Ambassador: Sudan Accords Only One Step in Peace Process
Continued effort to implement and monitor Sudan's peace agreement will be necessary to ensure safety for its population, Michael Ranneberger says.
Interview by Rob Moll | posted 5/01/2004 12:00AM

2 of 3

The two leaders and the senior officials on both sides have an enormous responsibility to present this accord to the people in the north and the south. It's my understanding that they're going to do that together in order to overcome this mistrust among the people and to build their confidence in the implementation process. That's going to be extremely important.
At the same time the parties are going to need very strong help from the international communityfirst of all to fund this implementation and the kind of reconstruction and development they need, but also to monitor the implementation so that the parties themselves know that there is an international monitoring mechanism looking over their shoulder to ensure that they adhere to the terms of the agreements.
What is the U.S.'s role in the implementation process?
We've been supporting these negotiations that have been held under the auspices of EAGAD, the East African Intergovermental Authority on Development. We've had observersincluding myself and othersat the talks continuously. We've been lobbying both sides at very high levels. So, we've been very active on this.
At a key moment in the negotiations earlier this year, we introduced a compromise proposal on Abyei that broke through a long impasse and basically helped to bring this to closure. At various other times we've presented ideas on how to overcome some of the differences. We are going to be supporting a resolution in the U.N. Security Council endorsing these accords and calling for a U.N. monitoring mission in the Sudan. And we're mobilizing to ensure that we have the necessary funding so that we can play a leading role in helping to implement the accords and also to promote reconstruction and development in the south.
How does this agreement affect the situation in Darfur?
The situation in Darfur is horrendous, and we've been working on that for quite a number of months. We've done an awful lot, which I could enumerate, but it includes bringing the issue to the U.N. Security Council, helping to broker a ceasefire in Darfur, helping to organize international monitoring in Darfur. Now, with the signing of these accords in Naivasha, I think the signing of those accords presents an important window of opportunity to intensify efforts to resolve Darfur.
There are two things: one, the parties themselves, Taha and Garang, both know that the north/south agreement essentially cannot be implemented unless there is peace in Darfur, because you cannot have a peace process in one part of the country with war raging in the other. So they have a strong interest in working together to resolve Darfur. Secondly, now that the Naivasha process is essentially completed, the international community can turn its full focus and force to pressing for a resolution in Darfur.
We intend to continue to exert enormous pressure on the government to end the violence in Darfur. I think we have an opportunity now with the signing of the Naivasha accords to try to turn around the situation in Darfur. So I think those accords signed at Naivasha will have a very positive impact on Darfur.
Copyright © 2004 Christianity Today. for reprint information.
Related Elsewhere:
U.K.'s Church Timesreports that the peace agreement is offering hope to church leaders and mission agencies.
More Christianity Today coverage of Sudan includes: