The Sudan SequelWashington Post, 15 October 2000

THE
CLINTON administration scored a welcome victory last Tuesday, when a vote at the
United Nations overturned Sudan’s expectation of a two-year term as Africa’s representative on
the U.N. Security Council. Sudan’s dictatorship is among the world’s most appalling; it deserves
much of the blame for a civil war that has killed 2 million people; it is subject to U.N. sanctions
and has bombed U.N. relief operations, making the idea that it might sit on the U.N. Security
Council preposterous. But the Africa seat rotates; Sudan’s turn had come up; and until the
administration began to work the issue, Sudan’s ascent seemed likely. The surprise election
instead of Mauritius goes to show what U.S. diplomacy can achieve when it is pursued with
determination.

The administration now needs to capitalize on its victory. Tuesday’s vote suggests that, when
given the chance to vote secretly, most of the world is ready to deny Sudan respectability.
Moreover, a similar momentum to isolate Sudan exists among international investors, who have
been dumping stock in companies with involvement in Sudan’s oil region, such as Canada’s
Talisman Energy and China’s PetroChina. But the pressure on Sudan is reduced by the
willingness of some countries to ignore the dictatorship’s failings. The next challenge for the
United States is to win over Sudan’s friends, or at least to embarrass them.

The chief targets of this campaign should be Malaysia, Canada and China, whose oil firms
are
working to expand Sudan’s energy exports and so to pay for its war against the southern rebels.
Of these, Malaysia is particularly brazen; its state oil company, Petronas, seems intent on taking
stakes in fields that can only be developed if the Sudanese army first succeeds in keeping the
rebels at bay by displacing civilians in the area with brutal, scorched-earth tactics. Canada,
meanwhile, is more likely to be persuadable; last year the government considered acting against
Talisman for its involvement in Sudan, though it backed off in the face of lobbyists. China, for
its part, stands to lose money if its Sudan links are publicized. Petrochina, a state firm, has
already lost $ 2 billion or more as a result of the divestment campaign. And a second state energy
firm with Sudanese links, Sinopec Corp., is soon to be listed on the stockmarkets of Hong Kong,
New York and London, making it vulnerable to embarrassing publicity.

Sudan’s government has resisted peace talks with the rebels; it has refused to hold elections;
it
has callously frustrated international relief efforts directed at its starving people. Under continued
pressure, there is a chance that the regime will crack; the rebels have reportedly made some
battlefield gains recently, and there are coup rumors in the capital. Of course, there is no
guarantee that a successor government would bring peace. But it could hardly be worse than the
present dictatorship.