ONE
on
ONE
with
The Final Call

Khidir Ahmed (KA): Officially, we have diplomatic relations. We have an embassy here. They have an embassy there in Khartoum. There are a lot of problems, obstacles that need to be removed in order to have normal diplomatic relationships with the United States. This has been going on, maybe the last 11 years. We believe that the U.S. as the sole superpower of our time, should have better relationships with Sudan, if they opted to, because many of their concerns are related to accusations that used to be in the past: terrorism; Sudan having bad relationships with its neighboring countries; democratization process; these allegations of slavery; Christian persecution and so on.

A lot of changes have taken place during the past six years in Sudan. We have diplomatic relationships with our neighbors now. In fact, we have very good relations�you could say excellent relationships�with Egypt, with Ethiopia. We have now restored normal relationships with Eritrea, with Algeria, with Tunisia, with Saudi Arabia.

FC: How about with Kenya and Uganda?

KA: We have normal relationships with Kenya, and now we have restored our relationship two months ago, with Uganda. So this issue of having bad relations is not there. This issue is obsolete.

FC: Is your country a haven for terrorists?

KA: With respect to terrorism, the United States (State Department) spokesman admit(ted) one month ago, that through engagement, within the last 12 months, a lot of positive development has been made on this front. Still, we are engaged in working on these issues. We continue the democratization process. We now have a permanent constitution. We have our president�(Omar) Bashir�being elected in a free, open, contest last January. We have a federally-elected parliament, also. These positive developments were very much encouraged by the EU�European Union�by a lot of countries around the world. They admit the fact that (we have been) changing drastically on a positive track. Some incidents (are) being taken out of proportion, with respect to this inter-tribal abduction and kidnapping, on the borderline between Western Sudan and Southern Sudan. The practice of tribal abduction is there from the beginning, for centuries.

FC: Before I ask you to follow-up on that point, what about El Shifa, the bombing of the pharmaceutical plant? The U.S. has not apologized or offered any compensation. Is this still an outstanding issue?

KA: They have not apologized. But, I think nobody now is quarreling now with the fact that it was a mistake. People will not say it publicly, because it has implications, but you (can�t) meet with anyone in this town who believes that was (the) right target. (The) majority of the people here think that it was�as one official at the Pentagon described it as�"bad science," and "bad intelligence." Interestingly enough, the issue of El Shifa Pharmaceutical Plant is this accumulation of false allegations which eventually led to the bombing. We are very much concerned that history might repeat itself. Instead, that could set a good example for policy makers here.

FC: When you say "history could repeat itself," do you mean another tragic mistake being made by the U.S. which would be harmful to the people of Sudan?

KA: Yes. Exactly. Like this issue of $10 million, this resolution being passed by the House of Representatives just three days ago, this resolution would provide the SPLA, the rebel movement, the Sudan resistance with this amount of money to topple the government.

KA: Well, they always say that. They try to put a good face on it. They call it the "Sudan Peace Act," but in their deliberations about this, one of the drafters of this resolution, said that: "The government in Northern Sudan is an obstacle toward the realization of peace in the country. So our objective, is to overthrow this government as a pre-requisite for peace-making in the country." And he criticized those who (spoke of) those "peace drums of reconciliation." So, what does that mean? That means he�s calling for war against the government of Sudan. He�s encouraging the SPLA, the rebel movement, to continue this civil war, which will claim thousands, if not millions of lives.

By the same token, 4 million people, almost 95 percent of the total population of Southern Sudan were displaced to the North or to neighboring countries. So, the House of Representatives, by this law and similar laws (is) in fact pouring more fuel on the fire there, because they are encouraging the other side to continue this war as (a) means of overthrowing the government in the North. They (go on) on this kind of false allegation of slavery or Christian persecution, without even verifying this information. (They) ignore the fact that the total population of Southern Sudan is 4.5 million, 3.5 million of them migrated to the North. So, if the North is enslaving Southerners, or persecuting them because they are Christian or Animist, these people would have not migrated to the North, because of very simple logic. They are surrounded by six African countries, which they could have migrated to.

So the analogy here between the bombardment of El Shifa Pharmaceutical Plant and the situation now, is that, it is time for the Executive Branch of the United States to collect information by itself, through staffing their embassy in Khartoum, and having competent, and trained professional diplomats present, so they could verify at least these allegations. The situation is now, this Congress, as well as some elements of the Executive Branch are depending heavily on information collected by elements of (the U.S.) religious right, or lobby groups, who are very, very hostile to Sudan.

I�m afraid, by continuing to do that, you are going again to accumulate a very huge pile of allegations which may lead the Administration to commit another mistake, very similar to that one of the bombardment of El Shifa Pharmaceutical Plant.

FC: Concerning the allegations of "slavery." In this country we hear frequent reports of Americans freeing captured "slaves" in Southern Sudan. Does slavery exist in your country?

KA: You have nomads on both sides of the border. The nomads in the northern part of the country are Arabic-speaking groups and Muslims. On the other side you have Dinka people who are predominantly Animists, or Christians. But both parties are nomads. Very often they fight over limited sources of water and pastures.

They have this unfortunate practice of abducting each other. The Dinka abduct Bagada people, Bagada people would also raid Dinka people and abduct some people from there, and then you need the tribal chief from both sides to sit and try to reconcile the differences and retrieve the abductees.

This (has been) going on for a long time. It is illegal. It is punishable by Sudanese law. According to the Country Report on Human Rights, which is issued annually by the State Department, it said, quote: "This practice exists where the government control is weak," unquote. This is in 1991, page 397. The government does not condone this practice. By the way, this practice is not confined to Arabic speaking groups versus non-Arabic speaking groups in the South. It also exists between southern tribes. You have nomadic tribes of Dinka in Southern Sudan, and they raid each other, and they take abductees. In fact, in 1998, American NGOs, in collaboration with U.S. AID, held a conference in Southern Sudan, in order to reconcile differences between Dinkas and Neur. (They) tried to reconcile the differences between them.

One of the main points of that agreement was to retrieve the abductees. Ironically, nobody called this slavery. They call it slavery when there (are) Muslim tribes involved, in order to create a false impression that this is Arabic Muslim practice of enslaving Black people. There is another fallacy here also, about this issue of Arabs versus Africans. Me, myself (I am) considered Arab. As you can see, by American standards, I am all African. We are Africans. We are a mixed race, we have Arab blood, but at the same time, we are mixed with African people. So, it is not clear-cut, of white, blue-eyed Arabs, versus Black (people). In fact in this region, where this practice is going on, sometimes it is very difficult for you to distinguish who is Arab and who is not Arab.