The Real World Darfur

[A UN helicopter delivers aid in Darfur - Photo from www.shanebauer.net]

The news out of Darfur continues - surprise, surprise - to be rather bleak.  Services are starting to fail in the camps, and no one knows quite what happens next.

Personally, I think responding to the immediate humanitarian crisis has to be the main priority - even if this means trying to broker a deal in which the UN Security Council agrees to suspend the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrant for Bashir, and Sudan allows the expelled aid agencies to resume work.

Both Kevin Heller at Opinio Juris and my genocide co-blogger Michelle have pointed out numerous flaws in this approach.   To quote Kevin: "Kleinman’s response is illuminating.  Would he have us do nothing?  Actually, yes."  He goes on:

"[I]f he doesn’t believe that doing nothing is enough — I think it behooves him to (1) tell us what actions the international community should take instead of pursuing Bashir’s arrest, and (2) explain to us why those actions will be more likely to influence Bashir’s behavior."

Kevin seems upset that my answer doesn't provide a long-term solution to the crisis.  He also points out that there's no guarantee that Bashir would even honor such an agreement; not to mention that it would provide Bashir increased leverage going forward (i.e. the knowledge that he can get the international community to back down simply by threatening aid agencies).

That's all true.  Guilty as charged. 

I'm more than willing to sacrifice a potential, theoretical resolution to the conflict (at some indeterminate point in the future) in exchange for addressing the immediate humanitarian crisis.  And I don't have a guarantee that my plan, such as it is, would work.

Kevin is searching for a certainty that doesn't exist.

That said, I believe cutting a deal with Bashir offers us our best chance to ensure that millions of people in Darfur continue to receive life-saving assistance.

My approach isn't perfect, but at least it's honest.  At least it acknowledges that there are always trade-offs - there are no perfect solutions in the real world.  Often, there aren't any decent solutions.  We do the best we can, we try to minimize harms, and sometimes we admit that we don't have all the answers.

Speaking of which, I find it interesting that some of those most concerned with a long-term solution are seemingly willing sacrifice a few hundred thousand lives to achieve their noble ends.  Or, as Kevin himself said:

"In the short term, of course, deferring the warrant would be better for a significant number of Darfuris.  No one, not even the most fervent defender of the ICC, denies that there are immediate costs — very real, very human costs — to the arrest warrant."

Very real, very human costs being one way to describe a million people suddenly left without food, water, or health care.

Anyhows, some may disagree with my solution.  As Kevin said: "Bashir remains in power, the aid keeps flowing, and nothing ever gets better — it just doesn’t get any worse.  Maybe that is enough for Kleinman.  It’s not enough for me."

Bravo.  Fine sentiment.  If Kevin can find a solution that allows us to achieve both justice and peace, that would be wonderful.  I'd love to hear about it.  In the real world, though, all these choices are hard, and all these choices have consequences.   Or, as Kevin phrases it, "very real, very human costs".

Sometimes you can't have your cake and eat it, too.  Sometimes you simply make a hard choice, and live with the consequences.  That's honest enough for me.

PS - there's a deeper disagreement here, as well, rooted in the assumption that somehow the international community can solve this crisis, as opposed to simply help manage the consequences.  Hence this desperate search for a solution - any solution that we can impose, that would bring all the parties to the table.

I think the international community does have a role, but it's a secondary role; there's a limited amount we can do until the parties themselves decide that it's time to search for peace.   There's a reason, for instance, the war in South Sudan went on for almost two decades before international mediation efforts finally succeeded.

So, what do we do in the long-term?  The same thing we've been doing all along - engaging both the Sudanese Government and the rebels, trying to get them to sit down and reach an agreement.   Using carrots and sticks, but at least with a willingness to admit when the use of sticks is counter-productive.  Thankless work, to be sure, but again there's no easy answer.