Hearing of the Africa Subcomm. of the House Int. Rel. Committee-Sudan Peace Agreement Around the Corner?

Federal News Service March 11, 2004 Thursday

Copyright 2004 The Federal News Service, Inc.
Federal News Service

March 11, 2004 Thursday

HEADLINE: HEARING OF THE AFRICA SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE

SUBJECT: SUDAN: PEACE AGREEMENT AROUND THE CORNER?

CHAIRED BY: REPRESENTATIVE EDWARD R. ROYCE (R-CA)

WITNESSES: PANEL I:

CHARLES R. SNYDER, ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF AFRICAN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF STATE; ROGER P. WINTER, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, BUREAU OF DEMOCRACY, CONFLICT AND HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE, UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT;

PANEL II: J. STEPHEN MORRISON, PH.D., DIRECTOR OF THE AFRICA PROGRAM, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES; PASTOR GARY KUSUNOKI, CHAIRMAN, SAFE HARBOR; ERIC REEVES, PH.D., PROFESSOR, SMITH COLLEGE

LOCATION: 2172 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D.C.

BODY:

REP. EDWARD R. ROYCE (R-CA): This hearing will come to order. The subject of today's hearing is "Sudan: Is the Peace Agreement Around the Corner?" I want to thank all of you for attending this hearing and let me begin by saying that as we examine the peace negotiations, we should all keep in mind what's at stake. The human toll has been staggering in Sudan. I think we all know there have been over two million dead in the conflict in Sudan, millions have been displaced. We will never know how many victims there were of slavery, of persecution. We will never have an accounting of all the atrocities.

And let me also say there is no doubt where the responsibility for this calamity lies. This Congress is on record condemning the National Islamic Front government of Sudan for genocide. It does not get clearer in my mind or starker than that.

President Bush and his administration deserve great credit, in my view, for energetically promoting the peace process and I think peace could be at hand. The administration, frankly, has been bold and creative. The agreements that have been reached to stop the fighting and hold a referendum on unity are truly historic. The administration realizes, though, that this progress is imperiled by the holdups in finalizing an agreement.

Last May at our subcommittee's hearing on the Sudan Peace Act, I said that perpetual negotiations are not in the cards and, unfortunately, the window for peace is closing and it's closing fast. Congress has played an important role in promoting peace negotiations, most prominently through the bipartisan Sudan Peace Act which we passed, and I'm certain that Congress will remain attentive to developments in Sudan whether we see good news or bad news come out of the final negotiations that are underway in Kenya.

There should be no mistaking on the part of anybody-there should be no mistaking the strong and enduring congressional commitment that this institution has to the cause of peace in Sudan. The Sudan Peace Act demands accountability of the two negotiating parties. So far the government of Sudan and the SPLM have been judged to be negotiating in good faith. We eagerly await the administration's third Sudan Peace Act report next month.

There is no doubt about who is responsible for the carnage in the western region of Darfur. The government has been rightly condemned for its attacks on the people of this isolated region, which we will hear about today. Darfur is an ominous cloud over the peace process. It jeopardizes the negotiations while underscoring the great complexities of moving ahead.

We should have no illusions that successful peace negotiations are the end game. Africa is littered with broken peace treaties, and even good people can be corrupted by power. Building a peaceful and stable Sudan will be a hugely difficult task. The Sudanese people bear this responsibility, but the U.S. and others have a strong interest in continuing to support their efforts. Peacemakers far outnumber war makers in Sudan.

The people who desire peace there far outnumber those who are in opposition. The key is whether the very small minority of Sudanese who profit from their country's destruction will control its future. Many envision a brighter day for Sudan, one in which Sudanese and Americans of all faiths work together in productive and unprecedented ways. For this to happen, the war makers must be defeated. I know that the administration and Congress will continue to oppose them every step of the way.

With that said, I want to introduce a man who has devoted much of his career in Congress to trying to see stability and peace in Sudan. That is Mr. Don Payne of New Jersey, who is the ranking member of this committee.

