AFRICAN UNION
UNION AFRICAIN UNIÃO AFRICANA
P. O. Box 3243, Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA Tel.: (251-11) 5513822 Fax: (251-11) 5519321 Email: oau-ews@ethionet.et / ausituationroom@yahoo.com
PROGRESS OF THE INTER-SUDANESE PEACE TALKS ON THE CONFLICT IN DARFUR
Presented by: Boubou NIANG, Political Adviser to the AU Special Envoy and Chief Mediator for the Darfur Talks, to the Sudan Consortium organized by the World Bank, Paris, France 9 – 10 March 2006
PROGRESS ON THE INTER-SUDANESE PEACE TALKS ON THE CONFLICT IN DARFUR
INTRODUCTION The first Round of the Inter-Sudanese Peace Talks on the Conflict in Darfur, bringing together the Sudanese Parties (the Government of the Sudan, the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army and the Justice and Equality Movement), organized by the African Union (AU), started in July 2004, in Addis Ababa. Subsequently, six rounds of negotiations took place in Abuja, Nigeria, under the leadership of H.E. President Olusegun Obasanjo, the then Chairman of the AU. The 7th Round opened in the Nigerian capital, on 29 November 2005. At the outset of the current Round, the Parties reaffirmed their firm commitment to make it a decisive one and do their utmost to arrive at an early conclusion of the deliberations. After more than three months in Abuja, the Parties have not yet been able to accomplish the expected results except in few areas. Procrastinations, lack of flexibility, mistrust and misunderstandings generated a lot of frustration among the participants. The AU Mediation has repeatedly called upon the Parties to accept and understand that in negotiations one cannot have all he wants. It is a give and take exercise, which requires flexibility and a sense of responsibility towards those on behalf of whom negotiations are conducted. Despite the continued pressure exerted by the AU and its international partners, the Parties have so far failed to demonstrate the necessary determination to negotiate with a sense of urgency, which the alleviation of the suffering of the people of Darfur dictates. In the same vein, there is a total de-link between the seriously deteriorating situation on the ground and the Abuja Forum. The Parties seem to be convinced that they can continue to fight and negotiate at the same time. What is the status of the current Talks? The AU Mediation put in place three negotiation frameworks in the form of separate Commissions, addressing the various aspects of a future agreement. Thus far, modest progress has been made in two of the three Commissions, namely: Power Sharing and Security Arrangements Commissions, but progress is much more substantive in the Wealth Sharing Commission. POWER SHARING COMMISSION The Power Sharing Commission a few days after the start of the Round, concluded and agreed on the first three items on its agenda relating to General Principles for Power Sharing; Criteria and Guidelines for Power Sharing and Human Rights. The fourth agenda item relate to Federalism and All Levels of Governance and Their Competencies.
1
While it was possible to bridge some of the divergent positions of the Parties on these subjects, there still remain unresolved and outstanding issues, including: the future status of Darfur (one region or the status quo of 3 States); representation of Darfurians in the Presidency; administration of the Federal Capital; and the boundaries of Darfur.
On the issue of region, the Parties agreed on the idea in principle. The bone of contention lies in the timing of its creation and the confirmatory popular consultation, which would enable the people of Darfur to freely express their views on the subject. The scenarios proposed by the Parties are: the conduct of free, fair and direct elections in the three States of Darfur, to be followed by formation of State Assemblies and democratically elected State Governments. Subsequently, popular consultation with the people of the three States of Darfur will be conducted to choose from the following options: (1) Creation of a region for the three States of Darfur; (2) Integrating the three States of Darfur into one State; (3) Formation of a Coordination Council for the three States of Darfur; and (4) any other option chosen by the people of Darfur; the creation, at the outset, of a strong and effective Regional government for Darfur that can provide its people with effective representation and comparable competencies, and then a referendum to confirm or dissolve the region.
-
Regarding Darfurians’ representation in the Presidency, the proposals made by the Parties suggest the following: the appointment of a Special Adviser to the President whose duties and responsibilities shall be agreed upon by the Parties, as well as a number of Ministerial positions in the Council of Ministers based on the quotas to be allocated to the various political forces and the size of Darfur. Representation in the National Council shall be based on the population of each state; or the appointment of a Vice President who would be nominated by the two Movements.
