New Labour's Heart of Darkness. posted by Richard Seymour

According to the Prime Minister, Sudan is the "world's worst humanitarian crisis" today. There is perhaps some justice in this. The Janjaweed militias, despite the government in Khartoum signing up to peace accords, continue to carry out an ethnic cleansing programme. There are millions of Sudanese wasting away in refugee camps while aid is blocked by government forces. As Human Rights Watch notes, Thousands have been slain, tens of thousands raped and brutalized, 1.2 million displaced from their homes, and at least 120,000 have fled to neighbouring Chad as refugees. The response, however, has been rather weak. The Security Council "condemns" atrocities, but does not name the culprits. Jack Straw and Hillary Benn urge "all parties" to the ceasefire to stay their hands. Their language is pathetically equivocal:

We congratulate the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement in taking this further step towards a comprehensive peace that will bring an end to decades of conflict in the south of Sudan. We also applaud the role played by the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD), and in particular General Lazaro Sumbeiywo, whose skill in mediating between the parties deserves real praise.

...

Despite the progress made at the peace talks in Naivasha, conflict and instability persist in Sudan. We remain deeply troubled by the serious situation in Darfur. Initial indications are that the new measures for processing visas and travel permits, announced by the Government of Sudan on 20 May, are starting to have an effect on humanitarian access. We will continue to monitor the situation closely. However it remains imperative that the parties to the 8 April ceasefire agreement implement it fully and that the AU-led ceasefire monitoring mechanism deploys as quickly as possible.

Congratulation is not the first gesture one would usually extend to a government busily exterminating many of its people. And one would not talk as if "all parties" to the conflict were on equal moral terms if one were not involved in some attempt at apologetic.

But this is not unusual. After all, during the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo, New Labour went so far as to arm Zimbabwe, Namibia, Angola, Rwanda and Uganda - all parties to the conflict. In fact, the great thing about this support was that Britain was arming both sides, the former three countries taking the DRC government's side, while Rwanda and Uganda sided with the rebels. Three million people died in this war, and a large amount of that blood is on British hands. The International Institute of Security Studies in Pretoria thanked the British government for "inflaming the situation by arming both sides", while the Foreign Affairs committee noted that British hawks were being used "in the intervention in the DRC". (Mark Curtis, Web of Deceit, 2003, pp 190-1).

In Sierra Leone, too, the British government contributed to the humanitarian crisis sending Sandline International guerillas, then the Paras in to assist government forces who were often no better than the rebels. Government soldiers were often known as "sobels" because of their criminal proclivities, particularly the way they dressed up like rebels in order to loot towns, butcher the people, steal the booty and even lop off a limb or two. ("Sierra Leone: Peace at Any Price?" in Medicin Sans Frontiere's new book: Fabrice Weissman (ed.), In the Shadow of 'Just Wars', Medicins Sans Frontieres, Hurst and Company, London, 2004). Across Africa, in fact, New Labour has been eagerly exporting arms to governments eager to slaughter their peoples. In 2001, Britain exported £400m in arms to Africa, that "scar on the conscience of the world". Well, the scar deepened in Botswana, Egypt, Eritrea, Morrocco, Nigeria, Zimbabwe and all the other countries to whom Labour exported arms.