SURVIVORS' RIGHTS INTERNATIONAL | Sudan Alert URGENT

The Government of Sudan's policy of religious persecution and genocide targeting innocent civilians is of grave concern. Many activists and human rights organizations suspect that Wall Street investment firms have been fervently lobbying Washington to exclude capital markets sanctions from the final version of the Sudan Peace Act. The capital markets sanctions proposed in the House version of this bill provides a strong and effective means for pressuring Khartoum to seek peace in good faith and halt atrocities. Capital markets sanctions would not be precedent setting, but would remain an exception in policy for dealing with fundamentalist governments committing genocide that are funding atrocities at an alarming level over a considerable length of time with the help of American dollars. The House-approved version of this peace initiative should be firmly supported, as opposed to supporting continued "oil blood" revenues for investment firms that are fearful of losing a portion of the profits they are receiving from those foreign oil companies operating in Sudan that are also raising money on U.S. markets.

The Government of Sudan (GoS) has refused to halt its egregious policy of bombing innocent civilian and humanitarian sites, continues to deny civilian displacement due to oil efforts, slavery, use of militias, racism and religious persecution. The GoS has been reported as now using short-range tactical ballistic missiles in southern Sudan. Humanitarian workers have reported seeing more mass displacement via GoS's scorched-earth policy due to increased oil development and exploration in new areas of southern Sudan. The GoS has denied and extensively delayed issuing visas to U.S. nationals working for non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in humanitarian aid programs in government-controlled areas. The GoS is now proposing a visa regime for all humanitarian workers (U.N. Operation Lifeline Sudan (OLS) and non-OLS) that would require a visa for each individual humanitarian worker in opposition-controlled areas of Sudan. The GoS continues to allow only one official airstrip to be used in the Nuba Mountains thereby immensely complicating relief efforts. The GoS has signed new agreements with various countries to begin oil exploration and/or development, and to export oil to new countries such as Kenya (key country involved in the peace initiative through the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development Agency (IGAD)). Selling oil to an IGAD member such as Kenya, should Sudan implement the proposed visa regime for aid workers in opposition-controlled areas of Sudan, could not only frustrate the peace process, but could severely affect the ability of OLS and non-OLS NGOs to access those civilians desperately in need in southern Sudan, and potentially Sudanese refugees in Kenya.

The U.S. has expressed condemnation and concern in regard to all of the actions of the GoS mentioned herein. The Bush Administration has placed Sudan as a top priority and is working to adopt a policy that will bring peace to Sudan. Yet, the U.S. has chosen to patiently test the GoS with incremental challenges in effort to gauge the GoS's sincerity for peace talks and renewal of diplomatic relations with the U.S. It is hard to imagine in what manner the GoS might be passing some of these tests of sincerity to negotiate peace when the GoS continues unabatedly a string of horrific genocidal atrocities upon its civilians. The GoS is clearly still a government not be trusted, despite the GoS's remission of any apparent relations with terrorists groups or the harboring of terrorists within its borders.

Therefore, it is particularly troubling that the Senate version of this bill omits any finding of genocide, condemnation of prior aerial bombardment of civilians by the GoS, disclosure and capital markets language, reporting requirements regarding the ability of the GoS to finance the war specifically with the proceeds from oil exploitation, and does not direct the State Department to investigate war crimes in Sudan. Capital markets sanctions are absolutely vital if the U.S. earnestly hopes to pressure the Khartoum regime to halt atrocities and negotiate a just peace in good faith.

Now that the Government of Sudan has proposed the implementation of a visa regime for humanitarian aid workers in opposition controlled areas, is expanding its oil operations and will be doubling its profits again, has purchased heavier weaponry with oil revenue and recently begun to use missiles, has stated that any peace process will not include the separation of religion and state, combined with the recent decision of Kenya (IGAD member) to begin importing oil from Sudan, leaves no prospect that the Government of Sudan will seriously talk peace without real "sticks" such as capital markets sanctions. Therefore, capital markets sanctions will provide the necessary means to force Sudan to seek an end to the war by seriously impeding their ability to continue to fund the war.

Furthermore, the drastic watering down of the House-approved Sudan Peace Act before the Senate in response to the Administration's and financial investment firms' fear that such measures would harm U.S. markets in the future is not grounded. Basically, those opposed to the House-approved version of the Sudan Peace Act are requiring that current profits for a few investment firms on Wall Street trump U.S. security and moral interests in working to pressure the extremist Government of Sudan to seek peace and to halt genocidal atrocities and religious persecution.

Capital markets sanctions in reaction to the level of genocidal atrocities in Sudan does not contradict the principles of capital markets fairness. The dire situation in Sudan, the complication of oil to the conflict, the number of deaths and the length of the conflict make Sudan a unique exception for the imposition of capital markets sanctions. Prohibiting U.S. companies from operating in Sudan while allowing foreign oil companies or other business operating in Sudan to raise money from U.S. investors on the New York Stock Exchange is contrary to the principles of "free markets" and equal access. U.S. oil companies such as Chevron have not gone to European markets because of U.S. imposed sanctions prohibiting our companies from doing business in Sudan.

A similar prohibition on foreign oil companies seeking to raise money and be traded in U.S. markets would not make our markets less attractive, as evidenced by Talisman Energy Inc.'s decision to sell their operations in Sudan after the House voted nearly unanimously to pass its version of the Sudan Peace Act simply because it could not risk losing access to U.S. markets. In fact, Talisman's CEO, James Buckee, stated to the Toronto Globe and Mail, dated June 18, 2001, "I don't think anybody could afford not to have access to the U.S. capital markets. No asset is worth that." The mere threat of the possibility of not having access to the N.Y.S.E. was enough to make Talisman, the second largest foreign stakeholder in Sudan's oil consortium, to pull out and sell when several previous efforts by activists and investors failed to prove so successful. U.S. Capital markets sanctions would likely force other foreign oil companies doing business in Sudan to either pull out of Sudan as Talisman has done, or to actively pressure the Sudanese government to accelerate the peace process in good faith in effort to prevent selling assets or incurring other monetary loss. U.S. financial markets are the most trusted markets in the world with the highest investor confidence, in part because we have the toughest enforcement of accounting and disclosure rules, and the strictest corporate and board responsibility laws aimed at protecting investors from unprincipled corporations. Therefore, there are few foreign companies that would actually choose to sacrifice access to U.S. markets in favor of foreign markets or maintaining operations in Sudan.

A comprehensive and effective version of the Sudan Peace Act is desperately needed by those civilians that continue to be brutally killed, religiously persecuted, selectively starved, or sold into slavery by the Khartoum regime and its military forces. The Government of Sudan is funding this war with oil revenues while innocent civilians remain the primary victims and targets. Therefore, it is essential that any version of the Sudan Peace Act include capital markets sanctions. Support for the House-approved version of this bill will not impede global competitiveness or the vitality of our capital markets. The U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and numerous human rights organizations have recognized the genocide in Sudan. With 2 million dead and 4 million internally displaced, the U.S. should therefore take the lead in addressing the need to halt genocidal atrocities in Sudan through a much needed, overdue and powerful response as laid out in the House-approved bill. The House-approved version of the Sudan Peace Act, especially the capital markets sanctions language, will help the victims of these atrocities by furthering the imposition of an effective peace initiative.

Site development & hosting by Cyberian Frontier