SUDAN'S RESPONSE: ENSURING THE AU REQUESTS A UN

C O N F I D E N T I A L KHARTOUM 000605

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR AF/SPG AND IO/PSC

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/08/2016
TAGS: PREL KPKO NATO AU US SU
SUBJECT: SUDAN'S RESPONSE: ENSURING THE AU REQUESTS A UN
RE-HAT OF AMIS

REF: STATE 36548

Classified By: CDA Eric Whitaker, Reason: Section 1.4 (b) and (d)


1. (C) Pol/Econ Chief delivered subject demarche on March 7
to MFA Department of the Americas Acting Director Abd Elghani
Elnaim Elkarim. Rejecting the premise of the message, he
offered several reasons why Sudan instead seeks to continue
the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS):

-- AMIS is not a failure; large-scale combat in Darfur has
given way over time to smaller incidents. AMIS is meeting
its objectives, and is frequently commended for its work.
Even so, it predictably needs more support;

-- The mandate of AMIS is open for discussion; mandate alone
is not cause to switch from AMIS to the UN. The UN is in
Sudan now, and so Sudan is not opposed to the UN per se;

-- Sudan's North-South conflict continued for more than 20
years, with no talk about imposing a UN mission. Why now, in
Darfur?;

-- How would UN troops make peace? On the contrary, they
would complicate matters, and perhaps bring terror to the
area. Darfur is a large, open area, the size of France, and
the presence of UN forces would make the situation more
complicated;

-- The focus should be on achieving results through the Abuja
peace process, as President Bashir recently conveyed in
writing to President Bush. Talking of replacing AMIS with a
UN mission strengthens the position of the rebels, who may
decide to wait for the UN/NATO and not negotiate with the
government any longer;

-- The U.S. appears to favor African troops and African
leadership of a Darfur peacekeeping mission. Sudan concurs,
and believes that the remaining issue, that of the mission's
mandate, can be discussed;

-- Changing from AMIS to a UN mission involves more costs and
logistics. The UN is more expensive. Funds could be used
instead to support AMIS. UNMIS has not met its goal of
10,000 troops in Sudan, and has only reached a level of 5,000
so far. How is it certain that an adequate number could be
obtained for Darfur?

-- Replacing AMIS with UN troops jeopardizes the position of
the AU in the future regarding peace keeping and the handling
of conflicts. It is important to strengthen and empower
regional organizations. The AU should be given a chance to
deal with its own issues. Its ability to do so helps
worldwide; taking the mission away from the AU is treating it
like a younger sibling who has things done for him by his or
her older sibling rather than having to learn to do so by
himself or herself. The Peace and Security Council is
so-named, as it is designed to deal with such issues; it
needs self-confidence and support to carry out the tasks it
was designed to handle.

2. (C) Abd Elghani also offered a copy of Minister of Foreign
Affairs Lam Akol's statement of February 22 before the
National Assembly on "The AMIS Transition to the United
Nations." Post will fax a copy to AF/SPG.
WHITAKER