REP. DONALD M. PAYNE (D-NJ): Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and let me express my appreciation for your continued work as chairman of the subcommittee. It's been a pleasure to work with you. And let me thank you for calling this important hearing today. Perhaps no other African country has received attention in recent years in Washington as has Sudan. And thanks in a large part because of your tireless effort and many others'.

Sudan is important because of the magnitude of the problem, because of the untold suffering the people of Sudan continue to endure, and because the situation in Sudan is heart wrenching. From slavery to genocidal war, the Sudan tragedy is unmatched in its harshness and brutality. And I thank my colleagues Mr. Tancredo and Congressman Wolf, who for many years have-although not a member of this subcommittee, has fought diligently on the whole question-oh, I didn't realize he was here. But I certainly commend him also.

At our last Sudan hearing I said I cannot argue against southern leaders who choose to negotiate with this regime, a brutal regime responsible for the deaths of many innocent civilians. I said then it is their future, their country and their people. I just hope that we are not and they are not being taken for a long ride by the charm architects of the National Islamic Front.

Indeed, several agreements have been signed by the SPLM and the government of Sudan. But once again we are witnessing the cunning duplicity of this regime. It's the way it's been and many times they say that leopards don't change their spots. They are frustrating the peace process by their intransigence on an issue many believe should not be a major issue and that could be easily resolved.

For anyone with little knowledge of what's happened in Sudan, everyone know historically that Abyei, the land of the Ngok Dinka, a territory placed under British administration in the north in 1905 -- not just overnight, 100 years ago. And even the 1972 Addis Agreement provides the people of Bayhee (ph) the right to a referendum and a special status under the supervision of the presidency. There is no doubt to whom this area belongs and the people who are in that land.

We have in the audience the grandson of a former chief of the Ngok Dinka, our friend Francis Ding (ph). Many friends. Unless the extremist government is Khartoum is using this issue to delay and to force a collapse of the talks, this issue is a non-issue. This is not something new, it's not something that we feel should create a delay, but we know that this is the continued ugly tactics of the NIF.

Let me put this in perspective. I'm sure you've heard the numbers many times before. Out of an estimated population of nine million people in Southern Sudan, more than two million have died as a result of this conflict, four million have been displaced and 500,000 have been made refugees in neighboring countries. These numbers are equal in proportion to 64 million Americans killed, 128 Americans displaced and 15 American refugees if we took the same population and extrapolated it up.

Let me also remind people as to who is largely and principally responsible for the heinous crimes against humanity: the National Islamic Front government in Khartoum. Lest we forget, this is the same government that ousted a democratically elected civilian government in 1989, that provided safe haven for Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorist organization for five years as they planned attacks in Nairobi and Darussalam, killing many Americans and African friends. And this is the same government that has maimed, killed and engaged in modern day slavery.

Not surprisingly, the people responsible for all these atrocities are still in power. Are these people going to be accountable for the mayhem they have caused over the past decades? Or are they going to simply forgive and forget just because the NIF said we have changed. All of a sudden we are peace loving, gentle people.

Mr. Chairman, Congressman Tancredo and myself wrote a letter to President Bush last month asking for explanation about the role of the current government in international terrorism. We urged the president that as we fight terror groups and terror sponsors in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere in the world, we must also ensure that those individuals involved in terrorism in the past or present must not be allowed to escape justice for far too many Americans have died, in part due to the support given by Sudanese officials to international terrorist organizations. It is appalling that not a single senior official has been removed from power or has gone to jail because of involvement in or support of terrorist activities. We should actually be banning the officials of Sudan from even traveling to our country with this blood on their hands.

Mr. Chairman, we have said to President Bush that our war on terrorism cannot succeed if we allow well known terrorists to escape justice. I do not want to prejudge people, but we want justice because justice delayed is justice denied. Mr. Chairman, the National Islamic Front government is good at lies and deceit. I'm afraid, as is our core constituency here in the United States, that they continue to do this.

