Darfur and the Sudan hustle

I confess that at first I was a little embarrassed that I did not join the pack with my own full-throated condemnation of Sudan over Darfur.

So now, here comes President George W. (For “worst in history”) Bush, slapping more sanctions on Sudan, and the chorus screaming “genocide” got louder still. Uh-oh.

Recently I talked to several Black folks who visited Sudan, including Darfur this Spring. More than one of them defended Sudan citing Paul Joseph Goebbels, the German Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda during the Nazi regime, and his “Big Lie Technique.”

To wit: “never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.” They said someone is practicing “The Big Lie” against Sudan.

Hmmm, I thought.

That certainly was the case in the story of so-called “slavery” in Sudan five or six years ago, when people—even well-meaning Black Civil Rights leaders—insisted that the Arab-Muslim government in the North of Sudan was practicing slavery against the Black-African-Christians in the South of the country.

Some of my friends went to the region and even claim to have “bought” slaves and set them free. That was all a hoax. There never was any “slavery” where people were bought and sold as chattel. There was a decades-old civil war raging in Southern Sudan, and often the various warring parties engaged in kidnaping and ransoming captured members of opposing tribal groups, but people weren’t being bought and sold into slavery.

Someone was using The Big Lie Technique to influence Blacks in America, knowing how sensitive we are to and unforgiving we would be of anyone practicing “slavery.” After all, if Black folks turn against an African government, that government can’t count on any friends in the U.S. public opinion.

But Darfur is no “slavery hoax,” although there are many similarities to be found. There is a huge humanitarian crisis, compounded by years of drought, and an old-fashioned “range war” where nomadic camel herdsmen, are competing for arable land and water to graze their animals, with farmers trying to grow crops. It’s a bloody fight. A fight which neither side can win outright.

So that’s the pretext and the context. A fight with the Arab-Muslim government on one side, and Black Africans on the other.

And then, a “smoking gun” was revealed. The Save Darfur Coalition, started to unravel from within. Questions were raised about whether or not the now deposed executive director of the organization—David Rubenstein—had wisely used a huge influx of cash from a few anonymous donors, in an advertising blitz, which included full page ads in metropolitan newspapers and in Black media. After Rubenstein walked the plank, Save Darfur board member Ruth Messinger, whose day-job is as President of the American Jewish World Service, said of him: “we wish him the best in his search for new opportunities for public service,” according to a report in the June 2, 2007 edition of The New York Times.

The Save Darfur Coalition, with its $15 million annual budget, wasn’t sending a dime to the refugee camps in Darfur or in neighboring Chad. They were spending big bucks, waging war against Sudan’s “radical Islamic regime,” composed of Arabs, obviously bent on “ethnic cleansing” of Black Africans.

The only thing is, 99.9 percent of all the people of Darfur, are Islamic. And as far as the Arab-government- business goes: they’re all Black! There’s not one person in the Sudanese government, who looks anything like your typical “Arab.” Not President Omar al Bashir, nor any of his cabinet, nor most of his country’s ambassadors, could pass the fabled “paper bag test” that was used to measure the color of Black students when they sought to attend Washington’s Dunbar High School, or Atlanta’s Spelman College, back in the day. They’re all too dark-skinned!

But we have heard, thanks to the Save Darfur “Big Lie Technique” ads, that the Arab-Muslims have been practicing “genocide” against the Black-Christian-Africans.

More sanctions they insist. Send in U.N. peace-keeping troops. Impose a “no-fly zone” over Darfur. Why that’s just what the U.S. did before invading Iraq, in what is now a luckless war of aggression, which the U.S. can never win.

Why is all of this going on? You might wonder. Oil. Huge un-developed oil reserves.

That Islamic government in Khartoum just happens to preside over the largest, and one of the most mineral rich countries on the African continent. Did I say they have lots of oil?

That Islamic government has ports on the Red Sea, and includes the head waters of the Nile River which can provide electricity all over the country. It has rich agricultural potential, and it borders on nine–count them–nine other African nations.

Sudan has the potential of being a bridge between Islamic Arab North Africa and Bantu Black Sub-Saharan Africa. In my book, that makes Sudan, an “enemy” of Western Imperialism, by simple definition.

