The Darfur crisis - the causes of the civil war

Résumé du document

The Darfur war does not seem to be an interesting topic for the media. Indeed, after a short period during which the world seemed to finally decide to act, the Darfur situation was once again forgotten. On August 2009, Rodolphe Adada and Luther Agwai, heads of the UNAMID, affirmed that the war was over in Darfur. However, even if the high scales massacres are over, the region cannot be said to be in peace. 2.7 million people are still living in refugee camps. The Darfur conflict is now a 'low intensity conflict' but still a conflict, the causes of violence are not eradicated. We will start by highlighting the fact that the best way to resolve a conflict is to first understand its roots. Indeed, this paper will deal about the explanation of the sources of the conflict using the tools given by theories of the international relations.

Extraits

[...] However, in most cases, this confrontation is the result of a political manipulation. The hatred is constructed and is the result of a political will. According to Jean-François Bayart in his work the Illusion of Cultural Identity, is some cases there is real invention of a tradition and the invented culture constructs itself in opposition to the others. The causes of the outbreak of the civil war in Darfur can be explained through the “grievance” notion, as people seems to rebel over issues of identity and ethnicity. [...]

[...] The decision to intervene cannot be apply if the states do not want so. In the case of Darfur, China was a really important factor because of its strong economic ties with Sudan. As Gérard Prunier points out, China is during the conflict leading supplier of arms to Bashir's regime, the guns that are killing people in Darfur.” It is then easy to understand the difficulties for the international community to intervene because of the ambiguous position of China. Moreover, once again, in international relations, interventions are decided by States, and if there are not enough advantages for an intervention, they do not want to spend money and risk their soldiers' lives. [...]

[...] If there are no large scale massacres anymore, the causes of the conflict are not erased. The head of the hybrid mission, declared on August that there was no war in Darfur presently. But no war does not mean peace. Illnesses cause many deaths, and according to analysts, the retreat of humanitarian assistance of the Darfur will cause many more deaths.[14] The international community should not consider Darfur as a resolved conflict. After the decision of the International Criminal Court to issue a warrant of arrest against Omar el- Béchir, this last one decided to expulse 13 non-governmental organizations from Sudan. [...]

[...] Nick Grono, Briefing Darfur, The Internationale Community's Failure to Protect African Affairs, 105/ p 626. Le Conflit du Darfour Courrier International, Dossier. Gérard Prunier, Sudan : Genocide in Darfur Le Monde Diplomatique, March 2007. Kate Kelland, La maladie principale cause de décès dans le conflit au Darfour Reuters January 2010, 8h32. [...]

[...] The Darfur (the land of Fur) is a region located in western Sudan. From the 1650's to 1916, it was ruled by an Afro-Arab sultanate. The Furs were African farmers settled on the mount Djebel Marra. With the Massalits (pastors), they succeeded to keep Arab invaders out, from the sixteenth to the seventeenth century. In 1874 an Arab slave trader overthrew the Fur Sultanate, but in 1916, the region was incorporated by force to the Anglo- Egyptian Sudan, and the British gave back to power to the Furs.[3] Darfur's inhabitants were then qualified as awlad al-gharb (children of the West) in opposition to the awlad al-balad (children of the land) for the people of the Nile Valley. [...]