The Allegations of Using Chemical Weapons: Despicable Rehash and Reproduction of Old Fabrications against the Sudan (2)
Kiev/ Ukraine in Arabic/Indeed, the international community must very wary and watchful, circles behind the fabrications of such nasty charges today, are the same anti- Khartoum forces, who were desperately manipulating, by all means available, to cause and effect, the long awaited international military intervention in the Sudan, seeking to relegate and push the Sudan into the yoke of chaos and instability, in replica of the conspiracy in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and elsewhere.
History tend to repeat itself; the current allegations, as shall be reviewed, are nothing more than a rehash and reproduction of almost the same fabrications, leveled against Khartoum during and since early nineties. It’s perhaps apt to cite some examples that support the above claim;
In August 1998, the Clinton Administration launched a cruise missile attack on the Al-Shifa medicine factory in Khartoum, claiming that the factory was producing chemical weapons. The destruction of that plant has perpetually deprived the people of Sudan, of a giant pharmaceutical plant, which used to meet 60% of their needs. The irony persists; The Clinton Administration, has not only failed to produce any evidence, but also vetoed and blocked any United Nations inspection of the Sudanese factory, in one of the ugliest manifestation, of both; the law of the jungle and the arrogance of power.
In 1999, Baroness Cox, the by then, President of Christian Solidarity Worldwide, who was vehemently infamous for her overt and barefaced support for the anti-Khartoum rebels, alleged that the very Sudanese armed forces, had used chemical weapons in attacks on Sudanese rebels. Khartoum categorically denied any such use of chemical weapons, and immediately agreed to a United Nations investigation of the claims.
Baroness Cox provided the British government In August 1999 with soil, water and shrapnel samples to back up her claims. The samples had been tested by the British Defense Ministry's chemical and biological weapons establishment. Eventually the results showed that the samples provided have been negative; the allegations were simply untrue.
The timing of Cox’s allegations were again not coincidental; they wickedly meant to becloud or overshadow some important economic and political developments in the Sudan by then. To name but a few; , in 1998 the new constitution was endorsed by over 96% of voters in referendum.
More importantly however, in May 1999, Sudan was inundated and overwhelmed with great joy and jubilation, marking the completion and inauguration of Sudan’s oil pipeline and oil refinery . In fact, the very August of 1999, witnessed a new dawn for the country;the landmarked shipment of the first consignment of 600,000 barrels of the Sudanese crude oil, from Sudan’s newly-constructed oil supertanker of ‘Bashayer’ heading towards Singapore.
Baroness Cox’s malice nonetheless, knew no borders, in another similar propaganda exercise, she came to accuse Sudan of hiding hundreds of Saddam Hussein's unconventional missiles, however these nonsensical charges were sooner dismissed and discredited by Britain and other European governments.
The leopard can't change its spots! again the deputy speaker of House of Lords, was part and parcel of another detrimental scandal, which fatally shattered both of Cox's international credibility and political career; forcing her to disappear from Sudan political theatre, for a quite some time, to show up once again, taking part in some of the seasonal shallow anti-Khartoum protests in diaspora, in support of rebels' agenda.
In February 2002; in an unprecedented international focus, some world-leading newspapers chose to publish, or republish, articles exposing the deep fraud and corruption at the heart of claims of "slave redemption" in the Sudan. These articles were the culmination of deep, long-standing concerns, about the activities of several High-profile western campaigners including Cox’s CSW, involved in what has become a Western-financed "redemption" industry in parts of Sudan.
That emotive issue of slavery in the Sudan has had a particularly strong impact among black Americans and Christian groups in the US, where it has become the biggest African cause since apartheid; Politicians have chained themselves to railings in protest; pop stars have given free concerts
As intended, the faked campaign managed to touch the hearts - and wallets - of millions, particularly in America where schoolchildren have given up their lunch money to redeem Sudanese slaves. The CSI has raised millions of dollars with its promise to save a slave for 50 US Dollar. However, the Slave redemption in Sudan was nothing more than an elaborate scam.
The Washington Post' for instance, reported that in numerous documented instances "the slaves weren't slaves at all, but people gathered locally and instructed to pretend they were returning from bondage". In reality, many of the ‘slaves’ are fakes, rounded up by SPLA officials to pose for the cameras. The Independent on Sunday' reported that it was able to "reveal that 'redemption' has often been a carefully orchestrated fraud".
However,such earthshaking scandal, has not repulsed or even lulled for a while, the gushing of further western machinations against Khartoum. The policy has always been;Khartoum should be carefully denied of any respite or time to utilize its vast natural resources.
In his infamous testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on the 9th of September 2004, completely rescinding the statement he publicly made in Darfur in midsummer, Colin Powell, the United States Secretary of State, unleashed yet another catastrophic lie; falsely declaring the conflict in Darfur a "genocide"
It’s highly important to note here, that no other permanent member of the United Nations Security Council has followed suit with the American claim; In fact the charge was soon rejected by officials of both the European and African Unions and also privately by the British officials.
