The signals of two private television channels,  7TV and  TFM , disappeared from the digital terrestrial television (TNT) network for eight days, without any official justification and in very opaque circumstances. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) condemns this arbitrary blackout and calls on the Senegalese authorities to honour their commitments and identify those behind the disappearance. The signals of two private television channels,  7TV and  TFM , disappeared from the digital terrestrial television (TNT) network for eight days, without any official justification and in very opaque circumstances. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) condemns this arbitrary blackout and calls on the Senegalese authorities to honour their commitments and identify those behind the disappearance. It seems the Senegalese authorities have been tempted by one of the oldest tricks in the book since late October. By cutting two TV channels’ signals on the TNT network operated by the public company Télédiffusion du Sénégal (TDS), the government is following in the footsteps of its predecessor, which unilaterally  cut the signal of the private channel  Walf TV   twice , in February and June 2024. The blackouts affecting the two broadcasters between 28 October and 6 November took place in complete secrecy. The  7TV signal was cut on the evening of 28 October, when police raided the channel’s premises to  arrest its director general,  Maïmouna Ndour Faye , who was released two days later. The same day,  TFM was taken off air just minutes after broadcasting an interview with media owner  Madiambal Diagne — who is currently subject to an international arrest warrant. The interview was conducted by  Babacar Fall , editor-in-chief of  Radio Futurs Médias (RFM) , which belongs to the same media group. In a statement  published on 5 November, the National Council for Audiovisual Regulation (CNRA) shifted blame onto the ministry, denied any involvement in the suspensions and even ordered TDS to “immediately restore” access to the two channels. Their broadcasts did indeed resume on 6 November. However, one question remains: who gave the order to TDS to cut off the signals of the two TV channels? Uncertainty persists as  neither outlet was notified of any such decision, and the authorities are yet to make an official statement. TDS Director Aminata Sarr and the Ministry of Communication declined to answer RSF’s questions.  “Now that 7TV and TFM are back on air, it is essential to establish responsibility and identify those behind this arbitrary decision -– which was made in violation of standard regulatory procedures — and continues to be characterised by complete silence from the authorities. This is unacceptable. The blackout not only deprived the public of its right to information for a week but also brought back  painful memories of Senegal’s recent past, when the same tactics were used by the former regime. RSF urges the authorities to identify those responsible for this attack on press freedom. Sadibou Marong Director of the RSF Sub-Saharan Africa Bureau The suspension of  TFM and  7TV occurred just after the  arrests of Babacar Fall and Maïmouna Ndour Faye on 28 and 29 October, respectively. At the same moment, Senegal’s Ministry of Communication was closing the International African Media Fair (SIMA), during which it had pledged to protect journalism and  the right to information — without mentioning the incident. Madiambal Diagne, who is currently in France, has been targeted by an  international arrest warrant issued by Senegal. Shortly before leaving the country — despite his travel ban — he had been summoned by the Criminal Investigation Division (DIC) as part of an inquiry into alleged suspicious financial transactions. French courts are expected to  rule on his extradition on 25 November. @ Reporters Without Borders (RSF) - 2021

An advocacy and exchange meeting on the fight against gender-based violence (GBV) was held on Wednesday, November 5, in Blitta-Gare, about 270 km north of Lomé, the Togolese capital. Organised by the Association of Empowered Women for Development (AFED) under its “Voix Essentielles” project, with financial support from Speak Up Africa, the meeting brought together local authorities, women from agricultural cooperatives, and market vendors from Blitta-Gare, Blitta-Village, Doufouli, and Yaloumbè. The main objective is to secure the commitment of local authorities to create a multisectoral platform for managing GBV cases by January 2026, strengthen coordination between institutional and community actors, and ensure the swift and comprehensive support of victims. The session also encouraged active participation from women, girls, and boys in GBV prevention efforts. AFED representatives presented the association’s mission, project framework, advocacy document, and the role of the future platform. Participants were trained in case management procedures and advocacy strategies with local authorities. Focal points were appointed in each district, and a monitoring committee was established to oversee implementation. AFED president Birrégah Ata Rosalie emphasised that GBV cases are often handled informally and without proper follow-up. She said the new platform would enable a coordinated, effective, and rights-based response. Blitta Prefect Batossa Boukari and Bang’na Izetou Zyad, representative of the mayor of Blitta 1, both welcomed the initiative and urged participants to spread awareness throughout their communities. This initiative forms part of AFED’s “Voix Essentielles” project, supported by Speak Up Africa, which seeks to strengthen the fight against gender-based violence in the Blitta prefecture. © 2025 African Press Agency

The resolution supports Morocco’s claim to the disputed Western Sahara, a stance backed by Trump’s administration. An archway in the entrance of Dakhla carries an image of Morocco's King Mohammed VI, in Western Sahara [File: Mosa'ab Elshamy/AP Photo] The United Nations Security Council has adopted a resolution stating that genuine autonomy for Western Sahara under Moroccan sovereignty could be the most feasible solution to Rabat’s 50-year conflict with the Algeria-backed Polisario Front. Western Sahara, a tract of desert the size of Britain, has been the scene of Africa’s longest-running territorial dispute since colonial power Spain left in 1975 and Morocco annexed the territory. The UNSC, in a United States-drafted text, on Friday called for the parties to engage in negotiations based on an autonomy plan first presented by Morocco to the UN in 2007. Morocco considers the territory its own while the Polisario Front seeks to establish an independent state called the Sahrawi Republic. “We urge all parties to use the coming weeks to come to the table and engage in serious discussions,” US ambassador to the UN Mike Waltz told the council after the vote on Friday. “We believe regional peace is possible this year, and we will make every effort to facilitate progress.” Russia, China and Pakistan abstained, while Algeria did not vote. The remaining 11 council members voted in favour of the resolution, which also renewed for one year the mandate of the UN peacekeeping force in Western Sahara, known