Sudan, S. Sudan: Ugandan war survivors partnered with therapy dogs

Note from Uganda Watch Editor:  Please stop and watch this short powerful BBC film about Ugandan war survivors being partnered with comfort dogs. 

I have spent a lifetime seeking and promoting practical ways to help people suffering poverty, homelessness and trauma.  More here below.  Here is the film.

Ugandan war survivors partnered with therapy dogs

'If it wasn't for him, I'd be dead'

A scheme in Uganda partner dogs with war survivors to help them overcome trauma and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Filda was abducted as a child and forced into the LRA rebel army in Uganda, where she witnessed terrible atrocities.  

As part of a scheme called The Comfort Dog Project, Filda has been partnered with a dog who was abandoned as a puppy.

The two are now helping each other heal, along with many others like them.

A film by Amelia Martyn-Hemphill for 100 Women.

Uganda’s Comfort Dog Project

• The Comfort Dog Project, an NGO, helps transform the region's stray and unwanted dogs into healing therapy animals for former child soldiers and survivors of war struggling with PTSD, trauma and depression
• A dog that has suffered should be able to help someone who has gone through trauma
• Dogs can help people rehabilitate their psychological condition
• So that they have the company, gain confidence and also overcome depression
• Francis, the founder of the project trained as a psychologist and set up The Comfort Dog Project in 2015 to help people recover from mental health conditions
• During the 5 month therapy programme the Comfort Dog Guardians learn to train and care for their dogs
• The group also undergoes extensive trauma counselling to help them process their past experiences
• But it is still a challenge for the project to gain acceptance
• In Northern Uganda people use dogs for hunting, guarding homes and also they look at dogs as useless 
• Even though Uganda's Ministry of Health estimates about 70% of people in Northern Uganda have been traumatically affected by the war there's still stigma around mental health services
• People think the moment you go to mental health you are already mentally disorientated, you cannot be helped
• But attitudes in the community are starting to change, as part of her recovery Filda is with veterinary outreach and educates people on dog training, animal rights and welfare 

To visit the above BBC film click here:  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-49409125/ugandan-war-survivors-partnered-with-therapy-dogs

Note from Uganda Watch Editor:  In addition to being a lifelong anti-poverty campaigner, I have spent the past 20 years researching cannabinoid therapy to help people, particularly peacekeepers, military personnel, former child soldiers and other survivors of war struggling with PTSD, trauma and depression.

Certain cannabinoids could help people with PTSD. Better still, such a therapy could be partnered with comfort dogs.  If anyone reading this can think of the best ways I could help Sudanese and Ugandan people with PTSD to be partnered with a therapy dog please contact me at ingridj.jones@btinternet.com.  Thanks.

THE COMFORT DOG PROJECT

http://thebigfixuganda.org/the-comfort-dog-project.html

Give a War Trauma Survivor a Comfort Dog

$500 sponsors a dog placement

$25 sponsors a weekly training class for the Comfort Dog Project

COMFORT DOG

Dogs have a profound effect on our ability to heal from emotional trauma.  The Comfort Dog Project pairs formerly homeless/neglected dogs with war survivors suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.  Psycho-social counseling is coupled with dog companionship and training to create a supportive bond.  For $500, you can help to rehabilitate a dog, place that dog with a war survivor, and enable them to go through our 5 month training program to receive certification as a Comfort Dog.

Uganda seizes truck taking food for South Sudan rebels SPLA-IO

Article from www.monitor.co.ug

By FELIX WAROM OKELLO Kampala

Published Monday 24 June 2019

Uganda seizes truck taking food for South Sudan rebels

Image: Uganda Revenue Authority said the truck was using an illegal route known as Kampala in Koboko District at the border with South Sudan. Oraba border customs is the main entry point to South Sudan through Yei and Kaya towns 

The Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) has impounded a truck loaded with food to be supplied to the South Sudan People’s Liberation Army in Opposition (SPLA-IO) rebels.

The authority said the truck was using an illegal route known as Kampala in Koboko District at the border with South Sudan.

Oraba border customs is the main entry point to South Sudan through Yei and Kaya towns. Speaking to Daily Monitor at the weekend, the northern regional manager for Uganda Revenue Authority, Mr Godson Mwesigye, said: “It [the issue] was not smuggled goods but our problem with them is that they wanted to use an illegal route. So, we could not allow the truck to use un-gazetted route.”

He confirmed that the food stuff was bought from Uganda and was being taken to the SPLA-IO.

“For us we have no problem because once the security clears it, we shall have no problem with them. It is a security matter,” he added. 

The 409th Brigade of Uganda People’s Defence Forces public relations officer, Lt Ibrahim Ssekito, said: “Our main interest is only to check if there are ammunition being smuggled in the truck. But for us we have no problem once the food is cleared because there is already an agreement signed between two warring factions in South Sudan that those people use our routes. So, we are waiting for the clearance from Kampala where initial clearance was originated.”

The deputy spokesperson of SPLA-IO, Col Paul Lam, said: “There is nothing like illegal routes because, there is no way you can bring food from Yei to our areas.”

editorial@ug.nationmedia.com

SOURCE: https://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Uganda-seizes-truck-taking-food-South-Sudan-rebels/688334-5169046-wsntxvz/index.html

Uganda's Museveni on Libya's Gaddafi and the West

Yoweri K. Museveni is President of the Republic of Uganda. This article was originally published in Uganda’s New Vision newspaper. Full copy:

From: www.zimbabwejournalists.com
First published: Friday, 25 March 2011; 11:37 GMT

Museveni on Gaddafi and the West
By President Yoweri Museveni, Uganda

BY THE time Muammar Gaddaffi came to power in 1969, I was a third-year university student at Dar-es-Salaam. We welcomed him because he was in the tradition of Col. Gamal Abdul Nasser of Egypt who had a nationalist and pan-Arabist position.

Soon, however, problems cropped up with Col. Gaddafi as far as Uganda and Black Africa were concerned. Idi Amin came to power with the support of Britain and Israel because they thought he was uneducated enough to be used by them. Amin, however, turned against his sponsors when they refused to sell him guns to fight Tanzania.

Unfortunately, Col. Muammar Gaddafi, without getting enough information about Uganda, jumped in to support Idi Amin. This was because Amin was a ‘Moslem’ and Uganda was a ‘Moslem country’ where Moslems were being ‘oppressed’ by Christians. Amin killed a lot of people extra-judicially and Gaddafi was identified with these mistakes.

In 1972 and 1979, Gaddafi sent Libyan troops to defend Idi Amin when we attacked him. I remember a Libyan Tupolev 22 bomber trying to bomb us in Mbarara in 1979. The bomb ended up in Nyarubanga because the pilots were scared. They could not come close to bomb properly. We had already shot-down many Amin MIGs using surface-to-air missiles.

The Tanzanian brothers and sisters were doing much of this fighting. Many Libyan militias were captured and repatriated to Libya by Tanzania. This was a big mistake by Gaddafi and a direct aggression against the people of Uganda and East Africa.

The second big mistake by Gaddafi was his position vis-à-vis the African Union (AU) Continental Government “now”. Since 1999, he has been pushing this position. Black people are always polite. They, normally, do not want to offend other people. This is called ‘obufura’ in Runyankore, mwolo in Luo – handling, especially strangers, with care and respect.

It seems some of the non-African cultures do not have ‘obufura’. You can witness a person talking to a mature person as if he or she is talking to a kindergarten child. “You should do this; you should do that; etc.”

We tried to politely point out to Col. Gaddafi that this was difficult in the short and medium term. We should, instead, aim at the Economic Community of Africa and, where possible, also aim at Regional Federations. Col. Gaddafi would not relent. He would not respect the rules of the AU. Something that has been covered by previous meetings would be resurrected by Gaddafi. He would ‘overrule’ a decision taken by all other African Heads of State. Some of us were forced to come out and oppose his wrong position and, working with others, we repeatedly defeated his illogical position.

The third mistake has been the tendency by Col. Gaddafi to interfere in the internal affairs of many African countries using the little money Libya has compared to those countries. One blatant example was his involvement with cultural leaders of Black Africa – kings, chiefs, etc. Since the political leaders of Africa had refused to back his project of an African Government, Gaddafi, incredibly, thought that he could by-pass them and work with these kings to implement his wishes.

I warned Gaddafi in Addis Ababa that action would be taken against any Ugandan king that involved himself in politics because it was against our Constitution. I moved a motion in Addis Ababa to expunge from the records of the AU all references to kings (cultural leaders) who had made speeches in our forum because they had been invited there illegally by Col. Gaddafi.

