POMED Notes: “Sudan at the Crossroads”

The House Committee on Foreign Affairs held its first Members’ briefing on Tuesday. The briefing focused on the future of Sudan following the completion of referendum elections on secession. To discuss the issues facing the country, the committee – chaired by Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) and with Congressman Howard L. Berman (D-CA) in attendance – requested the testimony of three individuals: Princeton Lyman, Special Advisor for Sudan, U.S. Department of State; Richard S. Williamson, Partner, Salisbury Strategies LLC and Former Special Envoy to Sudan and Ambassador to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights; and Omer Ismail, Advisor, The Enough Project.

To read full notes continue below, or click here for pdf.

Rep. Ros-Lehtinen opened the session by stating that during the 112^th Congress, the Committee “will be confronted with some of the most pressing national security and foreign policy challenges of our time – from ensuring rigorous enforcement of sanctions against Iran, to providing effective stewardship of American taxpayer dollars in foreign aid and State Department programs, to instituting systems for accountability at the United Nations.”

Addressing Sudan, Ros-Lehtinen stated that the while the referendum vote proceeded peacefully and credibly “the hardest work is yet to come.” She called for a resolution on those issues relating to the implementation of the CPA to take place prior to the transition period in July 2011 as well as a solution to the future status of Abyei, Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile. She stated that “we must not trade peace in Darfur for independence in the South.” Ros-Lehtinen criticized the Administration for making premature concessions—to advance normalizations, sanctions relief, and debt relief— to the Sudanese leadership, despite Khartoum’s history of reneging on its agreements. She was particularly concerned by suggestions Sudan may be removed from the State Sponsors of Terrorism List (SSTL) by July. “Removal from this List is not a ‘gold star’ that can be offered to advance an unrelated political objective. This is a serious matter with repercussions that directly impact our most vital national security interests,” Ros-Lehtinen said. She pointed to undesirable results of de-listing North Korea as evidence for a more cautious approach.

Rep. Berman congratulated the Sudanese in this “historic moment of self-determination” and applauded the diplomatic efforts made by the Obama Administration, in spite of the skepticism he met with in Congress. He echoed Ros-Lehtinen’s remarks that there is much to be done prior to the July deadline and stated that the U.S. and the U.N. will play a vital role in helping Southern Sudan transition into an independent state.

Rep. Christopher Smith (R-NJ) echoed concerns over the need to resolve key CPA issues like demarcation of borders, citizenship, oil-revenue sharing, etc. and pointed out that the country may soon suffer from a humanitarian crisis which could destabilize the South as millions of Southerners are moving down from the North at a pace which the South has proved incapable of handling. Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ) also echoed the need to resolve the status of Abyei lest it become another Kashmir with the countries still fighting over it 20 years down the road.

Ambassador Princeton Lyman began his testimony stating that many groups like the National Democratic Institute, International Foundation for Electoral Systems, and the Carter Center, among others, were essential in helping the referendum proceed peacefully. He echoed sentiments of others that much needs to be done including resolving the situation in Abyei, where the underlying issues remain critical, and in Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile where “popular consultations” need to take place.

Lyman went on to say that although it looks like Sudan will be divided into two independent countries, they will be highly interdependent and that the current division of resources gives them incentive to cooperate; this is especially true in regards to the oil industry in the country. Lyman stated that the people in Northern Sudan are worried about the referendum outcome as they feel that they will be abandoned or that secession will lead to war and economic stability; thus it is important that we pay attention to political reform and stability in the North, especially given the two countries’ interdependence. “The technical work has been done,” Lyman said, “Now the political work needs to be done.”

Southern Sudan will also need economic development to build up capacity, aid in conflict resolution, and to provide essential services like education and health, Lyman said. Aid will be absolutely essential in the country as many of the 1.5 million Southerners in the North begin returning to the South. Thus far, migrations have been erratic and not well-planned and the South has been unprepared to deal with the influx of people. However, we are now working with the U.N. to help facilitate the migrations. While many countries are contributing, he did note that the U.S. has contributed the most.

Addressing, Ros-Lehtinen’s concern that the Obama Administration is blindly making concessions to the North, Lyman stated the normalizing of relations with Sudan will be dependent on actions not promises. Among these actions are accepting the referendum results, completing steps outlined in the CPA, and addressing the situation in Darfur. The administration, he argued is not forgetting or sacrificing Darfur. In fact the future success of the country will depend on peace and stability in both Darfur as well as the South. The North will need to make concrete steps before the administration will ask Congress to remove the country from state-sponsored terrorism lists and lift sanctions.

Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) voiced concerns that Sudan was supporting, both directly and indirectly, state sponsored terrorism for groups like Hamas and as such should not be removed from the SSTL, as promised by Obama. Rep. Edward Royce (R-CA) echoed these concerns especially as they related to sponsorship of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). Lyman responded by saying that removal from the list is contingent on the results of a six month examination/investigation period—which will start after the acceptance of the referendum. If they are found to be in support of LRA, the U.S, will halt the normalization of relations and will not remove the country from SSTL.