Over the past two years the NIF agents have been actively charming some of our friends, telling people that they have changed, that peace is right around the corner and that they can have access to senior officials of this brutal regime. Unfortunately, some of our friends have been swayed by these lies. I remember friends coming to me in the late 1990s saying that they had been assured by the government that the bombing of civilians will stop. Of course, they did not then and they still drop bombs today. Let us remind our friends that this is the same regime currently engaged in the scorched earth policy in Darfur. Words mean nothing.

Why don't we take a look at one of the photos of a poor child being held up by one of our interns. This is recent. This is just the other day. This is this government that said that they have changed. This is a government can be trusted? That's a rhetorical question, I ask you that. What good is it to sign a peace agreement with the south and engage in ethnic cleansing in Darfur? Let us not lose sight and let us remain united. It is our unity and resolve that has gotten us where we are today. Divided we lose.

Let us not forget the victims. As we speak here today many will lose their lives. And I really also would like to thank the panelists who have so many years been involved in this issue, since the administrator went there in particular who currently even though there is a family crisis, he felt it was important for him to come here and I appreciate that, Mr. Winter.

REP. ROYCE: At this time we'd like to recognize Mr. Tancredo of Colorado. He's the author of the Sudan Peace Act and he'll be recognized for a statement.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

REP. ROYCE: And with that, we're going to go to our first panel. Charles Snyder is currently the acting assistant secretary of State for African Affairs. Previously he served as principal deputy assistant secretary. He's been closing involved with the Sudan peace initiative for several years. He's a career Africanist, a member of the-well, former director of the Office of Regional Affairs in the Africa Bureau, he has served in the senior Intelligence Service at the Central Intelligence Agency as a national intelligence officer for Africa.

Roger Winter was sworn in as assistant administrator for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance of AID in January of 2002. Before his appointment he directed the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance at AID and he served as executive director of the U.S. Committee for Refugees. He has far reaching experience in Africa, Southeast Asia, the former Soviet Union and Central America on the subject of dealing with refugees and displaced people.

I know that both of these gentlemen have been deeply involved and have been working overtime in order to try to get a peace agreement. And I would personally like to express my appreciation to you both for your work and, Mr. Snyder, if you would like to begin. I'll ask one last favor since we've read your testimony, and that is we're going to put it in the record. We'd like you to summarize in five minutes time, thank you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

We'll go to Mr. Winter.

MR. ROGER P. WINTER: It's a key moment and I must say I'm very grateful to you, Mr. Chairman and this committee, for almost perpetual vigilance and activism on Sudan because it has made a huge, huge difference. May I say what I said in the last hearing, that there have been dramatic humanitarian access improvements in the south. But today's hearing really isn't about the south. I'm going to focus my questions on Darfur.

We have continuing problems elsewhere. We have them on the eastern front, we have them in Southern Blue Nile, we have them in terms of the continuing problems we have with our commodities that are shipped to Sudan, and we have problems when it comes to the Lord's Resistance Army operating in the southern part of Sudan and its connections with the government of Khartoum.

However, I will now focus on Darfur because arguably this is the worst humanitarian emergency in Africa and perhaps in the world at this moment. I think despite the assertions of the president of Sudan, I think that the government finds itself in a quagmire that is not going to go away any time soon. This could turn out to be the major miscalculation that undermines the Sudan peace process, which I see as being on a precipice right now.

Now, personally I have been to Darfur at least a half a dozen times in the last six months. This is a major issue for us. We have topnotch personnel, the best that we have in disaster response, who are out there working this issue now. We have excellent commentators like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch who in detail are specifying what the issues are and what is happening in local situations.

But our perspective is based on our seeing and hearing and our judgment, and we're making up our own mind. And by the way, it's quite easy to do it right now. You don't even have to go to Darfur. There are truckloads of thousands of people beginning to show up in Khartoum right now, so we can just go out and we can ask them their individual stories and find out exactly what's going on. I'll come back and I'll tell you a couple of them in a moment.