I am not embarrassed any more to openly question the Save Darfur movement, because it is just the same old anti-Sudan movement, just dressed up in a different coat, a coat of many colors, including well-meaning conservatives, liberals, and even Blacks, all of whom have been duped by someone’s anti-Sudan “Big Lie” which has also proven to be a very profitable hustle.

5 thoughts on “Darfur and the Sudan hustle

  1. I don’t buy it.

    What Askia Muhammad offers readers instead of a reasoned analysis of the Darfur situation in “Darfur and the Sudan ‘Hustle’” (Washington Informer, Thursday, June 7) is far from convincing. It causes me to wonder, “Who’s hustling whom?”

    I am an activist, what many would call a “leftist.” I am inherently distrustful of U.S. foreign policy objectives, generally, but particularly as they relate to people of color – and this is true in spades on the African continent. I also am a Darfur activist.

    But I’m not Jewish. I’m not white. I am a Pan-Africanist, anti-Zionist African-American. And I have not, to use Muhammad’s words, “been duped.”

    Muhammad’s arguments are all over the place and completely miss the mark. How can one, after all, propose to address honestly the matter of Darfur with barely a mumblin’ word about Khartoum’s devastating and appalling record of human rights abuses against its marginalized populations on a massive scale?

    I won’t respond to Muhammad’s column point by point; however, I will say, first, two things about the Save Darfur Coalition. It is unfair to castigate an education and advocacy organization for not delivering direct aid. It’s not “hustling” to use funds for education and outreach instead of for humanitarian assistance, which isn’t its mission. In its own words, Save Darfur solicits contributions through its website and other means to fund “crucial awareness and advocacy programs that play a critical role in building … political pressure …to end the crisis in Darfur.”

    And about David Rubenstein: he likely would not have felt the need to place full-page ads in the black press if there weren’t so many misinformed and disinformed black folk demagoguing the issue of Darfur out of opposition to the Zionist lobby, or some sense of Muslim solidarity and common cause with Arabs, ostensibly because they are Third World people of color and because of the plight of the Palestinian people.

    The Nation of Islam has my respect and gratitude for its groundbreaking work with substance abusers, prostitutes, ex-cons and just struggling, working-class black folk when many “respectable” black churches didn’t care, and for advancing black consciousness and our struggle for justice here in this country. But when it comes to the sometimes mind-numbing, facile polemics of anti-imperialist, anti-Zionist, leftist political correctness, NOI spokesperson and minister Louis Farrakhan has few, if any, peers. In recent years, he has forged working alliances with the likes of Sun Myung Moon of the Unification Church and Lyndon LaRouche, both of whom, not coincidentally, are stinking rich. In recent years, their organizations have mounted well-funded recruiting efforts aimed at making inroads into the African-American community, and Farrakhan has been cozy with Khartoum since at least his “World Friendship Tour” in 1996. Bashir addressed the Nation’s annual Founder’s Day gathering this year in Chicago via satellite, at one point taking questions from the faithful; and the minister and at least one of his lieutenants, at Bashir’s invitation, helped wrangle a delegation of African-American journalists to fly to Sudan to get the “real scoop” on Darfur.

    Anybody remember the often co-opted reporting of the embedded press during the 2003 Iraq invasion?

    Never mind the fact that Bashir is just one in a line of Sudanese heads of state whose stated purpose has been the Arabization of Sudan, with a history of marginalizing and denying government services to Sudanese who do not self-identify as Arab. He has no use for them – only their land. And that holds true for the Nuba in the North, who have long been victimized by a government Arabization campaign and who now are at risk of losing, to hydroelectric projects at Meroe and Kajba, their homelands, as well as the ancient archaeological treasures of a culture that gave rise to Egyptian dynastic civilization; for the people of Darfur in the west, victimized by all manner of depredations and threatened with literal extinction; and for the people of the South as well. Never mind the 2 million, non-“Arab,” dead Southern Sudanese, the victims of a bloody civil war when some of their number finally rose up and said “no more.” Never mind that, presently, while the Government of Sudanese continues to reap millions in oil wealth from the oil-rich South, it spends less than ½ of 1 percent of its total GDP there. That means no roads, no schools, no hospitals, no water projects, no electricity – nada.

    The only attention, in fact, Darfur receives from Khartoum is of the unwanted kind: helicopter gunships, Antonov bombers and government troops on the ground, who soften up civilian targets for government-armed and -funded Janjaweed militias, who in turn burn and ransack villages, rape, mutilate and murder innocents at will. Documented evidence shows Bashir has painted government planes to masquerade as UN and African Union aircraft while ferrying arms and military hardware to Janjaweed militias. He thus fuels existing conflicts, using these “devils on horseback” to do his dirty work of obliterating the people of Darfur. He then blames the mounting death toll, the massive displacement on “rebel conflicts,” disavowing any involvement or responsibility– until earlier this year, when the evidence was so irrefutable, even Bashir had to admit to having bombed “rebel” villages in Darfur. For him, this shell-game is a threefer: advancing Arabization, removing any possible political opposition, and consolidation of control over the region’s land and oil wealth.

    What is accepted knowledge elsewhere seems to carry little weight among many in the African American community: Bashir is a lying, murderous scoundrel and a war criminal. Chad threatened to quit the organization if Bashir became head of the African Union, and other African nations protested vociferously until the baton was passed to the president of Ghana earlier this year instead. And Bashir is a racist. After all, black self-loathing and denial is nothing but anti-black racism internalized, and, unfortunately, the dark-skinned Bashir, like far too many of our black and Muslims brothers and sisters in East Africa, self-identifies as an Arab – not as a black man. That “they’re all black!” and couldn’t pass the paper bag test, as Muhammad correctly asserts, doesn’t change the fact that Bashir and his henchmen are targeting and ruthlessly exterminating non-“Arab” blacks like vermin. Of course, the historically accurate stereotype of Semitic Arabs victimizing black Africans is inaccurate in the case of Sudan, but as African-Americans, we should be especially sensitive to, and wary of, the discounting of black-on-black violence, or of people who use it to excuse the profound and shocking silence on the part of the African-American community in the matter of Darfur.

    We, the descendants of slaves, should know better. Human life is human life.

    Apparently, however, a traditionally provincial population in international affairs; an inexplicably undiscerning press; and a targeted, cynically calculated disinformation campaign – weak as it is – that panders to long-standing ideological hostilities and a well-earned distrust of U.S. foreign policy objectives can turn even Arab “I ain’t black” Bashir into Soul Brother Number 1 in some sectors of the African-American community.

    And why not?

    The Godfather is dead and buried – finally. The title is up for grabs.

    Kathleen Wills
    Washington, D.C.

  2. Whoa. I didn’t know this was going to actually appear.

    Here’s the revised version with some important info I didn’t include in the first version for fear it would be too long. But in this venue — who cares? ;)
    ——

    I don’t buy it.

    What Askia Muhammad offers readers instead of a reasoned analysis of the Darfur situation in “Darfur and the Sudan ‘Hustle’” (Washington Informer, Thursday, June 7) is far from convincing. It causes me to wonder, “Who’s hustling whom?”

    I am an activist, what many would call a “leftist.” I am inherently distrustful of U.S. foreign policy objectives, generally, but particularly as they relate to people of color – and this is true in spades on the African continent. I also am a Darfur activist.

    But I’m not Jewish. I’m not white. I am a pan-Africanist, a student of history, an anti-Zionist African-American. And I have not, to use Muhammad’s words, “been duped.”

    Muhammad’s arguments are all over the place and completely miss the mark. How can one, after all, propose to address honestly the matter of Darfur with barely a mumblin’ word about Khartoum’s devastating and appalling record of human rights abuses, on a massive scale, against its marginalized populations?

    The Save Darfur Coalition

    I won’t respond to Muhammad’s column point by point; however, I will say, first, two things about the Save Darfur Coalition. It is unfair to castigate an education and advocacy organization for not delivering direct aid. It’s not “hustling” to use funds for education, outreach and lobbying instead of for humanitarian assistance, which clearly is not its mission. In its own words, Save Darfur solicits contributions through its website and other means to fund “crucial awareness and advocacy programs that play a critical role in building … political pressure …to end the crisis in Darfur.”

    And about David Rubenstein: he likely would not have felt the need to place full-page ads in the black press if there weren’t so many misinformed and disinformed black folk demagoguing the issue of Darfur out of opposition to the Zionist lobby, Muslim solidarity, or out of some sense of common cause with Arabs, ostensibly because they are Third World people of color and because of the plight of the Palestinian people.

    The Nation of Islam and Muslim Solidarity

    The Nation of Islam has my respect and gratitude for its groundbreaking work with substance abusers, prostitutes, ex-cons and just struggling, working-class black folk when many “respectable” black churches didn’t care, and for advancing black consciousness and our struggle for justice here in this country. But when it comes to the sometimes mind-numbing, facile polemics of anti-imperialist, anti-Zionist, leftist political correctness, NOI spokesperson and minister Louis Farrakhan has few, if any, peers. In recent years, he has forged working alliances with the likes of Sun Myung Moon of the Unification Church and Lyndon LaRouche, both of whom, not coincidentally, are stinking rich. In recent years, their organizations have mounted well-funded recruitment efforts aimed at making inroads into the African-American community. And Farrakhan has been cozy with Khartoum since at least his “World Friendship Tour” in 1996. Sudan’s president Omar Hassan al-Bashir addressed the Nation’s annual Founder’s Day gathering this year in Chicago via satellite, at one point taking questions from the faithful; and the minister and at least one of his lieutenants, at Bashir’s invitation, helped wrangle a delegation of African-American journalists to fly to Sudan to get the “real scoop” on Darfur.

    Anybody remember the often co-opted reporting of the embedded press during the 2003 Iraq invasion?

    The Destruction of Black Civilization

    Bashir is just one in a line of Sudanese heads of state whose stated purpose has been the Arabization of Sudan, with a history of marginalizing and denying government services to Sudanese who do not self-identify as Arab. He has no use for them – only their land.

    In the West, the people of Darfur have been victimized by all manner of depredations and threatened with literal extinction. In the South, the death toll is officially and undisputedly at 2 million non-“Arab,” black Southern Sudanese, the victims of a bloody civil war when some of their number finally rose up and said “no more.” Never mind that, presently, while the Government of Sudan continues to reap millions in oil wealth from the oil-rich South, it spends less than ½ of 1 percent of its total GDP there. That means no roads, no schools, no hospitals, no water projects, no electricity – nada.

    The only attention Darfur receives from Khartoum is of the unwanted kind: helicopter gunships, Antonov bombers and government troops on the ground, who soften up civilian targets for government-armed and -funded Janjaweed militias, who in turn burn and ransack villages, poison wells, rape, mutilate and murder innocents at will. There are highly credible accounts going back several months that the Sudan government has painted planes to masquerade as UN and African Union aircraft while ferrying arms and military hardware to Janjaweed militias. Thus, Bashir fuels the existing conflict, using these “devils on horseback” to do his dirty work of obliterating the people of Darfur. He then blames the mounting death toll, the massive displacement on “rebel conflict,” disavowing any involvement or responsibility – until earlier this year, when the evidence was so irrefutable, Bashir himself had to admit that the government had bombed “rebel” villages in Darfur. For him, this shell game is a threefer: advancing Arabization, removing any possible political opposition, and consolidation of control over the region’s land and oil wealth.

    The Nuba in the North have long been victimized by a government Arabization campaign and now are at risk of losing, to hydroelectric projects at Meroe and Kajbar, their homelands, as well as the ancient archaeological treasures of a culture that gave rise to Egyptian dynastic civilization. The proposed dams not only would obliterate ancient Nubian archaeological sites, they would grow dramatically the population of displaced Sudanese – already estimated at about 2,150,000 from the Darfur genocide alone – and threaten to cause water wars in neighboring nations.