as the UN Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO). “The final decision on the future cannot, must not, belong to anyone other than the people under colonial domination,” Algeria’s UN ambassador, Amar Bendjama, told the council after the vote. “This text ignores the proposals of the Polisario Front … They are a party to the conflict, and their opinion must be heard.” A ‘victorious chapter’ Morocco’s autonomy proposal would establish a local legislative, executive and judicial authority for Western Sahara elected by its residents, while Rabat would retain jurisdiction over defence, foreign affairs and religious matters. The Polisario instead wants to hold a referendum with independence as an option. Morocco is seeking a win-win and “face-saving” solution for all the parties to the conflict, King Mohammed VI of Morocco said after the UN vote. He urged Sahrawi refugees held in the Polisario-run Tindouf camps in southwestern Algeria to endorse autonomy. The king also renewed his call for a “brotherly dialogue” with Algeria and said Morocco is committed to the Maghreb Union. “We are opening a new and victorious chapter in the process of enshrining the Moroccan character of the Sahara, which is intended to bring this issue to a definitive close,” King Mohammed said in a speech in which he expressed his “immense pride”. Thousands gathered in the streets of Morocco’s cities to celebrate the vote, carrying flags and chanting patriotic slogans. Polisario Front representative Sidi Omar said the resolution does not imply any recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara. He said the Polisario Front leadership would assess the UN resolution and make an official position public in due course. The Security Council resolution also asked UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to provide within six months “a strategic review regarding MINURSO’s future mandate, taking into account the outcome of the negotiations”. US President Donald Trump reaffirmed support for Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara in July, saying a Moroccan autonomy plan for the territory was the sole solution. Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff had said the US is working on a peace deal between Algeria and Morocco. France made a similar move, recognising Rabat’s sovereignty over the territory and greenlighting investments there. In June, Britain became the third UNSC member to back autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty. Spain has also backed Rabat’s position, along with an increasing number of European states, signalling a shift in European Union member states’ foreign policy on the issue. © 2025 Al Jazeera Media Network

By OHCHR United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner Logo GENEVA – The human rights record of Croatia will be examined by the United Nations Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) Working Group for the fourth time on Monday 10 November 2025, 14:30–18:00 (GMT+1), in a meeting in Geneva that will be webcast live . Croatia is one of 14 States scheduled to be reviewed by the UPR Working Group during its upcoming session from 3 to 14 November 2025. The first, second and third UPR reviews of Croatia took place in November 2010, May 2015, and November 2020, respectively. The UPR Working Group is comprised of the 47 Member States of the Human Rights Council. However, any UN Member or Observer State can participate in a country review. The documents on which the reviews are based are: 1) national report - information provided by the State under review; 2) information contained in the reports of independent human rights experts and groups, known as the special procedures, human rights treaty bodies, and other UN entities; 3) information provided by other stakeholders including national human rights institutions, regional organizations, and civil society groups. The three reports serving as the basis for the review of Croatia can be found here . Location: Assembly Hall (A Building, third floor), Palais des Nations, Geneva. Date and time: Monday 10 November 2025, 14:30–18:00 (GMT+1) The UPR is a peer review of the human rights records of all 193 UN Member States. Since its first meeting was held in April 2008, all 193 UN Member States have been reviewed three times. During the fourth UPR cycle, States are again expected to spell out steps they have taken to implement recommendations posed during their previous reviews which they committed to follow up on and highlight recent human rights developments in the country. The delegation of Croatia will be led by Mr. Ivan Crnčec, State Secretary, Ministry of Justice, Public Administration and Digital Transformation. The three country representatives serving as rapporteurs (“troika”) for the review of Croatia are Colombia, Iceland and Indonesia. The webcast of the session will be at: https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1q/k1qskv65pt The list of speakers and all available statements to be delivered during the review of Croatia will be posted on the UPR Extranet . The UPR Working Group is scheduled to adopt the recommendations made to Croatia on Friday, 14 November 2025, between 14:30 and 18:00 (GMT+1). The State under review may wish to express its positions on recommendations posed to it during its review. © OHCHR 1996-2025

By Rebecca Bush James Marape skipped the meeting last year in protest but will attend Cop30 due to ‘encouraging signs’ on climate finance. Papua New Guinea prime minister James Marape says developed nations are ‘ready to deliver on climate finance’ ahead of the Cop30 summit in Belém, Brazil. Photograph: Godfreeman Kaptigau Papua New Guinea’s prime minister, James Marape, has criticised Cop climate summits as “long on talk and short on action” but will attend the upcoming meeting of world leaders in Brazil, after pulling out last year in frustration with big emitters. The leader of the Pacific nation of about 10 million people skipped the meeting in 2024 in “protest at the big nations” for failing to support to the victims of climate change. Marape will take part in the annual UN climate summit, which officially beings in Belém, Brazil on 10 November, due to “encouraging signs” emerging from developed nations on climate finance. “I did not attend Cop29 because these meetings were often long on talk and short on action,” Marape said. “This year, we are attending because we are beginning to see encouraging signs that developed nations are ready to deliver on climate finance and solutions.” Marape said Papua New Guinea was both “a victim of climate change and a provider of solutions”. “We will have our say at Cop30 , and we will make sure our landowners benefit from conservation efforts.” Cop summits have faced persistent criticism that big-emitting countries have not done enough to take meaningful climate action. On Thursday, the UN secretary general, António Guterres, opened the gathering with harsh words for world powers who he said “remain captive to the fossil fuel interests, rather than protecting the public interest”. Allowing global warming to exceed the key benchmark of 1.5 degrees Celsius, laid out in the Paris agreement, would represent a “moral failure and deadly