The pattern we are seeing, as one of you indicated-I'm sorry, I forget which one-is all too familiar. Yes, there is a war and the parties have a war to fight. But what we are seeing goes far beyond the fighting of a war. We are seeing attacks on civilian targets in Darfur as we saw them in the south before.

The pattern is very, very similar. You have aerial bombardments going on, but they are coordinated with the militias that are operating on the ground and sometimes it's not just the militias, it's actually the Sudan government's military. The name that these militias go by that are doing most of this violence is the Janjaweed. This is an Arab based population and the people that they are attacking are African. It is a pattern we also saw in the south that we are seeing again.

These attacks are accompanied by massive patterns of rape. The reports are really quite staggering in terms of the numbers affected. They're also-overall Darfur has basically had its humanitarian assistance shut off since last November. And, yes, it is the case that there have been some marginal improvements in the last little while. Those marginal improvements actually are providing us additional documentation as to what has been going on and, as I say, I will mention some of that.

What is going on is population clearance. Now, I've used publicly the term ethnic cleansing, because I frankly believe that's what is going on. I'm not a lawyer. I'm not a human rights lawyer. I'm an old guy in some senses of the word and I go back to the old school, and that is if it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck, all right?

And what is happening is ethnic cleansing. You have an African population that is being driven from their homes in a very systematic, widespread and calculated, knowledgeable way in my judgment. And you can see it. You can frankly see it from the air. If you fly over the locations you can see the villages burning underneath you.

You know, you get the World Food Program fellows, the pilots, to circle their plane and go down and take a close look. You can see them down there. And now that we have a bit of access in some locations, we actually have WFP and other U.N. personnel on the ground.

Mr. Tancredo, one of the stories you didn't read in that report from Luke Kapeeler (ph), a recent one, I'd just like to tell you: "On February 27 humanitarian staff-that's U.N. personnel-traveling through Tawila, 62 kilometers west of Elfasher (ph) observed Janjaweed militia looting and burning a village. Local residents and IDPs indicated the following: (a) 17 people had been killed in the town and an additional 68 in the surroundings of Tawila town; (b) all houses, as well as the market and the health center, had been completely looted and the market burnt; (c) over 100 women had been raped, six in front of their fathers who later were killed; (d) about 150 women and 200 children had been abducted; and, (e) in all of the Tawila Administrative Unit 30 villages had been burnt, more than 200 people killed and more than 200 women raped."

This is a familiar pattern to us. I think what we are seeing in announcements from the government are spin control. The president has announced that the war is over. He's announced that it's time to rebuild the social fabric of Darfur. He's announced that refugees can return from Chad and that IDPs can return to their homes. It just ain't so. And when any of us go on the ground out there, there are stark limitations to what we can actually do and who we can actually talk to.

And although Abyei isn't in Darfur, let me just tell you when we were in Abyei about 10 weeks -- 10 days ago we were supposed to meet with an entire group of community leaders. What we found out, Abyei, which Congressman Payne mentioned as a Ngok Dinka traditional area-a homeland almost devoid of people at the moment. But what we found was a great crowd of people, but they all had been trucked in by the government from Mujulid (ph), which is 100 miles away, and not a single one of them was Dinka, right.

So we are confronted consistently with this kind of spin control. And I left that place thinking to myself, this is a place where the tensions are running so high that we could be faced with a massacre. I don't say that lightly. I've seen massacres, I've lived through them and what I'm suggesting to you is it is possible with the tensions running high in some of these locations.

Now, when we talk to people about their individual displacement event, what is it they tell us? Well, when we get to talk to people, as I have, let me tell you what they say, okay? I can remember very well one woman near the capital of Southern Darfur, Nyala, explaining that-I forget the name of her village, but she said they came perhaps 300 to 400 of them. They came on camels and they came on horses. They began to shoot. They began to raid the village. Our men came out, they tried to protect the village. After about six of our men were killed, we ran away. Right? They ran to the-to basically the capital of the state of Southern Darfur.

