababa
agreement in 1983, which had ended the first phase of the civil war in the south, is
considered a major factor triggering the civil war. The National Islamic Front (NIF)
government, which ousted the democratically elected civilian government in 1989,
pursued the war in southern Sudan with vigor. Previous governments, both civilian
and military, had rejected southern demands for autonomy and equality. Northern
political leaders for decades treated southerners as second-class citizens and did not
see the south as an integral part of the country.
Southern political leaders argue that under successive civilian and military
governments, political elites in the north have made only superficial attempts to
address the grievances of the south, reluctant to compromise the north’s dominant
economic, political, and social status. In recent years, most political leaders in the
north, now in opposition to the current government, have said that mistakes were
made and that they are prepared to correct them. But the political mood among
southerners has sharply shifted in favor of separation from the north.
The North-South Peace Agreement: Background
On January 9, 2005, the government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s
Liberation Movement (SPLM), after two and half years of negotiations, signed the
Sudan Comprehensive Peace Agreement at a ceremony in Nairobi, Kenya. More than
a dozen heads of state from Africa attended the signing ceremony. Secretary of State
Colin Powell, who led the U.S. delegation, reportedly urged the government of Sudan
and the SPLM to end the conflict in Darfur. The signing of this agreement effectively
ended the 21-year-old civil war and triggered a six-year Interim Period. At the end
of the Interim Period, southerners are to hold a referendum to decide their political
future. National, regional, and local elections are to take place during the second half
of the Interim Period.
On July 30, 2005, First Vice President and Chairman of the SPLM, Dr. John
Garang, was killed in a plane crash in southern Sudan (discussed below). His death
triggered violence between government security forces and southerners in Khartoum
and Juba. More than 100 people were reported killed. The government of Sudan has



established a committee to investigate the violence. The crash was investigated by
a team from Sudan, Uganda, Russia, United Nations (UN), and the United States.
The final report was issued in April 2006. In early August 2005, the SPLM
Leadership Council appointed Salva Kiir as Chairman of the SPLM and First Vice
President of Sudan. Salva Kiir had served as Garang’s deputy after the SPLM split
in 1991. He was officially sworn in as First Vice President in the Government of
National Unity (GNU) on August 11, 2005. On August 31, 2005, the National
Assembly was inaugurated. According to the CPA, the National Congress Party was
allocated 52% of the seats (234), 28% to the SPLM (126), and the remaining 20% for
the northern and southern opposition groups.
In September 2005, after weeks of contentious negotiations, the SPLM and the
National Congress Party (NCP), formerly known as the National Islamic Front (NIF),
agreed on a cabinet. At the core of the dispute was the distribution of key economic
ministerial portfolios. The NCP insisted on keeping the Energy and Finance
ministries, while the SPLM argued that each party should be given one or the other.
The SPLM ultimately gave up its demand and managed to secure eight ministries,
including Foreign Affairs, Cabinet Affairs, Labor, Transportation, Health, Education,
Humanitarian Affairs, and Trade. Several advisers were also appointed to the
Presidency (the Presidency consists of President Bashir, First Vice President Kiir,
and Vice President Osman Ali Taha), including two from the SPLM.
Implementation of the CPA
Implementation of the CPA by the Government of National Unity has been
selective and at times deliberately slow, according to United Nations officials and
Sudan observers. President Bashir, for example, has not yet implemented the Abyei
Boundary Commission (ABC) recommendations, and the formation of the Joint
Integrated Units has been slow, although over the past several months important
progress has been made. The ABC was mandated to “define and demarcate” the area
known as the nine Ngok Dinka Chiefdoms transferred in 1905 to Kordofan in North
Sudan. The ABC was chaired by former U.S. Ambassador to Sudan Donald
Peterson, with active international engagement. In July 2005, the ABC submitted its
final report to the Presidency. According to the CPA, “upon presentation of the final
report, the Presidency shall take necessary action to put the special administration
status of Abyei Area into immediate effect.”
After signing of the peace agreement, Abyei area was suppose to be
administered by an Executive Council. Members of the Executive Council were
suppose to be elected by the residents of Abyei and the Chief Administrator
appointed by the Presidency. At the end of the Interim Period, the residents of Abyei
are to choose between retaining a special administrative status in the north or be part
of South Sudan. The Bashir government has not put in place an administration in
Abyei and continues to reject the recommendation of the ABC. According to a
September 2007 report by the United Nations Secretary General, the lack of
administration in Abyei has hampered CPA activities and left gaps in policing, public



sanitation, and health services.” Continued intransigence on this issue is likely to
lead to war, according to South Sudanese officials and many Sudan observers.16
The CPA faces serious challenges, despite the number of commissions created
and decrees issued by the Presidency to address issues related to the agreement.
Government force redeployment from Southern Sudan, as called for in the peace
agreement, has been slow, especially in the oil field regions of Southern Sudan. The
SPLA completed redeployment of its forces from East Sudan in 2006. The
government of Sudan redeployed most of its forces as of December 2007, although
thousands of Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) remain in the oil region of South Sudan.
SAF has increased its forces in the Nuba Mountains and Southern Blue Nile in
violation of the CPA. According to the CPA, forces in these two states were suppose
to be at a level of peace time. Moreover, according to the CPA, government forces
were to be out of South Sudan by July 9, 2007. As of December 2007, more than
20,000 Sudanese Armed Forces had presence in South Sudan. According to the
United Nations, the government of Sudan has redeployed 88% of its forces. SPLA
forces also had a presence in the Nuba and Southern Blue Nile regions. According
to senior SPLM officials, the SPLA will pull out of the area once the SAF reduces
its presence and the Joint Integrated Units (JIUs) are fully deployed. In early January