negligence”, Guterres said, warning that “even a temporary overshoot will have dramatic consequences … every fraction of a degree higher means more hunger, displacement and loss”. Like other small island states, Pacific countries are at the frontline of the climate crisis. Papua New Guinea, which lies just north of Australia, is home to world’s third-largest expanse of rainforest, according to the World Wildlife Fund. Impoverished, surrounded by ocean and prone to natural disasters, PNG is also considered to be highly vulnerable to the perils of climate change. Marape said his goals for Cop30 included securing fair climate finance for landowners and more recognition for its forests and oceans. He met with the Brazilian president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, in Belém this week. “We are connecting the Pacific and the Amazon, two of the world’s big forest regions, to tackle climate change and build sustainable growth,” Marape said. The prime minister called for more cooperation with Brazil in agriculture, energy and technology. He also highlighted PNG’s energy plans, including expanding hydropower and increasing LNG exports to regional markets. “PNG is young but rising,” Marape said. “We want to be self-sufficient in energy and support the region with clean hydropower. Our LNG exports to Japan, Korea and Singapore show PNG is a reliable energy partner.” Marape also said PNG would support an Australia-Pacific bid to host Cop31 in 2026. Australia’s prime minister, Anthony Albanese, does not plan to attend this year’s summit in Brazil, drawing criticism as the country remains in a contest with Turkey to secure hosting rights. In PNG, environmental groups will closely watch the talks. Pamela Avusi from the Environmental Alliance in Port Moresby said while Marape had criticised bigger nations for failing to act on climate change, the government had exacerbated environmental problems through its own actions. “PNG has already suffered from decades of illegal and unsustainable logging,” Avusi said. “The government needs to stop these practices to be taken seriously internationally.” © 2025 Guardian News & Media Limited

By Michał Jagielski Protesters hold up a placard reading "Stop Execution in Iran" as they take part in a rally in Berlin, Germany, Oct. 22, 2022. Iran executed four Kurds by hanging on Jan. 29, 2024, having found them guilty of charges of collaborating with Israel. Photograph: AFP The Kurds, along with other ethnic minorities in Iran, have been suffering from systemic attempts by the state to limit their autonomy and forcefully assimilate them into the dominant Iranian culture. Any attempts by the Kurdish civil society to express their grievances and participate in peaceful movements have been met with violent crackdowns. Politically, the state has outlawed Kurdish political groups and actively punishes civilians for their lawful civil and political dissent. In recent years, Tehran has used domestic and international events as an excuse to further oppress the Kurds. By arresting civilians and community leaders, it aims to strip civil society of its tools to exercise its will. Socially, it has enforced its political, religious, and cultural vision on ethnic minorities, disregarding their right to cultural expression. Culturally, it criminalized the use of the Kurdish language, banned Kurdish symbols from the public sphere, and actively denied the contributions made by Kurds to the history and culture of the region. Economically, it has intentionally underdeveloped the provinces inhabited by Kurds, exploited the region’s natural resources, and put up bureaucratic hurdles, forcing the locals to work in perilous environments to survive. Physically, it engages in arbitrary arrests, torture, surveillance, and hands out death penalties on an unimaginable scale.   When all of Iran’s actions are taken into account, it is clear that its objective is to “menace the existence of the social group which exists by virtue of its common culture” to create a favorable status quo for the dominant group. In this light, Iran’s campaign against the Kurds can be understood as a form of cultural genocide, a sustained effort to erase a people by extinguishing the social, political, and cultural foundations that sustain them. Full report available under:

By Michał Jagielski Protesters marching in Zahedan city, Sistan and Baluchistan province. Photograph: UGC/AFP Sistan and Balochistan Province has been the victim of persistent attempts by the Iranian regime to oppress the Baloch and limit their capacity for mobilization. The events and policies described in this report are not isolated instances of ethnic persecution, but rather a strategy created to eradicate the Baloch. Tehran frames its policies as a response to the perceived terrorist threat, the subsequent instability, and severe underdevelopment, yet their true nature is vastly different. Militarization has normalized violence at security checkpoints, justified extreme surveillance, and allowed security forces to engage in extrajudicial killings and arrests, subsequently introducing insecurity into the province’s day-to-day life. Development projects, such as the Makran Development Plan, are often presented as opportunities, but they actually facilitate social engineering and resource exploitation. Religious discrimination, cultural suppression, and administrative restructuring aim to destroy the cultural identity and the communities of the Baloch. Furthermore, these policies deny the Baloch the opportunity to participate in the country's political, social, and economic life. The full report is available under:

By Barbara Plett Usher The paramilitary group, led by Gen Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, has taken the city of el-Fasher after an 18-month siege. Credit- BBC Sudan's paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has agreed to a proposal from the US for a humanitarian ceasefire, the group said on Thursday. Sudan's military-led government has not yet responded. The RSF issued the statement after seizing the city of el-Fasher in the western Darfur region. Their 18-month siege blocked humanitarian aid despite repeated UN appeals, causing starvation among residents unable to flee. A UN-backed global hunger monitor has confirmed famine conditions in the city. The RSF has been facing an international backlash over reports of mass killings by its foot soldiers, which it has denied. But it has admitted "violations" were committed by individuals and arrested some. Civil war broke out between Sudan's army and the RSF in April 2023. Both parties have agreed to various ceasefire proposals during the war, though none have stuck. In September, the US along with the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt proposed a three-month humanitarian truce, followed by a permanent ceasefire and a transition to civilian rule. The RSF's statement said it had agreed to enter the truce proposed by the four countries "in order to address the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of the war" and to allow the "urgent delivery" of aid. The group also said it looked forward to discussions about ending hostilities "in a manner that addresses the root causes of the