---

17 Jan 2006 : Column 217WH—continued

Security (Sudan)

12.30 pm

Mr. David Drew (Stroud) (Lab/Co-op): I am delighted to introduce this Adjournment debate, having escaped from Committee proceedings on the Animal Welfare Bill in which I was speaking about 30 seconds before I arrived in this Room. I am delighted also that the hon. Members for Buckingham (John Bercow) and for St. Ives (Andrew George), the Front-Bench spokesman for the Liberal Democrats, are present. I welcome the Minister to the debate. Its subject is not his particular portfolio, but I am sure that it will be a quick and helpful learning curve on Africa.

I wish to thank Senait Petros who has become the co-ordinator for the all-party group on Sudan, her predecessor Sultana Begum and my predecessor, Hilton Dawson, for the work that he did on Sudan. He is much lamented. We make no apology for continuing to raise the issue in this place, especially Darfur, which is in a parlous state. I thank Christian Aid, Amnesty International and Oxfam, which have also helped to bring to our attention some of the issues on which I shall dwell.

The humanitarian, security and political situations continue to deteriorate in Darfur. Atrocities happen daily. People are still dying of malnutrition and disease in large numbers and a new famine is feared. According to recent reports by the World Food Programme, the United Nations and the Coalition for International Justice, 3.5 million people are now hungry, 2.5 million people have been displaced due to violence and 400,000 people have died in Darfur. As      the security situation deteriorates—I stress "deteriorates"—humanitarian access is becoming worse. The international community is failing to protect civilians or to influence the Sudanese Government sufficiently to make sure that there is proper access.

The breakdown of the peace process and the deterioration of the security situation in Darfur have led to worsening relationships between Chad and Sudan, and the rebellion has ramifications that go beyond Darfur into the east of the country and threaten the comprehensive peace agreement. I intend to refer to those issues, but with your permission, Mr. Conway, I   hope that the hon. Member for Buckingham will be able to speak after I have finished.

The sanction report of the UN Security Council's committee on Sudan said that small arms and ammunition have increasingly been flowing to the anti-Government rebels from Chad, Eritrea and Libya in violation of the UN arms embargo. The UN-appointed panel also accused the Government of Sudan of violating the embargo by moving arms into Darfur from elsewhere in the country arming the Arab militias and deploying additional attack helicopters. That is all well known; the simple fact is that it continues to this day.

The report of the International Commission of Inquiry on 31 January highlighted the violation of human rights in Darfur. The main findings state that the Government of Sudan, the Arab militias and the rebels are all guilty of serious violation of human rights and humanitarian law that may amount to crimes against humanity and/or war crimes. Following that,
 
17 Jan 2006 : Column 218WH
 
on 29 March the UN Security Council passed resolution 1591. In reply to my parliamentary written question on 12 January, it was good to hear the Minister for Trade, who speaks on Africa in the House, make a robust statement on behalf of my noble Friend Lord Triesman, in which he stated that the UK Government want the International Criminal Court to be able to investigate what has been going on in Darfur. It is lamentable that the Government of Sudan continue to block that and not recognise the ICC. My hon. Friend the Minister might want to express some views on that.

The Security Council has put in place an asset freeze and travel ban on belligerents. It does not seem to be working. What does my hon. Friend have to say about that? What will the United Kingdom Government do to pressurise the Government of Sudan to fulfil their obligation to identify, neutralise and disarm militia groups outside the formal state security forces under their influence, as demanded by the Security Council? What will they do to pressurise all sides to abide by the   ceasefire and the security protocols, and the recommendation under resolution 1591 to widen the arms embargo? Clearly, the recommendation is not working. What are the Government doing to put pressure on the key nations of Chad, Eritrea and Libya to stop playing an unhelpful role in aspects of the conflict?

The ceasefire and peace talks seem to be making rocky progress. Since July 2005, efforts to push forward the peace process have continued. However, a split within the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army has brought the talks to a standstill. Negotiations with the SLM/A and the Justice and Equality Movement led eventually to the opening up of a joint position on behalf of the rebels. Given that the rebels have demanded the vice-presidency of Sudan and the return of territory that was removed from Darfur and incorporated into northern Sudan in the 1990s, such matters have been brought to an abrupt halt. I wonder what the UK Government are doing to provide capacity to the rebels but, more particularly, what pressure are they putting on the Government of Sudan to get the peace talks under way?