2008, the SPLA withdrew some of its forces from Nuba.17


A number of Commissions remain dysfunctional, although many of the
Commissions have been created by the government of Sudan. However, according
to the September CPA Monitor, the National Human Rights Commission, the
Electoral Commission, and the Land Commission have yet to be created.”18 The
Assessment and Evaluation Commission (AEC), which was mandated under CPA
to monitor implementation of the peace agreement, has created four Working Groups
to monitor implementation of the CPA, although the parties to the agreement have
not been actively engaged in the process. The parties have made little progress in the
implementation of the wealth-sharing and power-sharing provisions of the CPA,
while work on the north-south border is behind schedule. Failure to resolve the
border issue is likely to complicate the redeployment of forces and sharing of oil
revenues, since a number of the oil fields are located along the 1956 north-south
border. In December, the SPLM and the National Congress Party reached agreement
to resolve the north-south border issue and on oil-related issues.19
The United States and the North-South Peace Agreement
The United States played a key role in the North-South peace process, while
pressing for a resolution of the Darfur crisis in Western Sudan. Throughout the Inter-
Governmental Authority for Development (IGAD)-sponsored talks, the Bush
Administration engaged the parties at the highest levels, reportedly including calls


16 Ted Dagne interview of senior Government of South Sudan officials.
17 Ted Dagne met with senior SPLA commanders in January 2008 in Juba, South Sudan.
18 Report on the Implementation of the CPA. [http://www.unmis.org/english
/cpaMonitor.htm]
19 Ted Dagne interview of President Salva Kiir in Juba, South Sudan.

by President Bush to the principals at critical times during the negotiations, and
frequent visits to Kenya by senior State Department officials, where the talks were
being conducted. President Bush’s former Special Envoy, John Danforth, also made
several trips to the region to encourage the parties to finalize an agreement. Former
Secretary of State Colin Powell was actively engaged in the peace process and
traveled to Kenya to encourage the parties, according to U.S. officials and Sudanese
sources. U.S. financial support for the peace process and technical assistance during
the talks were considered by the parties and the mediators as critical, according to
U.S. officials. The United States provided funding for the SPLM delegation for travel
and other related expenses. American interventions at critical times during the
negotiations helped break a number of stalemates, including during security
arrangement talks and the three disputed areas of Nuba, Southern Blue Nile, and
Abyei.
Sustained U.S. pressure on the government of Sudan helped secure the
Comprehensive Peace Agreement. The Bush Administration, while maintaining U.S.
bilateral sanctions, also engaged the Government in critical dialogue and offered the
normalization of bilateral relations as an incentive for the resolution of the Darfur
crisis and settlement of the North-South conflict, according to U.S. officials and
Sudanese sources. U.S. policy toward Sudan is complicated because the same
government that signed the peace agreement with the South is also the one implicated
in atrocities in Darfur, which the U.S. government has declared is genocide. This
reality has led to some criticism of the Bush Administration, although many praise
the Administration’s sustained engagement in the North-South talks. According to
some critics, the Administration did not initially consider the Darfur crisis to be a
priority; instead the Administration was largely focused on the talks between the
government of Sudan and the SPLM. The first statement on Darfur by the White
House, they point out, was issued in early April 2004. The Bush Administration and
Congress, however, have been at the forefront in calling for an end to the crisis in
Darfur and demanding accountability, especially since mid-2004.
The Darfur Conflict and Impact on Chad and CAR
The crisis in Darfur continues to affect Chad and the Central African Republic
(CAR), in large part due to rebellions supported by the government of Sudan against
the governments of Chad and CAR. Indeed, the conflicts in Chad and CAR are
largely internal political disputes between the respective governments and a number
of armed groups. In Chad, some of the belligerents are armed and given safe havens
for training purposes by the government of Sudan. The most affected areas in Chad
are towns and villages near the border with Sudan. The government of Sudan
accuses the Government of Chad of supporting some of the rebel groups in Darfur.
The Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) reportedly benefitted from outside support,
including from fellow Zagawa elements in Chad. The Zagawa are dominant in some
SLA factions. President Idriss Deby of Chad is a Zagawa and some of the senior
officers in the Chadian army come from the Zagawa ethnic group. Successive
governments in Sudan have intervened in the internal affairs of Chad by providing
support to armed factions.



The current instability in eastern Chad is also due to pro-Sudanese government
militia groups and the Janjaweed crossing the border into Chad and attacking
civilians. A February 2007 U.N. Secretary General report on Chad and CAR stated
that “fighting between the Chadian armed forces and rebel groups, some of which are
armed and supported by the Sudan, and attacks by militia on the civilian population
have continued to destabilize eastern Chad, leading to widespread insecurity and
human rights violations, including continued displacement of civilian populations.”20
According to international NGOs and the United Nations, more than 120,000 people
have been internally displaced in eastern Chad. Chad has more than 230,000 refugees
from Darfur, according to these sources. The incursion by the Janjaweed and the
fighting between government forces and Chadian rebel groups have contributed to
the suffering of the internally displaced and the refugees in eastern Chad. The
internally displaced persons often move to areas closer to the refugee camps because
humanitarian assistance to the displaced has been limited. In December 2006,
President Deby reached an agreement with one of the rebel groups led by Mahamat
Nour. In March 2007, Mr. Nour was appointed as Minister of Defense.
In the Central African Republic, the fighting between rebel groups and
government forces has displaced more than 70,000 people in northeastern CAR,
according to the United Nations. Over the past several months, the CAR government
has recaptured towns taken by rebel groups. The CAR armed forces, supported by
French troops and a multinational force from the Central African Economic and
Monetary Community (CEMAC) have largely succeeded in containing rebel
advances. Meanwhile, negotiations between the government of President Francois
Bozize’ and several rebel groups have led to some agreements. In February 2007, in
negotiations mediated by Libya, two rebel leaders, Abdoulaye Miskine and Andre’
Ringui Le Gaillard, signed an agreement with the CAR government. However, the
agreement was rejected by the military chief of one of the rebel groups.
The United Nations has been working towards the deployment of a
peacekeeping force to Chad and CAR over the past several months, and has
concluded two technical assessment missions to Chad and CAR. The mandate of the
proposed U.N. multidimensional presence would include the protection of civilians
and internally displaced persons, maintenance of law and order, facilitation of the
free movement of humanitarian assistance, and coordination with African Union
Mission in Sudan (AMIS) and the U.N. Mission in Sudan (UNMIS). The area of
operations would be in eastern Chad and northeastern CAR. The U.N. Secretary
General recommended to the Security Council the deployment of 10,900 personnel
to Chad and CAR. The government of Chad has reportedly expressed reservations
about the deployment of an armed force but stated that the government would
welcome a police force.