conflicts" and "creates the appropriate environment for a just, comprehensive, and lasting peace". On Tuesday, before the RSF's statement, Sudan's Defence Minister Hassan Kabroun thanked US President Donald Trump's administration for its "efforts and proposals to achieve peace," in a speech broadcast on national television. But he added that preparations for the Sudanese people's battle against the RSF were ongoing. "Our preparations for war are a legitimate national right," he said. Sudan's chargé d'affaires in Nairobi, Mohamed Osman Akasha, told the BBC on Wednesday that the military-led government would agree to stop the fighting only if the RSF was dismantled, surrendered its weapons, and its leader was held accountable. "I have no information about a proposal for truce. The only thing that I know is the government of Sudan, the people of Sudan are very determined to defeat this militia," he said. The RSF's truce announcement comes after an aid organisation warned that a network of community kitchens in Sudan was on the verge of collapse . The locally run kitchens have operated in areas that are difficult for international humanitarian groups to access, but are facing closure due to neglect, shortages and volunteer exhaustion. A report from Islamic Relief quoted one volunteer as saying most of these kitchens - which are crucial lifelines for millions caught up in the civil war - will close within six months. The conflict has created what the UN has called the world's largest humanitarian crisis, with estimates that more than 24 million people are facing acute food shortages in Sudan. Many of those who fled the siege of el-Fasher are living in camps in Tawila. Credit- BBC More than 60,000 people have fled el-Fasher , which was captured by the RSF at the end of last month, the UN refugee agency said. There were reports of systematic killings as the group's fighters took control of the city. Survivors who escaped the siege told the BBC they had encountered "unimaginable" suffering and witnessed fighters torturing men trying to flee . "We saw people murdered in front of us. We saw people being beaten. It was really terrible," Ezzeldin Hassan Musa said. Last week, RSF leader Gen Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo announced an investigation into what he called "violations" committed by his soldiers in el-Fasher. The group has since released footage which it says shows the arrest of a fighter accused of carrying out executions. The UN's Human Rights Council said it would hold an urgent session on the situation in el-Fasher on 14 November. Copyright 2025 BBC. All rights reserved.

Dozens of Yemeni UN personnel could face death penalty, as UN says at least 59 of its staff are being held by the group. A member of Houthi security forces walks outside the United Nations compound following reports of UN staffers being detained, in Sanaa, Yemen, on October 29, 2025 [Khaled Abdullah/Reuters] Yemen’s Houthi -run government will put dozens of detained United Nations staff on trial, alleging that they have spied for Israel or had links to an Israeli air strike that killed the prime minister, according to officials. Abdulwahid Abu Ras, Yemen’s acting foreign minister, told the Reuters news agency on Friday that a cell within the UN’s World Food Programme was involved in directly targeting the government. The Houthi prime minister and nine other ministers were killed in an Israeli strike on the capital Sanaa in August, the first such attack to kill senior officials. The UN, which has repeatedly rejected Houthi accusations, said on Friday that a total of 36 UN employees were arrested after Israel’s attack. It says that at least 59 UN personnel are being held by the group. Abu Ras told Reuters that security agencies were acting “under full judicial supervision” and that public prosecutors were being kept informed “step by step”. It was certain, he said, that the process would lead “to trials and the issuance of judicial rulings”. Separately, Nasruddin Amer, a senior Houthi official, told the dpa news agency on Friday that the detained UN workers would be tried on charges of spying for Israel. “The judiciary will determine the penalty for those accused of spying for Israel in accordance with Yemeni law,” Amer said. “This is not a law we enacted. It is a law that has been in effect and applied in the country by previous regimes.” The UN defendants are Yemenis and could face the death penalty under the nation’s laws. Trial ‘not against the organisations’ Hundreds of UN personnel, including a small number of international staff, remain in parts of Houthi-controlled Yemen, according to Farhan Haq, deputy spokesperson for the UN secretary general. Houthi security forces entered several UN offices in Sanaa on Sunday. The UN says it is operating under increasingly difficult conditions, hindering its ability to provide assistance to those in need in Yemen. Amer told dpa: “The trial is not against the organisations, but against those who exploited humanitarian work to carry out espionage against our country and our people.” Abu Ras claimed that the Houthis are supporting humanitarian provision, and will “assist organisations committed to the principles of humanitarian work, facilitating their activities and work”. There was no immediate comment from the World Food Programme. Since Israel launched its war on Gaza in October 2023, the Houthis have targeted vessels in the Red Sea and carried out drone and missile attacks against Israel, saying that they are acting in solidarity with Palestinians under fire in Gaza. Israel has regularly struck the war-torn country, targeting civilian infrastructure, including residential buildings and the main international airport, while killing dozens at a time. Last month, Israeli strikes on Sanaa and the northern province of al-Jawf killed dozens of people, including journalists and children. © 2025 Al Jazeera Media Network

The Paramilitary Rapid Support Forces are collecting bodies after the deadly takeover of North Darfur capital, US researcher says. This image grab taken from handout video footage released on the paramilitary RSF's Telegram account on October 26, 2025, shows RSF fighters holding weapons and celebrating in the streets of el-Fasher in Sudan's Darfur region [AFP] A researcher at Yale University in the United States says the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) are digging mass graves in el-Fasher , the city in Sudan’s western Darfur region that has seen mass killings and displacement since the RSF took over last month. Nathaniel Raymond, executive director of the Humanitarian Research Lab at Yale’s School of Public Health, told Al Jazeera on Tuesday that the RSF “have begun to dig mass graves and to collect bodies throughout the city”. “They are cleaning up the massacre,” Raymond said. The RSF seized control of el-Fasher, the capital of North Darfur state, on October 26, after the withdrawal of the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), which has been fighting the paramilitary group for control of Sudan since April 2023 . More than 70,000 people have fled the city and surrounding areas since the RSF’s takeover, according to the United Nations , while witnesses and human rights groups