Once a rallying cry, Save Darfur now lost amid global conflict

It was one of the first rallying cries of the Information Age. Before hashtags, Save Darfur galvanized global attention to demand action against a genocide that began 13 years ago in western Sudan. A feat of grassroots lobbying, it mobilized civil society, celebrities, and public awareness into a campaign that bridged analog and digital divides. Yet flooded with activism, the cry to Save Darfur drowned out as the genocide dragged on, and by the time Amnesty International revealed chemical weapons attacks this past month, it had fallen flat.

The movement peaked in the mid ‘00s, going global and achieving significant policy. In Washington, President Bush acquiesced to the term genocide and vowed “not on my watch” as Congress released billions in record humanitarian aid. In New York, the United Nations deployed over 10,000 troops to Darfur, launching one of its largest peacekeeping missions at the time. And in The Hague, the International Criminal Court (ICC) indicted its first head of state, Sudanese President Omar Bashir, for crimes against humanity.

Last month, under this shadow of global fatigue, human rights group Amnesty International shed light on allegations that Bashir’s government has serially used chemical weapons in Jebel Marra, a remote region of central Darfur, killing more than 250 people and permanently wounding hundreds, in violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). The report came as a surprise to many, with Security Council diplomats expressing shock that Sudan maintained chemical stockpiles, no less that it has used them for the better part of this year. Yet, for most of the public, it simply failed to filter through the news cycle.

Such is the opacity of today’s Darfur, once a beacon of global attention, now as shrouded as it is isolated. The volcanic ridges of Jebel Marra, home to more than 100,000 people, are so inaccessible that Amnesty International had to conduct its assessment remotely, examining satellite imagery and interviewing displaced survivors. There is no footage of chemical attacks, videos of convulsing bodies, nor soil samples. This enables Sudan to undermine the report by pointing to its lack of on-the-ground evidence, which the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) requires to enforce the CWC. Of course, Jebel Marra’s isolation is entirely a product of Sudan’s making: by depriving the region of infrastructure, bombarding it, and refusing travel permits even to peacekeepers, Sudan has strategically cut it off from the outside world.

As it turns out, there’s no red line in the sand of a desert no one can see. Yet, chemical weapon attacks are intolerable no matter where they occur, and Amnesty’s findings should bring Darfur back from the shadows, where the international community still harbors resources to make a difference:

Firstly, the OPCW should push ahead with inspections of Jebel Marra regardless of Sudan’s resistance, with UN-AU peacekeepers exercising their right to access the region lest their mandate be enhanced and new sanctions introduced. Moreover, if last decade’s atrocities weren’t enough, chemical weapons should finally make Bashir a pariah on his own continent and restrict his movement. Recent cases in South Africa and Uganda, where governments were sued for failing to arrest Bashir in-country, show civil society can hold leaders accountable for abetting him.

Finally, by speaking out once more, the public can demonstrate that global consciousness is not a zero-sum game, and if we condemn images of chemical attacks in Syria we also remember those outside the camera lens, and that Save Darfur is still a rally worth crying.

Michael Clyne is a political risk analyst specializing in Africa.