THE TRAGEDY OF THE "BLACK CONTINENT"

In the 1990s when the world had only just discovered the truth of what was going on in Somalia, an employee of a humanitarian organization said gloomily in a hospital ward full of children dying of starvation: "Do you imagine what kind of fuss they would make if this was going on in the Balkans? But this is Africa and no-one cares about this tragedy."

Since that time, the world has changed very little, alas, and the "value" of blood spilt on the African continent is considerably lower than casualties in Europe, America or the Middle East. The media in the post-Soviet countries reflected the conflict in Sudan's Darfur only in the context of "the arms scandal". The international rights organization Amnesty International accused Moscow and Beijing of supplying weapons to the Sudanese government. In this regard, it also mentioned Belarus, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. 

We should recall that, in March 2005, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution No 1591 which, among other things, imposed an embargo on arms supplies to Sudan and demanded that Khartoum ask the UN for permission to move weapons to the province of Darfur in the west of the country. Over the last four years, more than 200,000 people have been killed there as a result of a conflict between the authorities and local Christian rebels. In turn, Amnesty International cites evidence that Sudan is not observing these requirements and "is continuing to redeploy and use foreign jets and other war planes,… as well as firearms and munitions… directly against the civilian population" in Darfur.

Strictly speaking, they are talking about the same old story with "white helicopters".

According to the BBC, Sudanese war planes and helicopters are often painted white in order to make them look like UN aircraft. "The use of completely white planes and helicopters in Darfur is a violation of all norms of international humanitarian law," Amnesty International says in a report based mainly on eyewitness accounts from Darfur and "confidential sources". As for Sudan, it denies having white war planes, but admits to having a certain number of white helicopters used by officials. Nevertheless, the report by the rights organization contains photographs, one of which, taken in the village of Niala in Darfur between January and March this year, shows a white Mi-24 helicopter gunship. Another picture shows an An-26 military-transport plane painted white, with registration number ST-ZZZ. Three planes with this number were noticed, and the document links their presence to the "unconfirmed bombings in Darfur".

For this reason, in its report Amnesty International expressed open outrage that individual governments, including two permanent members of the UN Security Council, are not blocking the flow of arms to the warring sides in Sudan.

According to the media, at various times this African country has purchased a considerable number of Russian-made weapons, both directly from Russia and from third countries. However, Moscow, as was expected, flatly denied the accusations. "Russia is cooperating with Sudan in the military-technical sphere strictly in line with international norms and on the basis of bilateral relations. The Russian side also fully and unconditionally observes all UN requirements regarding the embargo on arms supplies to Darfur," an official spokesman for the Russian Foreign Ministry, Mikhail Kamynin, told the BBC.

"Unlike a number of other countries, Russia has never supplied weapons to 'hotbeds of tension'. Not a single state can accuse us of violating international norms and rules of arms supplies abroad. There are no such facts. The information in the Amnesty International report is complete misinformation of the world community," a Russian official who requested anonymity told the Interfax news agency. Meanwhile, the director of the Moscow Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, Ruslan Pukhov, pointed out that Russia had actually supplied weapons to Sudan, but this does not mean that it is to blame for violating international commitments. "Russia has never concealed this and has submitted information to the UN that four types of hardware, including military hardware, had been handed over to Sudan. These are 12 MiG-29 jets, 30 armoured personnel carriers BTR-80, more than 15 Mi-17 military-transport helicopters and Mi-24 and Mi-25 helicopter gunships, of which five were supplied. There is no accurate information about this. This was related to the implementation of our obligations within the framework of the UN and to the fact that the situation is very complicated in the region. Our exports are on the increase anyway. For example, the contract for the 12 planes (sold to Khartoum) was extremely important to the MiG corporation at the time. We now have big contracts with Venezuela, Algeria, China and India, we are working on a major contract with Saudi Arabia, and the Sudanese market is extremely marginal for us. For this reason, even if there was no UN Security Council resolution, we would probably refrain from supplying, because our reputation is much more important to us," Pukhov explained.

At the same time, he suggested considering the positions of various sides: "Rights champions absolutely fairly inform the public about what is going on in various parts of the world and arms manufacturers and sellers understand that we have to keep people working in Ulan-Ude, Kazan and adjacent enterprises, so that Russian workers have jobs. You should always seek a reasonable compromise where there is no ban and where there is no direct interference with the international obligations of the Russian Federation. For this reason, the Russian Federation has not violated international commitments yet." Moreover, the expert also said that most of the Darfur tragedy victims died from light, small arms which Russia had not supplied to Sudan. "We have only two customers who buy light, small arms - Libya and Venezuela," Ruslan Pukhov recalled.

There is another factor evident in all this. The slanging match between Amnesty International and Russia about Sudan coincides quite conveniently with the constant accusations from the USA, Israel and other countries about Russian arms supplies to countries like Syria, Iran and Venezuela.

At the same time, the conflict in Sudan which has already been recognized as one of the biggest tragedies of the modern period, and the biggest humanitarian catastrophe, remains in the background - also because it is very difficult to talk about certain geopolitical factors, confidential negotiations and the control of some intriguing "strategic raw materials" here. What we are talking about is a very old problem in Africa - tribalism and tribal strife. Most of Sudan's people are Muslim Arabs. However, the southern part of the country, mainly Darfur, is populated by non-Arab people - Negroid tribes, among whom there are Christians and pagans. Officially, the Darfur conflict began in February 2003 when these same non-Arab people started an uprising here to fight what they called the usurping of their rights by a government that represents the interests of Sudan's Arabic population. In reply, the official authorities sent troops to the south; they were helped by the local militia called the Janjavid.

The four-year-long conflict in Darfur, which involves black rebels on the one hand and the pro-government Arab militia Janjavid on the other, has claimed more than 200,000 lives according to official reports. A further 2.4m residents of the region have become refugees.

"This is the greatest concentration of human suffering on the planet, this is a desecration of the moral values of the world," the international operations director of the British organization Oxfam, Penny Lawrence, said after visiting Darfur. 

Alas, the activities of many humanitarian organizations in the conflict zone are also questionable. This is not just about the well-known scandal of the UN staff accused of using children as sex slaves.

It was precisely in Sudan where the notorious Christian Solidarity Worldwide, led by the well-known Baroness Caroline Cox launched its campaign. Claiming that Muslim tribes capture and sell Darfur Christians as slaves, its activists bought them out of slavery. Then the happy and free slaves stood in front of the cameras and thanked Cox and her companions. While some people donated money, others asked uncomfortable questions: in fact, Cox and her companions are sponsoring the international slave trade, because a slave trader does not care who buys their slaves, be it Christian Solidarity or an ordinary buyer.

There is another aspect to the story here. Mikhail Margelov, chairman of the international affairs committee of the Russian Federation Council, is sure that the humanitarian catastrophe has long since turned into a business. "I have quite a depressing impression. There is a feeling that after the campaign regarding the problem of East Timor, the problem of the Middle East settlement will probably go on for decades, if not for centuries, because the UN needs some history of success. And probably, the interests of Western countries and international organizations overlap here. Let's deal together with the one big tragedy called Darfur! Tribal strife and kidnappings have been common there for many centuries. The same situation continues, but instead of bows and arrows, large-calibre machine guns are being used. I can say for sure that there are not millions of casualties there. I can say for sure that it is quite convenient for the leaders of various countries in this region for tribes to migrate from one country to another. It is very convenient to invite international officials and say: Look, we have refugees here! Then the same tribe will move to another country and the officials will move there as well. I mean there is an element of money-making in this humanitarian catastrophe," Margelov told the BBC. However, the catastrophe itself is no less tragic for this.