have reported cases of “summary executions”, sexual violence and massacres of civilians. A report from Yale’s Humanitarian Research Lab on October 28 also found evidence of “mass killings” since the RSF took control of el-Fasher, including apparent pools of blood that were visible in satellite imagery. UN officials also warned this week that thousands of people are believed to be trapped in el-Fasher. “The current insecurity continues to block access, preventing the delivery of life-saving assistance to those trapped in the city without food, water and medical care,” Jacqueline Wilma Parlevliet, a senior UN refugee agency (UNHCR) official in Sudan, said. Sudanese journalist Abdallah Hussain explained that, before the RSF’s full takeover, el-Fasher was already reeling from an 18-month siege imposed by the paramilitary group. “No aid was allowed to access the city, and no healthcare facilities [were] operating,” Hussain told Al Jazeera from the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, on Tuesday. “Now it’s getting even worse for the citizens who remain trapped.” Amid global condemnation, the RSF and its supporters have tried to downplay the atrocities committed in el-Fasher, accusing allied armed groups of being responsible. The RSF’s leader, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, also known as Hemedti, has also promised an investigation. But Raymond at the Humanitarian Research Lab said: “if they want to actually have an investigation, then they need to withdraw from the city [and] let UN personnel and the Red Cross and humanitarians enter … and go house-to-house looking to see who’s still alive”. “At this point, we can’t let the RSF investigate themselves,” he said. Raymond added that, based on UN figures and what can be seen on the ground in el-Fasher, “more people could have died [in 10 days]… than have died in the past two years of the war in Gaza”. “That’s what we’re talking about. That’s not hyperbole,” he told Al Jazeera, stressing that thousands of people need emergency assistance. More than 68,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israel’s war on Gaza since October 7, 2023. © 2025 Al Jazeera Media Network

Relatives mourn over the body of 1-year-old Ali, who died of malnutrition in June 2004 in a refugee camp in El-Geneina in the Darfour, Sudan. The total number of people who have died as a result of the Darfur conflict is uncertain, but activists say it could exceed 400,000.Marco Longari / AFP - Getty Images file Why Save Darfur Didn’t Save Darfur By Prof. Gregory Stanton Founding President Genocide Watch   Written in March 2012, converted to past tense in 2025   In 2003, Humanity United (HU) called a national conference of people its staff identified as potential activists for an anti-genocide movement. Notably missing were any members of the Republican party, most of the heads of member organizations of the International Campaign to End Genocide and any leaders of the International Association of Genocide Scholars.    At the conference, Humanity United announced that Pierre and Pam Omidiyar, HU’s funders, intended to donate $100 million over the next seven years to support activism against genocide, human trafficking, and a few other causes.  They also announced that unsolicited applications for grants would not be accepted.  Most of the money they pledged was spent by 2012.   The Genocide in Darfur, Sudan   In early 2003, after an attack by rebels on a Sudanese Air Force base in Al Fasher, the Sudanese government began a genocidal counter-insurgency war against the Fur, Masalit, Zaghawa and other black African groups in Darfur.  Genocide Watch was the first organization to declare a Genocide Watch for the situation in June, 2003.   In the summer of 2004, a few human rights activists founded the Save Darfur Coalition, and a number of organizations quickly joined it. Genocide Watch was among the first to join in 2004, but was not listed as a member on the Save Darfur website until 2008, and was excluded from all leadership meetings.    The Coalition staff were paid from funds donated by Humanity United and other fundraising via the Center for American Progress, the liberal think tank organization funded by George Soros.  The Center for American Progress later played a prominent role in Barack Obama’s campaign for President.   In 2004, Save Darfur’s 180 member organizations adopted a Unity Statement that included the following goals regarding people in Darfur:  · Ending the violence against civilians; ·  Facilitating adequate and unhindered humanitarian aid; ·  Establishing conditions for the safe and voluntary return of displaced people to their homes; ·  Promoting the long-term sustainable development of Darfur; and ·  Holding the perpetrators accountable.   From its start, the Save Darfur Coalition was weakened by several role conflicts:   1.     Save Darfur set out to organize a grass-roots political movement against the genocide in Darfur but it acted as a coalition in name only.  In fact, Save Darfur was directed exclusively by a small elite staff and board from offices in Washington, DC.  Increasingly, statements by the “coalition” were actually made after short consultations among only eight of its members: Save Darfur (meaning its central staff and Board of Directors) by Humanity United itself, Enough, Investors Against Genocide (a project of Save Darfur, Massachusetts), the Genocide Intervention Network and StopGenocideNow, all funded by Humanity United, and by Physicians for Human Rights USA, American Jewish World Service, and Human Rights Watch.  The statements were then issued on behalf of all 180 members of the Save Darfur Coalition, though few received them or read them before they were issued.   Grassroots initiatives were never treated as central to the movement and were even discouraged.  Two projects organized by Rev. Tim Nonn, for example, were not endorsed by Save Darfur. One was a Mock Trial of Omar al-Bashir in November 2006 at the Church Center for the UN with Wole Soyinka as Chief Judge. Another was Rev. Nonn’s Tents of Hope project that placed hundreds of painted tents from every state on the Washington, DC Mall in September 2008. That project was reluctantly accepted by Save Darfur only when it was clear that Nonn’s project would proceed even without Save Darfur’s endorsement. Save Darfur finally gave Tents of Hope a tiny grant of $10,000, less than Rev. Nonn had spent from his own pocket.   2.     Huge amounts of money were donated to Save Darfur, both directly by HU and through direct fund-raising.  The success of Save Darfur at fundraising is indicated on its IRS 990 forms.  Gross receipts were $16 million in 2005, $49.3 million in 2006, $7.6 million in 2007, $4.8 million in 2008, and $5 million in 2009.  Net assets of Save Darfur in September 2009 were $2.7 million.  Total receipts from 2004 through 2009 were over $82.7 million.   The money was spent to pay: ·       high staff salaries (the Save Darfur President’s salary in 2008 was $185,455; in 2007, the top five salaried employees ranged from $138,000 to $87,656; in 2006, salaries totaled over $1 million and the top five officers earned from $130,000 to $68,000).  