This is a common thing and what we are now finding with humanitarian workers, where they do have some access, is you can actually go and you can see attacks on the ground in progress. You can actually see African based villages that are destroyed. You can actually see other villages that are entirely not destroyed and not hampered in any way, shape or form. When you ask these people when the attack occurred were there any rebels around anywhere, that is the rebels-the political opposition that the military is fighting, the government's military is fighting, and to a person they have said there were no rebels whatsoever anywhere in the vicinity.

And they even say that with government security people present and listening to everything that is being said. These kind of situations-that is the burning villages that you can see from the air and these kind of attacks-are continuing to today. What I read to you from Tawila is happening today.

Now, beyond public statements of which the State Department and USAID have had many, beyond calls from the secretary and the White House, what are we doing? Well, frankly, not enough.

We are trying to change the gear. We have offered to deploy the Civilian Protection and Monitoring Unit.

USAID has been cast by the National Security Council to lead an initiative, so the administration is seeking to be in the lead in terms of arranging for a humanitarian ceasefire and we will be participating in the planned talks that will be scheduled either next week or the following week in Chad. We've been talking to the rebels for the last six weeks to assure their participation and to make sure that the standards they find necessary to be involved in these talks are actually met.

But when all is said and done the central issue for us, and I think the central issue as it relates to the Sudan Peace Act, is how is the government of Sudan behaving? How are they actually behaving? Are they part of the solution or are they part of the problem?

Now, the reports we receive from our workers on the ground are that the government-the military of the government of Sudan stands by or participates in some of these deprivations. When we ask people, who exactly were these people that did the attacking, they say Janjaweed, the government. It's the same. Now, it may not be exactly precisely the same, but this is the way the victims see it.

And further, the government which brands the rebels, that is the political opposition forces, and the Janjaweed both as criminals and outlaws takes no enforcement actions whatsoever against the Janjaweed. There is no example of any enforcement action being taken against them and it is these people that the victims cite as the ones who are attacking them. The great humanitarian need now is not just for food. It is for protection.

People need protection and we actually have people who are in displaced persons camps right now telling us, please don't give us the food. Don't deliver the food because with the assistance comes the attackers. And I've never had this kind of thing happen before when people in this circumstance say, don't bring us the food. Whatever the solution is that we hope comes out of the Chad meeting, there must be a robust international presence. It's the only way I think that we can assure the level of protection that these people need.

The real tragedy beyond Darfur itself is the impact that Darfur is having on the overall southern peace process. Almost all Sudanese want this just peace to come through this peace process. Frankly, most of the people I know in the government of Sudan want this peace process to succeed and I can say in my view clearly the SPLM wants this peace process to succeed.

Where we are right now is that the White House will not take no for an answer, so we are beefing up our capacities, we are with the State Department and USAID and the National Security Council assigning additional personnel, trying to achieve a level of engagement with the parties that tries to assure that this peace process does not fail. Why? It is only this peace process that can produce the democratic transformation in Sudan which will change the character of the country so that the kind of thing that is happening in Darfur today does not continue to happen. We need this peace process very badly. Thank you.

REP. ROYCE: Thank you, Mr. Winter. We thank you for your compelling testimony. I think we're very fortunate to have someone on the ground who has your years of experience dealing with victims of conflict. There are two questions that I wanted to ask, and the first comes-goes right to the heart of the issue of the peace dividend itself that should propel both sides to the table. They created this National Petroleum Commission and this is something that I over a year ago talked to Senator-or our special envoy Danforth about, the idea of creating something that could be audited, where who you knew that there was a reason to come to the table because of the advantage.

And yet we look at this resource sharing agreement that was signed in January and it seems to be free of all outside monitoring. I think that since Sudan is going to be the beneficiary from large amounts of development aid, from debt relief, from a concerted effort among all the international institutions to assist, that it wouldn't be unreasonable to ask that the international community, which will contribute so much, would be able to monitor the distribution of billions of oil revenues in the north and the south. And so let me begin with that question as to why this is not in the agreement?

MR. SNYDER: Thank you, Mr. Royce. I think the thing you need to remember where we are in this agreement is a framework agreement.

REP. ROYCE: All right.