-
The representation of the Movements in the shares assigned to Northern Sudan in the Executive is yet to be agreed upon. On the issue of Federal Capital, the disagreement concerns whether or not the post of Governor of the Federal Capital is to be occupied by a Darfurian; as well as the representation of Darfurians in the administration of the Federal Capital. The Parties agreed that the Northern Darfur boundaries would return to what they were on 1st January 1956. The problem lies with the demarcation. The issue of North/South
2
borders will be addressed by the Technical Ad hoc Committee established by virtue of the CPA. Regarding Agenda Items 5 and 6, namely: Effective Participation in All Institutions at the Federal Level and at All Other Levels of Governance, and the Institutions of the State and Public Services, respectively, the discussion focused on level of Darfurian participation in the Federal Council of Ministers and the National Assembly. The Parties have not yet agreed on the representation of Darfurians in the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial organs as well as in the National Security and Intelligence Services, the Army High Command and other regular forces. In the existing arrangement, Ministerial appointments are made on the basis of representation in political parties. In this context, three Cabinet Ministers and three Ministers of State in the Council of Ministers are reserved for Darfurians. Whether or not any of these positions should be given to the representatives of the Movements would be determined through negotiations between the two Parties. The agreed power sharing criteria, namely: precedents and population size, where relevant, as well as policies of positive discrimination, should eventually be applied. Furthermore, the other argument put forward is that, on the basis of the population of Darfur, the effective participation of Darfurians in the Council of Ministers should be much higher than the current numbers. With regard to specific percentages on representation in the National Assembly, it is argued that the percentages agreed with the SPLM in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), should be given due consideration. With regard to the Civil Service, the other Executive, Legislative and Judicial organs, as well as the National Economic, Social, and other Institutions, it had been proposed that representation should be made on the basis of competition and competence, and that policies designed to redress past imbalances, as well as affirmative action, should be adopted. The differences between the positions of the Parties on all these issues remain wide. The AU Mediation therefore engaged in extensive consultations with the Parties and other stakeholders, in order to narrow their positions on the issues through extensive bilateral consultations both in plenary and in smaller working-groups. While such consultations were able to bridge some of the divergent positions of the Parties, nevertheless, there are still unresolved and outstanding issues, as noted above. Given the fact that the Parties exhausted their presentations and arguments on the issues involved, the AU Mediation is endeavouring to fine-tune some proposals that would be submitted to the Parties as a basis for final negotiations and an eventual agreement.
3
SECURITY ARRANGEMENTS Notable progress is also being made in the Security Arrangements Commission. The Parties have, thus far, completed discussions on the enhancement of the Humanitarian Ceasefire Agreement and its Mechanisms. In the process, they reviewed the mandates of the mechanisms established under the N’djamena Humanitarian Ceasefire Agreement, particularly, the Ceasefire and Joint Commissions and how to strengthen them; the operational difficulties experienced by the African Mission in the Sudan (AMIS), the Civilian Police and others in their line of duty in Darfur; how to ensure the internal security of Internally Displaced Persons’ (IDPs) camps and supply routes; the mapping of the respective military positions of the Parties, and the issue of de-mining and ensuring safe routes so as to enhance the work of UN and other Humanitarian Agencies. However, substantial differences remain with respect to conclusion of a Comprehensive Ceasefire Agreement. The Commission is about to begin discussions on non-military logistic supplies to the Movements and ground rules on aid delivery. Intensive consultations are also being conducted on disengagement as it relates to extension of territory; movements of the military forces of the Parties; establishment of buffer zones (demilitarized areas); establishment of restricted zones or zones of exclusion and zones of limitation, on the basis of all previous agreements entered into by the Parties. More importantly, the Mediation is working on a draft Comprehensive and Permanent Ceasefire Agreement that builds on and strengthens the existing Ceasefire and other Security Agreements, including the Abuja Protocol on the Enhancement of the Security Situation in Darfur. Ultimately, there will be discussions around issues such as Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) as well as final Security Arrangements for Darfur. WEALTH SHARING COMMISSION In the Wealth Sharing negotiations, agreement has been reached by the Parties on 8 out of the 10 Agenda Items, namely: Principles for Wealth Sharing; Fiscal Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations; Criteria and Basis for Wealth Sharing; Economic Policy; Urgent Programs for Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), Refugees and Other Waraffected Persons; Compensation, Reconstruction, Investment and Development; Management of Land and Natural Resources. The 2 remaining Agenda Items relating to the Implementation Modalities and Guarantees as well as the General Provisions, will be discussed after full agreement is reached on the above issues. In the meantime discussions are continuing on the following aspects of the first 8 abovementioned items: the question as to whether or not to provide an initial financial support towards the resettlement of the returnees (IDPs and refugees), in addition to the