United to End Genocide, the successor to Save Darfur, and GI-Net continued to pay these high salaries to its top staff members until funding ran out. ·       professional fundraisers: $1 million in 2007 and $1.3 million in 2008; ·       professional advertising firms, including a remarkable $34.9 million in 2006, which included payment for numerous full-page ads in the New York Times and Washington Post; ·       for postcard and call-in campaigns to members of the US Congress.   None of Save Darfur’s budget was used to directly assist victims of the genocide in Darfur.  For example, in 2008, out of total expenditures of $9.3 million, total grants by Save Darfur to recipients in Sub-Saharan Africa for various services totaled only $84,050, and even that money did not go for aid to the victims.  A tiny number of Save Darfur’s grantees included small projects in Darfur as part of their programs, but they are not detailed in Save Darfur’s reports, and the average grants to coalition members were under $5000.   Save Darfur leaders were never willing to work with Bush Administration officials as the primary foreign policy makers during the Darfur genocide.  Although several members of the coalition, including Genocide Watch, repeatedly reminded Save Darfur’s leaders from the beginning that foreign policy in the USA is made by the Executive Branch – especially by the President, National Security Council, State Department, and Defense Department, Save Darfur concentrated its efforts on lobbying members of Congress.  The coalition was proud of rallying bipartisan Congressional condemnation of the Sudanese regime.  But Congress was never willing to advocate by resolution or law any US military intervention to stop the genocide.  Congressional resolutions were toothless – never advocating US or UN intervention.   Congress has a secondary role in foreign policy making in the US.  Its greatest impact is on appropriations.  Save Darfur, Enough, and GI-Net claimed that their congressional lobbying increased relief assistance to the IDP and refugee camps. But their claims had a post hoc, ergo propter hoc logic.  Money for Darfur IDP’s and refugees was appropriated through the normal channels of the State Department’s well-funded Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, which receives an annual appropriation without any pressure from outside groups.    There is little evidence that appropriations for Darfur IDPs and refugees were increased through efforts of the Save Darfur Coalition.  In fact, the Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs during the Bush administration, Dr. Jendaye Frazier, said that Save Darfur and Enough’s constant criticism of Bush administration policies, despite the President and Secretary of State’s direct condemnation of Sudanese government’s crimes as “genocide,” frustrated several of her initiatives for a more active, interventionist policy.   Throughout the Darfur genocide, the US and Canada were preoccupied with two major wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  These nations were therefore unlikely to commit American or Canadian troops to intervention in Darfur, and the Bush administration’s emphasis on the “War on Terror” even led to attempts to cooperate with the intelligence services of Sudan.   The Save Darfur Coalition’s 180 member organizations came almost exclusively from the United States and Canada, with a few from the UK.  The result was that Save Darfur was unable to put political pressure on leaders in the European Union, or other states in the UN to support intervention to stop the genocide and crimes against humanity in Darfur.    France, for example, was in a much better position than the US to take strong action because France was not tied down in the Iraq and Afghan wars, and because of France’s historic influence in Africa. France had military bases in Chad, and a demonstrated willingness to intervene in states like Côte d’Ivoire, where French interests were at stake.  But Save Darfur had no organization in France, and it failed to enlist the support of the French government.   Similarly, Save Darfur was unable to exert any pressure on Sudan’s main supporter, China, in spite of a well publicized, but ultimately fruitless “Genocide Olympics” campaign led by actress Mia Farrow, partially funded by HU, including a few trips for talks with Chinese officials, without results.    5.     Probably the single most effective blow against the Sudanese regime was referral of the situation in Darfur to the International Criminal Court.  The Save Darfur Coalition claimed credit for the referral, but Save Darfur had nothing to do with it.  In fact, Genocide Watch, working with policy makers inside the US government, particularly Nick Rostow, the legal adviser to the US Ambassador to the UN in New York, and a classmate of Genocide Watch’s President, resulted in Rostow’s carefully drafted UN Security Council resolution referring the situation in Darfur to the International Criminal Court.   The UNSC Resolution immunized citizens of countries that were not parties to the Rome Statute of the ICC.  That paragraph permitted abstentions, rather than vetoes, by China, Russia, and the US. It was the first resolution by the UN Security Council that referred to the ICC a situation in a country not a State-Party to the ICC’s Rome Statute.   The effect of the ICC referral was the indictment of President Omar al-Bashir, Ali Kushyb, leader of the Janjaweed militias, and Ahmed Haroun, the Sudanese minister in charge of “humanitarian assistance,” for crimes against humanity and genocide.  The Sudanese government greeted the indictments and arrest warrants by expelling thirteen NGO relief groups, further evidence of the genocidal intent of the regime.   Omar al-Bashir became persona non grata  in Uganda, South Africa, and other countries. But emboldened by his “victory” in fraudulent “elections”, al-Bashir stepped up his campaign of “ethnic cleansing” in Jebel Mara.  Al-Bashir and his new Governor in South Kordofan, the ICC-indicted war criminal Ahmed Haroun, then began genocidal massacres in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile states.   Prognosis for the future of Darfur   1.     There is still no effective plan supported by the US or any other great powers to end the Sudanese civil war, and to provide security for over two million IDP’s and refugees to safely return to their former homes.  Save Darfur didn’t have a plan with any reasonable chance of implementation, nor did any of the eight organizations that ran the Save Darfur Coalition.   2.      Al-Bashir told the IDP’s they should return home to their devastated villages, and a few did, but millions understandably remained untrusting of al-Bashir’s assurances of their security and stayed in IDP camps.   3.     After the 2011 referendum in South Sudan, when South Sudan voted to become independent, Sudan demanded outrageous fees to ship South Sudanese oil through Port Sudan in Sudan. South Sudan stopped producing oil and Sudan threatened war.  The Sudanese government finally extracted an agreement from South Sudan to pay reduced fees and the flow of oil resumed. The misnamed Comprehensive Peace Agreement failed to include resolution of the civil war in Darfur. The genocides in Sudan, South Sudan, and Darfur continued.     