20 Report of the Secretary General on Chad and the Central African Republic, February 23,

2007, at [http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/sgrep07.htm].



The Crisis in Darfur: Background
The crisis in Darfur began in February 2003, when two rebel groups emerged
to challenge the National Congress Party (NCP) government in Darfur. The Sudan
Liberation Army (SLA) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) argued that
the government of Sudan discriminates against Muslim African ethnic groups in
Darfur and has systematically targeted these ethnic groups since the early 1990s. The
government of Sudan dismisses the SLA and JEM as terrorists. The conflict
primarily pits three African ethnic groups, the Fur, Zaghawa, and Massaleit, against
nomadic Arab ethnic groups. Periodic tensions between the largely African-Muslim
ethnic groups and the Arab inhabitants of Darfur can be traced to the 1930s and had
surfaced again in the 1980s. Most observers note that successive governments in
Khartoum have long neglected the African ethnic groups in Darfur and have done
little to prevent or contain attacks by Arab militias against non-Arabs in Darfur.
Non-Arab groups took up arms against successive central governments in Khartoum,
albeit unsuccessfully. In the early 1990s, the National Islamic Front (NIF)
government, which came to power in 1989, began to arm Arab militias and attempted
to disarm the largely African ethnic groups.
The conflict in Darfur burgeoned when the government of Sudan and its allied
militias began what is widely characterized as a campaign of terror against civilians
in an effort to crush the rebellion and to punish the core constituencies of the rebels.
At the heart of the current conflict is a struggle for control of political power and
resources. The largely nomadic Arab ethnic groups often venture into the
traditionally farming communities of Darfur for water and grazing, at times triggering
armed conflict between the two groups. Darfur is home to an estimated 7 million
people and has more than 30 ethnic groups, which fall into two major categories:
African and Arab. Both communities are Muslim, and years of intermarriages have
made racial distinctions difficult, if not impossible. Fighting over resources is one
of several factors that has led to intense infighting in Darfur over the years. Many
observers believe that the NIF government has systematically and deliberately
pursued a policy of discrimination and marginalization of the African communities
in Darfur, and has given support to Arab militias to suppress non-Arabs, whom it
considers a threat to its hold on power. In 2000, after the ouster of the founder of the
NIF, Hassan al-Turabi, and after a split within the Islamist Movement, the
government imposed a state of emergency and used its new authority to crack down
on dissidents in Darfur. By 2002, a little-known self defense force emerged as the
SLA, challenging government forces in Darfur.
With the NCP regime internally in turmoil and mounting international pressure
to end Sudan’s North-South conflict, the SLA and JEM were able to gain the upper
hand in the initial phase of the conflict against government forces in early 2003, and
appeared well armed and prepared. The rebels also enjoyed the support of the local
population, as well as officers and soldiers in the Sudanese army. A significant
number of senior officers and soldiers in the Sudanese armed forces come from
Darfur. The SLA reportedly benefitted from outside support, including from fellow
Zaghawa elements in Chad and financial support from some Darfur businessmen in
the Persian Gulf region. In late 2004, another Darfur armed group, the National
Movement for Reform and Development (NMRD) emerged. Initial reports suggested



that the NMRD was created by the government of Sudan in order to undermine the
SLA and JEM. In December 2004, the NMRD and the government of Sudan signed
a ceasefire agreement in Chad and a month later agreed to cooperate in facilitating
the return of refugees from Chad to Darfur. Regional officials and Sudanese
opposition figures assert that the NMRD is backed by the government of Chad and
that the rebels wear uniforms and carry arms similar to those of the Chadian army.
Over the past year, the rebel groups have splintered into different factions and often
clashed with each other. In June 2006, another rebel group was formed, the National
Redemption Front (NRF), consisting of several rebel faction groups. These include
splinter groups from SLM and JEM, as well as the Sudan Federal Democratic
Alliance (SFDA).
Darfur Developments: Accountability for Atrocities
In July 2004, the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate unanimously
passed resolutions (H.Con.Res. 467, S.Con.Res. 133) declaring the crisis in Darfur
to be genocide, based on the five criteria for genocide enumerated in Article 2 of the
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. On
September 9, 2004, then Secretary of State Colin Powell, in his testimony before the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, declared the atrocities in Darfur genocide.
Secretary Powell stated that, after reviewing evidence collected by the State
Department team, “genocide has been committed in Darfur and that the government
of Sudan and the Jingaweit bear responsibility — and that genocide may still be
occurring.” Powell further stated that because the United States is a contracting party
to the Geneva Convention, Washington will demand that the United Nations “initiate
a full investigation.” Shortly after Powell’s testimony, a draft U.N. resolution (1564)
was adopted.
The resolution requested the Secretary General of the United Nations to
“establish an international commission of inquiry in order to immediately investigate
reports of violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law in
Darfur by all parties, to determine also whether or not acts of genocide have
occurred, and to identify the perpetrators of such violations with a view to ensuring
that those responsible are held accountable.” The declaration of genocide by the Bush
Administration did not lead to a major shift in U.S. policy or a threat of intervention
to end genocide. Instead, Bush Administration officials continued to support a
negotiated settlement between the rebels in Darfur and the government of Sudan.
But continued violence in Darfur and the government’s failure to disarm the
Janjaweed militia further strained relations between Khartoum and Washington.
In January 2005, the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur submitted
its report to Secretary- General Kofi Annan. The 176-page report provided a detailed
accounting of atrocities committed by the government of Sudan and its Janjaweed
militia allies. The Commission declared that “based on thorough analysis of the
information gathered in the course of the investigations, the Commission established
that the government of Sudan and the Janjaweed are responsible for serious
violations of international human rights and humanitarian law amounting to crimes



