When one thinks of the crisis in Darfur and which foreign states have leverage to stop it, China invariably is the first to spring to mind; and for good reason. Yet when directing our advocacy efforts, it’s important to remember that it’s not just nation states alone that have influence over Khartoum; it’s also nation states working together in supranational bodies like the UN and African Union. Resolving the crisis in Darfur is not just about helping the people of Darfur obtain the conditions to live in peace and security. It’s also about doing it in a way that proves to ourselves here in the US and to peoples around the world that we are in that endeavor together -- that we can live with each other and not against each other.

This is about China
There is no question that China holds Khartoum’s purse-strings. It buys about 64% of Sudan’s oil to the tune of roughly USD$2 billion per year. In 2006, that accounted for 7% of all of China’s energy needs. That’s a serious flow of hard currency into Khartoum. It’s also the primary source of income for Khartoum’s weapons purchases. However, if there is anything more important to China than Sudan’s energy deposits, it’s its own coming out party -- the 2008 Olympic Games.

And importantly, the Olympic Games have always been about more than sports. They are about amity over hostility. In the words of the Olympic Charter, a fundamental principle of Olympism is “…promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity.” I cannot think of a more appropriate forum for advancing the cause of peace in Darfur.

Not only is the Olympic frame appropriate but it works. We saw that China is willing and able to stop being obstructionist on Darfur when pushed in the right ways. (For more info on that see: http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/13/america/web-0413diplo.php) And the international community should keep pressuring China until Khartoum hears from its oil patron that it wants there to be a just peace in Darfur. That does not mean threatening a boycott of the Olympic Games for two reasons. Firstly, winability is highly unlikely. And second, threats of a boycott were not necessary for China to vote in favor Resolution 1769 so there is no need now to threaten a boycott. Nevertheless, world pressure on China must remain strong because once the Olympics end on August 24, 2008 our leverage over China with respect to Darfur (and China’s other human rights problems) will most likely diminish drastically -- and that day is less than a year away.

But it’s about much more than China
Despite China’s importance, it is not the only relevant state actor. Some of these actors need to be brought into the spotlight. Oil companies from other countries such as India and Malaysia have access and are angling for greater access to oil blocks in Sudan. The role of India’s ONGC Videsh in particular should not be allowed to remain in the shadows. As the world’s largest democracy, the Indian government and Indian corporations should hold themselves to higher ethical standards than they do now.

Beyond oil, there are many nations that can provide essential support for the soon-to-be deployed peacekeeping force and the upcoming peace talks. France has military bases with airfields in Chad from which peacekeepers and supplies could be deployed. The UK, US, France, Italy and a few other states have the ability to provide sophisticated logistical support for the hybrid peacekeeping force. These states should follow the lead of Norway and Sweden which have already offered to provide engineering and logistical support for the hybrid force. Also, Norway was a founding member of the regional organization IGAD and participated in the CPA, DPA and Eastern Sudan peace processes. Norway, France and the US amongst other international and regional players such as Eritrea are uniquely placed to ensure that all the rebel groups are present at the peace table and that they have the capacity to negotiate capably with a formidable counterpart. These nations are able to play a role and need to be encouraged forcefully to do so.

Multilateral Muscle
Aid and diplomatic pressure by state actors is important but only to the extent that the providers operate in concert with each other. Darfur is a watershed opportunity for the international community to reaffirm that states can cooperate together in positive ways. The upcoming peace talks are a chance for multilateral diplomacy -- not war -- to regain its rightful place in international relations. And the mechanisms are in place for that to happen. The hybrid UN-African Union peacekeeping force will be the largest in the world. It’s also the first ever hybrid force involving the UN. Likewise, the peace talks are being convened by a joint AU-UN mediation team led by Jan Eliasson and Dr. Salim Ahmed Salim. The table is being set, the invitation list is nearly complete and the tasks are clear; it’s high time for states to act in concert with each other and within these frameworks before the opportunity is lost.

I look forward to your comments, our discussion and my next posting, Seeking a Just and Sustainable Peace for the People of Darfur.

Many thanks and best, BNR.