The fourth big mistake was by most of the Arab leaders, including Gaddafi to some extent. This was in connection with the long suffering people of Southern Sudan. Many of the Arab leaders either supported or ignored the suffering of the black people in that country. This unfairness always created tension and friction between us and the Arabs, including Gaddafi to some extent.

However, I must salute H.E. Gaddafi and H.E. Hosni Mubarak for travelling to Khartoum just before the Referendum in Sudan and advising H.E. Bashir to respect the results of that exercise.

Sometimes Gaddafi and other Middle Eastern radicals do not distance themselves sufficiently from terrorism even when they are fighting for a just cause. Terrorism is the use of indiscriminate violence – not distinguishing between military and non-military targets. The Middle Eastern radicals, quite different from the revolutionaries of black Africa, seem to say that any means is acceptable as long as you are fighting the enemy. That is why they hijack planes, use assassinations, plant bombs in bars, etc. Why bomb bars? People who go to bars are normally merry-makers, not politically-minded people.

We were together with the Arabs in the anti-colonial struggle. The black African liberation movements, however, developed differently from the Arab ones. Where we used arms, we fought soldiers or sabotaged infrastructure but never targeted non-combatants. These indiscriminate methods tend to isolate the struggles of the Middle East and the Arab world. It would be good if the radicals in these areas could streamline their work methods in this area of using violence indiscriminately.

These five points above are some of the negative points in connection to Col. Gaddafi as far as Uganda’s patriots have been concerned over the years. These positions of Col. Gaddafi have been unfortunate and unnecessary.

Nevertheless, Gaddafi has also had many positive points objectively speaking. These positive points have been in favour of Africa, Libya and the Third World. I will deal with them point by point.

Col. Gaddafi has been having an independent foreign policy and, of course, also independent internal policies. I am not able to understand the position of Western countries which appear to resent independent-minded leaders and seem to prefer puppets. Puppets are not good for any country.

Most of the countries that have transitioned from Third World to First World status since 1945 have had independent-minded leaders: South Korea (Park Chung-hee), Singapore (Lee Kuan Yew), China People’s Republic (Mao Tse Tung, Chou Enlai, Deng Xiaoping, Marshal Yang Shangkun, Li Peng, Jiang Zemin, Hu Jing Tao, etc), Malaysia (Dr. Mahthir Mohamad), Brazil (Lula Da Silva), Iran (the Ayatollahs), etc.

Between the First World War and the Second World War, the Soviet Union transitioned into an Industrial country propelled by the dictatorial but independent-minded Joseph Stalin. In Africa, we have benefited from a number of independent-minded leaders: Col. Nasser of Egypt, Mwalimu Nyerere of Tanzania, Samora Machel of Mozambique, etc. That is how Southern Africa was liberated. That is how we got rid of Idi Amin. The stopping of genocide in Rwanda and the overthrow of Mobutu, etc., were as a result of efforts of independent-minded African leaders.

Muammar Gaddafi, whatever his faults, is a true nationalist. I prefer nationalists to puppets of foreign interests. Where have the puppets caused the transformation of countries? I need some assistance with information on this from those who are familiar with puppetry. Therefore, the independent-minded Gaddafi had some positive contribution to Libya, I believe, as well as Africa and the Third World.

I will take one little example. At the time we were fighting the criminal dictatorships here in Uganda, we had a problem arising of a complication caused by our failure to capture enough guns at Kabamba on February 6, 1981. Gaddafi gave us a small consignment of 96 rifles, 100 anti-tank mines, etc., that was very useful. He did not consult Washington or Moscow before he did this. This was good for Libya, for Africa and for the Middle East. We should also remember as part of that independent-mindedness he expelled British and American military bases from Libya, etc.

Before Gaddafi came to power in 1969, a barrel of oil was 40 American cents. He launched a campaign to withhold Arab oil unless the West paid more for it. I think the price went up to US$20 per barrel. When the Arab-Israel war of 1973 broke out, the barrel of oil went to US$40.

I am, therefore, surprised to hear that many oil producers in the world, including the Gulf countries, do not appreciate the historical role played by Gaddafi on this issue. The huge wealth many of these oil producers are enjoying was, at least in part, due to Gaddafi’s efforts. The Western countries have continued to develop in spite of paying more for oil. It, therefore, means that the pre-Gaddafi oil situation was characterised by super exploitation in favour of the Western countries.

I have never taken time to investigate socio-economic conditions within Libya. When I was last there, I could see good roads even from the air. From the TV pictures, you can even see the rebels zooming up and down in pick-up vehicles on very good roads accompanied by Western journalists. Who built these good roads? Who built the oil refineries in Brega and those other places where the fighting has been taking place recently? Were these facilities built during the time of the king and his American as well as British allies or were they built by Gaddafi?

In Tunisia and Egypt, some youths immolated (burnt) themselves because they had failed to get jobs. Are the Libyans without jobs also? If so, why, then, are there hundreds of thousands of foreign workers? Is Libya’s policy of providing so many jobs to Third World workers bad? Are all the children going to school in Libya? Was that the case in the past – before Gaddafi? Is the conflict in Libya economic or purely political?

Possibly, Libya could have transitioned more if they encouraged the private sector more. However, this is something the Libyans are better placed to judge. As it is, Libya is a middle income country with GDP standing at US$89.03 billion. This is about the same as the GDP of South Africa at the time Mandela took over leadership in 1994 and it is about the current size of GDP of Spain.

Gaddafi is one of the few secular leaders in the Arab world. He does not believe in Islamic fundamentalism that is why women have been able to go to school, to join the army, etc. This is a positive point on Gaddafi’s side.

Coming to the present crisis, therefore, we need to point out some issues. The first issue is to distinguish between demonstrations and insurrections. Peaceful demonstrations should not be fired on with live bullets. Of course, even peaceful demonstrations should coordinate with the police to ensure that they do not interfere with the rights of other citizens.

When rioters are, however, attacking police stations and army barracks with the aim of taking power, then, they are no longer demonstrators; they are insurrectionists. They will have to be treated as such. A responsible government would have to use reasonable force to neutralise them. Of course, the ideal responsible government should also be an elected one by the people at periodic intervals.

If there is a doubt about the legitimacy of a government and the people decide to launch an insurrection, that should be the decision of the internal forces. It should not be for external forces to arrogate themselves that role, often, they do not have enough knowledge to decide rightly. Excessive external involvement always brings terrible distortions. Why should external forces involve themselves? That is a vote of no confidence in the people themselves.

A legitimate internal insurrection, if that is the strategy chosen by the leaders of that effort, can succeed. The Shah of Iran was defeated by an internal insurrection; the Russian Revolution in 1917 was an internal insurrection; the Revolution in Zanzibar in 1964 was an internal insurrection; the changes in Ukraine, Georgia, etc., all were internal insurrections. It should be for the leaders of the Resistance in that country to decide their strategy, not for foreigners to sponsor insurrection groups in sovereign countries.

I am totally allergic to foreign, political and military involvement in sovereign countries, especially the African countries. If foreign intervention is good, then, African countries should be the most prosperous countries in the world because we have had the greatest dosages of that: slave trade, colonialism, neo-colonialism, imperialism, etc.

All those foreign-imposed phenomena have, however, been disastrous. It is only recently that Africa is beginning to come up partly because of rejecting external meddling. External meddling and the acquiescence by Africans into that meddling have been responsible for the stagnation in Africa.

The wrong definition of priorities in many of the African countries is, in many cases, imposed by external groups. Failure to prioritise infrastructure, for instance, especially energy, is, in part, due to some of these pressures. Instead, consumption is promoted.

I have witnessed this wrong definition of priorities even here in Uganda. External interests linked up, for instance, with internal bogus groups to oppose energy projects for false reasons. How will an economy develop without energy? Quislings and their external backers do not care about all this.

If you promote foreign-backed insurrections in small countries like Libya, what will you do with the big ones like China which has got a different system from the Western systems? Are you going to impose a no-fly-zone over China in case of some internal insurrections as happened in Tiananmen Square, in Tibet or in Urumuqi?

The Western countries always use double standards. In Libya, they are very eager to impose a no-fly-zone. In Bahrain and other areas where there are pro-Western regimes, they turn a blind eye to the very same conditions or even worse conditions.

We have been appealing to the UN to impose a no-fly-zone over Somalia so as to impede the free movement of terrorists, linked to Al-Qaeda that killed Americans on September 11; killed Ugandans last July and have caused so much damage to the Somalis, without success. Why? Are there no human beings in Somalia similar to the ones in Benghazi? Or is it because Somalia does not have oil which is not fully controlled by the western oil companies on account of Gaddafi’s nationalist posture?