under international law.”21 The Commission found, however, that “the government
of Sudan has not pursued a policy of genocide.” The Commission, while
acknowledging that government officials and other individuals may have committed
genocidal acts, stated that “the crucial element of genocidal intent appears to be
missing.” The Commission submitted a sealed document listing 51 suspects for
prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
U.S. officials argue that the government of Sudan is responsible for genocide
in Darfur, despite the Commission’s conclusion of no genocidal intent. Washington
initially did not support the Commission’s referral of these cases to the ICC. U.S.
opposition to the ICC is unrelated to the Darfur case. It is largely driven by concerns
about the potential prosecution of U.S. personnel by the ICC, and because of this
concern, the United States is not signatory to the ICC. In March 2005, the United
States abstained on Security Council Resolution 1593, paving the way for its passage.
Resolution 1593 refers the situation in Darfur to the International Criminal Court
(ICC). In June 2005, the Special Prosecutor of the ICC formally began an
investigation. ICC spokesman Yves Sorokobi indicated that the decision to launch
the investigation came after the ICC had finished its analysis of the referral by the
UN Security Council. This analysis included, he said, consultations with experts,
ensuring that the ICC had met statutory requirements before beginning the
investigations. Meanwhile, ICC officials continue to gather information and pursue
their investigation, although the ICC has not issued any indictments to date. In July,
the ICC Chief Prosecutor charged President Bashir with genocide, crimes against
humanity, and war crimes.22
Since the crisis began in 2003, sources estimate 450,000 people have been
killed, more than 2 million displaced, and some 234,000 Sudanese are in refugee
camps in neighboring Chad. The security situation continues to deteriorate, especially
since the signing of the peace agreement in May 2006 reportedly due to recent troop
deployments by the government of Sudan. According to human rights groups, over
a dozen humanitarian workers have been killed in Darfur, including an International
Rescue Committee nurse on September 1 and an International Committee of the Red
Cross driver on August 30, 2006. In 2007, according to reports, tens of thousands
Darfuree civilians have been displaced from their homes due to government and
Janjaweed attacks. According to a February 2008 United Nations report, “tensions
inside camps of internally displaced persons and carjacking incidents continued. One
week after the transfer of authority from the African Union Mission in the Sudan
(AMIS) to UNAMID, the force faced its first armed attack.”23
Meanwhile, humanitarian groups have warned that they may not be able to
continue to provide assistance to the civilian population because of deteriorating
security conditions. In November 2006, the government of Sudan ordered the


21 Report of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur to the United Nations
Secretary General. January 25, 2005.
22 For recent developments on the ICC and Sudan, please see the ICC and Sudan Section.
23 CBC News. Darfur heading for disaster unless U.N. troops are allowed: Annan,
September 13, 2006, at [http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2006/09/13].

Norwegian Refugee Council to leave the country, while a German relief organization,
Welthungerhilfe, announced it would pull out of Darfur for safety reasons. In
October 2006, armed militia attacked a village in Jebel Moon and Seleah in West
Darfur, killing over 50 people, including children and elderly. Meanwhile, security
conditions inside IDP camps have also deteriorated in recent months, with increasing
number of armed groups in the camps. In his monthly report to the Security Council
in November 2006, Secretary General Kofi Annan stated that “the insecurity,
banditry and fighting which have characterized the reporting period continued to
prevent access to populations in need of humanitarian assistance.”24 According to the
same report “In Northern Darfur alone, the World Food Program (WFP) reported that

355,000 people went without food aid during July and August.”


In early August 2006, the government of Sudan submitted a letter to the United
Nations Security Council outlining the government’s decision to deploy significant
new security forces and implement other measures in Darfur. According to the
government of Sudan, “the National Plan embodies several priority themes for the
restoration of normal life in Darfur.” The government of Sudan began to deploy more
than 26,500 troops and 7,050 police personnel in order to address “threats imposed
by the non-signatories of the Darfur Peace Agreement and getting control of the
security situation and restoration of peace in Darfur.” Human rights groups, U.N.
Secretary General Kofi Annan, and U.S. officials have criticized the deployment of
these troops and stated that this action violates the peace agreement. Meanwhile,
senior commanders of the SLM, the only group that signed the peace agreement, have
stated that continued government attacks in Darfur and continued rejection of a U.N.
force could lead to the collapse of the peace agreement.
The Janjaweed: Background
Since the crisis in the Darfur region began in 2003, the name Janjaweed (also
spelled as Janjawid, Janjawad, Jingaweit, Jinjaweed) has become a very familiar
name to many in the international community. The Janjaweed and the government
of Sudan have been accused of committing genocide against civilians in Darfur by
the United States government in 2004 and accused of war crimes and crimes against
humanity by the United Nations and other governments.
The existence of the Janjaweed goes back over a decade. In the mid-1980s, the
government of Sudan began to arm Arab militias in order to prevent African Darfuris
from joining the Southern Sudanese rebellion against the government. In 1983, the
Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) began its armed struggle
against the government of Sudan. Attacks against Darfuri African tribes and Nubans
increased in intensity for most of the 1980s.
In 1991-1992, an SPLM commander from Darfur led a force into Darfur in
support of the Darfuris, who were being targeted by the government of Sudan and
pro-government Arab militia. Those targeted were the Fur, Massaliet, and Zagawa
peoples. More than 200 villages were attacked and later occupied by pro-government


