America.. has changed its tone but has not changed its approach – behind the news – ✍️ Muhammad Wadaa
*The American envoy, since his appointment last February, has not met his Secretary of State, Lincoln, nor President Biden*
*It is necessary to know the weight and value of these statements by the American administration, and whether they express American policy towards Sudan*
*If America is serious about reaching an agreement in Geneva based on what was done in Jeddah, it must demand that the militias declare their commitment to the Jeddah agreement*
*Observers: Berlio's statements do not represent the US administration's view of the conflict in Sudan*
*Analysts: Berlio's statements aimed at attracting Sudanese officials to Geneva*
*Mr. Berlio, with all due respect, due to his professional status, is not in a position to fulfil such commitments*
The US envoy to Sudan, Mr. Tom Berlio, is a junior employee of the US State Department. He was appointed last February by the United States of America regarding his appointment as the US Special Envoy to Sudan (sometimes called the US President’s Envoy), in which he will coordinate US policy towards Sudan and strengthen efforts to end hostilities and ensure the arrival of humanitarian aid. The truth is that no one knows which party Mr. Berlio belongs to. The US State Department or the White House? Is he a coordinator or does he have decision-making power? In any case, it has never been mentioned in the news that he met with his country’s Secretary of State, Lincoln, nor that he met with US President Biden.
In America, Berlio appeared once last May and gave a statement before the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Congress, after which he was reprimanded by the members of the committee for the lack of clarity of his policy and plans. Berlio visited all the countries, except the country to which he was appointed envoy.
After Berlio's recent statements, which some have described as positive, the US administration must know the weight and value of these statements and whether they express US policy towards Sudan, especially since some statements may require executive decisions to confirm the seriousness of US policy. the administration, because there have been no clarifications. Concretely, Berlio's commitments to support (the Sudanese who do not want a political role for Rapid Support in the future), nor how his administration will act in recognizing that (Rapid Support has a history linked to genocide and ethnic cleansing in Darfur), as well as his admission that (Rapid Support has no future in Sudan and that the army is an institution with a history in Sudan).
Observers tend to believe that Berlio's statements do not represent the US administration's vision of the conflict in Sudan, and analyses suggest that these statements are aimed at attracting Sudanese officials to Geneva, for electoral needs, while verbally promising that the Geneva parties will take into account the Jeddah agreement as a basis, and these are false justifications for involving the United Arab Emirates in Geneva to ensure the implementation of what has been agreed.
The seriousness of considering Jeddah as a base, and after the militia agreed to go to Geneva, requires that the militia immediately begin implementing its obligations under the agreement. For example, leaving citizens' homes and evacuating civilian objects does not require any procedure or arrangement. the bombing of civilians in El Fasher and Khartoum. This is one of the most important provisions of the Jeddah agreement, and it does not require any additional arrangements. Only the Rapid Support Militia must stop it. do not require any procedure or negotiation. These are obligations under international humanitarian law and human rights law, as well as those explicitly stipulated in the Jeddah agreement,
If America is serious about reaching an agreement in Geneva based on what was done in Jeddah, it must demand that the militias declare their commitment to this and respect international humanitarian law, including the rights of civilians in wartime. America must inform the Emirates, the official sponsor of the militias' aggression, to stop the supply of weapons and military equipment because this contradicts the text of Resolution (1591) and the report of the Committee of Experts,
With all due respect, Mr. Berlio, due to his professional status, cannot fulfill such obligations. Perhaps he should ask his administration for concrete and written commitments to reassure the Sudanese side that his statements represent the American policy towards Sudan. The Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not received a response to requests regarding the agenda and parties, the position on the Jeddah agreement and the request for a meeting with the American side. Can Mr. Berlio rush the response of his country's Ministry of Foreign Affairs? America has changed its tone but has not changed its approach.
August 7, 2024 AD