I have received much evidence from Amnesty International of awful human rights abuses, such as rapes and sexual violence against women and girls. I have much evidence of illegal detentions, arrest and intimidation of civilians, forced returns of internally displaced persons and evidence of torture. The Sudanese Organisation Against Torture—the wonderful organisation that we met when the hon. Member for Buckingham and I were last in Sudan—comes forth daily with many lists of people who are being discriminated against and worse. In the west of Darfur, an even worse situation is growing. Again, what are the UK Government doing to put pressure on both the Chadian Government and the Sudanese Government to help resolve the problem?

I shall move on to the wider scene in Sudan. As an all-party group, we have been desperately worried for the past two years that whatever is happening in Darfur can be played out in the east of the country. We met representatives of the Abuja Congress there and we continue to meet them here. They seem to be only a touch away from launching their own conflict, which would be a desperate situation. Matters are made worse
 
17 Jan 2006 : Column 219WH
 
because of the closeness of Eritrea and Ethiopia, which are making their own warlike noises. It would be interesting to know what the UK Government are trying to do to bring some sanity into the situation.Under the comprehensive peace agreement, the SLM/A must withdraw from eastern Sudan by 9 January 2006. There is no evidence that that has happened. What will the UK Government do to make that happen? The withdrawal is behind schedule and there is a risk that it could spark a full-scale conflict.

I shall speak positively about the CPA towards the end of my remarks, but if it is to mean anything, it will have to bring peace to Darfur and stop war in the east. It is not only the Government of Sudan who must be brought to task to make sure that that is happening. Pressure must be put on the SLM/A that will result in something better happening. As for the International Crisis Group, it is recommended that the UN should name a special envoy to do what Senator Danforth was doing several years ago. It needs a lead mediator who can speak to all the different parties. What are the UK Government doing to bring that forward?

Andrew George (St. Ives) (LD): The hon. Gentleman is making an excellent case and asking exactly the right questions. Does he wish to comment on the context of the UN mandate? We both went to see Lord Triesman to discuss the issue. Does the hon. Gentleman wish to comment on whether that might be strengthened, and if so, how? Are there sufficient African Union troops in the area to enforce that sort of mandate?

Mr. Drew : The hon. Gentleman is percipient: I was about to mention the African Union and the support that we should be providing, starting with the point that the AU force is still not up to strength. I believe that it was demanding 7,700 peacekeepers; it said that that was how many it needed to be at least partly effective on the ground. What are we doing to help in that regard?

I do not know what has been the outcome of the dispute over the failure of the Government of Sudan to allow in the armoured personnel carriers that the Canadian Government kindly offered. Are they still stuck somewhere in Khartoum, or have they now reached the place that they should be at? It would be interesting to get the definitive answer to that; there are rumours that they have now been released, but it would be good to hear what the Government have to say about that.

How can we further bolster the AU? In the short term, there needs to be a push for support to the western part of Darfur, but the AU force may need to be strengthened further and linked with UN—and, possibly, NATO—forces because of logistical requirements. We might also need to put pressure not only on the Government of Sudan, but on the Government of China, who have not been helpful through the UN Security Council. I would like the Minister to comment on that.

My last point relates to eastern Darfur. It is somewhat bizarre that there are suggestions that Sudan is being nominated for the chairmanship of the AU. Nothing ceases to amaze me, but in this time and place, with AU troops in that country to try to keep the peace there, it is surely not appropriate for the Government of Sudan to be chairing the AU, which is, in a sense, trying to scrutinise what they are doing.
 
17 Jan 2006 : Column 220WH
 

I will finish on a more positive note, before allowing the hon. Member for Buckingham—who is my good friend—to say a few words. The comprehensive peace agreement is a wonderful achievement; no one wants to underestimate that. However, questions arise out of the fact that it appears that only $112 million out of the $4.5   billion that the donors promised has yet to be made available in the pot. That will lead both the   Government in Khartoum and the SLM/A in the south seriously to question the will of the wider world to deliver on its promises in respect of the CPA. Although I welcome what the CPA is about overall, the proof will be in the eating, and it will be a bit disappointing if what has happened so far is evidence of an unwillingness on behalf of the western world in particular to put its money where its mouth is.