24 Monthly report of the Secretary General on Darfur, November 8, 2006.

Arab militia in the Garsilla District, now know as the Wadi-Saleh Province. These
attacks were carried out by a group now known as the Janjaweed.
Daoud Yahya Bolad, who was a senior member of the National Islamic Front
(NIF) in Darfur before the 1989 coup, was the leading figure in the SPLM-led
rebellion against the Sudanese government in Darfur in the early 1990s. In 1976,
Bolad, an ethnic Fur, was Chairman of the student union of the University of
Khartoum. He was sent by the NIF leadership to Darfur in the late 1970s to recruit
members for the NIF. He left the NIF due to a major disagreement with the leader
of the NIF, Hassan al-Turabi. Turabi and other NIF leaders recruited Arab youth to
go to Libya and other places for training purposes and began other activities without
consultation with Bolad and other Darfuri leaders.
The traditional leaders in Darfur described the Janjaweed then as men who own
a horse and a G-3 rifle and who commit crimes against civilians. Darfuri leaders link
the Janjaweed to a manifesto called the Quresh. The principal objective of the
Quresh, they argued, was to create a region called Dar-el-Arab, Land of the Arabs.
The architects of the manifesto and those who signed it are senior members of the
National Islamic Front government, currently known as the National Congress Party.
The 1991-1992 rebellion against the NIF regime failed in large part due to lack
of preparation inside Darfur and major Janjaweed and government operations against
the small SPLA force in the region. The commander of the SPLA force decided to
withdraw his troops after the government and Arab militia forces discovered the
location of the SPLA force before final preparation for operations.
Elements within the government intensified their campaign to bring Bolad back
into the NIF for talks with pledges to change policies and address the concerns of the
Darfuris. Bolad decided to return to engage NIF officials against the advice of the
SPLA leadership and the force commander, believing that since he knew some of the
leaders in the government and the NIF he might be able to make a deal. Upon his
return he was captured, tortured, and executed, according to Sudanese sources.
For many Darfuris, the war between the various groups started well before 2003.
Darfuris who experienced the atrocities in the mid-1980s, in large part, are the ones
currently fighting the Janjaweed and the government of Sudan. The groups that were
targeted in the mid-1980s are the same ones currently being attacked by the
Janjaweed and the government of Sudan: the Fur, Massaliet, and Zagawa.
In the current crisis in Darfur, the Janjaweed are armed and protected by the
government, and their attacks against civilians are coordinated with the Sudan Armed
Forces, the Popular Defense Force, and other government-supported militia groups.
Senior Sudanese government officials and leaders of the Janjaweed admit this
collaboration between the Janjaweed and the government. As was the case in the
mid-1980s, one of the main objectives of the Janjaweed is to push out African
Darfuris in order to take control of areas belonging to non-Arabs.
Human rights groups, foreign governments, and Sudanese groups have
documented the atrocities committed by the Janjaweed against Darfur civilians,
humanitarian workers, and African Union peacekeepers. Human Rights Watch in its



report “Darfur Destroyed,”25 provides detailed accounts of Janjaweed atrocities as
well as those committed by government forces. Janjaweed leaders and government
officials claim that they are fighting rebels and violent militia. But the victims of
these atrocities have been reported as the civilians in Darfur, mainly the Zagawa, Fur,
and Massaliet. The Janjaweed, like the Interhamwe in Rwanda and the Lord’s
Resistance Army in Uganda, are reported to principally target civilians and terrorize
the civilian population.
The Darfur Peace Agreement and Status of Implementation
On May 5, 2006, the Government of National Unity and the Sudan Liberation
Movement (SLM) signed the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) after almost two years
of negotiations. The agreement was rejected by two other Darfur groups: the Justice
and Equality Movement (JEM) and a splinter group from the SLM. The agreement
calls for the integration of 4,000 SLA troops into the Sudan Armed Forces, provides
$300 million initially and $200 million each in 2007 and 2008 from government
funds for reconstruction and development purposes for Darfur, and establishes the
Transitional Darfur Regional Authority (TDRA), a new entity mandated under the
DPA to administer Darfur. The agreement provides seats for the SLM in the national
and regional parliaments and several top positions, including the chairmanship of the
TDRA and Senior Assistant to the President.
On August 7, 2006, the leader of the SLM, Mini Minawi, was sworn in as
Assistant to the President. The agreement also calls for the disarmament and
demobilization of the Janjaweed. Since the signing of the agreement, the DPA has
failed to win popular support in Darfur. The faction that signed the agreement is also
accusing the government of violating the agreement. In mid-May 2006, violent
demonstrations in IDP camps had led to a number of deaths and injuries. AMIS
personnel have also been targeted, forcing African Mission in Sudan to reduce its
presence in IDP camps. Meanwhile, implementation of the agreement is also moving
slowly. According to the United Nations DPA Monitor report, “the parties continued
to miss critical DPA implementation deadlines.”26 The Preparatory Committee,
tasked to organize the Darfur-Darfur Dialogue, was not fully functional, although in
late September a chairman was appointed to head the Committee. On October 16,
2006, a day-long forum on pre-Darfur to Darfur Dialogue Consultation took place
in Khartoum.
U.S. Humanitarian Funding
The United States continues to provide significant humanitarian assistance to
Darfur and to Darfur refugees in Chad. The United States has provided more than $5
billion in humanitarian assistance to Sudan and eastern Chad since 2005. As of


25 Human Rights Watch. Darfur Destroyed: Ethnic Cleansing by Government Forces and
Militia. May 2004, at [http://hrw.org/reports/2004/sudan0504/sudan0504simple.pdf].
26 Report on the Implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement, at
[http://www.unmis.org/ english/dpaMonitor.htm] .

September 2008, the United States had provided $769.8 million in humanitarian
assistance to Sudan and eastern Chad for FY2008.27
Table 1. U.S. Assistance to Sudan
($ in thousands)
F Y 2007 F Y 2007 F Y 2008 F Y 2008 F Y 2009
Ac t u al Supp Es t . Supp Request
T otal 494,746 250,000 334,772 70,000 332,630
Child Survival and23,79117,48820,230
Health
Development Assistance70,000127,721
Economic Support Fund45,000100,87670,000254,100
Global HIV/AIDS3,000
Initiative
Int. Disaster and Famine
Assistance
Int. Narcotics Control9,80013,57824,000
and Law Enforcement
Nonproliferation, Anti-3,7254,0004,000
terrorism, Demining and
Related Programs
Peacekeeping 84,000 150,000 70,822 30,000
Operations
PL 480255,334100,000
IMET96287300
Source: State Department FY2009 International Affairs Budget Request.
The African Union and the Crisis in Darfur
The African Union (AU) was slow in responding to the crisis in Darfur. The AU
became actively engaged during the cease-fire negotiation in Chad in 2004 and
subsequently assumed a central role in monitoring the cease-fire agreement and
facilitating political dialogue between the government of Sudan and SLA/JEM. In
March 2004, the AU sent a team led by Ambassador Sam Ibok, Director of the AU’s
Peace and Security Department, to participate in talks in Chad. In the April Cease-
Fire Agreement, the AU was tasked to take the lead in the creation of a Cease-Fire
Commission. The Commission was tasked to define the routes for the movement of
the respective forces, assist with demining operations, and collect information about


