As
Sudan Ends Aid
Deal, Rice
Says If Not
Cooperate, "We
Have To Take
It Up"
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
November 8 --
It was on US
election day
that Sudan's
government
declared
"terminated"
the tripartite
agreement
with the UN,
African Union
and Arab
League to
provide
humanitarian
access and aid
to Southern
Kordofan and
Blue Nile
states.
On
Thursday
morning in
front of the
UN Security
Council, Inner
City
Press asked US
Ambassador
Susan Rice
again about
the tripartite
agreement, and
Khartoum
saying it is
over.
Ambassador
Rice
told Inner
City Press,
"Obviously
they've
resisted all
along, in a
way that's
nothing new.
The imperative
remains that
there's got to
be
humanitarian
access... and
if they don't
want to do
that in a
cooperative
way, we're
going to have
to take that
up."
The
Security
Council had a
meeting about
Libya into
which
Ambassador
Rice
was rushing,
so it was not
possible to
determine if
the "we"
to take up
humanitarian
access is the
Security
Council, which
has yet
to even speak
on the issue
of Abyei going
"off track,"
of
the re-elected
US
administration.
On
November
7, Inner
City Press
asked UN
spokesman
Martin Nesirky
about
Sudan ending
the tripartite
agreement:
Inner
City Press:
the Sudanese
Government has
announced that
it is ending
this
tripartite
agreement that
was to have
provided
humanitarian
aid
to Southern
Kordofan and
Blue Nile
States that
the UN was a
party to. They
blamed the
rebels for it,
but in any
case, they are
saying that
it is over. Is
there a UN
response to
that? Do they
think the
program should
go forward?
What do they
say about it?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Well, not just
the United
Nations, but
the United
Nations,
the African
Union and the
League of Arab
States are
concerned
about
the reports in
the media that
quote the
Sudanese
Commissioner
for
Humanitarian
Affairs as
saying that
the Tripartite
Memorandum of
Understanding
on
humanitarian
aid will not
be extended.
The
Tripartite
members -- in
other words,
the UN, the
African Union
and
the League of
Arab States --
have requested
an extension
of the
Memorandum of
Understanding,
so that they
can continue
working on the
initiative
with the
Government of
Sudan and with
the SPLM
[Sudan
People’s
Liberation
Movement]
North to
ensure that
urgently
needed
humanitarian
aid reaches
civilians
affected by
the conflict
in South
Kordofan and
Blue Nile
States. And
the UN and its
humanitarian
partners stand
ready to
provide
life-saving
assistance to
all people
affected by
the conflict,
when the
security
situation
permits. So,
just to
reiterate, the
Tripartite
Members have
requested an
extension
and stand
ready to
provide
assistance
when they can.
Would
Sudan be more
likely to
grant an
extension, or
access, if the
UN
Security
Council or US
administration
speaks? Watch
this site.
Footnote:
in Thursday's
Security
Council
meeting, new
UN envoy to
Libya Mitri
described
pro-US rallies
in Benghazi
after the
deadly
September 11
attack on the
US consulate,
but he did not
opine in any
way on the
roots of the
attack. This
is callled
diplomacy --
or deference
to the US. But
from Sudan on
Kordofan?
We'll see.
, 