12.43 pm

John Bercow (Buckingham) (Con): I am extremely grateful to the hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. Drew) for—characteristically generously—giving me this opportunity to contribute to the debate. It was a privilege to go with him to Sudan, including Darfur, in the summer of 2004, and I agree with everything that he has said.

I want specifically to pick up on the point that the hon. Gentleman made about Sudan's prospective chairmanship of the African Union. I cannot think of a single step that would be simultaneously more absurd and better guaranteed to undermine its reputation, and I very much hope that that is avoided.

In Darfur, it is extremely difficult to establish with any precision the numbers of deaths—as the Minister understands, and doubtless will himself proclaim. However, we can confidently say, without fear of exaggerating or of being contradicted, that death is still taking place in Darfur on a daily basis and on a significant scale—death through violence, through disease and through malnutrition, and I want briefly to focus on two points. First, given the capacity and funding constraints experienced by the AU mission and the recognition by the mission itself of the need for a step change in tackling the violence in Darfur, would it not now make sense for the international community to go for a direct transfer to a UN mandate? That would allow for the AU force to be blue-helmeted, would make greater resources available, and would speed up deployment. That is my first and very specific challenge to the Minister.

I will now make my second point, after which I will listen attentively and respectfully to the Minister's reply, and to anything else that might be said. The international community in the form of the United Nations has adopted the responsibility to protect. I do not want to sound pious about this matter. We in this Chamber know very well that there is a pervasive cynicism about politics and politicians. That is a recurrent theme in debates on many different subjects; that cynicism applies to politicians irrespective of whether we are operating on a domestic terrain or discussing international issues. If the responsibility to protect is not to be merely a pious piece of rhetoric designed to make those who have crafted it look and sound good, but is to be translated into practice for the betterment of the human condition in some of the most difficult and ravaged parts of the world, the time is now for that to happen in Darfur.
 
17 Jan 2006 : Column 221WH
 

That is simply not happening at present; it is not true to say that we regard it as a great priority to tackle the savagery and the cocktail of barbarity that has been served up there, principally by the Government of Sudan in recent years. There has been what I would describe as a holding operation by the AU—a new institution that is genuinely committed and that is doing its best with pathetic resources and with delivery on the promises of increased resources being very slow.

My anxiety is that we are in danger of becoming desensitised to death on a dramatic scale; it is almost as though the number, range and seriousness of conflicts around the world are causing us to be numbed by the seeming inevitability of it all. I know that we cannot change everything overnight, but we have a duty to act. I would like the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary and the Minister to be championing the cause for a UN mandate and for a much greater intensity of activity on a daily basis. That is what I want to hear about from the Minister, and I shall now resume my place in the expectation that I might.

12.48 pm

The Minister for Europe (Mr. Douglas Alexander) : I   thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Mr. Drew) for securing this important and timely debate. In recent days in some of our newspapers, all-party groups have not received the most benign coverage, but the sort of debate that we have had this morning evidences both the importance of the work that this particular all-party group has undertaken, and the expertise and commitment that Members bring to this area of concern. I share with Members who have spoken profound concerns about the grave situation in Darfur and elsewhere in Sudan, about the problems in neighbouring Chad and the risks that they pose to Sudan, and about the problems in the east of the country and the slow progress towards a peace agreement in Abuja.

My hon. Friend and the hon. Member for Buckingham (John Bercow) raised a number of specific points, and I will endeavour to answer all the questions asked. I therefore hope that I will have Members' forbearance as I seek to make rapid progress in respect of remarks that I know will be of direct interest to some of them, and then in answering each of the specific questions.

The problems under discussion are of huge dimensions with terrible consequences for the people of    Sudan. The situation is extremely serious. My ministerial colleagues and I—and, indeed, the British Government––are committed to a Sudan that is peaceful, democratic and prosperous and that respects human rights and the rule of law, a Sudan whose people share equally in their nation's future prosperity and that   is an active and constructive member of the international community. That cannot be achieved until Sudan accepts and implements peace. Of course, the most immediate threat to Sudan's security comes from Darfur. We need to ensure also that the comprehensive peace agreement of which my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud spoke is fully implemented. There is a further threat in the east from ongoing conflict; that was also addressed in our debate.
 