27 [http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assistance/disaster_assistance/countrie
s/sudan/template/fs_sr/sudan_ce_sr02_12-20-2007.pdf]

cease-fire violations. The Commission reports to a Joint Commission composed of
the parties to the agreement, Chad, and members of the international community.
In January 2006, the African Union stated that transforming AMIS into a United
Nations force is acceptable to the AU in principle. In March, the AU agreed to accept
a United Nations peacekeeping mission for Darfur. Meanwhile, the Security Council
requested that authorities in the U.N. provide options for a U.N. peacekeeping
operation. On September 20, 2006, AU officials extended the AMIS peacekeeping
operation until the end of December 2006, and in December the AU extended the
AMIS operation for another six months.
United Nations officials and many observers of Sudan argue that failure to
resolve U.N. peacekeeping deployment is likely to lead to the collapse of the DPA
and a major humanitarian crisis. In addition to its peacekeeping responsibilities,
AMIS is a key player in the implementation of key provisions of the DPA. The
Ceasefire Commission and the Joint Commission are chaired by AMIS, while it is
also tasked to establish and play a key role in the Joint Humanitarian Facilitation and
Monitoring Unit. Security in IDP camps, creation of Demilitarized Zones,
verification of disengagement and demobilization are also the responsibility of
AMIS.
Possible Policy Options Concerning Darfur
There are a number of unilateral and multilateral policy options available to
consider in facing the Darfur crisis. These options are complicated by a number of
factors. Members of the international community are divided over Sudan, and some
governments are allies of the regime in Khartoum. Since the late 1990s, the European
Union has adopted a policy of engagement, instead of containment, while the United
States pursued a policy of isolation and containment of the government of Sudan.
Sudan’s neighbors are also divided. Relations between Eritrea and Sudan were poor,
although in recent years relations have improved, while relations with Chad are poor.
For some of the options outlined below to be successful, close cooperation and
coordination between the United States and the international community, especially
the Security Council and Sudan’s neighbors, is pivotal. Some of the other options are
not dependent on close cooperation with the international community.
Engagement. One option is engagement with the government of Sudan. The
government of Sudan is eager to appease the international community as long as it
can avoid punitive sanctions and ensure its own political survival. In this scenario,
engaging the government might yield some positive results, short of full cooperation
and accountability by the government. Past engagement with the current government,
however, has not succeeded in changing its behavior. The government of Sudan signs
peace agreements or shows flexibility when it feels that it is in its interest to do so.
Sanctions. Many observers assert that the current regime only responds to
real pressure. The Clinton Administration imposed comprehensive economic and
trade sanctions in 1997; the impacts of these sanctions are mixed. Over the past
decade, a number of punitive measures have been imposed on the government of
Sudan. The government of Southern Sudan is exempted from these sanctions. But the
government of Sudan has survived years of sanctions imposed by the United States.



Moreover, some countries oppose sanctions against the government of Sudan,
especially those countries with business interests in Sudan’s oil sector. Multilateral
targeted sanctions, including oil embargo, travel ban, and asset freeze, might have
serious impact, especially if enforced by the international community. Another option
is prohibiting foreign businesses from raising capital or trading their securities in the
United States if they are engaged in business activities in Sudan.
Regime Change. Some observers and Sudan opposition leaders argue that
the regime is incapable of change. They argue that since the National Congress Party
government came to power in 1989, it has committed war crimes in south Sudan, the
Nuba Mountains, and now in Darfur. They also maintain the regime has ties to
international terrorist and extremist groups. A regime change in Khartoum, they
argue, could bring a swift end to the crisis in Darfur, and help implement the North-
South agreement. But opposition groups are not strong or united enough to pose a
serious threat to the regime. Moreover, 21years of war with the SPLA and other
armed groups did not lead to the collapse of the regime in Khartoum. For this option
to be viable, the opposition would have to be united and assisted. Nonetheless, the
only force capable of countering the regime in Khartoum is the SPLA. Proponents
of the regime change concept argue that strengthening the SPLA militarily, unifying
the Darfur factions, and assisting other opposition elements in the North, could pose
a threat to the regime in Khartoum.
International Intervention. Another option involves military intervention
by the international community. The international community could disarm the
Janjaweed, enforce a no-fly zone, and provide protection to civilians in Darfur by
deploying large numbers of peacekeepers with a Chapter VII mandate. The
government of Sudan has rejected the deployment of a United Nations peacekeeping
force after the Security Council passed resolution 1706. Deployment without
government consent is an option, although there seems to be no strong support for
such a forceful measure.
Bilateral Targeted Military Measures. Another force-based option is the
targeting of certain military assets of the Sudanese government. These targets might
include the Sudanese air force, military airfields, intelligence and military
headquarters, and training facilities for the Janjaweed and the Sudanese armed forces.
In 2005, 138 Members of Congress cosponsored H.R. 1424, which would have given
the President authority to take similar measures.



110th Congress Legislation
H.Con.Res. 7 (Lee)
A resolution calling on the League of Arab States to acknowledge the genocide in the
Darfur region of Sudan. Introduced January 4, 2007. Passed 425-1 on 4/25/07.
H.Res. 98 (Payne)
A resolution honoring the life and achievements of the late Dr. John Garang de
Mabior and reaffirming the continued commitment of the House of Representatives
to a just and lasting peace in the Republic of the Sudan. Introduced January 24,

2007. Passed 410-1 on March 6, 2007.


H.Res. 164 (Tancredo)
A resolution encouraging the federal, state, municipal governments, universities,
companies and other institutions to divest from companies that do business in Sudan.
Introduced February 14, 2007.
H.R. 180 (Lee)
A bill that supports states and universities efforts of divestment and restrictions on
investment in companies that do business in Sudan. Introduced January 4, 2007.
Passed 418-1 on 7/31/2007.
H.R. 459 (Rangel)
A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to deny foreign tax credit and the
benefits of deferral to companies doing business directly or through subsidiaries in
Sudan. Introduced January 12, 2007.
S.Res. 76 (Feingold)
A resolution calling for a comprehensive regional strategy in Africa to protect
civilians, facilitate humanitarian operations, contain and reduce violence, and
contribute to conditions for sustainable peace in eastern Chad, the Central African
Republic, and Darfur, Sudan. Introduced February 8, 2007. Passed on April 11,

2007.


