Let the people flee Darfur There are few options for ending the genocide in Darfur. The international community could impose tighter sanctions or bomb Khartoum until the Sudanese government agrees to sign a peace agreement with the rebels. But neither of these solutions seems viable. The only reasonable way to stop the genocide in that unhappy region is to allow its people to emigrate somewhere - be it to Kenya or Kansas. The people must be allowed to leave because their way of life is disappearing. Land that was once plenty enough for both the region's black farmers and its Arab nomads is now turning into desert wasteland.

Formerly tools of the tech savvy, two new social networking trends are becoming mainstream – and changing how citizens react to crisis situations. Moblogging (short for “mobile” and “blogging”) and microblogging allow for instant updates via cell phone to a web interface. During the recent Kenyan elections and Myanmar cyclone relief efforts, moblogging has been used to provide valuable on-ground information to circumvent autocratic governments.

In the aftermath of the Kenyan elections, the formerly free press was suddenly under the control of the state.  Leading Kenyan bloggers (including Kenyan Pundit and White African) gathered and created a mashup, Ushahidi.com, to gather real time reports of major events.  Updates included reports of police brutality, bonfires, and peaceful events (such as meetings or candlelight vigils).  The blogs then used information to report on the post-election crisis.  A good summary of this coverage can be found at Global Voices Online.    

Western Christian missionaries have been peddling their wares in East Africa for centuries. Although Kenya is 80% Christian, the religion's mix with local culture has brought about a curious sort of Christianity. Locals absorb the message of salvation, but pray at Mt Kenya for a good harvest and the cleansing of curses. Some view this as a warping of Christianity. But evangelists find it tempting.

In 2007 there were over 6,000 separate churches in Kenya, and 2,000 more waiting for registration. Christian messages are ubiquitous, yet often oddly placed. Matatus, the reckless passenger vans with dents and missing mirrors, bear "Jesus loves you" in fresh paint; sheds advertising "Maximum Miracles" look for drunkards who slip out from the tavern next door. And locals cheerfully accept the white man's deity, but are less keen on his Mea Culpa inculcations.

Soft power on safari

Being American in Africa usually comes with plenty of baggage. Elders and politicians blame their troubles on your trade policy. In the Islamic north, Americans are seen as blasphemous bullies; almost everywhere, they are seen as unapologetic polluters.

In Kenya, things are different. Americans are welcomed into hotels, into capital markets and, as Dick Morris recently proved, into presidential campaigns. Whether the credit goes more to the State Department's skills or to Kenya's natural affinity, the alliance should be studied for lessons the US could apply elsewhere as it vies for influence in a difficult region.

All locals are politics

In Kenya this month the bosses are away from their corner offices and the professors absent from their podiums. Taking their beach side vacations? Quite the opposite: they are working to secure their next promotion. Many who owe their post to politics, indeed, most people with serious political connections, will be busy campaigning until the presidential election in December, when either Mwai Kibaki of the Party of National Unity (PNU) will hang on to power, or Raila Odinga of the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) will replace him. Hobnobbing with community leaders on the coast and in Rift Valley, you find that all locals are politics.

New peace talks aimed at resolving the crisis in Darfur began this weekend in Libya. The prospects don’t look good. Although the Sudanese government agreed to a cease-fire on Saturday, leaders of some of the most potent rebel groups did not even show up.

Congress, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and President Bush have all called the situation a genocide. But while the U.S. has given more than $2 billion in aid since 2005, according to Bush, at the same time it’s changed its military position in Africa. You have to ask, is the U.S. repeating its go-it alone style of foreign policy in yet another hotspot?

I got into a passionate discussion with a friend after going to Church this Sunday. The friend who I was debating with is from Hong Kong and our "discussion" revolved around the approaches that have been used by China and the West in their economic relationship with Africa. His bottom line is that the strategies used by both sides is essentially the same-that both sides have sought to exploit Africa in every which way and as quickly as possible.

In his view the main difference is that the West is more sophisticated in their exploitation and that their efforts at encouraging good governance and human rights simply serves as good PR (with China being more "honest" about just simply wanting to get at the natural resources). I agreed that both sides were looking out first for their own national interests in Africa and that the West was not entirely altruistic. However, I argued that the West's focus on getting African countries to improve their human rights and governance frameworks would ultimately serve the continent's long term interests better and demonstrated a concern with moving the relationship beyond one of dependence.

In April 2005, Sallah Abdallah Gosh - one the key architects of the Darfur genocide and a cohort of Osama bin Laden during his time in Khartoum - made his journey to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia on a pre-arranged private jet. He was flown in by the U.S. government to participate in high-level meetings on U.S. counterterrorism initiatives.[i]

As head of Sudan’s security, Gosh is responsible for the unleashing of Arab militias, known as the Janjaweed, onto the non-Arab civilians of Darfur, fueling a counterinsurgency that has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives and displaced millions. Over the past four years the conflict has evolved as a result of the divide-and-rule tactics of the Sudanese government. The two main rebel groups have splintered into several different factions that not only fight against the Janjaweed but also attack each other and target innocent civilians. As noted in ENOUGH’s June field report [ii] Khartoum has authorized the Janjaweed to broaden their targets to include not only non-Arab tribes such as the Fur, Zaghawa, and Massaliet, but also other Arabs, in an effort to claim land as compensation for their work as Khartoum’s proxy militia.

As part of its continuing effort to crush Darfur's rebellion by attacking civilian populations purported to be supportive of the rebels, the Sudanese regime has again stepped up its aerial bombing campaign, the most definitive tactical advantage the government possesses.

Because the regime continues to bomb indiscriminately and because frustrations deepen around glacial forward movement in the peace process and in deploying the proposed AU-UN hybrid force, voices from across the political spectrum are clamoring for some kind of action. President Bush, former Prime Minister Blair, U.S. presidential candidates, members of parliament and Congress in Europe and the U.S., and advocacy organizations on both sides of the Atlantic have considered or called for the military enforcement of a no-fly zone.

President Bush’s announcement today that his administration will begin implementing a set of punitive measures– its oft-threatened “Plan B� – against the Sudanese Government could have marked a real turning point in U.S. policy to end what the president calls genocide. Unfortunately, it doesn’t.

With international diplomatic efforts to halt atrocities in Darfur at a standstill, the President announced three measures intended to change the calculations of the regime in Khartoum and intransigent rebel leaders. First, the U.S. will add 31 Sudanese companies to a list of 130 that are already denied access to the U.S. financial system. Second, the U.S. will freeze the assets of three of the many individuals responsible for the violence in Darfur. And finally, it will “seek� a resolution at the United Nations Security Council to impose targeted sanctions on individuals and expand an ineffective arms embargo that has been violated with impunity.