The Western countries are always very prompt in commenting on every problem in the Third World – Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, etc. Yet, some of these very countries were the ones impeding growth in those countries. There was a military coup d’état that slowly became a Revolution in backward Egypt in 1952. The new leader, Nasser, had ambition to cause transformation in Egypt. He wanted to build a dam not only to generate electricity but also to help with the ancient irrigation system of Egypt. He was denied money by the West because they did not believe that Egyptians needed electricity.

Nasser decided to raise that money by nationalising the Suez Canal. He was attacked by Israel, France and Britain. To be fair to the USA, President Eisenhower opposed that aggression that time. Of course, there was also the firm stand of the Soviet Union at that time. How much electricity was this dam supposed to produce? Just 2,000 mgws for a country like Egypt!! What moral right, then, do such people have to comment on the affairs of these countries?

Another negative point is going to arise out of the by now habit of the Western countries over-using their superiority in technology to impose war on less developed societies without impeachable logic. This will be the igniting of an arms race in the world. The actions of the Western countries in Iraq and now Libya are emphasising that might is “right.” I am quite sure that many countries that are able will scale up their military research, and in a few decades we may have a more armed world.

This weapons science is not magic. A small country like Israel is now a super power in terms of military technology. Yet 60 years ago, Israel had to buy second-hand fouga magister planes from France. There are many countries that can become small Israels if this trend of overusing military means by the Western countries continues.

All this notwithstanding, Col. Gaddafi should be ready to sit down with the opposition, through the mediation of the AU, with the opposition cluster of groups which now includes individuals well known to us – Ambassador Abdalla, Dr. Zubeda, etc.

I know Gaddafi has his system of elected committees that end up in a National People’s Conference. Actually Gaddafi thinks this is superior to our multi-party systems. Of course, I have never had time to know how truly competitive this system is. Anyway, even if it is competitive, there is now, apparently, a significant number of Libyans that think that there is a problem in Libya in terms of governance. Since there has not been internationally observed elections in Libya, not even by the AU, we cannot know what is correct and what is wrong. Therefore, a dialogue is the correct way forward.

The AU mission could not get to Libya because the Western countries started bombing Libya the day before they were supposed to arrive. However, the mission will continue. My opinion is that, in addition, to what the AU mission is doing, it may be important to call an extra-ordinary Summit of the AU in Addis Ababa to discuss this grave situation.

Regarding the Libyan opposition, I would feel embarrassed to be backed by Western war planes because quislings of foreign interests have never helped Africa. We have had a copious supply of them in the last 50 years – Mobutu, Houphout Boigny, Kamuzu Banda, etc. The West made a lot of mistakes in Africa and in the Middle East in the past. Apart from the slave trade and colonialism, they participated in the killing of Lumumba, until recently, the only elected leader of Congo, the killing of Felix Moummie of Cameroon, Bartholomew Boganda of Central African Republic, the support for UNITA in Angola, the support for Idi Amin at the beginning of his regime, the counter-revolution in Iran in 1953, etc.

Recently, there has been some improvement in the arrogant attitudes of some of these Western countries. Certainly, with black Africa and, particularly, Uganda, the relations are good following their fair stand on the black people of Southern Sudan. With the democratisation of South Africa and the freedom of the black people in Southern Sudan, the difference between the patriots of Uganda and the Western governments had disappeared. Unfortunately, these rush actions on Libya are beginning to raise new problems. They should be resolved quickly.

Therefore, if the Libyan opposition groups are patriots, they should fight their war by themselves and conduct their affairs by themselves. After all, they easily captured so much equipment from the Libyan army, why do they need foreign military support? I only had 27 rifles. To be puppets is not good.

The African members of the Security Council voted for this Resolution of the Security Council. This was contrary to what the Africa Peace and Security Council had decided in Addis Ababa recently. This is something that only the extra-ordinary summit can resolve.

It was good that certain big countries in the Security Council abstained on this Resolution. These were: Russia, China, Brazil, India, etc. This shows that there are balanced forces in the world that will, with more consultations, evolve more correct positions.

Being members of the UN, we are bound by the Resolution that was passed, however rash the process. Nevertheless, there is a mechanism for review. The Western countries, which are most active in these rash actions, should look at that route. It may be one way of extricating all of us from possible nasty complications.

What if the Libyans loyal to Gaddafi decide to fight on? Using tanks and planes that are easily targeted by Mr. Sarkozy’s planes is not the only way of fighting. Who will be responsible for such a protracted war? It is high time we did more careful thinking.

Al-Shabab and Al-Qaeda: Playing Americans for suckers - Clooney Falling Into Bin Laden’s Sudan Trap

Al-Shabab and Al-Qaeda: Playing Americans for suckers
Source: Michael Scheuer's Non-Intervention.com
Author: Michael Scheuer
Published: 15 July, 2010. Full copy (excluding 4 Comments):

The suicide bombing in Uganda’s capital of Kampala by the Somali Islamist group al-Shabab serves several agendas. While the facile and clueless Western media call it an “anti-World Cup attack” and the lame Obama White House says it proves al-Qaeda’s “racism” toward Africans, the reality is that from al-Sahbab’s perspective the attack is a logical and necessary response to the prolonged U.S.- and Western-backed intervention in Somalia. (How long, one wonders, will it take U.S. and Western officials to learn people don’t like being occupied?) The Kampala attack also is another episode in al-Qaeda’s ongoing campaign to lure the United States into more interventions in the Muslim world.

At the most basic level, there would be no al-Shabab in Somalia — at least not at its present strength, reach, and popularity — if Washington had not panicked several years ago at the thought of an Islamist organization known as the “Islamic Courts” taking power in Somalia. The Islamic Courts’ had all but displaced a feckless, corruption-ridden UN-backed Transitional Federal Government (TFG), and was beginning to bring a harsh but effective law-and-order system to Somalia for the first time in decades. Under President Bush, however, Washington could not stand the thought of a working Islamic government and so labored overtly and covertly for its demise.

Ultimately, Washington supported Ethiopia’s late-2006 invasion of Somalia without thinking through that it would henceforth be seen as the sponsor of Christian Ethiopia’s invasion of Muslim Somalia. The invasion turned Somalis of most factions against the interloping Christian occupiers. The large and better-armed Ethiopian conventional forces prevailed, broke up what was left of the Islamic Courts, and protected the UN-backed TFG, which now appeared even more as the imposed creature of hostile Christian countries. The Ethiopians fought a growing guerrilla war against the Somali militias and insurgents until casualties became too heavy and Addis Ababa decided to withdraw its forces. The African Union then acted to supply the 5,000 military personnel from Uganda and Burundi who now are the peacekeepers and TFG-protectors in the capital of Mogadishu.

The sum of this complicated story is that al-Shabab was born, developed quickly, and now appears to have the manpower, political savvy, and military wherewithal to compete for control of much of the central and southern portions of Somalia. Al-Shabab’s quick evolution is the result of several factors, including foreign occupation, which historically radicalizes Somalia’s usually moderate form of Islam, and the availability of help from al-Qaeda, especially in the form of veteran fighters, who offer training and a leaven of combat experience, and media operatives whose expertise has dramatically improved the quality of al-Shabab media capabilities during the past two years. In addition, a substantial inflow of aid from Arab Peninsula countries who are nominally U.S. “allies” has allowed al-Shabab and other Somali Islamists to deliver food and health services to destitute Somalis and improve their weaponry.

Having helped destroy the less radical Islamic Courts regime and still backing the moribund TFG, Washington now confronts the potential of al-Shabab controlling two thirds of Somalia and — after the Uganda bombing — the specter of the group slowly destabilizing heretofore reliably pro-U.S. regimes in Ethiopia, Kenya, and elsewhere in East Africa.

Neither Ethiopia nor Kenya is as stable as it was before the Islamic Courts were destroyed. Ethiopia paid a high price for its invasion and occupation of Somalia not only in terms of funds and lives, but in earning the durable enmity of Somali Muslims and their Islamist allies in Africa and overseas. Kenya has likewise earned al-Shabab’s wrath for supporting the corrupt TFG regime and for its willingness to host the dozen or more UN agencies and multiple Western NGOs who are operating in Somalia with intentions that are perceived by many Somalis as anti-Islamic.

And here is where al-Qaeda is luring the United States into another potentially disastrous intervention. Even though it has expended a minimum and mainly media-focused effort to support al-Shabab, Washington’s abject fear of al-Qaeda — notwithstanding Obama’s cocky and denigrating words about the group — has made bin Laden’s al-Shabab ally a primary U.S. target and therefore yet another vehicle for luring America into an expensive fight on Muslim territory.