    The situation in Nubia is eerily reminiscent of what happened in Egypt in more ways than one. The Aswan High Dam was built and went online in the 1964. It flooded much of lower Nubia, destroyed untold archaeological treasures and displaced over 90,000 people. Even more profoundly, however, and farther back in time, Arabs conquered Egypt in 700 A.D., more than 3,500 years after the foundation of dynastic Egypt was laid with the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt – by a black king. And now, a little more than 1,300 years later, Egypt is the seat of the Arab world, its population and much of the rest of the world in complete and utter denial of its black African heritage. I cringe at the possibility of what Sudan might look like even 40 years hence, given the accelerated pace of the assault on the non-“Arab” blacks of Sudan.

    In fact, were he alive today, noted historian Chancellor Williams could write a sequel to his masterwork The Destruction of Black Civilization: Great Issues of a Race Between 4500 B.C. and 2000 A.D. devoted alone to the 21-year conflict in the south of Sudan, the Darfur genocide, and the hydroelectric projects in the North that Muhammad so glibly touts in his column.

    Should the ongoing campaign to Arabize Sudan succeed, with the marginalization, slaughter and displacement of non-“Arab” populations by the Bashir regime left to continue, Sudan will become, like Egypt, an Arab nation, more closely aligned politically with the Middle East than with Africa. So much for Muhammad’s specious contention that “Sudan has the potential of being a bridge between Islamic Arab North Africa and Bantu Black sub-Saharan Africa.” Khartoum repeatedly has responded to the indigenous, black Bantu peoples of its own nation with marginalization, exploitation, cultural aggression, dislocation and genocide. There is no reason to believe – or even hope – that its response to sub-Saharan Africa will be to extend the hand of brotherhood.

    Apparently, however, an African-American population traditionally provincial when it comes to international affairs; an inexplicably undiscerning or silent black press; and a targeted, cynically calculated disinformation campaign – nonsensical as it is – that panders to long-standing ideological hostilities and a well-earned distrust of U.S. foreign policy objectives can turn even Arab “I Ain’t Black” Bashir into Soul Brother Number 1 in some sectors of the African-American community.

    And why not?

    The Godfather is dead and buried – finally – and Michael Jackson is white, tragically confused and living in Bahrain. The title is up for grabs.

    The Judgment of History

    What is common knowledge elsewhere curiously seems to carry little weight among many in the African American community – that Bashir is a lying, murderous scoundrel and a war criminal. Chad threatened to quit the organization if Bashir became head of the African Union, and other African nations protested vociferously until the baton was passed instead to the president of Ghana earlier this year. And Bashir is a racist. After all, black self-loathing and denial is nothing but anti-black racism internalized, and, unfortunately, the dark-skinned Bashir, like far too many of our black and Muslim brothers and sisters in East Africa, self-identifies as an Arab – not as a black man. That “they’re all black!” and couldn’t pass the paper bag test, as Muhammad correctly asserts, doesn’t change the fact that Bashir and his henchmen are targeting and ruthlessly exterminating non-“Arab” blacks like vermin. Of course, the historically accurate stereotype of Semitic Arabs victimizing black Africans is not the case in Sudan, but as African-Americans, we should be especially sensitive to, and wary of, the discounting of black-on-black violence, or of people who use it to justify the profound and shocking silence on the part of much of the African-American community in the matter of Darfur.

    We, the descendants of slaves, should know better. Human life is human life.

    So, what will we tell our grandchildren should the non-“Arab” peoples of Darfur, the South and the Nuba Mountains recede into history as victims of ongoing warfare and cynical neglect directed at them by their own government, as casualties of the first genocide of the twenty-first century? If their once thriving villages and cultures disappear into the dust, the drifting, uprooted survivors left to subsist in miserable refugee gulags dotted throughout Chad and the rest of the region? How will we, as African Americans, explain our failure to speak out, to act, to stand with the people of Darfur? What will we tell our grandchildren when they ask, “Grandpa, Grandma, why didn’t you do something?”

    What will be the unblinking judgment of history and our progeny?

    It will be one of ignorance, apathy, laziness and astounding gullibility in the face of smug, lying, unctuous demagogues spouting the flimsiest of rhetoric in defense of a ruthless tyrant. It will be that our inertia, suspicion of the U.S. government and our opposition to the Zionist lobby were greater than our moral outrage at preventable human suffering; greater than our sense of duty to the sacred legacy of struggle, overcoming and humanity bequeathed to us by our ancestors – and, tragically, shamefully, far greater than the love we possessed for our own people.

