Sudan -- Somehow it's Our Problem

Former envoy to Sudan, Andrew S. Natsios, has an article in today's Washington Post called, "Obama, Adrift on Sudan." Natsios argues that the U.S. needs to be more involved with Sudan, and that referring to atrocities in Darfur as "genocide" is not an "accurate term." He makes te case that the genocidal actions occurred in the past, whereas today the situation is chaotic and a merely a "low-level insurgency."In his view,

The United States ought to be in a commanding position to mediate in these negotiations, as it did in the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement that ended 22 years of civil war between Sudan's North and South. But disputes within the Obama administration are inhibiting U.S. efforts to stop Sudan's slide toward civil war at a time when unified American leadership is essential.

The problem with this sort of thinking is that it ignores U.S. interests. What U.S. advantage is gained by meddling in what is, to all appearances, an intractable situation? What vital U.S. interests are at stake in Sudan? If there are any, Natsios doesn't bother to point them out. He simply assumes that U.S. "leadership" in trying to solve Sudan's many problems would be a good thing.

The ICC & Sudan

The International Criminal Court ordered the arrest of President Omar Hassan al-Bashir of Sudan yesterday. The New York Times has an article up today about the reaction in Sudan, that illustrates the pointless nature of the ICC's action. The ICC declared him a criminal and ordered his arrest, even though they have no power to arrest anyone. In response, Bashir gets to posture and whine about "new colonialism," calling the ICC action "a conspiracy designed to recolonize his country." That statement is both funny and sad. It's funny, because the ICC has no power to do anything, let alone "recolonize" a country. It's sad, because the unfortunate truth is that most people in Sudan would be far better off as a colony of any western power. For Sudan, freedom and independence mean the freedom to slaughter each other in large numbers.

The ICC's action is a prime example of the type of meaningless feel-good political activity that is at best useless, and at worst counterproductive. Is Bashir a worthless human being who is responsible for various atrocities? Yes. But what good will come of this action? It allows him to claim he's being persecuted by foreigners, helps generate support from certain elements in Sudan, and complicates ongoing relief efforts. And for what?