Even before all the causalities from the bombing were counted, for example, the FBI had sent investigators to the “crime scene” in Kampala — as if the Ugandans need help from the helpless — and yesterday Rudyard Obama said he would “redouble” U.S. efforts in Somalia, which certainly means more U.S. military involvement there and the pouring of more taxpayer money into the maw of the corrupt-to-the-bone TFG. And as it becomes clear that Ethiopian and Kenyan security are also threatened by al-Shabab, those countries too will be the recipients of Mr. Obama’s resolute eagerness to dig us ever deeper into expensive, Bush-like foreign adventures.

Overall, Bush and Obama took a problem that was on the periphery of top U.S. security issues and through mindlessness and intervention made it an agent of destabilization in East Africa and a growing drain on U.S. resources. Renewed U.S. efforts against al-Shabab, together with Washington’s efforts to undermine the Muslim government of Sudan and get U.S. military forces involved in the irrelevant-to-America Darfur civil war, will again do al-Qaeda’s work for it by validating for Muslims bin Laden’s claim that Washington intends to destroy all Muslim regimes except those of the Arab tyrants who supply oil to the United States and its allies.

Years ago Osama bin Laden said something akin to: “All we need to do is send two mujahedin anywhere on earth to wave a flag that has ‘al-Qaeda’ on it and the Americans will arrive the next day with their troops and an open wallet.” As Obama hungrily gobbles down this latest lure from al-Qaeda, one can only think that there truly is a sucker born every minute.
[End of copy]

- - -

Further Reading

Clooney Falling Into Bin Laden’s Sudan Trap
Source: FOX News - http://nation.foxnews.com
Date: Monday, 03 January 2011. Full copy (excluding 271 Comments):

With the U.S. government and such scintillating strategic thinkers as George Clooney, Don Cheadle, Angelina Jolie, and Mia Farrow in the lead, the West is about to help rip Darfur and the rest of Muslim Sudan's oil-rich southern territories out of the country and create an independent, largely Christian state.

Under the guise of a "referendum" (set for 9 January 2011) that will be observed by a 110-person European Union team of imperial busybodies, Sudan's primarily Christian south will be severed from the Sudanese nation-state, setting the stage for a continuation of the decades old Muslim-Christian Sudanese civil war. The difference will be that henceforth - as is occurring in Somalia - the U.S. and the West will be obliged to protect the new nation they created by theft and oil lust with diplomacy, funding, arms, military training, and eventually troops.

And what is America's interest in becoming involved to the hilt and inextricably in Sudan? What is so vital to the United States in Sudan that President Obama is pressing the leaders of Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, and the other states of the African Union to support "our intense interest in having a successful referendum" - read that as "our intense interest in carving up Sudan to suit our imperial purposes and corner access to Sudanese oil." (As an aside, one must admit Rudyard Obama is nothing if not an aggressive proponent of improving - that is, "Westernizing" - the lives of "our little brown brothers," although the blatant theft of Islamic land is a rather odd component for the kinder and more gentle "Muslim outreach program" Obama announced in Cairo and Jakarta.)

The answer is that Obama, our bipartisan political elite, the mainstream media, and the rich, immature, libertine, and anti-U.S. Hollywood set lead by Clooney, et al, want to feel good about themselves by doing "good" for foreigners. For these elite U.S. citizens-of-the-world, ordinary Americans and their kids can starve, freeze, live on the streets, fail to find work, and remain illiterate forever. In essence, they can rot while Washington spends their taxes on Darfur - a place where absolutely no genuine U.S. interest is at stake.

Now, that's a bit harsh and in one aspect even wrong. The Democrats and Republicans must ensure that ordinary Americans are kept well-off enough to keep having children who will join the U.S. military that will be used to fight the wars their interventionism start. And there can be no doubt that Washington's leading role in championing Darfur's secession from Sudan will intensify America's war with Islam and the evolving Islam-vs-Christianity war in Africa. And, not surprisingly, the ever-adept Osama bin Laden began setting this trap for the United States over the course of the last decade.

Bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and Abu Yaha al-Libi, one of al-Qaeda's leading theologians, have spoken publicly and on multiple occasions about Washington's intention to intervene in Somalia and Sudan to halt the spread of Sunni Islam in the Horn of Africa; to eliminate the Islamic regime in Sudan; to champion the spread of Christianity in Africa; and to ensure Sudan's massive oil reserves are in pro-U.S. hands. Obama's administration, with full Republican support, is about to make these three al-Qaeda leaders appear omniscient to the Muslim world.

READ THE FULL STORY AT NON-INTERVENTION.COM [By Michael Scheuer entitled "U.S. intervention in Sudan and Somalia: Sowing war’s whirlwind for Americans" published Wednesday, 29 December 2010]

- - -

Postscript from Uganda Watch editor
Note the following copy of two quotations published in the sidebar of Michael Scheuer's Non-Intervention.com:

My policy has been and will continue to be ... to be on friendly terms with, but independent of, all nations on earth. To share in the broils of none. To supply their wants, and be carriers for them all; being thoroughly convinced that it is our policy and interest to do so; and that nothing short of self-respect, and that justice which is essential to a national character, ought to involve us in war.
George Washington

Don't patronize the enemy. They mean business. They mean every word they say. They're killing us now. Their will is not broken, They mean it. ... If they're there, your job is to kill them all. I did not want to have them just retreat and have to fight them all over again.
Maj. Gen. James Mattis, USMC

Also, note that according to Michael Scheuer's About page, he resigned from the CIA in November, 2004 and since that date has written for Antiwar.com and LewRockwell.com.
- - -

Follow news from Sudan at this site's parent blog, Sudan Watch http://sudanwatch.blogspot.com

Yellow fever outbreak along Sudan-Uganda border

Yellow fever is an acute viral hemorrhagic disease transmitted by infected mosquitoes and can cause severe illness and death.

Yellow Fever Outbreak Along Sudan-Uganda Border
Source: SRS - Sudan Radio Service - www.sudanradio.org
Date: Thursday, 30 December 2010. Full copy:

30 December 2010 – (Juba) - There is an outbreak of Yellow Fever at the southern Sudan–Uganda border areas which has hampered the transport system between the two regions.

The number of people who are affected is not yet known.

The Minister of Health in the Government of Southern Sudan Luka Monoja speaking to SRS in Juba on Thursday said the ministry is preparing to handle the outbreak.

[Luka Monoja]: “We are organizing to take immediate measures. You know Yellow Fever is a very serious disease, but it has got specific steps. We will prevent anybody who doesn’t have a yellow card. But we should be able to vaccinate there at the border. You will not come until your card is ten-days old. Now a technical team from my ministry is meeting with WHO. We have about five or eight border points leading to Uganda, they should be staffed with competent health care personnel to assist. It is possible this disease started some days ago. We are going to make a public awareness for people at risk like travelers and so on, to get vaccinated so that when they travel they have no problem”.

Yellow fever is an acute viral hemorrhagic disease transmitted by infected mosquitoes and can cause severe illness and death.

- - -

Further Reading

According to Bupa's website, the following information was published in February 2009 by, quote "Bupa's Health Information Team and is based on reputable sources of medical evidence. It has been reviewed by appropriate medical or clinical professionals. The content is intended only for general information and does not replace the need for personal advice from a qualified health professional".

Symptoms of yellow fever

You usually get symptoms three to six days after you have been bitten by an infected mosquito. This is known as the incubation period. The symptoms usually come on suddenly and can include:

high fever (39 to 40 °C)
shivers
headaches
nausea and/or vomiting
loss of appetite
muscle pain and aches
bloodshot eyes
flushing of your face
These symptoms usually last for three to four days and represent the acute phase of the virus. Most people begin to recover after this phase and their symptoms gradually disappear.

However, within 24 hours of seeming to recover, 15 to 25 percent of people enter a toxic phase of the disease. Symptoms during this phase are far more serious and may be life-threatening, including:

fever
jaundice (yellowing of your skin and the whites of your eyes) - this is where the disease gets its name
kidney failure, which may result in you no longer being able to pass urine
stomach pain with vomiting
blood in your vomit or stools
bleeding from your mouth, nose or eyes
Up to half of people who enter the toxic phase of the disease die within 10 to 14 days. Major organ failure, shock, delirium and coma usually occur before death. The rest of the people who enter this phase usually make a full recovery.

Treatment for yellow fever

There is no specific treatment for yellow fever, other than preventive measures.

Some of your symptoms may be relieved through bed rest and taking rehydration salts and paracetamol. Always read the patient information leaflet that comes with your medicine.

Intensive hospital care may help people who enter the toxic phase of the disease. However, this type of hospital care is often not available in poorer countries where the virus is widespread.

People who recover from the disease will be immune to the virus for the rest of their life.