Lessons to be learned from Save Darfur’s failure to Save Darfur   1.     The Save Darfur Coalition claimed credit for organizing the largest anti-genocide movement to date, and its successor, United to End Genocide, made the same claim.  But United to End Genocide dropped any pretext that it was a coalition.  Most of the people and organizations in the US, Canada, and the UK who joined the Save Darfur Coalition had no role in United to End Genocide.   Nevertheless, United to End Genocide continued to use Save Darfur’s e-mail list to solicit funds.  All funds in the coffers of the Save Darfur Coalition and GI-Net were transferred to United to End Genocide without approval of the other members of the Save Darfur Coalition.  And United to End Genocide retained exclusive rights to the e-mail and fund-raising lists developed by the Save Darfur Coalition, which it refused to share with other coalition members, but eventually transferred to Enough.   2.     Support for UN Security Council Resolutions, the African Union Peacekeeping Force, and other objectives of the Save Darfur Coalition in 2004 proved to be naïve hopes.  Save Darfur never advocated an armed UN/AU Peacekeeping Operation with a mandate to disarm the Janjaweed and to protect hundreds of thousands of displaced Darfuri persons so they could return to their homes. Instead, the UN/AU Mission in Darfur became an Observer Mission, without a mandate to stop genocide and destruction of Darfur’s villages.   A former US Marine who joined the UN Mission in Darfur resigned in disgust at its failure to protect civilians. His photos of burning villages taken from a UN helicopter was proof of a continuing genocide.   Save Darfur’s preference for pacifism paralyzed its effectiveness.  The head of the successor United to End Genocide was also a pacifist, and there were no changes to Save Darfur’s aversion to legitimate use of armed force.   3.     Nothing would have stopped the Darfur genocide except the insertion of superior military force no later than mid-2004.  France and NATO could have imposed a “passive” no-fly zone over Darfur, with mortars positioned to destroy Sudanese aircraft on the ground after they returned from their bombing missions.   The UN, ECOWAS, NATO, and other alliances could have put heavily armed infantry on the ground to stop the murderous Janjaweed and Sudanese Army, in cooperation with African Union troops recruited from Rwanda. But the UN Mission in Darfur’s mandate never authorized such use of force.   4.     NATO warships could have blockaded Port Sudan’s export of oil and import of refined petroleum, while permitting imports of food and other goods.  But the US, the UK and NATO were pre-occupied by the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. France lacked the will to take such aggressive action, and the African Union, Arab League, and the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations objected to obstruction of fuel supplies.  Instead, weak UN Security Council Resolutions and an impotent African Union observer mission became substitutes for stopping the genocide. Wishful UN resolutions became covers for failure to take effective action.   5.     The inability of the Save Darfur Coalition to organize outside the US, Canada, and the UK weakened its ability to affect the foreign policy of other countries.   6.     The top-down, high-cost, elite-driven organizational structure of the Save Darfur Coalition significantly undermined its long-term effectiveness.  It failed to become a self-sustaining movement.  GI-Net called for the creation of a “permanent anti-genocide constituency.” United to End Genocide declared the same goal.  But neither had any experience in organizing such a mass movement.   7.     STAND (the student division of GI-Net) was the most effective member of the Save Darfur Coalition in creating this anti-genocide constituency. But STAND was limited to student members, and therefore it had limited influence.   8.     Save Darfur called itself an “interfaith” organization, and many of its members were faith groups.  But it made little use of the potentially enormous “permanent anti-genocide constituency” that could be based in religious organizations. Faith groups transcend national boundaries and connect with groups in countries at risk of genocide.   Conclusion   These critiques of the Save Darfur Coalition and of United to End Genocide are not meant to diminish what the Coalition accomplished – awareness among the American and Canadian people of the genocide in Darfur.   Save Darfur involved actors, sports stars, and other celebrities to an unprecedented degree.  It mobilized members of Congress, and some of its supporters joined the Obama administration.   These were major accomplishments of the Save Darfur Coalition and should not be minimized.   But US and European organizations of young white people are an inadequate foundation for the global anti-genocide movement that will be necessary to prevent genocide in the twenty-first century.   I remain hopeful that a “permanent anti-genocide constituency” can be organized to prevent and stop genocides and massive crimes against humanity in this century.    But it will take major paradigm shifts in thinking about genocidal processes, anti-genocide education, effective organization, public communications, how to influence policy, and the international institutions needed to prevent genocide.   The effectiveness of the US, Canada, and the EU in preventing genocide is currently limited by the impotence of the United Nations, which remains paralyzed by the Perm-5 veto in the UN Security Council.   A new United Nations Charter is needed. Article 109 of the UN Charter should be invoked to call a General Conference to rewrite the Charter. A new UN Charter should free the UN from the 1945 colonial powers that imposed the paralyzing Perm-5 veto.   The Statute of the International Criminal Court should be supplemented by a Protocol to create an effective international police force to arrest persons charged with war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide by the ICC.   Regional, national, and local organizations must take the lead in genocide education and prevention. Religious organizations must be enlisted to create the moral education needed to move people beyond their narrow ethnic loyalties.   The Anti-Genocide Movement must be organized from the ground up in countries at risk.  Organizing an anti-genocide movement will have to be a grass-roots effort like the organization of Amnesty International chapters.   US, Canadian, EU governments and Western NGOs can financially support local efforts. But the Anti-Genocide Movement cannot be limited to America and Europe. It must become a truly global movement to free humanity from our endless wars and genocides.   The first step toward ending genocide is the realization that there is only one race: the human race.     Copyright 2025 Gregory H Stanton Under Creative Commons Copyright. May be copied and republished freely so long as full credit is given to the author, it is republished in its entirety without alteration, and republication is not by a profit making corporation, publication, individual, or other entity.