MR. SNYDER: So this national petroleum thing is far from final. And, clearly, when we get into fleshing this out in full detail one of the things we're going to be pushing for are the transparency initiatives that are present elsewhere, the kind of thing you see in the Chad-Cameroon pipeline. We've talked to them about this. It's interesting, they're both a little reluctant but I think they see this is as --

REP. ROYCE: I hear they're both reluctant, yes.

MR. SNYDER: And I think at the end when we're squeezing them, this is one we'll get. It's not there yet but it's a framework agreement. Give us a chance to perform and the final-the final agreement. Which by the way, just to give you an idea of the flow, if we manage to succeed my guess is we're going to be in for 90 days of fleshing out all these agreements, not just this oil agreement but the security agreement and some of the others in much more minute detail. So there'll be a time period before the comprehensive agreement is ready for signature.

REP. ROYCE: Now, the other similar subject would be why both sides are resistant to the idea of a U.N. peacekeeping operation. And so let me just ask you are there conversations taking place within the U.N. concerning a peacekeeping operation that might follow this? And would it be a Chapter 6? Would it be a peacekeeping operation or a peacemaker operation, a Chapter 7 operation, if it were to be given as a mandate and what the administration's position would be? And I guess the most important issue to me personally is just why the resistance on the part of the SPLM and Khartoum to the idea of having a U.N. peacekeeping force on the ground?

MR. SNYDER: I think the resistance on the government's part is typical of the sovereign party in any of these arrangements anywhere we've had this problem. They don't like the U.N. coming into their turf and dictating. The truth of the matter is it's obvious to us all, and the U.N. has already engaged, that there will have to be a U.N. presence of some significant size. I think the secretary alluded to 8,000 to 10,000. These are very early stages of negotiation. A lot of it will depend literally on how we finally set up the security arrangement in particular, which will go to troop flows and whether or not they go to intermediate bases and how many men we need to monitor that and so on.

So I think there'll be a robust presence. Again, the issue of Chapter 6 -- Chinese Chapter 6 or Chapter 7 will be debated at the end. The truth is this particular force will have to be able to protect the human rights groups that have been threatened on the ground, and in fact to do some of the things that the CPMT will do in the interim period in a much more robust fashion, providing the kind of literal visual guarantee to these people that have been so traumatized over the years that we begin to change the psychology.

I think it's less important whether it's 6, Chinese 6 or 7 than that mandate to say that: that these people are there to protect the citizens, their human rights, et cetera, et cetera. And when we get into the actual negotiation in the U.N. we certainly will be pressing hard for that. It's a little premature to go beyond that because we're not there yet and we don't know the details, but that's what our thinking is.

REP. ROYCE: Well, I thank you for clarifying that, Secretary Snyder. We're going to go to Mr. Payne and we'll try to rather rapidly-we've got another panel so we're going to try to rapidly go through the questions here.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

REP. ROYCE: Well, we want to thank our witnesses for their candid responses today and we thank you gentlemen very much for your efforts on this challenge.

We're going to ask our next panel to come up at this time. Gentlemen, I may be submitting some questions in writing for your answers if that's all right. Thank you.

REP. SMITH (?): And if it's all right that I could also, Mr. Chairman.

REP. ROYCE: Without objection.

REP. SMITH: Thank you.

REP. ROYCE: Let me introduce our three witnesses here. Dr. J Stephen Morrison directs the CSIS Africa Program. He co-chaired the reassessment of the U.S. policy to Sudan in 2000. And in the summer of 2002 he organized an energy expert mission to the Sudan peace negotiations in Kenya. Prior to joining CSIS he worked for the Secretary of State's Policy Planning staff, the USAID Office of Transition Initiatives, and the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa.

Next we have Doctor Eric Reeves, a professor at Smith College. He's written and published extensively on Sudan, served as a researcher and consultant to numerous human rights and humanitarian organizations. His work is published in a variety of Southern Sudanese magazines and newspapers and websites. He provides commentary on Sudan to international news services. He is presently at work on a book length study of Sudan's civil war and American policy responses to Sudan over the last decade.

