Doc's Talk: Obama Administration Takes Credit for Birth of South Sudan

Sunday, July 10, 2011

Obama Administration Takes Credit for Birth of South Sudan

Patrick Goodenough

(CNSNews.com) – The important role played by President George W. Bush in setting South Sudan on the road to independence went unacknowledged by Obama administration officials at a briefing Thursday ahead of Saturday’s birth of the world’s newest sovereign nation.

While President Obama’s “steadfast leadership and personal engagement” was noted, Bush was not mentioned once during the briefing by U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice, Assistant Secretary for African Affairs Johnnie Carson and USAID Deputy Administrator Don Steinberg. Rice, who heads a presidential delegation attending the independence celebrations, did recognize the efforts of former Secretary of State Colin Powell – also part of the delegation – and former U.S. envoy to Sudan John Danforth, saying the two had “worked so hard to lay the groundwork for the Comprehensive Peace Agreement.”

But she focused the rest of her acknowledgements on the efforts and achievements of the current administration.

“The United States has worked tirelessly to help make the promise of this moment a reality,” she said. “First, it would not have been possible without the steadfast leadership and personal engagement of President Obama, who raised his voice consistently and eloquently as he did before what was a historic gathering at the United Nations last September, where he spoke in support, quote, ‘of a future where, after the darkness of war, there can be a new day of peace and progress.’”

Rice also mentioned Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Carson, Obama’s Sudan special envoy Princeton Lyman, his predecessor, Scott Gration, “and many others.”

The Bush administration laid the groundwork for South Sudan’s independence when it led four years of intensive international diplomacy resulting in the landmark 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). The accord ended the two decade-long civil war between the Muslim north and the mostly Christian and animist south that cost two million lives.

The CPA was a blueprint for a six-year period of peaceful power-sharing between the north and south. It provided for a semi-autonomous government in the south, agreements on sharing oil and other resources, national elections in 2010 – billed as Sudan’s first multi-party presidential election in more than two decades – and, on January 9 this year, a referendum on whether the south should secede or remain part of a united Sudan.

Bush involved himself personally in the arduous negotiations, calling Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir to urge progress on a number of occasions, both during the drawn-out process and after the CPA. Four such phone calls to Bashir took place in December 2003 [2], March 2004 [3], August 2005 [4] and May 2006 [5].

A Congressional Research Service report [6] on Sudan, updated last March, refers to the deep involvement of the U.S. in the negotiations.

South Sudan [7]

Southern Sudanese soldiers participate in an independence rehearsal procession in Juba on Thursday, July 7, 2011. (AP Photo/Pete Muller)

“Throughout the … talks, the Bush Administration engaged the parties at the highest levels, reportedly including calls by President Bush to the principals at critical times during the negotiations, and frequent visits by senior State Department officials to Kenya, where the talks were being conducted,” it said.

“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 report stated.

“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 was a factor in securing the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA).”

‘Extremely volatile’

On Saturday, the “Republic of South Sudan” formally comes into existence, under the leadership of President Salva Kiir. While in Juba, Rice and her delegation will participate in a ceremony turning the U.S. consulate there into the U.S. Embassy.

The U.N. Security Council is expected to meet next week to discuss South Sudan’s admission as the United Nations’ 193rd member state.

Shadows loom over the historic occasion, however, caused by several unresolved and potentially explosive issues.

South Sudan [8]

Southern Sudanese boys take shelter from afternoon rains that disrupted rehearsals for independence day celebrations in the capital city of Juba on Monday, July 4, 2011. Southern Sudan is set to declare independence from the north on July 9. (AP Photo/Pete Muller)

Oil-rich Abyei, located along the north-south divide, remains in dispute – as it has since well before the CPA was signed. Its inhabitants were meant to hold a separate referendum alongside the national one in January, to decide whether to join the north or the south, but the vote never took place because of differences over voter eligibility.

After north-south clashes, soldiers from the (north) Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) occupied Abyei in May. The U.S. helped to negotiate an agreement last month to withdraw troops from the area and deploy Ethiopian peacekeepers there.

Some 100,000 people in Abyei have been displaced by the fighting, and Rice on Thursday described the situation as “extremely volatile.” The area’s status remains undetermined, and she warned that to allow Abyei and several other issues “to linger without resolution for any length of time could swiftly destabilize the future relationship between these two states.”

Meanwhile in South Kordofan state, north of the soon-to-be international border, many of the inhabitants lean towards the south, including a group that allied itself to southern rebels during the civil war.

Fighting erupted there last month, and following SAF bombing some human rights advocates voiced suspicions that Bashir was trying to clear the state of anyone sympathetic to the south.

Bashir’s government is insisting that U.N. peacekeeping troops leave South Kordofan and other tense border areas on Saturday, but Rice said it was vital to extend their presence – to support ceasefire efforts and protect civilians.

Carson told the briefing that although July 9 marks the “technical conclusion” of the CPA, key elements of the agreement remain unsettled, including Abyei’s status, resolution of five remaining border disputes, oil and transitional financial arrangements and issues of citizenship.

He and Rice both stressed that the U.S. would remain engaged and active in supporting the full implementation of the agreement.

On the issue of Sudan’s removal from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism [9], Carson and Rice said that could only take place after Khartoum has met its obligations under the CPA.

Carson added that Sudan would also have to meet other statutory criteria for removal from the list.

U.S. law requires the president will have to certify to Congress that a designated country has not provided any support for international terrorism during the preceding six-month period. The country must also provide assurances that it will not support terrorism in the future.

Source URL: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-administration-takes-credit-birth

Links:
[1] http://www.cnsnews.com/image/south-sudan
[2] http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/12/20031208-7.html
[3] http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/03/20040322-4.html
[4] http://www.redorbit.com/news/international/201247/bush_phones_garangs_widow_bashir/index.html
[5] http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/05/20060502-4.html
[6] http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33574_20110304.pdf
[7] http://www.cnsnews.com/image/south-sudan-0
[8] http://www.cnsnews.com/image/south-sudan-1
[9] http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-administration-links-sudan-s-remov
[10] http://cnsnews.disqus.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnsnews.com%2Fnode%2F100042

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk