Nepali pro-democracy activists attend a protest rally in New Delhi. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi
Bin Laden adds to Darfur woes, Sudan dam-related killings, a new anti-HIV gel, and why has India gone soft on the Nepalese king?On top of all their existing problems, the conflict-ravaged people of Darfur could really do without Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden trying to drag them into his struggle against Western governments. In an audiotape message broadcast on Sunday, he pointed to the crisis in the troubled region of west Sudan as further proof the West is waging war on Islam. 'I call on mujahideen and their supporters, especially in Sudan and the Arabian peninsula, to prepare for long war against the crusader plunderers in western Sudan,' he was quoted as saying in Britain's Guardian newspaper.
Plans to send U.N. peacekeeping forces into Darfur to replace a struggling African Union mission seem to have served as a red rag to a bull. Abdel Bari Atwan, editor of al-Quds al-Arabi newspaper and author of a book on al-Qaeda, told the Guardian that this prospect, together with the weakness of the government in Khartoum, is creating 'an atmosphere he loves'. But if bin Laden is expecting the establishment of a new base in Sudan ' which sheltered him in the 1990s - to go swimmingly, he may need to think again.
The Sudan Tribunereports that one of the two main Darfur rebel groups has rejected the call to fight external interveners because this could lead Khartoum to crack down more heavily on Darfur. 'His words are completely disconnected from the reality in Darfur. Bin Laden is still preaching the theory of an American-Zionist conspiracy when the real problem comes from Khartoum, which is a Muslim government killing other Muslims,' Justice and Equality Movement official Ahmed Hussein was quoted as saying. According to the BBC, the Sudanese government has also distanced itself from bin Laden's appeal.
Given bin Laden's apparent desire to take on U.N. forces in Darfur, he might be disappointed to hear that peace talks among the warring parties in Darfur don't seem to be going too well. Khartoum has said it won't allow a U.N. mission in unless a deal is sealed and the African Union, which is mediating talks, has set a deadline for the end of April. According to the Sudan Tribune, Simon Ibok, head of the AU negotiating team, has said if there are no indications by then that a deal is possible, talks will be wound up.
Sudanese government representatives and the two rebel movements will be presented with a final draft agreement this week. But whether the talks succeed or fail, the fact that bin Laden has stated his interest in getting involved casts yet another shadow over the shattered lives of the three million people in Darfur who need daily humanitarian assistance.
***
Another group of people suffering in Sudan are those being displaced by the construction of one of Africa's largest hydropower projects. The Merowe Dam, north of Khartoum, is financed by China Exim Bank and a number of Middle Eastern backers, and is being built by Chinese and European companies, including Lahmeyer International, Alstom and ABB.
The International Rivers Network, (IRN), an advocacy group, has argued for some time that the resettlement conditions on offer from the government are likely to lead to severe poverty among the affected communities ' mainly because much of the land they're being allocated is in desert areas.
However, things now seem to be taking a turn for the worse. According to IRN and the Leadership Office of Hamdab Affected People (LOHAP), militia protecting the dam recently attacked a group from the Amri community, killing three people and wounding at least 50 others. The armed men, working for the government's dam authority, reportedly opened fire without warning on people having breakfast at a local school.
IRN's Peter Bosshard told AlertNet: 'The dam authorities have been taking steps to prepare for the resettlement of this community, and as part of that, they wanted to do a census. The villagers wouldn't participate, and so it is likely that the attack came in response to that.' IRN and LOHAP are calling on the international community 'to take immediate steps to protect the people affected by the Merowe Dam from further atrocities, and to investigate the massacre'.
***
Unusually, there's some potentially good news regarding HIV/AIDS. Scientists are gathering in Cape Town to study a gel that releases an active ingredient designed to kill HIV during sexual intercourse.
According to the BBC, the hope is that the product, known as microbicides, will be on the market in the next four years. It's now being trialled in Africa and India, and is expected to be of particular help to women, due to the difficulty of insisting on condom use during sex.
Interestingly, the article notes that most of the funding for the research, which began 15 years ago, comes from the U.S. and U.K. governments and the Gates Foundation, because pharmaceuticals companies have shown little interest in the product.
***
In Nepal, it seems that the embattled king's offer on Friday to allow political parties to form an executive was too little too late. He came across as arrogant (no hint of an apology for his power grab last year or the heavy handedness of the security forces during recent days) and as mainly trying to save his own bacon (no offer to restore parliament, create a constituent assembly or give up control of the army).
Rejection may have seemed the obvious course of action for political parties and civil society leaders in Nepal. But why were India and some Western countries so keen to get them to accept?
In a comment piece in the Guardian newspaper, Isabel Hilton describes how the ambassadors of the United States, Sweden, France, Britain and Germany visited the home of the leader of the Nepali Congress Party to try and get him to go with the king's offer. Believing that doing so would not end the war, and could in fact, lead to greater bloodshed, his answer was no.
Civil society leaders smuggled a letter out of jail in which they criticised the move by Western diplomats: 'Your reaction has needlessly delayed a peaceful transition in the country at a critical hour ' This show of people's solidarity ... deserves more respect than has been accorded by the international community."
The fact that India sent a special envoy to talk with the king before his pronouncement has rung alarm bells, and angered many in India, which last year helped broker a pro-democracy deal between the political parties and the Maoists. Hilton says this needs to be placed in the context of the U.S. 'war on terror' and its new strategic partnership with India.
At all costs, the U.S. wants to keep the Maoists out of power in Nepal, and has pressed the king and the army to step up the fight against them, according to Hilton. And, as she points out, the Indian press has not been slow to detect the link between this and the role India seems to be playing in the current crisis.
***
The blogosphere, meanwhile, has been buzzing with chatter on the situation in Nepal. Here's a sample of some of the voices out there.
Weeks of violent protests against Nepal's King Gyanendra are headed in name by a seven-party alliance, but the invisible hand of Maoist guerrillas, who control over a third of the countryside, is dominating the campaign.Peace_lover, United We Blog! for a Democratic Nepal
The king is nowhere close to seeing the light. He is nowhere close to seeing that a political decision has to be taken to take the country to a constituent assembly. All he is trying to do is diffuse the situation. He wants to trick the people into going back into their homes, off the streets. He tried tear gas, he tried imprisonment, he tried killing people. None of that worked. All of that backfired. Now he has used his ultimate weapon: a speech. I expect it to backfire even more.Paramendra Bhagat, Democracy for Nepal
If he won't give up power, we'll have to drag him out and make him give it up then. Drag him out in his pajamas.manan, United We Blog! For a Democratic Nepal
I appreciate the King's step in search for peace. Some may say that he was forced to but I do not think so ... This a good gesture form the king and if he had not declared it today, more people would have died.Pradeep Chand, WeBlogNepal
Maoist insurgents control 80% of the countryside and have set up working, alternative governments. Nepal's seven main parliamentary parties are allied against the King, but do not support the Maoists, although all have joined in a united front against the King.They did not do this out of ideological unity. The reason that the parliamentary parties have come out in opposition to the monarchy and formed a tactical alliance with the communist insurgents is the strength of the insurgency itself. Bob, Politics in the Zeros
Megan Rowling and Tim Large AlertNet journalists
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
