Not on Our Watch by Don Cheadle, John Prendergast

ethnic dynamics, sowing internal divisions within the opposition. They manipulate American, European, and African diplomats, buying time through disingenuous negotiation to gain the upper hand on the battlefield. And they manipulate humanitarian assistance, hiding behind the iron curtain of state sovereignty to deny humanitarians access to territory where vulnerable civilians need help.
    The ruling National Islamic Front (known today as the National Congress Party) has taken state-sponsored brutality to extraordinary levels, but the systematic hoarding of wealth and power by elites in Khartoum and the endless violent campaign to silence a deprived and angry population have deep historical roots.

    Colonial Times—Sowing Seeds of Discord
    Sudan is the largest country in Africa, straddling the cultural divide between the Arab and Arab-influenced societies of northern Africa and the societies south of the Sahara. Sudan’s geography and its 41 million citizens are correspondingly diverse. Follow the Nile River from Sudan’s northern border with Egypt to its southern border with Uganda and you travel from scorching desert landscapes to swamps and rain forests. The people you meet along the way are equally varied. More than 50% of Sudanese describe themselves as black or ‘African,’ and nearly 40% are Arabs. Sunni Muslims are 70% of the population and Christians are at least 5%, with the remainder adhering to traditional belief systems.
    From the early 15th until the 20th century, the northwestern region of Darfur was a prosperous independent kingdom of the Fur people. (In Arabic, Dar means ‘home’ and Darfur therefore is ‘home of the Fur.’) Successive Fur leaders, called sultans, extended the kingdom’s control southward from the Sahara. Colonialism put borders around Sudan’s diverse geography and people for the first time, creating a number of difficulties. In 1899, Britain and Egypt assumed joint authority over Sudan: Britain managed affairs in the south and let the Egyptians control the north. As a result, the two regions developed unique cultural and religious characteristics. While the Egyptians encouraged the spread of Islamic values in the north, the British developed a ‘Southern Policy’ to reduce Islam’s influence, encouraging Christian missionaries to work and promoting the English language in southern Sudan. In 1916, the British government decided to extend its own control to include Darfur, and the colonial administration annexed the sultanate. Working through local political leaders, the British established a so-called ‘Native Administration’ that loosely controlled Darfur.
    When the British government began to withdraw from Sudan after World War II, British officials reconnected the north and south and handed power to the northern elites. Northern Sudanese officials quickly replaced the British administrators in positions of influence in the south. At this time, Darfur was arguably less developed than the south, and the people of Darfur were suspicious of any central authority in Khartoum. Southerners were equally wary of northern intentions. The consolidation of power in the northern city of Khartoum at the expense of the south and the west only confirmed this distrust. The battle lines were drawn, and southerners rioted and rebelled in 1955, just before independence.

    Sudan’s First Civil War—A Nation Born into Conflict
    Internal conflict overshadowed any celebration when Sudan became independent on 1 January 1956. Two years later, the national army took power by force. General Ibrahim Abboud’s regime crushed political opposition and began efforts to Islamise the south through violent proselytisation. Southern ex-soldiers and policemen formed a guerrilla army—the Anya-Nya (meaning ‘snake poison’ in the local Dinka language)—to resist northern aggression. The Anya-Nya found sympathy among the southern population. Soon, the government’s violent counter-insurgency intensified