S. 831 (Durbin)
A bill to authorize States and local governments to prohibit the investment of State
assets in any company that has a qualifying business relationship with Sudan.
Introduced March 8, 2007.
H.Res. 422 ((Lee)
A bill calling on the Government of the People’s Republic of China to use its unique
influence and economic leverage to sop genocide in Darfur, Sudan. Introduced

5/21/2007. Passed 410-0 on June 05, 2007.


H.Res. 573 (Moran)
A resolution recognizing the efforts of advocacy groups to raise awareness about the
crisis in Darfur, Sudan. Introduced 7/25/2007. Passed 366-0 on 10/29/2007.



H.Res. 726 (DeLauro)
A resolution calling on the President to take measures to stop sexual violence in
Darfur, Sudan. Introduced 10/10/2007. Passed on 10/29/2007.
H.Res. 792 (Payne)
A resolution honoring the dedication and hard work of Professor Eric Reeves on
behalf of the people of Sudan. Introduced 11/1/2007.
H.Res. 910 (Payne)
A resolution calling for the full implementation of the Comprehensive Peace
Agreement in Sudan. Introduced 12/19/2007.



Appendix
Executive Order: Blocking Property of and Prohibiting
Transactions with the Government of Sudan
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the
United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers
Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)(IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601
et seq.)(NEA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and taking appropriate
account of the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act of 2006 (the “Act”),
I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that, due to
the continuation of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United
States created by certain policies and actions of the government of Sudan that violate
human rights, in particular with respect to the conflict in Darfur, where the
government of Sudan exercises administrative and legal authority and pervasive
practical influence, and due to the threat to the national security and foreign policy
of the United States posed by the pervasive role played by the government of Sudan
in the petroleum and petrochemical industries in Sudan, it is in the interests of the
United States to take additional steps with respect to the national emergency declared
in Executive Order 13067 of November 3, 1997. Accordingly, I hereby order:
Sec. 1. Except to the extent provided in section 203(b) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b))
or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this
order, all property and interests in property of the government of Sudan that are in the
United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter
come within the possession or control of United States persons, including their
overseas branches, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported,
withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in.
Sec. 2. Except to the extent provided in section 203(b) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b))
or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this
order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted
prior to the effective date of this order, all transactions by United States persons
relating to the petroleum or petrochemical industries in Sudan, including, but not
limited to, oilfield services and oil or gas pipelines, are prohibited.
Sec. 3. (a) Any transaction by a United States person or within the United States that
evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, or attempts to violate any
of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.
(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is
prohibited.
Sec. 4. (a) Subject to paragraph (b) of this section, restrictions imposed by this order
shall be in addition to, and do not derogate from, restrictions imposed in and under
Executive Order 13067.



(b)(I) None of the prohibitions in section 2 of Executive Order 13067 shall apply to
activities or related transactions with respect to Southern Sudan, Southern
Kordofan/Nuba Mountains State, Blue Nile State, Abyei, Darfur, or marginalized
areas in and around Khartoum, provided that the activities or transactions do not
involve any property or interests in property of the government of Sudan.
(ii) The Secretary of State, after consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, may
define the term “Southern Sudan, Southern Kordofan/Nuba Mountains State, Blue
Nile State, Abyei, Darfur, or marginalized areas in and around Khartoum” for the
purposes of this order.
(c) The function of the President under subsection 6(c)(1) of the Comprehensive
Peace in Sudan Act of 2004 (Public Law 108 497), as amended by section 5(a)(3) of
the act, is assigned to the Secretary of the Treasury as appropriate in the performance
of such function.
(d) The functions of the President under subsection 6(c)(2) and the last sentence of
6(d) of the Comprehensive Peace in Sudan Act of 2004 (Public Law 108 497), as
amended by subsections 5(a)(3) and (b), respectively, of the act, are assigned to the
Secretary of State, except that the function of denial of entry is assigned to the
Secretary of Homeland Security.
(e) The functions of the President under sections 7 and 8 of the act are assigned to the
Secretary of State.
Sec. 5. Nothing in this order shall prohibit:
(a) transactions for the conduct of the official business of the Federal Government or
the United Nations by employees thereof; or
(b) transactions in Sudan for journalistic activity by persons regularly employed in
such capacity by a news gathering organization.
Sec. 6. For the purposes of this order:
(a) the term “person” means an individual or entity;
(b) the term “entity” means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture,
corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization;
(c) the term “United States person” means any United States citizen, permanent
resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction
within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United
States; and
(d) the term “government of Sudan” includes the government of Sudan, its agencies,
instrumentalities, and controlled entities, and the Central Bank of Sudan, but does not
include the regional government of Southern Sudan.



Sec. 7. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked
pursuant to section 1 of this order who might have a constitutional presence in the
United States, I find that, because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets
instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this
order would render these measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these
measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in Executive
Order 13067 there need be no prior notice of a determination made pursuant to
section 1 of this order.
Sec. 8. The Secretary of the Treasury, after consultation with the Secretary of State,
is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and
regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be
necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may
delegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States
Government, consistent with applicable law. All executive agencies of the United
States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their
authority to carry out the provisions of this order and, where appropriate, to advise
the Secretary of the Treasury in a timely manner of the measures taken. The Secretary
of the Treasury shall ensure compliance with those provisions of section 401 of the
NEA (50 U.S.C. 1641) applicable to the Department of the Treasury in relation to
this order.
Sec. 9. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right, benefit, or
privilege, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party
against the United States, its departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its
officers or employees, or any other person.
Sec. 10. This order shall take effect upon the enactment of the Darfur Peace and
Accountability Act of 2006.
GEORGE W. BUSH
THE WHITE HOUSE,
October 13, 2006.



Executive Order: Blocking Property of Persons in Connection
with the Conflict in Sudan’s Darfur Region
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the
United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers
Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)(IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601
et seq.)(NEA), section 5 of the United Nations Participation Act, as amended (22
U.S.C. 287c)(UNPA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,
I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that an
unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the
United States is posed by the persistence of violence in Sudan’s Darfur region,
particularly against civilians and including sexual violence against women and girls,
and by the deterioration of the security situation and its negative impact on
humanitarian assistance efforts, as noted by the United Nations Security Council in
Resolution 1591 of March 29, 2005, and, to deal with that threat, hereby expand the
scope of the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13067 of November 3,
1997, with respect to the policies and actions of the government of Sudan, and hereby
order:
Sec. 1. (a) Except to the extent that sections 203(b) (1), (3), and (4) of IEEPA (50
U.S.C. 1702(b)(1), (3), and (4)) may apply, or to the extent provided in regulations,
orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and
notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the
effective date of this order, all property and interests in property of the following
persons, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States,
or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States
person, including any overseas branch, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid,
exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in:
(I) the persons listed in the Annex to this order; and
(ii) any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, after consultation with
the Secretary of State:
(A) to have constituted a threat to the peace process in Darfur;
(B) to have constituted a threat to stability in Darfur and the region;
(C) to be responsible for conduct related to the conflict in Darfur that violates
international law;
(D) to be responsible for heinous conduct with respect to human life or limb related
to the conflict in Darfur;
(E) to have directly or indirectly supplied, sold, or transferred arms or any related
materiel, or any assistance, advice, or training related to military activities to:
(1) the government of Sudan;



(2) the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army;
(3) the Justice and Equality Movement;
(4) the Janjaweed; or
(5) any person (other than a person listed in subparagraph (E)(1) through (E)(4)
above) operating in the states of North Darfur, South Darfur, or West Darfur that is
a belligerent, a non-governmental entity, or an individual;
(F) to be responsible for offensive military overflights in and over the Darfur region;
(G) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, materiel, or
technological support for, or goods or services in support of, the activities described
in paragraph (a)(ii)(A) through (F) of this section or any person listed in or
designated pursuant to this order; or
(H) to be owned or controlled by, or acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of,
directly or indirectly, any person listed in or designated pursuant to this order.
(b) I hereby determine that, to the extent section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C.
1702(b)(2)) may apply, the making of donations of the type of articles specified in
such section by, to, or for the benefit of any person listed in or designated pursuant
to this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency
declared in Executive Order 13067 and expanded in this order, and I hereby prohibit
such donations as provided by paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) The prohibitions of paragraph (a) of this section include, but are not limited to,
(I) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or
for the benefit of any person listed in or designated pursuant to this order, and (ii) the
receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such
person.
Sec. 2. (a) Any transaction by a United States person or within the United States that
evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, or attempts to violate any
of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.
(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is
prohibited.
Sec. 3. For the purposes of this order:
(a) the term “person” means an individual or entity;
(b) the term “entity” means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture,
corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization;
(c) the term “United States person” means any United States citizen, permanent
resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction



within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United
States; and
(d) the term “arms or any related materiel” means arms or related materiel of all
types, military aircraft, and equipment, but excludes:
(I) supplies and technical assistance, including training, intended solely for use in
authorized monitoring, verification, or peace support operations, including such
operations led by regional organizations;
(ii) supplies of non-lethal military equipment intended solely for humanitarian use,
human rights monitoring use, or protective use, and related technical assistance,
including training;
(iii) supplies of protective clothing, including flak jackets and military helmets, for
use by United Nations personnel, representatives of the media, and humanitarian and
development workers and associated personnel, for their personal use only;
(iv) assistance and supplies provided in support of implementation of the
Comprehensive Peace Agreement signed January 9, 2005, by the government of
Sudan and the People’s Liberation Movement/Army; and
(v) other movements of military equipment and supplies into the Darfur region by the
United States or that are permitted by a rule or decision of the Secretary of State, after
consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury.
Sec. 4. For those persons listed in or designated pursuant to this order who might
have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that because of the ability
to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of
measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render these measures ineffectual.
I therefore determine that, for these measures to be effective in addressing the
national emergency declared in Executive Order 13067 and expanded by this order,
there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section

1 of this order.


Sec. 5. The Secretary of the Treasury, after consultation with the Secretary of State,
is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and
regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA and UNPA
as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the
Treasury may delegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the
United States Government, consistent with applicable law. All agencies of the United
States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their
authority to carry out the provisions of this order and, where appropriate, to advise
the Secretary of the Treasury in a timely manner of the measures taken. The Secretary
of the Treasury shall ensure compliance with those provisions of section 401 of the
NEA (50 U.S.C. 1641) applicable to the Department of the Treasury in relation to
this order.
Sec. 6. The Secretary of the Treasury, after consultation with the Secretary of State,
is hereby authorized to submit the recurring and final reports to the Congress on the



national emergency expanded by this order, consistent with section 401(c) of the
NEA (50 U.S.C. 1641(c)) and section 204(c) of the IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1703(c)).
Sec. 7. The Secretary of the Treasury, after consultation with the Secretary of State,
is hereby authorized to determine, subsequent to the issuance of this order, that
circumstances no longer warrant the inclusion of a person in the Annex to this order
and that the property and interests in property of that person are therefore no longer
blocked pursuant to section 1 of this order.
Sec. 8. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right, benefit, or
privilege, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party
against the United States, its departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its
officers or employees, or any other person.
Sec. 9. This order is effective at 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on April 27, 2006.
GEORGE W. BUSH
THE WHITE HOUSE,
April 26, 2006.
ANNEX
Individuals
1. Gabril Abdul Kareem Badri [Colonel for the National Movement for Reform and
Development (NMRD), born circa 1961]
2. Gaffar Mohmed El Hassan [Major General for the Sudan Armed Forces, born June

24, 1952]


3. Musa Hilal [Sheikh and Paramount Chief of the Jalul Tribe in North Darfur, born
circa 1960]
4. Adam Yacub Shant [Commander for the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA), born circa

1976]