The Credibility test

Since March 2005 the Sudanese President Omar al Bashir has been on the radar of the international community. In accordance with the agreement reached between the United Nations Security Council, or UNSC, and the International Criminal Court, or, ICC, regarding the prosecution of nationals of states non-party to the Rome Statute of the ICC, the UNSC requested legal proceedings against al Bashir, based on the Chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter (resolution number 1593/2005); in other words, for being a threat to international peace and security.

This was a historic decision pursuant to the agreement between the UNSC and ICC. Due to its economic interests, China, who always sides with Sudan, abstained to veto the Resolution 1593. Immediately after, the U.N. passed a list of 51 suspects including Janjaweed leaders Ali Mohammed Abderrahman and Ali Qusheyb and former Interior Minister Ahmed Haroun to the court. Since the ICC Chief Prosecutor Luis-Moreno Ocampo prepared his indictment and asked for the issuance of an arrest warrant for al Bashir on July 14, 2008 on the charge of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur. The arrest warrant could be issued in the course of the month. Hence the international excitement.

It is widely acknowledged that the Khartoum government backed Muslim Arab Janjaweed guerillas in Darfur killed 100,000 civilians as 200,000 more are said to have died of hunger and illness. Besides, over two million people in the region are victims of ethnic cleansing and are being displaced, 250,000 among of whom are refugees living in neighboring Chad. It is widely believed that behind this human tragedy is the Sudanese government that has failed to find a solution to the disaster, that has obstructed U.N. efforts and that has supported Janjaweed guerillas. For this reason, the ICC is going after al Bashir.

However, there is no international consensus over his arrest. Among the decisions of the 12th Summit of the African Union, or AU, held early this month exist the lobbying for the postponement of the Chief ICC Prosecutor’s indictment against al Bashir. Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi, who was elected as AU’s term president for one year, apparently played a critical role in this decision. Qaddafi is claiming to resolve the Darfur issue. On the other hand, some African leaders who may face similar charges are not pleased with the collaboration between the UNSC and the ICC. The institution that can decide on the postponement is the UNCS, where Turkey has been a temporary member since the beginning of the year. We should assess Babacan’s remarks as well as the visits of the Sudanese Vice President Ali Osman Mohammed Taha and that of the Ethiopian Foreign Minister Mesfin in this framework. The visitors were clearly asking for Turkey’s support in the UNSC, and they apparently got it.

Turkey’s test

The new U.S. Permanent Representative to the U.N. Susan Rice always challenged the attitude of the Bush administration on Darfur. So the United States will most likely veto the postponement of al Bashir indictment. The counter-group led by China and Russia together with the Africans will try to postpone it. The Western group is of the opinion that similar delaying tactics are no good for peace talks and the prosecutor’s request should be endorsed. Peace in Darfur is not on the agenda for long. In fact, clashes continue and the government forces keep bombing refugee villages and opening fire on the joint AU-UN force UNAMID.

Having a seat at the UNSC is not an issue of prestige, as it is thought by some. It is a duty of international responsibility. Positions taken on a variety of international issues before the Security Council reveal the moral standpoint of the member state, its side and its preferences. A hand raised in favor of al Bashir at the U.N. would contradict the government’s moral stance against Israel on Gaza and would position Turkey against the West.