And Pastor Gary Kusunoki is the founder and chairman of Safe Harbor International Relief, a church-based relief and development agency. Since 1994, Safe Harbor has worked in more than 20 different nations, bringing physical, spiritual and emotional aid to those in need. Pastor Gary has worked in war-torn areas, such as Rwanda and Sudan. Since 1996 he has made more than 25 trips to South Sudan. Now, that is a commitment, 25 trips to Sudan, which I'd like to thank him for making. In November of 2002, Pastor Gary accepted an invitation to travel to Khartoum to meet with the president of Sudan, General Bashir.

So we're going to hear from each of our witnesses, and we're going to start with Dr. Morrison. Wait, and before we do that, before proceeding, I'd like to recognize one of the many distinguished guests that we have in the audience, Reverend Francis Campbell Gray. If I could ask you to stand. Reverend Gray serves as assistant bishop in the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia. Bishop Gray has served on the House of Bishops Committee on World Mission for the past 14 years, and on the standing commission for World Mission for six years.

In 1999, he was elected president of the Compass Rose Society, an organization supporting worldwide Anglican mission efforts. Reverend Gray recently returned from Sudan. The Episcopal church is doing very good work throughout all of Africa, so I'd like to thank you, Reverend, for again joining us today and monitoring our work here.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

REP. ROYCE: Let me begin by asking Pastor Gary Kusunoki. You did a film on Muslim-Christian relations in the United States, which you had shown on the Khartoum channel or on Sudan television. And I wondered if that had led to any expressions of religious tolerance in the national media. What feedback-after your film was shown on Sudanese television, what feedback you received. Do you think religious tolerance is improving with respect to government controlled areas in the country.

MR. KUSUNOKI: From what I see, there is some movement in that area among certain people. And I would say that there is a move among certain people towards moderation. And so what I would have to say is, yeah, that's a definite possibility. And we've received feedback on two areas. One official feedback from the government that they were pleased with the film and the response from the nation, and then feedback from our people on the ground and from our pastors in Northern Sudan that it has made a tremendous difference. And really the documentary was focused on the average person.

REP. ROYCE: You have spent more time, I think, in consultations with people in Sudan than anyone I know outside of some of my Sudanese friends. Could you tell me what impact, what immediate impact, this peace negotiation is having on the lives of everyday Sudanese. Let's talk about it in Khartoum and let's talk about it in the south.

MR. KUSUNOKI: Well, both in Khartoum and in the south, we have had the opportunity to basically wander the streets or the trail, so to speak, depending on where we are. And what we have seen is the greatest difference is there's now hope. Even in areas where they have no food, they have no clothing, they have no medicine, they know that there are peace negotiations going on, that there is a chance for a peaceful settlement of this war and for the suffering to stop, and they also know the United States is engaged, and that has given them just a tremendous sense of hope.

REP. ROYCE: Thank you, Pastor.

I was going to ask Dr. Reeves a question about the negotiations themselves with respect to the Khartoum government. Is there one government in Khartoum, or is there-are there factions involved in this negotiation?

MR. REEVES: That's a very good question, and I don't think there's any entirely clear answer. The National Islamic Front regime that is the government of Sudan is essentially unchanged. With the exception of the sidelining of Hassan al-Turabi, this is the same regime that came to power, deposing an elected government, in 1989. Came to power by military coup, and in the process, aborted the most promising chance for peace prior to the present one.

REP. ROYCE: We understand that. But are there people who favor, in your view, in this administration, in Khartoum, negotiations at this point.

MR. REEVES: Let me frame my answer a little differently. I believe all of the people in the National Islamic Front are survivalists. There are different calculations about what is required to survive with so much U.S. and international scrutiny. I believe the calculations are of those who want a peace that we will in six and a half years be able to undermine this peace. It will be the task of the U.S. to say to those who have agreed to a peace, you will be proved wrong. We will show you.