In January 2005, an International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur, authorized by UN Security Council Resolution 1564 of 2004, issued a report to the Secretary-General with the conclusion that, no genocidal policy has been pursued and implemented in Darfur by the Government authorities, directly or through the so called militias under their control.
Increasingly exaggerating the humanitarian catastrophe in Darfur, Washington’s desire for a regime change in Khartoum has by far, characterized and biased all its previous and subsequent positions vis-a -vis Khartoum.
As a matter of fact, the UN reports by then,on the contrary, appeared to confirm food surveys priorly conducted by other agencies in Darfur, which also stood in stark contrast to the dire US descriptions of the food crisis.
Lie after a lie after a lie, Collin Powell’s claim of genocide in Darfur in 2004, is yet another reminiscent of the catastrophic speech, he gave at the U.N. justifying the U.S. invasion of Iraq on the basis of bogus evidence that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons. In copy-paste repetition of the script, of the Sudanese pharmaceutical factory ( El-shiffa) in 1988.The paradox remains; while the US vetoed the sending UN inspection team to Khartoum, but after just a couple of years, the US attacked and reduced Iraq to rubble, for denying access to the same UN inspection team!
Is there any reward for good, other than good? At the time, the government of Sudan was busily concluding and signing the historical the Machakos Protocols with the SPLA in Kenya, paving the way for the landmarked CPA, that eventually ended Africa's longest civil war, and at the time Khartoum was keenly anticipating,in return, the gratitude, encouragement and reward from the international community, the war-mongers in the west, in an irony of fate, were wily engaged, in weaving another conspiracy to torpedo the fragile social peace and fabric in Darfur, warming up the new rebellion in Darfur, to offset the mushrooming peace in south Sudan.
Just hours after US Secretary of State Colin Powell, told a US legislative committee that the killings in Darfur over the past year "constitute genocide", the US representative in the Security Council, John Danforth, presented the draft resolution that included an embargo on Sudanese oil exports. The pivotal question here is why Sudan's oil was targeted in the first place?
Arguably, a concurring development in the Sudan demystifies what the American rush in the UN, was all about; let's recall, during that very day, Sudan and China jointly announced that the output of oil in Sudan, has more than doubled to hit a plateau( roughly 490,000 barrels per day). Announcing likewise, plans for the construction of the 1,392 kilometers long pipeline, connecting all the newly discovered wells in the southern part of the Sudan, with Port Sudan, towards the Red Sea in the east (not the Gulf of Guinea in the west, perhaps to the very detriment of the American clandestine plans)
China’s relationship with Sudan by then, demonstrated the intensity of its quest for energy security. Being China's largest overseas oil project and investment worth of three billion dollars, Sudan was integral part of China’s broader push to expand trade and influence across the African continent; the way it is manifest today.
The ensuing diplomatic showdown in the UN remains a history; China poised and firmly warned to apply her veto right in the Council and block these sanctions. In fact, for China, India and Malaysia, the US draft resolution on oil sanctions against Sudan, posed a direct economic threat. In other words, from their perspective it was a sort of an economic war put forth and directed against them on behalf of the Anglo-American oil conglomerates, whose objective was to establish a monopoly control over African oil and oil pipelines
Hence, beyond any doubt, due to the growing western concern and competition over energy resources and commodities, the exaggeration of the humanitarian situation in Darfur and the ensued genocide falsity, was a western malignant ploy. The conflict in Darfur, was by far, molded and orchestrated to serve as an ethical and political stumbling block, in the face of China’s newly-molding international role; from a passive, reactive, and isolated traditional regional power, to a more active, interactive, interconnected and modernizing global power. In a nutshell genocide saga was orchestrated, inter alia, to nip nascent China’s global ambitions in the bud.
China was fully mindful of its strategic interests; any potential failure in Sudan at that time, could have severely damaged China's shaky efforts to become a global player in the oil business. From Kazakhstan to the Middle East, Chinese firms past pursuits for oil, have all ended in failure; they have been aced out by the multinational titans that dominate the energy business; Japan appeared set to claim Siberian stocks that China once thought were in hand. Adding insult to injury, the U.S-led war in Iraq, has thrown away China’s oil concessions in that country.
Apologetically, Mr. Collin Powell, after long ten years and in a rare moment of truth,has recently admitted that the said speech, shall remain a blot and a failure, that will always be attached to him. Despite his repeated insistence that he didn’t know he was spreading falsehoods to justify an aggressive (and thus illegal) war. It’s only God who knows, how many years’ Sudanese people,in return, are destined to wait, for yet another similar moment of truth?
By Mubarak M.Musa Diplomat; Sudan Embassy Kiev
sudanvisiondaily.com