    Kathleen Holt Wills
    Black Voices for Darfur

  3. Another example of the wrong-headedness of Askia Muhammad and other apologists and shills for the NOI, like Akbar Muhammad, who headed up a delegation of African-American businessmen to Sudan to explore investment opportunities: http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article22143

    At least recent U.S. sanctions will put the kabosh on that crap.

    In part the linked article states: “A delegation of US businessmen is currently in Khartoum to explore business opportunities in different sectors, Sudanese media reported. The visit was organized by the Sudanese investment ministry to a group of 23 American investors working in the fields of agriculture, manufacturing, dam construction, education and health. Sources told Sudan Tribune that the delegation is led by Akbar Muhammad the international representative of the US Black Muslim movement, Nation of Islam.”

    Dam construction, huh? Like the hydroelectric projects underway in Nubia? Would you like to see the kind of thing the Nation of Islam is promoting? Would you like to see how the Government of Sudan reacts to peaceful demonstrators protesting a dam under construction that will flood Nubia, displace thousands of non-“Arab” black peoples — without any planned compensation or plans for relocation of inhabitants whatsoever tendered by the GoS? Take a look at what happened at Kajbar less than two weeks ago.

    http://www.sudaneseonline.com/cgi-bin/sdb/2bb.cgi?seq=msg&board=100&msg=1182151292

    Sudanese security forces ambushed a group of peaceful Nubians protesting the dam at Kajbar with tear gas and live ammunition, killing six and wounding scores of others. When demonstrators sought refuge behind a stand of date palms, forces set the trees ablaze and later obstructed doctors’ access to the wounded.

    Someone ought to investigate people like Akbar Muhammad and Louis Farrakhan, because if they haven’t been required to register as agents of a foreign government (Sudan) in the U.S., it sure seems to me they ought to. Betcha they’re on the payroll.

    Nothing but blood money. The blood of innocent black people is on their hands.

    And Askia Muhammad, you say you USED to be “embarrassed” about not speaking out on Darfur and that butcher in Khartoum?

    Hell. You should be MORE than embarrassed. You should be so humiliated, so ashamed, you should want to crawl in a hole and pull it in after you.

  4. Pingback: The Devil of ‘Arabism’ - 101 « Arab racism Islamo fascism

  5. Hello,

    Great article on Sudan and “Save Darfur = More War”

    We are working on this also.

    Boston Anti Zionist Action
    http://www.bazabaza.blogspot.com

    Do you know anyone else we can contact to help stop the war on Sudan?

    Pete

    Stop the U.S. and Zionist War Against Sudan

    By David Rolde October 2006

    The United States has been waging war against Sudan for the past 15 years, and we need to stop it. Justlike with Iraq, the U.S. war against Sudan is a war for oil and a war for Israel. The proposed invasion of Sudan is based on lies. The lie of accusing the government of Sudan of “genocide in Darfur” serves the same function as the lie a few years ago accusing the government of Iraq of “possessing weapons of mass destruction.” The U.S. government, and its allies the Israeli and UK governments, are the real world champion purveyors of genocide and possessors of WMDs.

    Sudan, the geographically largest country in Africa and the home of 35 million people, has been devastated by U.S. attacks for the past 15 years. In the early 90s the U.S. government declared Sudan to be a “state sponsor of terrorism” because the government of Sudan does not support Israel. The U.S. government imposed sanctions against Sudan. The U.S. sanctions and trade boycott escalated in severity several times during the 90s and 00s and damaged the Sudanese economy causing immense human suffering. Throughout the 90s the U.S. government armed and funded the SPLA rebels in the south of Sudan in a war against the Sudanese government, and against rival southern groups, in which millions of persons were killed or displaced. Millions of southern refugees fled from the SPLA and now live in Khartoum, the northern capital. The culmination of U.S. support for war in Sudan was the so-called “Sudan Peace Act”, signed by George W Bush in 2002, which allocated one hundred million dollars per year to the SPLA.