Prevention of yellow fever

Prevention is vital in protecting yourself and stopping the spread of yellow fever. Current preventive measures include immunisation and protecting yourself from mosquito bites.

Click here for more information at www.bupa.co.uk

KPFA Radio/Ann Garrison: "Oil, African Genocide, and the USA's LRA Excuse"

NOTE to self. Re-read the below copied report written by Ann Garrison. The report was published yesterday at her blog titled Ann Garrison. According to Ms Garrison's blogger profile, she is located in San Francisco, California, USA.

Also, copied here below is a map published Nov. 25 at this site's sister blog Congo Watch: "CAR: CPJP rebels kill 4 soldiers, hold Birao garrison town near border with Chad and Sudan".



Oil, African Genocide, and the USA's LRA Excuse
Source: Ann Garrison - anngarrison.blogspot.com
Author: Ann Garrison - KPFA Radio Weekend News, 12.04.2010
Date posted: Monday, 06 December 2010 at 10:50 AM
Copy in full:

On Wednesday, November 24th, President Obama sent his plan to mobilize Uganda's army, the Uganda People's Defense Force, to cross its northern border into the Central African Republic and Southern Sudan, to disarm the Lord's Resistance Army, a militia that has been fighting the Ugandan government for over 20 years. The White House issued a statement saying:

“The development of the strategy, relied on the significant involvement of the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the US Agency for International Development and the Intelligence Community." --White House "Strategy to Support the Disarmament of the Lord's Resistance Army," posted to the website of the Pulitzer Center

The President seemed either unaware or unconcerned about the UN Mapping Report, released on October 1st, which documents Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni's army's war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocidal massacres of civilians, Rwandan Hutu refugees and Congolese Hutus, in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

How else could he propose to mobilize the very same army to enter the Central African Republic and Southern Sudan to protect civilians and refugees, and "meet humanitarian requirements" in "affected populations," as his strategy statement said he would?

Just over a week later, on Friday, December 3rd, NBC News Dateline aired "Winds of War, George Clooney in Sudan," which warned that the Northern Sudanese Moslem regime of Omar al-Bashir might commit genocide in Christian Southern Sudan. The next day I called Black Star News Editor Milton Allimadi from the KPFA Radio studios, in Berkeley, California, to produce this segment for the KPFA Weekend News:

KPFA Weekend News Anchor/David Rosenberg:
NBC's Dateline last night aired an hour long documentary titled "Winds of War, George Clooney in Sudan." The actor warned Dateline's audience that Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir's regime in Khartoum has already been indicted, by the International Criminal Court, for war crimes and genocide, and that he is now amassing weapons and troops to prevent Southern Sudan from forming an independent state. Critics of U.S. interventions in the region say that the U.S. is also amassing weapons and troops to move on Southern Sudan, from the Central African Republic, and from its southern border with Uganda, to secure oil. Ann Garrison is live in the studio with this report.

KPFA/Ann Garrison:
George Clooney, on Friday night's NBC Dateline, cited the opinions of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the CIA, and President Barack Obama as evidence that everyone agrees that the U.S. must engage to stop genocide after Southern Sudan's January referendum, in which the Southern Sudanese are all but certain to vote for independence.

Actor George Clooney on NBC's Dateline:
The State Department said, the Secretary of State said it's a ticking time bomb. The CIA said this is the next genocide if we're not careful; it is the biggest risk. The President has said as much. This, everyone acknowledges that this is what is going to take place if someone doesn't moderate and mediate. And that's not just my saying it. That's everyone saying it. I'm just trying to say it as loud as possible.

Ann Garrison:
Clooney's "everyone" did not include Ugandan American journalist Milton Allimadi, Editor of the New York City-based Black Star News. Allimadi says that if the President were really serious about stopping genocide in Africa, he would send peacekeepers into eastern Congo, where the worst African genocide is ongoing and has been for the past 16 years, with a loss of over 6 million lives.

Allimadi also said that Obama would not be martialing the Ugandan army of Yoweri Museveni in Northern Uganda, to move into the Central African Republic and Southern Sudan, enacting the LRA DIsarmament Act, after the October 1st release of the UN Mapping Report documenting the Ugandan Army's war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocidal massacres of Hutu civilians in Congo. Allimadi says the LRA is really an excuse to secure Southern Sudanese oil after Southern Sudan's January referendum on independence.

Black Star News Editor Milton Allimadi:
I don't buy this LRA business, not for one minute. The United States is not interested in going after the LRA. If the Ugandan government, which is familiar with the terrain, could not defeat the LRA in 24 years of conflict, what added dimension can the United States bring to this? We already saw one disastrous instance, in December 2008, using U.S. logistical support and intelligence, the Ugandan Army attacked the LRA camp at Garamba, in the Democratic Republic of Congo. And the consequences were just disastrous. They failed to get the key leaders of the LRA and instead provoked massacres of innocent Congolese civilians. Who knows who did the killings, whether it was the LRA or the Ugandan troops? It was a massive disaster.

Milton Allimadi:
I think this is what's really happening:

As you know, in early January, Southern Sudan, whose capitol is Juba, is going to vote on a referendum. That referendum will decide whether it becomes an independent republic, and it's a foregone conclusion that they're going to vote for independence.

Now here's the deal. Most or all of the oil wealth that is now sustaining the government of Sudan in the North happens to be located in Southern Sudan. I don't see how the government in Khartoum can survive and sustain itself without this oil wealth.

I think the U.S. has taken a keen interest in the management and control of this oil wealth. And if you look at the map very carefully, the LRA right now, is purported to be concentrated in Central African Republic, which also conveniently happens to be bordered with the Sudan. It's on the southwestern part of the Sudan's border, so they share a border. And in fact, if you're going to look at it from a military point of view, it's half the distance to march from the outpost of the border in Central African Republic to the capitol of Khartoum than it is to march from Juba, the capitol of Southern Sudan, to Khartoum.

I am convinced that the United States, with its ally, the Ugandan dictator Yoweri Museveni, are setting up a front line in Central African Republic, in order to weaken the government of the Sudan in Khartoum and make it difficult for the government of the Sudan in Khartoum to launch an attack against Southern Sudan, should they declare independence, which is a foregone conclusion. That to me is a much more credible story than this bogus story about the U.S. wanting to go after the LRA.

KPFA/Ann Garrison:
And do you think they want to do this in order to secure Southern Sudanese oil reserves?

Absolutely. Southern Sudanese oil reserves. And that is becoming a huge oil field now. Southern Sudan borders northern Uganda. And going from that region into Western Uganda, that's a vast oil field. As you know in recent years there's been massive discoveries of oil fields in that part of Uganda as well. So if you look at this as a continuous region, starting from Western Uganda sweeping into Northern Uganda, into Southern Sudan, very rich oil fields, which, considering the U.S. presence in the region right now, is much more secure than some of the oil fields in the Middle East.

KPFA/Ann Garrison:
President Obama himself, in his 2006 Senate Bill, the Obama Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act, said that rebel militias serve as pretexts for Uganda and Rwanda's invasions and resource plunder of neighboring Congo, but Allimadi says that Obama, the U.S. Africa Command, and federal legislators now seem to be using the pretext themselves.

For Pacifica/KPFA Radio, I'm Ann Garrison.

See also:
U.S. Troops Train Ugandan Soldiers, Photo Essay, U.S. Department of Defense, Black Star News, 02.12.2008

DRC: Civilians suffer as Uganda takes on LRA, IRIN, 01.20.2009

Peace in Northern Uganda via U.S. Bullets and Bombs, Black Star News, 03.29.2010

How Invisible Children Falsely Marketed The LRA Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act, Black Star News, 06.02.2010
Congo Genocide; Obama Knows the Real Story, Black Star News, 10.07.2010

Sen. Barbara Boxer Co-sponsored Bill That Strengthens African Genocidal, Homophobic, Dictator, Black Star News, 09.22.2010

[End of copy]

Further Reading

From the New York Times - Sunday, 05 Dec 2010

Headlines Around the Web

What's This?

SUDAN WATCH

DECEMBER 4, 2010

Sudan: Arab or African? (The

Debate Continues)

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

DECEMBER 4, 2010

South Sudan Official: No Delay to

Jan Freedom Vote

INSIDE DATELINE

DECEMBER 3, 2010

Take action on Sudan now...

ECORAZZI.COM :: CELEBRITIES CAUGHT GREEN-HANDED

DECEMBER 3, 2010

George Clooney Sudan Special

Particularly 'Revealing' Warns Ann

Curry

SPERO NEWS - RELIGIOUS NEWS

DECEMBER 2, 2010

Sudan: Signs of hope and wonder

More at Blogrunner »

New Sudan war would cost Uganda, region

New Sudan war would cost Kenya, region
Source: AFP / www.capitalfm.co.ke
Date: Thursday, 25 November 2010

(Khartoum, Sudan, Nov 25) - A return to civil war in the event that south Sudan votes for independence would cost the country, the region and international community more than 100 billion dollars, a study published on Thursday warned.

Aegis Trust, an NGO, and three research centres including the Institute for Security Studies, based in South Africa, drew up four post-referendum scenarios, ranging from peace to a resumption of full-scale war between north and south Sudan.

In the case of a 10-year conflict of medium intensity, the losses for Sudan would amount to at least 52.1 billion dollars (39 billion euros), on top of about 29 billion dollars for neighbouring Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda, the study estimated.

The impact on the international community would top 30 billion dollars in terms of peacekeeping missions and humanitarian aid.

"This report demonstrates the high cost of conflict. It implies that domestic, regional and international parties should be asking: 'Are we doing enough to avoid a war that might cost over 100 billion dollars and ruin countless lives?'" said Matthew Bell of London-based Frontier Economics.

The study calculated Sudan's losses in case of war on the basis of an annual 2.2-percent decline in Gross Domestic Product.

It would cost Ethiopia and Kenya more than one billion dollars a year in terms of forecast growth, the researchers said, warning that war would also damage Egypt, Sudan's northern neighbour and the region's leading economy.

The impact could be even heavier in the event of full-scale war that would disrupt the oil production of Africa's largest country, which has reserves of more than six billion barrels.

Khartoum and the former southern rebels signed a peace deal in 2005 after more than two decades of war. A central element of that accord is an independence referendum for the south scheduled for January. Since July, the two sides have been negotiating on key post-vote issues.

Chief among those crucial to a peaceful transition in case of partition is the sharing of oil resources.

Oil revenues make up the Sudanese government's main source of foreign currency earnings, while southern Sudan depends on oil for as much as 98 percent of its budget.

Most of Sudan's reserves are concentrated in the south but can only be exported through a pipeline passing through the north on the way to Port Sudan on the Red Sea.

An oil-sharing formula would benefit both the north and south, whereas an interruption in production and exports would damage the whole country.

"Reaching some level of agreement before the referendum is important not only because both economies need uninterrupted revenue, but also to sustain the confidence of oil companies in their existing investments," the International Crisis Group said this week.

In case of peace and healthy ties between north and south Sudan as well improved security in Darfur, Sudan's growth would steady at an annual 6.2 percent for five years and even reach nine percent from 2016, the study said.

- - -

Report On The Cost Of A Possible Return To War In Sudan
Source: SRS (Sudan Radio Service) - www.sudanradio.org
Date: Thursday, 25 November 2010

(Nairobi, Kenya) – A report published by a coalition of European and African economic and political think-tanks on Thursday says a return to war in Sudan would cost Sudan, the region and the international community about 100 billion US dollars.

The report which comes amid fears that the referendum could trigger an escalation of violence attempts to analyze the economic cost of war to the region.

Mathew Bell an Associate Director of the London based, Frontier Economics spoke to SRS in Nairobi during the launch of the report.

[Mathew Bell]: “The report is an attempt to do with economic analysis of what the cost of war to Sudan and the region and the international community could be. It very explicitly sets aside the very real and important human costs of death and suffering that would result in war but to take a financial perspective as a way of adding to the debate around the cost of war. The headline itself looks like it would cost in excess of about a hundred billion dollars to the combination of Sudan the region and the international community should war break out. That figure breaks down into about 50 billion dollar cost to the Sudanese economy itself. About a 25 billion dollar cost to the regional economy including Kenya, Ethiopia and Uganda. And about a 25 to 30 billion dollar cost to the international community in the form of peace keeping in the form of humanitarian intervention.”

Mathew Bell recognizes the difficulties in measuring the costs of potential future conflict in the report. He explains the different scenarios.

[Mathew Bell]: “Because of the uncertainties of what may happen because nobody can be sure about what the outcome is going to be, we have looked at different potential scenarios; we have tried to come up with a range of figures. And the 100 billion dollar that we have been quoting is towards the bottom end of that range. And the Low, medium and high conflict scenarios are different levels of conflict from a low level civil war situation, to a very serious situation to a very serious full blown civil war that might involve some of the regional players as well, or ways of how to characterize different points in the spectrum of costs. What we don’t comment on at all is what the likelihood of different scenarios would be. But we want to give a range of potential costs.”

According to the report the evidence suggests that the net impact of conflict would be significantly negative. Sudan would lose about 50 billion USD from its GDP, the neighboring countries would lose 25 billion USD of GDP and the international community would lose 30 billion USD in peacekeeping and humanitarian costs.

The report by the European and African economic and political think-tanks on the cost of war in Sudan was launched in Nairobi on Thursday.

Southern Sudanese travelling to Ugandan border to register

Southern Sudanese Travelling To Ugandan Border To Register
Source: SRS (Sudan Radio Service) - www.sudanradio.org
Date: Monday, 22 November 2010

(Kampala) – Voter registration in Kampala, Uganda has witnessed low turnout since the exercise started last week.

According to the chairperson of the Central Equatoria Women Association in Kampala Suzy Alfred Wani, most southern Sudanese are traveling to Kaya and Nimule borders to register.

[Suzy Alfred Wani]: “The registration is not going well in Kampala though there are some people registering but it's not going well, because there was a delegation that came from Juba in Central Equatoria with a message that let everybody go and register at the borders in Kaya and Nimule. So anybody who wants to register in Kampala should go and register in these two centers. Right now there are busses that have been hired and some southern Sudanese who owned busses have contributed with their busses to ferry people from Kampala to Kaya and Nimule borders.”

Ms Suzy said that southern Sudanese going to register at the borders are exempted from paying exit visa from Uganda.

[Suzy Alfred Wani]: “The government of Uganda has ordered its Migration officers at the two borders not to charge those going for registration visa fees so no one is paying visa fees. In order for you to differentiate between Acholi, of Uganda or Sudan, Kuku of Sudan or Uganda, it is difficult for us that's why we want to make sure that we the real Sudanese go to the border to avoid any problem that may arise.”

That was the chairperson of the Central Equatoria State Women in Kampala Suzy Alfred Wani speaking to SRS from Kampala Uganda on Monday.

IGAD Summit: Uganda president attends - S. Sudan's Salva Kiir Mayardit's Statement - Sudanese leaders hailed for agreeing 'soft border' solution

ON Tuesday, 23 November 2010, Uganda's President Yoweri Museveni joined other Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Heads of State and Government in the Ethiopian Capital Addis Ababa for a one day summit that centred on the progress of the implementation of the Sudanese Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) that was initialed between the Southern Sudanese People’s Liberation Army.

Full story below, followed by several related reports including a copy of Salva Kiir Mayardit's address to the Summit of IGAD Heads of State and Government on Sudan. Excerpt:

"In a nutshell, Sudan requires a lot of help from IGAD, the AU, UN and the international community. The country has myriads of problems – it is yet to implement fully Popular Consultations in the two areas of Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan. Being an integral part of the CPA, the people of these areas must also conduct the popular consultations as agreed. Similarly, Sudan needs help in order to peacefully resolve the conflict in Darfur. No new strategy can work for Darfur until all parties are brought to the negotiating table to agree for peaceful settlement.

In conclusion, the CPA is the roadmap for success in the Sudan, particularly when the referendum is peacefully implemented. Now, as the greatest moment of our history approaches, it is up to all of us to ensure that the referendum is conducted peacefully and without delay."

President Attends IGAD Summit
Source: Office of the President / Uganda Media Centre www.mediacentre.go.ug
Date: Wednesday, 24 November 2010. Copy in full:

President Yoweri Museveni today joined other Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Heads of State and Government in the Ethiopian Capital Addis Ababa for a one day summit that centred on the progress of the implementation of the Sudanese Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) that was initialed between the Southern Sudanese People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) and the Government in Khartoum in January 2005 in Nairobi.

The CPA was meant to end the 2nd Sudanese Civil War, develop democratic governance countrywide and share oil revenues. The Agreement further set a timetable by which Southern Sudan would have a referendum on its independence. The referendum in scheduled to place in 2 months time in January next year.

Today’s summit that took place at Sheraton Hotel in Addis Ababa was also attended by host Premier Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia, Sudanese President Omar Hassan el Bashir, President Ismael Omar Guelleh of Djibouti, President Mwai Kibaki of Kenya while the Transitional Federal government of Somalia President was represented by H.E. Yusuf Hassan Ibrahim.

The Summit, in a communiqué issued at the end of its deliberations, reaffirmed its commitment to not only continue the support for the full implementation of the CPA but also for the post referendum period for the sake of peace, stability and democracy.

The communiqué also said that the Assembly of the IGAD leaders took note of their summit coming at a critical time in the history of the Sudan as that country, in just less than 2 months before the referendum on self-determination for the people of Southern Sudan, and a few days after the start of registration of voters for that referendum, represents a significant milestone in the implementation of the CPA between the government of the Sudan and the SPLM.

The IGAD Heads of State commended the efforts of the AU’s group of eminent African personalities, comprising former South African President Thabo Mbeki as the group’s Chairman, President Abdulsalami Abubaker and former Burundi President Pierre Buyoya, for facilitating the Sudanese parties in the implementation of the CPA paying attention to outstanding issues in the Agreement and post referendum time.

The Summit requested the AU group of eminent personalities to keep IGAD updated on the progress of the negotiations including the ongoing discussion between the two parties to the CPA.

On Somalia, the IGAD leaders called upon the Presidency and Parliament in Mogadishu not only to work together for the greater cohesion for the Somali nation but also to provide political and ideological leadership so as to ensure total harmony among the leadership.

The leaders of the IGAD member countries affirmed their unswerving and continued support to the Transitional Federal Institutions of Somalia in their endeavour to create peace, security and stability in the country and put in place institutions of governance that will deliver basic services to the people of Somalia.

President Museveni, who was accompanied by State Minister for Regional Affairs, Mr. Isaac Musumba, Uganda’s envoys to Khartoum and Ethiopia Betty Akech and Mull Katende respectively, among others, later returned home this evening.
ENDS

- - -

Gen Salva Kiir Mayardit, Chairman of the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) - Address to the 16th Extraordinary Summit of IGAD Heads of State and Government on Sudan
Source: Press Release reprinted at Sudan Tribune - www.sudantribune.com
Date: Wednesday, 23 November 2010 (Addis Ababa, Ethiopia)

Your Excellency, Ato Meles Zenawi, Prime Minister of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia and Chair of IGAD,

Excellencies, Heads of States and Government of IGAD,

Your Excellency, Mr. Jean Ping, Chair of the African Union Commission,

Your Excellency, Mr. Thabo Mbeki, Chair of the AU High-Level Implementation Panel, and colleagues former Presidents Pierre Buyoya and Abdulsalami Abubakar,

Excellencies, Foreign Ministers,

Representatives of the AEC and the UN,

Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,

I take this opportunity to thank you IGAD Heads of State and Government for convening this Extraordinary Summit on the Sudan in order to be briefed about the implementation of the Sudan Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), which is your own baby. This gathering comes indeed at a critical moment of the history of our country. We are now left with just less than two month before the referendum in Southern Sudan takes place on January 9th, 2011. This auspicious meeting is to us another display of IGAD unwavering commitment to ensure full implementation of the CPA and to also reaffirm its commitment to regional peace and stability.

From our side, I would like to equally reassure you that the SPLM, the Government and people of Southern Sudan and peace loving Sudanese in general commend your efforts most sincerely. We are very grateful for your continued interest and attention, and we need your support now more than ever before to peacefully complete the implementation of the CPA.

As you are all aware and I am happy to brief you today that the registrations are going on smoothly and peacefully. Preliminary information shows that the turnout is quite encouraging particularly throughout Southern Sudan. There is a lot of enthusiasm and anxiety amongst our people not to miss the golden opportunity to express their rightful desire to either vote for the continued unity of the Sudan or to secede to become a country of their own.

Distinguished Delegates, This exercise of the right to self-determination is critical and it remains a formula for maintaining peace today and in the future. That is why we are doing all we can to ensure that the referendum takes place as scheduled. We are also cognizant that any delays risk a return to instability and violence and my message to you today is that every effort must be exerted to achieve a timely conduct of the referendum.

At this juncture, I would also like to commend the efforts of the Southern Sudan Referendum Commission (SSRC) and the Southern Sudan Referendum Bureau (SSRB), who are working around the clock to ensure that the exercise take place as scheduled.

As far as funding is concerned, it is important to admit that there are still difficulties particularly with the National Government in Khartoum, which has deliberately failed to fulfill its obligation to contribute money to the SSRC. The Government of Southern Sudan has so far released SDG 100 million out of the SDG 150 million it has pledged. The donors are also struggling to meet their target may the SRSG and the AEC can later on shed more light on the contributions of the international community.

Politically, the atmosphere is not good particularly in Northern Sudan. Instead of preaching peace some senior members from the National Government and the National Congress Party (NCP) have been raising tempers in the public by issuing statements that are likely to instigate violence. I appeal to this august gathering to discourage the Sudanese parties from provocative behavior. The records are documented that IGAD and the international community should seriously note because should violence erupt there are people to be held responsible.

In Southern Sudan the platform for campaigns is leveled for both those who would like to propagate for unity and separation. Regional and international observers are allowed to move freely and they can speak the truth for themselves. We are desirous and committed to ensure that the referendum in Southern Sudan occurs smoothly and peacefully in order to produce credible results that represent the will of the people. This is our goal and I wish to reiterate to you that we will make certain that all opinions and campaigns for unity or separation are given equal opportunity to be heard. We are exerting all efforts to ensure that the credibility of this referendum is beyond question.

What is badly required of IGAD and other guarantors of the CPA is to mobilize support for the outcome of the referendum in Southern Sudan and the rest of the international community to ensure a peaceful transition.

We are also deeply concerned by the lack of progress in resolving the outstanding issues of the CPA: 1. Abyei 2. North-South border demarcation 3. Post-referendum arrangements

Meantime, we are genuinely willing to negotiate with our brothers and sisters in the North. We are committed to work in a spirit of partnership to create peaceful and sustainable good relations between Northern and Southern Sudan regardless of the outcome of the referendum. I have said it time and again that it is in our interest to see to it that the North remains a viable state, just as it should be in the interest of the North to see Southern Sudan emerge as a viable state too. There should be no room for fear about the future because I have also reiterated several times that even if Southern Sudan separates from the North it will not shift to the Indian Ocean or to the Atlantic Coast. Instead we will be sharing the longest border between us and I would like to reassure you that the security of Northern Sudanese in the South will remain our priority and we request our Northern partners to do the same for Southern Sudanese in the North. Thus, we are committed to sustainable peace and stability irrespective of the outcome of the referendum. We have achieved a lot in the past few years since the CPA was signed and we still have a lot of work ahead of us to improve the lives of our people.

There has been a lot of talk and propaganda about the viability of Southern Sudan as a state if its people chose independence? Let me assure you that Southern Sudan will contribute immensely to peace and the well being of our region of the horn of Africa and our continent as a whole. We have got potentials that, in a free and peaceful environment, can be exploited not just for the development and sustenance of the new state but also for the benefit of the neighboring countries. In order to achieve that we have been reaching out to Southern Sudanese of all walks of life on the referendum and the future of Southern Sudan irrespective of the expected outcome of the exercise. We have been holding successful meetings of ‘All-Southern Sudanese Political Parties' in Juba and most of you may have already come across the resolutions. We are also engaging leaders of Other Armed Groups (OAGs) to discuss the transition in case of secession outcome.

In a nutshell, Sudan requires a lot of help from IGAD, the AU, UN and the international community. The country has myriads of problems – it is yet to implement fully Popular Consultations in the two areas of Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan. Being an integral part of the CPA, the people of these areas must also conduct the popular consultations as agreed. Similarly, Sudan needs help in order to peacefully resolve the conflict in Darfur. No new strategy can work for Darfur until all parties are brought to the negotiating table to agree for peaceful settlement.

In conclusion, the CPA is the roadmap for success in the Sudan, particularly when the referendum is peacefully implemented. Now, as the greatest moment of our history approaches, it is up to all of us to ensure that the referendum is conducted peacefully and without delay.

Once again, we commend the efforts of IGAD, the AU, the UN and the International Community for the continued support for peace in our country and our people. On our part we will do our utmost best not only to reciprocate your efforts but to work for a favorable environment for economic development and sustainable peace in the region. We are optimistic about the future and with your efforts we will make it together.

May God continue to bless us and grant us the patience required to achieve the desired goals and objectives for posterity!

Thank you.

- - -

Sudan's Ruling Party Welcomes IGAD Summit Recommendations‎
Source: Voice of America (VOA) - www.voanews.com - by Peter Clottey
Date: Wednesday, 24 November 2010

Photo: Dr. Rabie Abdelati Obeid is a prominent member of Sudan's dominant National Congress Party (NCP)

A senior member of Sudan’s ruling party has expressed confidence that both his ruling National Congress Party (NCP) and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) will resolve all outstanding issues ahead of the 9th January referendum.