REP. ROYCE: Okay. Then how does the international community empower those who are farthest out on the limb of seeing it in Sudan's interests long-term to have this new relationship with U.S. and with the international community?

MR. REEVES: I agree with Steve. I think one of the most important things is that we don't trust at all a regime that has shown itself utterly untrustworthy, and that we have a robust peace support operation of a sort that's not presently being contemplated. I think we need to look at those security arrangements and make sure that, among other things, we provide for the rapid redeployment and demobilization of Khartoum's troops in the south. The present security arrangement's agreement allows for two and a half years. That's too long.

REP. ROYCE: I see. All right. Thank you.

And I wanted to ask Dr. Morrison a question about who would be the beneficiary if this thing is stalled? Politically, militarily, economically, you know, the talks remain in limbo.

Is the government-is the SPLM building its military right now? I mean, who are the beneficiaries if this does not come to closure soon?

MR. MORRISON: Well, within both movements you have skeptics and you have spoilers. And a stall that frays the will and unity and determination of the two sides-of the parties on both sides that have driven this process forward, a stall weakens their position and leaves them open to further criticism and erosion of their position. And with Darfur hanging over the situation as well, that compounds that and raises the risk of the situation collapsing.

The other thing I would say is that what we're seeing is the possibility, certainly in Darfur, of a reopening of political space for radical Islamic influence. What Charlie Snyder was referencing in terms of the linkages between the JEM armed movement in the west and Turabi. And that is a dangerous development and one that fits into a sort of spoiler mode where the more this goes on, the more he's able to demonstrate his ability to shape events in a fairly pernicious fashion.

REP. ROYCE: It then calls into question one of the assumptions you have in your report, an assumption which I hope is true, which is that this is going to earn the U.S. good will in the Arab world, if we negotiate out this peace. But I think we've been somewhat chagrinned in the past at trying to anticipate Arab public opinion. So I guess I'd ask, given this circumstance, is that really the case that as we force this negotiation for peace, that that necessarily will translate into support in the Arab world.

I'd just like to hear what the response is in North Africa and in the Middle East right now to our efforts on pressuring Khartoum to come to the table with the south. What is the response? Just to play devil's advocate, I guess, for a moment here, and ask you about that, Dr. Morrison.

MR. MORRISON: I think the response to a durable, fair negotiated peace settlement, with the U.S. clearly as a driver of this, the response within the region, both within East and North Africa, will be mixed, and the expressions will be also different sometimes as to what's said publicly and what's said privately. A peace settlement that re-stabilizes this region will be much appreciated. You have many governments in East Africa and across West Africa that are struggling with mixed populations of Muslims and Christians which are unsteady, which face many similar problems.

And this will register in a very positive way. Will this type of achievement overcome or surmount the animosity against the United States borne of Iraq and other such things? Not in the short term. I think we shouldn't be na?ve about that.

REP. ROYCE: But that's not my question. My question is simply how is this processed in terms of our engagement in this peace process in the Arab world, on the Arab street? And I was just going to an assessment that-or assertions you'd made in your report which I found interesting. But time will tell whether your assessment is correct or not.

We're going to go to Mr. Payne for his questions.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

REP. ROYCE: Let me end by thanking all three of you not only for your trip out here, but I want to just commend your very thoughtful CSIS report, Dr. Morrison.

And, Dr. Reeves, you mentioned that the aggression had flown under the radar. Thanks to your good work, the aggression in Darfur is exposed today and you continue to dedicate your career to trying to organize the international community and try to encourage us to adopt policies which will put an end to that aggression.

I want to end by thanking Pastor Gary Kusunoki, not only for his extraordinary commitment to try to bring closer ties between Christians and Muslims, but to repeatedly go not only in country and meet with leadership on both sides and try to build these bridges, but on top of it do the work on the ground and then to adopt the orphans of slave raids there in South Sudan, and take upon his shoulders and his wife upbringing these children. It says something his commitment to humanity. And I think all three of you really deserve to be thanked for the longstanding commitment you've made for peace in Southern Sudan.

This hearing stands adjourned.