17 Jan 2006 : Column 222WH
 

Against the backdrop of this serious situation, progress has been made. It is worth taking stock of some of the main points. The international community has mobilised the largest humanitarian operation in the world in Darfur, feeding and providing for 3.4 million people. The humanitarian situation has improved significantly: the mortality rate is down and malnutrition rates have almost halved since last year. The United Kingdom is the second biggest national donor to Darfur, providing £75 million this year alone.

The African Union monitoring force has established an increasingly effective presence, and has improved security and reduced human rights abuses where it operates. As a result of international pressure, the Government of Sudan have withdrawn their Antonov bombers from Darfur and allowed in 105 Canadian-supplied armoured personnel carriers for the AU mission in Sudan. There is now a peace process—the Abuja talks to which I referred—which offers the possibility of a political settlement to the conflict. The referral of the situation to the International Criminal Court sends a strong signal to the world at large that there will be no impunity for those guilty of grave human rights abuses in that conflict.

Clearly there has not been enough progress, and in some areas there has been a deterioration. The old guard in Khartoum has still not done enough to rein in the forces and their proxies in Darfur, nor has it taken serious steps to punish those guilty of human rights abuses. In Darfur, security has deteriorated. The sheer numbers of people killed or injured through violence are shocking and abhorrent to our Government. The situation is becoming more complex, with the two rebel movements fighting each other. The AU force is still relatively weak and is facing a funding crisis.

I very much regret that AMIS—the African mission in Sudan—has suffered fatalities. I join my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development and my noble Friend Lord Triesman in their condemnation as wholly unacceptable the killing of a Senegalese member of AMIS on 6 January. AMIS was originally conceived of as a smaller, short-term operation. Darfur will need a peace- support operation of increasing complexity for several more years, and the recent assessment mission for AMIS recommended that that would be best done by an international force. In principle, the AU supports handing over AMIS to the UN. That makes sense: it would put the funding and logistics on a surer footing and would allow the AU to focus on the longer-term priority of developing its own peacekeeping capacity.

Perhaps the greatest concern is the recent fighting in Chad; it risks spilling over into Darfur. Both Chadian and Sudanese rebels are active in Darfur. There is a risk of a military build-up by both countries on both sides of their borders. All parties need to exercise restraint, to demonstrate their commitment to peace in Darfur, and to seek a solution through negotiation, not violence.

I now turn to the questions asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud and, first, to the role of the International Criminal Court and the progress made there. On 6 June, the ICC prosecutor, Moreno-Ocampo, announced the start of a formal investigation. The court has since been collecting evidence from various sources. On 13 December, the prosecutor briefed the United Nations Security Council, noting that the office had
 
17 Jan 2006 : Column 223WH
 
made good progress in the investigation's first phase, and that the next phase would involve seeking further assistance and co-operation from the Government of Sudan. Also on 13 December, Sudan's Justice Minister said that Sudan would not allow investigators from the ICC into Darfur.

My noble Friend Lord Triesman released a statement highlighting our concern and noting that we expect the Government of Sudan to comply with the wishes of the international community as set out in UN Security Council resolution 1593 and to co-operate fully with the ICC, should it decide to visit Darfur. Our ambassador in   Khartoum also raised the matter directly with the    vice-president of Sudan on 23 December. We have consistently made it clear that the Sudanese must co-operate with the ICC. The ICC visited Sudan recently, and the Government of national unity set up an intergovernmental committee to receive them.

My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud also raised the issue of Chad. We are obviously concerned about its current instability, and the tensions between it and Sudan. We are calling on both sides to rein in their troops and exercise restraint. Our ambassador in Khartoum raised those points with the Sudanese Foreign Minister on 7 January. Chad is host to 200,000 Darfurian refugees, who are in 10 camps located along the eastern frontier with Darfur. We are working closely with the international community to ensure that all contingencies have been prepared for. This year, the United Kingdom   provided £5 million to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the World Food Programme and non-governmental organisations delivering life-saving medical assistance and water supplies. Support for the humanitarian response will continue in Chad during 2006 as part of our response to the problems in Darfur.

