Amnesty International’s Allegations On Use Of Chemical Weapons In Darfur: Facts Versus Propaganda

Amnesty International has published on 29^th September a report titled “Scorched Earth, Poisoned Air: Credible Evidence of children killed and maimed by horrific Chemical Weapons attacks in Darfur”. In the report the organization alleges that it “has gathered harrowing evidence strongly suggesting the repeated use of chemical weapons against civilians, including very young children in Jebel Marra – One of the most remote parts of Darfur”.

Implausibility of the allegations:

1. It should be recalled that the Sudanese Army fought one of the longest and most difficult wars in South Sudan, before signing the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in January 2005. Yet it had never resorted to the use of chemical weapons in the South, nor was it ever accused of this. Thus, why should chemical weapons be used in Darfur, at a time security and tranquility prevail in the region and the situation is almost completely under the control of the Sudanese Army?

1. The report estimates the victims of the alleged chemical attacks as around 200 hundred people, while asserting that 171 villages in the area have been repeatedly attacked between January to September, 2016. Given that the said area is densely populated, and that Sudanese Army’s soldiers do not use protective masks, is it logical that the number of victims would be around that figure, if there were repeated chemical attacks for a period of NINE MONTHS as the report alleges?

1. The United Nation/African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID) has permanent presence in the area since 2007 and holds regular meetings with representatives of the local communities and displaced people as well as with leaders of armed groups. At no time had the mission raised any concerns that chemical weapons might have been used in the area.

1. Besides, the US Special Envoy to Sudan visited Jebel Marra in September 2016 for 5 days and had meetings with all concerned parties in the area. Nothing close to the accusation of use of chemical weapons by the Sudanese army has ever cropped up in his discussions with the Sudanese officials. The question is how Amnesty International, which does not have presence in the area or even gained legal access to it, obtained information and “credible evidence” that the 20,000–strong UNAMID and the US Special Envoy failed to notice?

On 9^th October 2016 Mr. Martin Ihoeghian Uhomoibhi, Joint AU-UN Special Representative to Darfur, Head of UNAMID and Joint Chief Mediator, issued an elaborate press statement on peace in Darfur. Concerning the allegations by Amnesty International on use of chemical weapons in Darfur, Mr. Uhomoibhi points out the following:

“UNAMID has been requested to shed light on the claims in the Amnesty International’s report and the facts are as follows:

• In spite of the almost 20,000 UNAMID personnel on the ground in Darfur, none of them has seen any Darfuri with impact of the use of chemical weapons as described by Amnesty International’s report.
• Not one displaced person meeting such description has shown up at any UNAMID Team Site clinics where they would have naturally gone for help.
• Amnesty International claimed to have made calls into Jebel Marra but did not for once call any of the almost 20,000 UN personnel all over Darfur, including in places like Sortony and Nertiti within a stone throw from the places where chemical weapons were reported to have been used.
• Not one among the leadership of the Armed Movements in Darfur discussed use of chemical weapons with me or my Deputy during several meetings spanning January, April, May, July, August and September this year”.

Position of the OPCW:
The Organization of Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is the only international implementing body of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) which entered into force in 1997, and aimed at preventing chemistry from ever again being used for warfare.

Sudan is party to the CWC and member of the OPCW since 1998. Sudan is by no means in possession of any type of chemical weapons. Sudan’s Industrial facilities, military and civil, are all open to the verification of the OPWC at all times.

In its latest report, June 2016, the OPCW confirmed that Sudan does not have or use chemical weapons. The OPCW’s official response to Amnesty International’s report, on 29^th September 2016 reads:

“The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has examined the relevant parts of the Amnesty International report regarding allegations of the use of chemical weapons in the Darfur regions of Sudan. The OPCW has also noted the response of the Government of Sudan to the allegations. Without further information

and evidence being made available, it is not possible at this stage to draw any conclusions based on the content of the report”.

This is in contrast with claim of Amnesty International that its report contains “credible evidence” of use of chemical weapons by the Sudanese Army.

He committed himself to hold meeting of his faction Leadership to consider joining the Peace Process. He further asked for UNAMID’s assistance toward that end, a request that was approved by the JSR provided that there is a formal written letter to process the request. Abdul-Wahid promised to send the letter immediately. However, according to the JSR, he failed to do so till the date in spite of the JSR’s two reminders on that. That is why the JSR concludes that there is a need that “the UN and respective Special Envoys of influential countries to exert necessary pressure on the Sudan Liberation Army / Abdul-Wahid to Join the Peace Process”

Apparently Abdul Wahid was aware of the contents of the report Amnesty had been working on, which would provide him with yet another excuse to continue his stubborn refusal of peace bids in Darfur. Amnesty International’s said report is, therefore, little more than propaganda to serve Abdul Wahid war agenda.

   Comments0