HIGHLIGHTS OF BRIEFING BY UNITED NATIONS AND
AFRICAN UNION SPECIAL ENVOYS FOR DARFUR

Jan Eliasson, Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Darfur, and Salim Ahmed Salim, Special Envoy of the African Union for Darfur, briefed journalists on the results of two days of informal consultations in Geneva with regional partners and international observers on Darfur. Yesterday, the Special Envoys had met with representatives of neighbouring countries – namely Chad, Eritrea, Libya and Egypt – and today with international partners to discuss the political process.
“We found the meeting very constructive and, I think, for us, it gave us new energy to push the political process forward,” said Mr. Eliasson.
The focus of the meeting, according to Mr. Salim, had been “to do everything possible to expedite the process of negotiation but also to create the necessary conditions to have that realized.” To do so, it had been agreed to adopt a multi-track approach, “to engage the parties through, for example, shuttle diplomacy, through indirect negotiations, which then eventually culminate in substantive negotiations in a forum.”
A particular issue of concern had been the conflict between Chad and Sudan. “We believe very strongly that for there to be sustainable peace in Darfur, it is absolutely crucial that there be a process of normalization of relations between Chad and Sudan,” said Mr. Salim.
Mr. Eliasson recalled that he and Mr. Salim had been working together for over a year to try to invigorate the peace process in Darfur. There had been some positive steps forward, particularly when the Security Council had adopted resolution 1769 on 31 July 2007, calling for an enhanced peacekeeping presence in Darfur. The resolution had also expressed strong support for the political process and dealing with the basic issues of power-sharing, wealth-sharing and security in Darfur. Another positive step had been the meeting in Arusha, Tanzania, last summer, bringing together practically all the rebel movements to agree on a common platform.
“Then, I think we both can admit that we saw negative developments,” said Mr. Eliasson, including unrest in the camps, a growing number of tribal clashes and growing fragmentation of the rebel movements when the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) split. There had also been some difficulties within the Government of Sudan, when one of the coalition partners, SPLM, had suspended its work in the Government. “And then, at the end of last year and beginning of this year, we saw a very negative development concerning Chad, a coup attempt and the growing number of incursions across the border in both directions.”
It was in this climate, said Mr. Eliasson, that the meeting in Geneva had been convened, with the participation of the permanent members of the Security Council, the neighbouring countries, the European Union, the Arab League and some individual countries who were directly engaged in the developments the region.
“We have now received strong support for moving the political process forward. The first step is, of course, to do whatever we can – and particularly the participants in this meeting, whatever they can – to facilitate the relationship between Chad and Sudan, which is basic for peace in Darfur,” said Mr. Eliasson. The meeting had given support for a call for the cessation of hostilities. Moreover, the group of states participating in the meetings over the last two days would use their strong influence to bring the Government of Sudan and the rebel movements to the negotiating table with cohesive positions.
Mr. Eliasson and Mr. Salim both noted that a major challenge for them was consolidating the positions of the key actors, particularly the rebel movements, which were fragmented and dispersed, even if some progress had been made in that regard. In the beginning, they had numbered between 15 and 20. Last year, in Arusha, their number had been reduced to eight and now they were down to five, which was nevertheless still a significant number to contend with. Bringing the movements together in one room and getting them to agree on common positions was a major challenge. “So far, we have not been able to that,” said Mr. Salim. Some of the movements were not yet ready to engage meaningfully.
Of the five movements, Mr. Eliasson said that two were ready to begin negotiations immediately, one wanted more time to prepare, and the remaining two had certain conditions for participating in peace talks, some of which were quite far-reaching and would have to be dealt with.
“It’s no coincidence that this conflict has gone on for five years,” said Mr. Eliasson. “It is extremely difficult to solve. It is probably the most difficult issue that I have dealt with.” The “active support” of the international community was needed in order to succeed.
On that subject, Mr. Salim said that the attention paid by the international community to the issue of Darfur had been commendable. “And this has been a tremendous help in terms of trying to find a solution to the crisis.” Nevertheless, certain aspects of the international community’s response left a lot to be desired. “Everyone has been talking about the need for a robust force which can make a difference,” said Mr. Salim, “which can provide some degree of security for the people.” But such a force would have to be well equipped. “But as you know, it is public knowledge, until now we have not been able to find the necessary helicopters. So the question is, how do you reconcile this international commitment, international concern for the need for movement in Darfur with the fact that until out of the thousands of helicopters around the world, you can’t find 26?”
Addressing the next steps in the process, Mr. Eliasson said that members of the Special Envoys’ team would tomorrow return to Khartoum where they would share the conclusions of the consultations with the Government of Sudan and the rebel movements, to the extent they were able to. “And then Salim and I plan to go back a couple of times in the next few weeks. We also plan to have another meeting with the regional countries and the international observers in the near future. We are satisfied with the outcome of this meeting and hope that we will now take a new step towards peace. We have gone through a negative period but hope that we are onto a new start,” said Mr. Eliasson.
“The value of a meeting like the one we had today,” said Mr. Salim, is that it represents the concerted position of the international community to try and help the process of peace in Sudan. In the final analysis however, the only people who can make peace in Darfur are the people of Darfur themselves and the Government. The international community can help, can encourage, can dissuade, but it cannot impose peace. Peace can only be brought about by the people of Sudan themselves and by the people of Darfur.”