In relation to the comprehensive peace agreement and the UK Government's support, as part of our substantial development programme, the UK is providing £380,000    to support a number of key national commissions—on the judicial service, on the civil service, on human rights, on land, fiscal and financial monitoring and allocation, and on petroleum. The UK has already provided experts for the Abyei boundary commission and the constitutional review commission. In relation to the International Crisis Group's request for a high-level UN special envoy, I assure hon. Members that we have full confidence in the United Nations Secretary-General's current special representative, Mr. Jan Pronk.

I was asked what information we had on the location of the armoured personnel carriers. All 105 APCs have been delivered and are being deployed across Darfur. During the EU troika visit in October, Lord Triesman urged the Government of Sudan to ensure that equipment such as the Canadian APCs were allowed quickly into Darfur.

On the regional players—an issue that my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud raised—there is an important role for African countries in addressing the problems of Darfur. Of course, the AU is heavily involved, as I have said. Alan Goulty, the United Kingdom's special representative for Darfur, recently visited Tripoli for talks with the Libyan Government, and he plans to travel to Eritrea for talks with its
 
17 Jan 2006 : Column 224WH
 
Government shortly. I assure hon. Members that we recognise the importance of the regional players in the conflict.

On support for the southern Government, we are providing them with £2 million for rapid technical assistance. Addressing that new Government's considerable capacity constraints is, of course, a priority for us, so we will provide short-term advice on a flexible and responsive basis to fill the critical needs identified. In relation to the east of Sudan, on 11 January a militia allied to the Sudanese armed forces entered the eastern town of Hamesh Koreb and occupied positions held by the eastern front. The UN mission in Sudan—the UN force responsible for monitoring the comprehensive peace agreement—has sent a monitoring team to the area. Its initial assessment is that the incident was less significant than initial media reports claim. Our embassy in Khartoum is monitoring the situation closely.

The timetable for the withdrawal of the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army from eastern Sudan has been extended for one month by the joint defence board, which may reconsider the time scale once again before the deadline of 9 February. That is provided for under the terms of the comprehensive peace agreement, and we welcome that party's efforts to ensure that the CPA actually works.

On the point raised by the hon. Member for Buckingham of the Sudanese candidacy for the presidency of the African Union, it is of course for the AU member Governments to decide who the president of the AU should be. However, it would be difficult for the AU to maintain its credibility in Darfur, both in terms of its role in the Abuja talks and in relation to AMIS, if one of the parties to the conflict held the presidency. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will understand that I do not wish to say anything further at this stage, not least given the potential for the views of the British Government to become a factor in the discussions under way in the AU, in a way that might not help us to meet his objectives. However, I assure him that I have listened carefully to the points that he made.

Although the Abuja talks that I mentioned are making some progress, there is still a long way to go. In particular, the rebel movements are still holding too rigidly to maximalist positions on issues relating to power sharing and are not engaging fully on issues of security. The Government of Sudan could do more to engage the movements and break the impasse. Africans and non-Africans alike need to keep up the pressure on both sides to negotiate flexibly and with a much greater sense of urgency.

The continued problems in the east are also a concern for security in Sudan. The recent increase in attention paid to them is welcome, as are the recent announcements that the eastern front and the Government of Sudan are to meet under Libyan auspices to explore the possibility of a negotiated solution, possibly as early as today. If international observers are invited, the United Kingdom will of course attend. It has already played an important role, providing technical assistance to the eastern front to help it to prepare for peace talks. The international community needs to co-ordinate its efforts to ensure that there are viable solutions to the humanitarian problems of eastern Sudan as well as to security problems.
 
17 Jan 2006 : Column 225WH
 

The UK will continue to play a leading role on Darfur. We are vocal in pressing the Sudanese Government to provide security to their own people and to support the AU in Darfur. Within the UN and the EU, we have also worked to maintain strong international pressure—

Derek Conway (in the Chair): Order. I am sorry to interrupt the Minister when he has nearly finished, but the clock has beaten us.

---