4
restoration of basic social services, to enable them restart their livels; and the proposal that, instead of the cash money, agricultural inputs should be provided and a micro-credit system established. Following broad consultations with various quarters, including the UN Agencies involved in repatriation as well as NGOs, the Mediation, taking into account various international practices, has proposed that in addition to these inputs, a comprehensive and appropriate resettlement package be given to the returnees. Also proposed their inclusion of a provision on commitment by the government to contribute resources to enable the returnees to meet their urgent needs. The demand for Darfur, in addition to its share from the National Revenue Account as determined by the Fiscal and Financial Allocation and Monitoring Commission, be given 6.5% of the total annual national revenue for a period of 10 years to enable it catch up with other parts of the Sudan and meet the Millennium Development Goals. The government has proposed the allocation of a given amount as seed money under the Darfur Reconstruction and Development Fund, pending the completion of the Joint Assessment Mission (JAM), which will determine the GoS contribution for a given period. The Mediation has also proposed a formula, aimed at incorporating the concerns of both Parties, linking the GoS contribution to the announced seed money, in addition to its share of the JAM. The request that a provision be included in the agreement , in the event that the Fiscal and Financial Allocation and Monitoring Commission (FFAMC) provided for in the CPA, does not complete its work before the end of the present fiscal year, for a rate of 35%, should be applied for the vertical allocation between the Central Government and the States for the fiscal year 2007. Fixing a rate in Abuja is viewed by some as tantamount to prejudging the outcome of the work of the FFAMC. One of the proposals submitted is that, in the event that the formula is not determined by the FFAMC and approved in time, nothing less than the present rate should be applied for 2007. On the issue of compensation, the Mediation with the assistance of Resource Persons, has finalized a proposal, which has been submitted to the Parties for discussion. Substantive progress has been made. The Parties agreed on the establishment of a Compensation Commission but have not yet agreed on the setting up of a Compensation Fund either as a separate and independent body or as a window of the proposed Darfur Reconstruction and Development Fund.
Intensive consultations are continuing on the above issues. The Parties have become more positive in their approaches. The Mediation is of the view that if they continue to demonstrate the same willingness and determination, an agreement could be reached very soon. GENDER ASPECTS The African Union (AU) Mediation has adopted multiple strategies for increasing women’s effective participation in and contribution to the peace process in terms of both process and content.
5
Three phases inform the broad framework for women’s engagement with the peace process. During the first phase two main activities took place: an evaluation of the gender needs of the Peace Process and the Development of the Women’s Priorities. For the second phase, the accent is on ensuring that women’s concerns are included in the envisaged Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA). The third phase runs from the signing of the DPA to the Darfur-Darfur Consultations, where the focus will be on seeking support for the DPA. To that end, the AU Mediation Team has prioritized four urgent actions: enhancing the capacity of the AU Mediation Team to provide the technical backstopping required to adequately promote gender equality in the peace process; building the capacity of women delegates to engage effectively with the negotiation process; and advocating for the “Women’s Priority Concerns for Reconstruction in Darfur” (Women’s Priorities); disseminating and generating support for Women’s Priorities; and providing linkage between the Abuja peace processes at the Sudan/Darfur level. In this regard, the document on Women’s Priorities prepared by the female delegates of the Peace Talks and a Gender Experts Support Team (GEST) sponsored by UNIFEM and, adopted in Abuja in December 2005, has already been disseminated to facilitate cross-fertilization between the Abuja peace process and initiatives at the Sudan/Darfur level. In addition, the Mediation is exploring ways to prepare the women of Darfur for a more empowered engagement with the Darfur-Darfur Consultation through a series of activities, including consultations with the women on the ground. Further to this, the precedent-setting gender mainstreaming work being carried out vis-à-vis the Peace Talks on Darfur is being documented. Consequently, a more coordinated, and more synergetic approach is now in place, and the results thereof are visible. Indeed, gender issues and women-specific provisions are being included in the documents and discussions. CONCLUSION By the Mediation’s calculation, a Comprehensive Peace Agreement for Darfur may be weeks away, provided the Parties are able to exhibit the necessary political will, overcome internal contradictions, negotiate for and reach an Agreement to end the suffering of their people. It is also important that the countries of the Region, the Partners and the wider international community refrain from launching parallel initiatives that could further delay the efforts in Abuja which have already been agonizingly slow.
6