Darfur rebel unity proves elusive

By Karen Allen
BBC News, Arusha, Tanzania

Rebel leaders have agreed on a common position

When Darfur's rebel leaders and international envoys packed their bags and left Arusha in Tanzania on Monday, they knew the hard work had only just begun.

They may have agreed on a common platform on issues such as power sharing, security, land, humanitarian affairs and compensation, but there are two more pressing tasks in their inbox:

• First, to appoint a "leader" or "committee" who will head up any future negotiations with Khartoum
• Second, to try to bring on side the rebel leaders who were left out of the deal, either through personal choice or circumstance.

Throughout the closed-door meeting, a chair was left empty for Abdul Wahid: an acknowledgement of the influence he still wields.

There is no doubt that the UN Security Council's decision to send more peacekeepers into Darfur has galvanised the rebel movement to put aside issues of personality and try to focus on a common agenda.

Details of that "common agenda" were handed in a sealed envelope to the UN's special envoy to Sudan, Jan Eliasson, as he left the fresh air of Arusha and headed for the dry heat of Khartoum.

Key absentees

He is now in meetings with the government of Sudan, to try and sell the idea of fresh talks, and agree on practicalities and timetables.

The rebel movement in Darfur has fractured over the last year

So far, the response in Khartoum seems to have been positive.

But will the UN and African mediators be able to bring in those who remained absent from the talks?

Suleiman Jamous, widely seen as a unifying figure in the broad grouping of the Sudanese Liberation Army (SLA) lay in a UN hospital bed in Kordofan while his colleagues were thrashing out policy.

Largely seen as a political agitator, he has been threatened with arrest by the authorities in Khartoum, but the mediators recognise his role will be crucial and have kept him up to speed with negotiations by telephone.

Even the actress and UN goodwill ambassador Mia Farrow has offered to "take his place" to enable him to participate in any future talks. Not surprisingly, perhaps, Ms Farrow has not been taken up on the offer.

Then there is Abdul Wahid - the father of the rebel movement and first chairman of the SLA, who boycotted talks for two reasons.

Firstly, because they were being held while Darfur is essentially still "at war", and secondly, because in his view, they rewarded factionalism.

It is true that since its inception, the SLA has been dogged by in-fighting which rapidly got worse when Minni Minawi's faction of the SLA signed the Darfur peace agreement in 2006.

'Parallel process'

But given this reality, and the fact that any peace deal would fail without the participation of key players, international mediators seemed to have little choice but to bring the parties together for what their jargon calls "pre-negotiation talks".

KEY REBEL PLAYERS SLM: Minni Minnawi's faction signed 2006 peace deal SLM: Abdul Wahid Mohammad Ahmed al-Nur's faction rejected peace deal Jem: Khalil Ibrahim, one of the first rebel groups, rejected deal Rebel negotiator: Suleiman Jamous SLM Unity: Abdallah Yehia UFLD: recently formed umbrella group including SLM commanders Other breakaway SLM commanders: Mahjoub Hussein, Jar el-Neby and Suleiman Marajan There are estimated to be more than 13 rebel factions in Darfur

Throughout the closed-door meeting, a chair was left empty for Abdul Wahid: a largely symbolic gesture, but nevertheless an acknowledgement of the influence he still wields.

Although his political clout has waned in recent months, he is still a symbolic figure in many of the camps in Darfur.

He is held in close affection by Darfur's largest ethnic group, the Fur, but is renowned for his chaotic style of leadership and erratic decision making.

Although mediators have said no single individual will "veto" the talks, efforts will be made to "woo him" as he "manages" his rebellion from a Paris base.

As hurried efforts are now made to raise the cash and the troops to send more than 19,000 extra peacekeepers in to Darfur, there will be pressure to start a parallel peace process in the coming months.

By now it is almost a cliche to ask what is the point of peacekeepers "when there's no peace to keep".

Yet the question reflects a genuine concern that talks need to get swiftly back on track if there is to be any chance of calming this troubled region.

Avoiding same mistakes

The Darfur peace agreement failed because of hurried attempts to secure a deal and get UN peacekeepers in.

They did not get a deal and they did not get UN peacekeepers. Instead security rapidly worsened in Darfur.

Fragmented rebel factions targeted humanitarian groups to kit themselves out with vehicles, satellite telephones and other necessities to assert their presence in the battle for Darfur.

The people who ended up worst off were the civilians, who found themselves deprived of humanitarian assistance for periods of time when aid agencies had to suspend operations.

Many in humanitarian circles are concerned that the same mistake not be made again.

If a majority of rebel factions can cement the ties that were nurtured in Arusha and sustain them for longer than an August weekend, then peace may have a real chance in Darfur.