[statecom-discuss] Fwd: Bush says Sudan's control over their own oil threatens US national security

[David Rolde]

Subject: new anti-imperialist article on Sudan from the Party for  
Socialism & Liberation

http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2? 
page=NewsArticle&id=5949&JServSessionIdr009=8lkx3n6835.app1b

U.S. imperialists increase efforts to recolonize Sudan
Friday, November 3, 2006
By: Natividad Carrera

Sudanese people reject interference

The civil war in the Darfur region of Sudan is escalating. Rebel  
groups under the banner of the National Redemption Front are  
increasing attacks on Sudan’s government-led forces.

For over three years, the ongoing war has provided the imperialists  
with a pretext to justify intervention under the guise



Sudanese protest against U.S.-U.N. intervention in Khartoum.

of the United Nations.

The National Redemption Front is an alliance of rebel groups that  
refused to sign the Darfur Peace Agreement on May 5, 2006. The main  
rebel group at the time, the Sudan Liberation Army, and the  
government signed the deal. The agreement allocated $U.S.30 million  
in assistance for the region and gave SLA leader, Minni Minawi, a  
position in Sudan’s government under the president.

Since the agreement was signed, the imperialists have continued to  
pressure Sudan and pave the way for what they really want—a U.N.  
"peacekeeping" force in the country.

The U.N. Security Council passed a resolution on Aug. 31 calling for  
the establishment of a 22,500 strong force of U.N. troops and police  
officers to replace the African Union force in the Darfur region of  
Sudan.

The U.N. resolution was drafted and pushed largely by the United  
States and Britain. Britain was the colonial power ruling Sudan until  
the country won independence in 1956. It was responsible for  
splitting the country into northern and southern sections, which  
helped set the stage for civil war and fighting within the country.

John Bolton, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, claimed that the  
Security Council did not need Sudan’s permission to pass the  
resolution—a clear sign of disdain for Sudan’s sovereignty.

Sudan’s president, Omar al-Bashir, objected to the procedure and  
U.S.-British chauvinism against Sudan. He recently told the Guardian,  
"[W]e take exception to not being consulted before the resolution was  
passed. The U.N. is a membership organization in which members have  
equal rights and duties. We know it is a theoretical equality, but at  
least we should have been granted the apparent dignity of being  
consulted in such a matter of vital importance to our interests."

The people of Sudan have mounted numerous large protests to denounce  
the U.N. resolution. At the same time, its government has sought a  
diplomatic solution to the imperialist threats.

Initially, President Bashir renounced all foreign interference in  
Sudan’s internal affairs. The imperialist pressure under U.N. cover,  
however, has forced Sudan to modify its position and permit limited  
"logistical and material" support.

Bashir told the Guardian, "[W]e have no objection to the AU  
increasing its troops, strengthening its mandate, or receiving  
logistical support from the EU, the U.N., or the Arab League for that  
matter, but this must, of course, be done in consultation with the  
government of national unity."

In the interview, Bashir stressed the importance of only allowing  
African Union troops in the country. He stated, "If this particular  
provision of the agreement is met, defining the role of the U.N.  
would be feasible. For instance, we have recently agreed to a request  
by Kofi Annan, the U.N. secretary-general, to send support from the  
U.N. to [the African Union mission] in the form of experts, equipment  
and logistics."

Sudan wants to keep the imperialists at bay, but the U.S. and British  
governments are continuing to press for U.N. intervention. They have  
used a variety of tactics to accomplish this goal.

Numerous imperialist tactics

The United States government has been particularly adamant about  
pursuing sanctions against the Sudanese government and demonizing it.

On Oct. 13, President Bush signed a new executive order to strengthen  
sanctions against Sudan. The order condemned what it called Sudan’s  
violation of human rights, but its most telling language targeted  
what’s really at stake—control of Sudan’s vast oil and other  
natural resources.

According to Bush’s order, "The pervasive role played by the  
government of Sudan in Sudan's petroleum and petrochemical industries  
threatens U.S. national security and foreign policy interests."

Under U.S. imperialism’s logic of conquest and greed, Sudan, a  
sovereign nation, is a threat to the United States because its  
government controls its own oil and oil industries. This should  
reveal the U.S. government’s true intentions to anyone who thinks  
that the Sudan issue is fundamentally a "human rights" issue.

The executive order is an extension of a 1997 order by then-President  
Clinton. Clinton used his order to justify bombing a Sudanese  
pharmaceutical manufacturing plant in 1998. The Al-Shifa plant, which  
produced 50 percent of the medicine for one of the world's poorest  
countries, was completely destroyed, causing untold tens of thousands  
of deaths from diseases like malaria and tuberculosis in the  
following years.

Equally telling about the executive order was the supposed tough line  
it takes with the central government in Khartoum,



while allowing aid and foreign investment in Southern Sudan.

The U.S. government backed the anti-government insurgency in the  
south for decades. The conflict ended in 2005, just as the crisis in  
Darfur was becoming more acute.

Anti-government rebel groups like the Justice and Equality Movement  
and Eastern Front have ties to the CIA. They have received funding  
and critical military support over the years in their bid to unseat  
the government.

Sudan is a poor country that has been underdeveloped by colonialism  
and is now under attack by imperialism. Armed groups acting as agents  
of imperialist powers like France, Britain and the United States are  
not legitimate national liberation organizations. They are  
essentially proxies for imperialist interests in the region.

‘The imperialist trap’

As in Iraq, the imperialists are willing to split up Sudan in order  
to take control of its resources and strategic location. But, this is  
not their first choice. The imperialists, led by the U.S. government— 
the strongest imperialist power—would prefer to destabilize the  
central government in Khartoum and replace it with a pro-imperialist  
regime.

The proxy rebel groups have their eyes on this prize. The New York  
Times reported on Oct. 23 that many of the groups, "including  
Darfur’s rebel groups, have national ambitions and dream not of  
carving out their own piece of territory but of overthrowing the Arab- 
led government."

The conflict in Sudan has been misrepresented in the media as an Arab- 
African conflict. This is a source of confusion and allows the  
imperialists to pretend that they are trying to help oppressed  
African people. This gives their intervention scheme a humanitarian  
disguise. The roots of the internal division inside of Darfur are not  
fundamentally ethnic but are rather economic and social. There is a  
dispute over control of natural resources between nomadic herders and  
subsistence farmers. The vast majority of people in Darfur, who are  
characterized in the western media as "Arab," are Muslim and Black.

Basic conflicts between nomadic hunting and gathering societies and  
those engaged in agriculture, over land and water issues can be  
severe. But they alone do not explain the enduring conflict that  
seems to renew and actually intensify every time the Sudanese  
government appears to have successfully hammered out a negotiated  
settlement. This is no accident. The intervention of the United  
States and other imperialist countries has been a decisive factor in  
fostering and exacerbating the country’s conflicts.

As the threat of intervention increases, so do the lies spewed by the  
capitalist media. While the Sudanese government is still a capitalist  
government with its own contradictions, Sudan is a country oppressed  
by imperialism.

No one should fall into the trap set by the imperialists. They aim to  
sew confusion about Sudan by charging the government with "genocide"  
and getting liberal think-tanks and celebrities to rally behind the  
cause. This ignores the true facts and context behind the conflict.

They have tried similar ploys with success in Iraq and the former  
Yugoslavia.

What they leave out is their role as primary antagonists whose  
overarching goal is to recolonize Sudan and steal its resources.

Sudan must be recognized by revolutionaries and progressives as  
independent state fighting to maintain its sovereignty. Lending Sudan  
and its government critical support against imperialism is essential.