Rabie Abdelati Obeid welcomed the recommendation by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) summit on Sudan saying both the NCP and the SPLM will solve the problems and disagreements between them.

“The two partners have shown their readiness to follow what (has) been recommended (by IGAD), and I think the coming days will show the seriousness of the two partners to implement the Referendum Act and also all outstanding points from the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA).”

East African leaders met Tuesday [23 Nov] in Addis Ababa to discuss tension in Sudan, where a referendum on independence for the country's south is now less than seven weeks away.

Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir and southern Sudanese leader Salva Kiir were among those who attended the summit.

Participants urged northern and southern Sudan to avoid reigniting the civil war that ravaged the country for 21 years ending in 2005.

Obeid said the NCP is satisfied with the recommendations from the IGAD heads of state and government.

“The NCP has shown their full satisfaction and they also thank IGAD member states for their efforts to narrow the differences, or to remove the differences, between the two partners. We also thank IGAD for their work and their facilitation, and it is very clear for the NCP that IGAD member states are very keen to establish security and peace in Sudan,” Obeid said.

“This will also be reflected in the coming days between NCP and SPLM to resolve the majority of the points that are still outstanding between the two partners before the conduct of the referendum.”

Meanwhile, state media in Sudan quote Mr. Bashir as telling the summit there will be “no return to war,” and that his government will work for strong relations with the south in the event of separation.

In a statement, summit participants said they are confident Mr. Bashir and Mr. Kiir can lead Sudan into a new era of peace, but also expressed concern over issues that continue to divide the north and south.

- - -

Arab League Delegation to Conduct Talks in Khartoum on Referendum‎
Source: Sudan Vision - www.sudanvisiondaily.com - by Staff writer
Date: Wednesday, 24 November 2010

A delegation from the Arab League is expected to conduct talks in Khartoum to-day and get briefed on preparations for southern Sudan self-determination referendum. The delegation will be headed by Ambassador Sameer Hosni, the director of Arab-African Cooperation Department at the League.

In statement to reporters, Ambassador Hisham Youssef, head of the AL Secretary General's office said the delegation will prepare for the forthcoming visit to Sudan by AL Secretary-General, Amro Mousa. The delegation will also discuss with officials in the Sudan numerous issues, particularly those related to relief and the re-construction works in the Darfur region.

Ambassador Hisham Youssef said AL Secretary-General's office will participate in the East of Sudan Development Conference to be held in Kuwait on this coming December. He further said that the AL Secretary-General will head a high-level delegation to the conference which will provide opportunity for consultation on development of the situations in the Sudan. He added that a meeting to be held at AL permanent members' level this coming Saturday will discuss developments in the Sudan, current preparations for the referendum and the role that could be carried out by AL and Arab countries in following up this matter for achieving the interests of the Sudanese people.

"The Arab League will also follow up the southern Sudan self-determination referendum through a delegation that will include a group of officials from the secretariat-general and who might be joined by some Arab Parliament members," he said.

On the probability of the postponement of the referendum, Ambassador Hisham Youssef said this matter is connected to arrangements and preparations. "There are some who believe the forthcoming period is sufficient for conducting the referendum while some others think that there are some organizational difficulties," he said. He added that if the referendum is postponed that would be for a very short period of time, and for organizational and not other reasons.

As regards the situation in Darfur and talks by the Qatari sponsor of that peace talks could be achieved before the end of the year, Ambassador Hisham Youssef said he hoped that peace could be achieved within such a period. "There is a tremendous effort being exerted by the Qatari side and by many Arab countries for achieving peace in Darfur before the end of the year," he said.

On a related development, the joint mechanism for the follow up of Arab undertaking for supporting and addressing humanitarian situations in Darfur will hold a meeting at the Arab Authority for Agricultural Investment and Development premises to-day Wednesday and tomorrow Thursday.

The meeting will discuss the comprehensive peace strategy, the development of Darfur in addition to the performance of AL projects in Darfur, the projects proposed by the Reconstruction Commission for 2011 as well as replicating the experiment of constructing humanitarian services complexes centers to which IDPs return.

The meeting will also discuss the means of earning living projects for IDPs who have returned to their homes, and for those who will soon settle in their homes and the nomads.

- - -

IGAD Summit: Sudanese leaders hailed for agreeing on 'soft-border solution
Source: (PANA) / Afrique en Ligue - www.afriquejet.com
Date: Wednesday, 24 November 2010

(Addis Ababa, Ethiopia) - East African leaders have hailed Sudanese President Omer Al-Bashir and his Southern Sudan counterpart Salva Kiir for agreeing on a 'soft-border' solution as well as to limit tension around possible north-South separation. In a communique issued Tuesday after a meeting to fashion out a solution to the pending issues, the East African leaders also requested the Sudanese leaders to demarcate the north-south border within the time allocated in their peace deal.

'The Summit was particularly encouraged by the parties' commitment in achieving in the event of the secession of Southern Sudan, two viable states living as peaceful and cooperative neighbors,' said the commu nique, issued after the meeting of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) here.

The two states will maintain common security as well as a 'soft border' that forges cooperation without disruption to the livelihoods of the people, the IGAD leaders announced.

South Sudan is headed for a decisive referendum which could see the region declare independence from the larger Sudan on 9 January 2011, in according with a peace agreement reached in Nairobi, Kenya, in January 2005.

The six East African leaders, meeting under the IGAD, emphasised that political tensions arising from the planned referendum be managed in the context of the of Sudan as a melting pot of cultures.

The use of the term, Sudan, the melting pot of cultures, is a reference to the north-south divide in Sudan. It is often offered as an explanation to the diversity of the Sudanese citizenry, which combines a largely Arab North and a b lack population in the South.

The Summit welcomed the dedication of Presidents Al-Bashir and Kiir to resolve the outstanding issues, in particular the issue of Abyei, and called upon the parties to approach the next round of negotiations with a sp irit of compromise.

African Union's High-Level Panel leader Thabo Mbeki has been meeting the two Sudanese leaders to address the issue of Abyei, claimed by both north and South.

Abyei lies in Southern Sudan but has been administered from the North since the British rule in the Sudan. The Southerners want the region to revert to their region, but this has to be done through a referendum.

The current deadlock over the Abyei issue centres on complaints from Southern Su danese tribes that a northern Sudan tribe, the Missiriyah, should not be allowed to vote in the Abyei referendum because they are not local residents.

The IGAD leaders said the two Sudanese parties must take cognizant of the need to guarantee the rights and livelihoods of the affected people.

The leaders welcomed the commitment of the Sudanese Parties to the timely and credible conduct of free and fair referendum and the respect for its outcome.

They noted in particular the commitment by the parties to never return to war but instead to seek peaceful resolution of issues that may divide them.

- - -

IGAD Presidency Meeting On Abyei Scheduled For November 27th
Source: SRS - Sudan Radio Service - www.sudanradio.org
Date: Wednesday, 24 November 2010

(Juba) – The Intergovernmental Agency for Development or IGAD member states have rescheduled the meeting on Abyei referendum to November 27th.

A delegation led by the GOSS President returned to Juba on Wednesday from the 16th IGAD summit where they discussed the progress on the implementation of the CPA.

Pagan Amum, the GOSS Minister for Peace and CPA implementation addressed the press in Juba on Wednesday.

[Pagan Amum]: “The summit was a success and we are happy with the results of the summit. The presidency is going to meet on the 27th, next Saturday to discuss Abyei and to find a lasting solution to the impulse that we have been facing. As you all know the National Congress Party has taken Abyei literally as a hostage and they are using it as a bargaining chip to extort concessions from the south as well as from other actors from the international community, particularly the government of the United States of America. We are hopeful that with the forward leaning position taken by the government of the United States of America and the readiness of the SPLM to discuss what the National Congress really wants to let free the process of Abyei.”

Pagan Amum said the meeting of the Presidency on Abyei will be mediated by the AU High Implementation Panel. He also said the popular consultations for Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan states will be discussed in the next meeting.

[Pagan Amum]: “There is also going to be a meeting on the 28th and 29th of this month focused on the completing discussions on the framework agreement. Hopefully if Abyei and border issues are resolved, then we will have a situation of agreement on the total issues that we have on the CPA and we will be able to close the chapter of conflict in Sudan, especially between the north and the south. The meeting is also going to look at the preparations for the conduct of the popular consultations in the two areas of Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile state. As you all know, the process in Southern Kordofan is delayed because of the delay in the conduct of elections.”

Pagan Amum, the GOSS Minister for Peace and CPA implementation addressed the press on Wednesday in Juba after his arrival from the IGAD Summit in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.