Peace in Sudan? Perhaps

Okay, I’ll admit it. In the rush of day-to-day life, I often forget about Sudan. The Darfur conflict has been going on since 2003 but is still generally ignored by the media. Issues closer to home tend to grab my attention. The conflicts between Republicans and Democrats over health care and the Iraq War seem far more relevant, especially since those issues receive much more mainstream media coverage than does Sudan.

But since the conflict began in 2003, the estimated death toll has reached 300,000, and more than 2.5 million civilians have been displaced. Maybe it deserves our attention. So when I was flipping through Google News and a saw the little blurb “Peace in Sudan?” I was caught off guard. Surely I’d have seen something if the conflict was over. And it isn’t yet, but for once it looks like an end might be in sight.

As of now, a temporary truce has been signed between the largest opposition group and the Khartoum regime. The two have plans to talk further to reach a permanent agreement. A worrisome component of this agreement, however, is the March 15 deadline for a permanent peace treaty. Can two groups that have been fighting for seven years reach an agreement in three weeks? As much as I’d like to believe the answer is yes, I find it nearly impossible.

After all, there was a peace agreement in 2006 between one faction of the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army (SLA) and the Sudanese government. Unfortunately, another faction of the SLA did not sign the treaty, and violence continued in the region. The latest treaty was signed by the Justice and Equality Movement (Jem) and the Khartoum regime. Other rebel groups such as the SLA refuse to sign even this temporary treaty until all violence is stopped. And while the Sudanese government says they intend to include other factions in the negotiations, those factions are angered by the separate ceasefire with Jem. Some rebel groups have united to form the Liberation and Justice Movement in opposition to Jem.

It may be a little early to expect a permanent ceasefire. The current negotiations seem to be further alienating rebel groups rather than bringing everyone to the table for a discussion on ending the conflict. It’s disheartening when one of the major obstacles to peace results from excluding some dissenting groups. However, if the Sudanese government reaches out to the other rebel groups, as they claim they intend to, perhaps peace in Darfur is closer than we think.

I hope that if a permanent peace agreement is reached in Darfur, then the media will give it the proper coverage. After all, the end of a seven-year-long conflict that many had written off as hopeless is nothing if not newsworthy. And it’s certainly more interesting than hearing more reports that Congress is at a standstill as they argue about healthcare.

SARAH WENTZ