    One notable episode of the US war against Sudan happened in 1998 when the U.S. government of Bill Clinton, with a missile strike, destroyed Sudan’s only pharmaceutical plant, the al-Shifa plant near Khartoum. This rendered Sudan unable to produce needed human medications to treat endemic diseases such as malaria and also veterinary medicines needed by Sudan’s livestock industry which is a major part of the livelihood of the people of Sudan.

    In 2004, during the U.S. presidential election campaign, the U.S. government started leveling false allegations of “genocide” against the Sudanese government in regards to the new civil war in Darfur in the west of Sudan. The U.S. media and pro-imperialist “human rights” organizations (such as Human Rights Watch which is controlled by billionaire George Soros and the Council on Foreign Relations) falsely portrayed the conflict in Darfur as a slaughter of Black Africans by a “White Arab” Sudanese government. In reality it was a civil war among many armed groups, some of which were supported by the US and Israelis, fighting over limited resources in an impoverished region. Nearly everyone in Sudan is a Black African. And nearly everyone in Darfur is a Black African Arabic-speaking Muslim. The numbers cited for the “genocide” in Darfur were inflated estimates of how many people might die from famine and disease.

    This year the propaganda against Sudan in the United States has intensified again. On April 30, 2006, the U.S. government in conjunction with U.S. Zionist groups, staged a large pro-war rally in Washington DC. U.S. congresspersons, as well as members of the Bush administration, spoke at the rally calling for the war against Sudan to be escalated by sending in an invasion force of U.N., NATO or U.S. troops. Nearly every major pro israel group in the USA has anti-Sudan “genocide in Darfur” propaganda on the front of their website. In Massachusetts an example of a Zionist group doing pro-war activism is the Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC) of Greater Boston.

    The anti-Sudan rhetoric is no different than the rhetoric that the U.S. government uses against other countries that the United States is attacking. One aim of U.S. attacks against Sudan is to gain or maintain control over Sudan’s natural resources: notably petroleum but also uranium, other minerals, gum arabic, and the Nile River which supplies water to Egypt. China currently has access to oil from Sudan, and the U.S. government wants to cut China off. Destabilizing and impoverishing Sudan serves American and Israeli hegemonic interests to make sure there are no prosperous independent nations in the Middle East and North African regions.

    But within the United States the anti-Sudan rhetoric is useful for more than just getting Americans ready for more overt war against Sudan. Anti-Arab and anti-Muslim rhetoric regarding Sudan is part of the general anti-Arab and anti-Muslim propaganda that is used to gain U.S. domestic support for the war in Iraq, continued U.S. support for Israel, and the so-called “war on terror.” Zionist groups in the United States have been purveying anti-Arab propaganda regarding Sudan for many years before the Darfur war, making false claims about “slavery” in Sudan. Slave redemption efforts in Sudan have been shown to be a hoax. Divesting from Sudan is a Zionist anti-Arab counter-proposal to the idea of divesting from Israel. Lies about Arabs divert attention from efforts to end Israeli apartheid in Palestine.

    On September 1, 2006, the US rammed a resolution through the UN Security Council calling for tens of thousands of UN troops, ostensibly “peace-keepers” but really an imperialist invasion force, to be sent to Darfur to replace the current smaller US-puppet African Union force. On September 17, Zionists and other pro-war Americans held an anti-Sudan rally in Central Park in New York City. The keynote speaker at the rally was Madeleine Albright, Clinton’s Secretary of State, who is infamous for having admitted that the Clinton administration and the UN had killed half a million Iraqi children through the sanctions in the 90s but nevertheless defending the actions against Iraq as worthwhile. Rally attendees were asked to wear blue hats to signify their desire to send “blue helmet” UN troops to invade Sudan. These UN troops would not be “peace-keepers”. We can see the likely outcome by looking at Haiti where, in 2004, the US deposed the legitimate government and then sent in a UN occupation force which has terrorized the country and brutalized the Haitian people. When foreign UN soldiers get to Darfur and can’t determine which Black Arabic-speaking Muslims are the “bad Arabs” and which are the “good Africans”, the UN troops will kill people indiscriminately. The Sudanese people will rightly resist. The situation will escalate. US warmongers will call for sending more troops, including US troops, and bringing the war to Khartoum. It will be a disaster. The US war against Sudan needs to be stopped and reversed now.