Sudan Siege - British youth call on Pope Leo to speak out Independent Catholic News by Rebecca Tinsley Nov 3rd, 2025 UK Catholic Youth meeting 2 November 2025 Young British Sudanese are urging Pope Leo to press the international community to take robust action to stop the killing in Sudan. At a meeting in London, Sudanese Diaspora expressed horror that the United Arab Emirates was sending UK-made weapons to Sudan. This follows reports to the UN Security Council detailing how British military equipment has reached the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) besieging El Fasher in Darfur. At a weekend meeting organised by the human rights group, Waging Peace, dozens of young people, many born in the UK to refugee parents, urged Pope Leo to continue his appeals to diplomats to respond to the humanitarian catastrophe in Sudan. In the week since the Rapid Support Forces (the former Janjaweed militia) captured El Fasher, its soldiers have posted atrocity videos, confirming satellite evidence showing mass graves. For more than 500 days, the RSF militia had besieged the city of 260,000 people, preventing food entering, as they shell civilian infrastructure. On Sunday October 26th, the last Sudanese Armed Forces garrison fell and the army abandoned the citizens to their fate. The RSF has built a mud wall encircling the city, and there are multiple credible reports of the systematic elimination of Black African ethnic groups living there. Militiamen have posted videos of killing 460 people in a maternity hospital, and it is thought that at least 3,000 people have died since the city fell. David Miliband of the International Rescue Committee said in a briefing to donors that his charity, based in Tawila, 70 kilometres from El Fasher, stood ready to receive people escaping from the siege. It is estimated that 60,000 have fled the city in recent days. However, few people have arrived in Tawila, leading Miliband to fear they have been killed while trying to escape. Over the weekend, the RSF has also bombed Bara in North Kordofan and conducted a drone strike on an internally displaced persons' camp in South Kordofan. Both regions are home to Sudan's Black African ethnic groups. The British government now faces calls to stop selling weapons to the Unted Arab Emirates (the UAE) which allegedly backs the RSF. In 2024, the UN Security Council tasked its panel of experts to investigate the flow of weapons into Sudan in breach of the long-standing arms embargo on Darfur. The panel found there have been multiple flights from the UAE to Sudan, and equipment supplied to the UAE by countries such as the UK has been found in Darfur. UK Prime Minister Starmer meets with UAE Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan When asked by MPs on October 29th why British equipment (including small arms target systems and armoured personnel carrier engines) has been found in Darfur, the Foreign Secretary, Yvette Cooper, said that the UK's export regulations were "extremely strong." The FCDO minister Stephen Doughty, also resisted Liberal Democrats' calls for an arms embargo on the UAE. UK Government export data reveals that the UK sold £750m worth of arms to the UAE between 2019 and 2023. Proposing the embargo, the Lib Dem MP Monica Harding said, "The possibility that British military equipment is contributing to the horrors occurring there, and aiding the carnage caused by the RSF, is horrific. The UK must cease all arms sales to the UAE immediately - until we can confirm without a doubt that no British weapons are going via the UAE to the RSF." The UK has long had a lucrative relationship with the oil-rich Gulf kingdom, with the City of London managing UAE investments. The emirate is reputed to own more London property than the Duke of Westminster, in addition to Manchester City football team. President Donald Trump meets UAE Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan Source: UAE Foreign Ministry International efforts to stop the fighting have so far yielded little. The diplomatic "Quad" (the UAE, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the USA) have been meeting in Washington DC to discuss the violence in Sudan. The UAE is reported to have vetoed Quad proposals for a ceasefire between the RSF and the Sudanese Armed Forces. Since 2016, the UAE has spent $154m on lobbyists in Washington. Egypt and Saudi Arabia are known to support the Sudanese Armed Forces. On several occasions recently, Pope Leo has appealed to the international community to respond to what he called the "humanitarian catastrophe" in Sudan. It is believed that 150,000 Sudanese have been killed so far since the war began in April 2023. LINK Waging Peace: https://wagingpeace.info/ Tags: Sudan , Waging Peace , Rebecca TInsley , Pope Leo , David Miliband , Monica Harding , International Rescue Committee , Stephen Doughty , Arms , Weapons Share this story Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Print Email