Rep. Berman ceded his time to Rep. Payne (D-NJ) who noted the importance of the African Union in the referendum process and asked what role it will play moving forward. Lyman responded that the African Union will lead panels on post-referendum negotiations and is working closely with the U.N. and the U.S. Payne also asked Lyman what his take on Abyei, Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan and about how Egypt views the issue of water-sharing. Lyman stated that first consultations need to take place regarding how the referendum has affected them and secondly we need to look at the internal governance of the state to see how the political structure of the North can incorporate them. On Payne’s question of Egyptian concerns over the Nile, Lyman stated that while Egypt was worried about the implications of the referendum on the water sharing agreement, they have urged Khartoum to go through with the referendum and in the future will likely deal with both the North and the South. Egypt will watch closely to see what kind of water-sharing agreement is made.

Rep. Smith (R-NJ) asked Lyman about what is being done to prevent a humanitarian crisis and the role churches have been playing in the South. Lyman stated the churches in the South have been very important in conflict resolution and development and that civil society, including church groups will be vitally important as we move forward. He also said that in consultations with Sudanese leaders they have told the North that there absolutely cannot be any violence or retaliation with the South. In preparation for the migration of people to the South, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has been working to get people emergency supplies which should last them about 3 months, giving them time to become integrated. The Southern Sudan government is also working to make arrangements for the anticipated influx of people.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) asked about U.S. spending in Sudan and how it compared to that of China, which has invested heavily in Sudanese oil industry. Lyman responded that thus far the U.S. has spent $10 billion and are the biggest contributors while China has spent money on development, peacekeeping forces, and its share of UN Security Council contributions. They are playing a much more positive role now that they had earlier, Lyman said. Rohrabacher assertively stated his lack of understanding as to why we have spent $10 billion in a place with only 38 million inhabitants, and questioned why we have done so when our adversary spent less and is benefitting from the funding we have given Sudan thus far.

Rep. Payne (D-NJ) used his second period of questioning to ask what we are doing to help the South develop its potential for great agriculture and what industries Khartoum should look to develop, given the Norwegians’ assessment that oil in Sudan is not that great and will decline in the next 5 years. Lyman stated that agriculture will be a major focus for both the North and the South. Northern Sudan has many investments from Arab countries to help them make that transition. The South will need help. Responding to a question by Rep. David Rivera (R-FL) on determining future aid to Sudan, Lyman stated that Sudan won’t be fully independent for a while and as such a new agreement will have to be made after the end of CPA and the full independence in July 2011. That is when questions about sanctions and debt relief will be answered as well.

Responding to a question by Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH) to explain the mechanisms for the oil-revenue and wealth shares will look like, Lyman responded that there are three options: 1) create a joint-management agreement, 2) have the South take out an equity on the pipeline, or 3) have the South pay a transport fee to use the pipeline.

While Lyman took a cautiously optimistic view of the situation in Sudan, Richard S. Williamson’s testimony painted a very different picture stating that the country has seen general marginalization for the past 200 years in all areas: economic, political, education, and health. Williamson argued that resentment over the marginalization permeates the country and creates instability in all areas, not just the South. Additionally, he said, the political leaders see violence as a legitimate method of pursuing its political objectives; one only needs to look at the events in the week prior to the referendum when bombs, originating from the North, were dropped in the South. The nature of the Khartoum regime he said is one that breaches commitment and refuses to abide by its agreements; he pointed to the government reneging on its agreements in the CPA as evidence for his claims. Thus, he argued, incentives are not enough. While, the US’s goal for a peaceful referendum on secession has been attained, it is not proper that we should be “overly generous” in rewarding Khartoum for its promises and the small steps it’s taken when marginalization and injustice continue. We must have the proper monitoring and verification mechanisms put in place before we can agree to incentives.

Omer Ismail also testified before the committee, echoing others’ sentiments that the referendum is the first step towards achieving lasting peace and security in Sudan. He stated that we must capitalize on the referendum’s momentum to address three major issues: 1) the relationship between the North and the South before formal secession in July, including major issues like citizenship, border demarcation, and economic arrangements. 2)  Darfur Peace Process, 3) the democratic transitions in the North and South, where governments must value pluralism and inclusivity. Additionally, Ismail called for the U.S. to “jumpstart a much more aggressive and decisive policy that pushes for the peace process.”

In response to questions by Rep. Rivera and Rep. Rohrabacher stated that Khartoum is likely to follow through on the steps outlined by the United States and others to have sanctions lifted not only for economic reasons, but also because the country seeks to gain legitimacy in the international community. However, he voiced concerns on how many of our agreements are based on incentives: “We can’t talk incentives, without talking coercion.”

And responding to questions by Rep. Smith and Rep. Payne, Williamson stated that U.S. policy goals are stability, peace, and justice and as such we cannot ignore the issues in Darfur and in the Eastern mountainous areas; the governments need to address the root causes of injustice. He also stated that the issues of oil and wealth share need to be fully resolved, as it is the reason behind the conflict in Abyei.

Ismail and Williamson also responded to questions about the need for the U.S. to engage with international organizations by stating that they are very important and the success of Sudan will be a collective effort. If we don’t help it, they said, it will fail. Rep. Rohrabacher addressing the calls for aid stated that the U.S. gives a disproportionate amount of aid in foreign countries, but we cannot do it anymore; we’re going broke. The world needs to take note and plan their futures accordingly; we can no longer afford to take that burden on. Noting the oil revenue the country has received and that China has benefited from, Rohrabacher stated that he expects for the U.S. to be paid back for its efforts in Sudan.