Doha and Darfur: A Connection Worth Considering

Last December, in his meeting with South African President Thabo Mbeki, President Bush made yet another embarrassing misstatement. Referring to the failing global trade talks, Bush mentioned the “Darfur round” of trade talks, instead of the Doha round.

Rather than dwell on what was possibly going through (or not going through) his mind, it may be worthwhile to consider how, in fact, Doha and Darfur are related.

China, which now imports 64 percent of Sudan’s oil exports, clearly holds strong economic influence over Sudan. It could join the United States in imposing sanctions on Sudan, thereby cutting the steadily increasing stream of revenues funding the Sudanese government and likely its arms purchases. And being Sudan’s largest supplier of arms, the impact of sanctions by China could be even more direct – limiting the Sudanese government’s ability to continue arming the Janjaweed.

Instead, China maintains a cautious role, arguing that pressure and sanctions are “not practical.”

Or did they mean to say “not profitable”?

Global trade and an insatiable desire for ever-increasing profits seem to take priority over other objectives such as human rights and peace. Many believe China’s position is unlikely to change dramatically, but who knows? Eric Reeves, an expert analyst on the Darfur genocide, writes, “China seeks acceptance at the world's diplomatic top table -- and this cause is unlikely to be advanced if China is perceived to be complicit in genocide. Imagine the newspaper ads leading up to the Beijing Games in 2008: Human rights campaigners will call on the world to boycott the Genocide Olympics.”

Keep the pressure on – Let’s make Darfur a top priority, one that can’t be sacrificed for economic gain.