In recent months the government of Sudan has come under intensive criticism by several western agencies accusing it of lack of concern for the causes of the famine in the south of the country. Some, like Mr Niall Toibin of Trocaire, went as far as accusing the government of Sudan of waging war with food as the key weapon (The Irish Times, June 2nd, 1998.)
Such charges against Sudan are not new. The government has been subjected to various accusations, such as state-sponsored terrorism, human rights abuses and support of organised slavery.
On the latter score, the well-known British peer Lord McNair, in a report following a visit to Sudan, dismissed the accusations of slavery as completely unfounded. As to the charges of human right abuses, the fact that there is not, at present, a single political prisoner in the country speaks for itself.
On the issue of the famine, all assertions by western media that Sudan was hindering the supply of aid to the south proved to be ill-founded. As early as March, the Sudanese government agreed to provide aid to areas identified by the UN, and immediately lifted the ban on flights to Bar El Ghazal, imposed after a rebel attempt in January to capture Wau city, capital of Bahr El Ghazal state. The government later provided 11,000 tonnes of food to contain the famine.
Sudan's decision to allow the resumption of relief flights to Bahr El Ghazal was warmly welcomed by several leading UN agencies, including the Security Council. At a press conference in Nairobi, the UN Secretary-General, Mr Kofi Annan, announced that he was well aware of the efforts made by the Sudanese government to help the famine-stricken areas in the south.
It is very likely, especially in African situations, that whenever there is war there would be famine. The Guardian on May 1st was right to say that the famine is caused by war and this war must be stopped. Paul Cullen wrote in The Irish Times on May 30th, 1998: "Indeed the catastrophe in the worst-affected area, Bahr El Ghazal, can be traced directly to the offensive launched in the area last January by a maverick and brutal warlord, Kerubino Kuanyan Bol."
The root of the conflict in southern Sudan goes back to the colonial era. The British colonial policy implemented between 1899 and 1947 was designed to isolate the south from the north. Northern Sudanese were prevented from entering the south of the country by "apartheid" laws such as the passport and permits ordinance and the closed district ordinance. The aim was to create a separate identity in the south. The first southern revolt in August 1955 arose due to political mistrust.
The Addis Ababa Agreement and Self-Government Act in 1972 under President Nimeiri finally gave Sudan 10 years of peace. A government was formed in the south with a regional assembly to legislate on matters affecting the region. But due to a quarrel among the southern leaders, and at the instigation of some of them, Nimeiri split the south into three regions and abolished the assembly in 1983. The present phase of the civil war arose from that period.
After the overthrow of the Nimeiri regime in 1985, the search for peace continued by successive governments, including the government of Gen Omar Al-Bashir. The current government, in its National Dialogue Conference, enumerated 10 areas that needed attention to achieve a comprehensive peace.
On the question of powersharing, the conference accepted a long-standing southern demand for a federal system of government. Acknowledging the African and Arab composition of Sudan as well as Islam and Christianity, the conference said: "Rights to power, wealth, duties and obligations are all based on citizenship and not on religion."
States can exempt themselves from religious legislation that runs contrary to their traditions.
With such a broad basis for negotiations the government met rebel factions in Nairobi, Abuja and many other areas to discuss peace. The negotiations finally resulted in a peace agreement - the Khartoum Peace Agreement - which was signed on April 21st, 1997, by the government of Sudan and six of the rebel movements, with the exception of Col John Garang's Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA).
The Khartoum agreement, in addition to providing for the establishment of a federal system of government, also provides for a referendum, due to take place in four years' time, whereby the southerners shall choose between remaining within Sudan or breaking away from the north altogether.
SINCE the first southern revolt in 1955, the main cause of conflict was the unequal distribution of wealth and power between north and south. However, it seems that all the political, economic and legal grievances that had underpinned the civil war in southern Sudan have now been addressed. The agreement, which the government signed with six of the seven rebel movements, represents the best chance for peace and reconciliation.
The main stumbling block is Col John Garang, or perhaps those who fund and keep stoking one of the world's longest-running insurgencies. Since 1983, over two million lives have been lost. Another five million(77 per cent of the entire southern population) were displaced as a result of the fighting.
Some 80 per cent of those displaced from the south resettled in northern cities, a fact which negates the popular misconception that the conflict is an ethnic one between the Arab north and the African south or between Muslims and Christians.
The role of the international community in ending the war in Sudan remains questionable. Many in the west are suspicious of the Islamic government of Sudan. By perpetuating the war in the south and by continuing the political pressure and economic embargo against the country, many hope the government will eventually be overthrown.
However, the government may or may not fall, but the miseries are certain to continue until such time as pressure is exerted on the SPLA to accept the offer of ceasefire, end the war and stop the suffering.
Yahya Al-Hussein is a Sudanese Irish and Imam of the Dublin Mosque.