Posted By Colum Lynch Share

The Sudanese government on Saturday, Dec. 3, blocked the U.N's relief coordinator, Valerie Amos, from visiting Khartoum, where she planned to press Sudanese officials to grant greater access to U.N. relief workers in conflict zones in South Kordofan and Blue Nile states.

The visit, which was planned well advance, was cancelled after Sudanese authorities said that the top official responsible for addressing humanitarian issues was not available to meet with her because the cabinet had been dissolved.

The cancellation comes amid concern that Sudan is heading towards a worsening civil war, with hardliners pressing for a military crackdown on resistance elements in the country, and a coalition of rebel groups forming an alliance to try to overthrow the government of President Omar al-Bashir.

"Civil war is spreading in Sudan," the International Crisis Group warned in a recent report on Sudan. "With hundreds of thousands of people displaced...the growing war on multiple fronts poses serious dangers for the country, for its future relationship with the Republic of South Sudan and for the stability of the region as a whole."

The region has been in a state of turmoil since neighboring South Sudan gained its independence from Sudan. After relinquishing control over the south last summer, Khartoum's forces moved quickly to restore control over the disputed region of Abyei that straddles the north and south, and launched offensives against the restive South Kordofan and Blue Nile regions.

The United Nations, which was required to leave the region after the referendum, has not been allowed to monitor what's happening in South Kordofan and Blue Nile. Amos's visit was part of an ongoing effort to ensure that relief can be delivered to those displaced by rising violence.

A spokeswoman for Amos, Amanda Pitt, told Turtle Bay that Amos is "extremely concerned" about the plight of displaced civilians in South Kordofan and Blue Nile, and planned to press the government to ensure relief agencies could "reach the people" affected by the violence.

Pitt said that Amos was at the international airport in Istanbul, Turkey, en route to Sudan when she was informed that there was no appropriate official available to meet her and that she should not come. "I know that she definitely wants to go and is working" with the Sudanese government and the U.N. team in Sudan to "sort out another date," said Pitt.

Follow me on Twitter @columlynch

 

DANIELSERWER

4:53 PM ET

December 6, 2011

Or will it be interstate war?

Will the South stay out, or will Khartoum's repression in Blue Nile and South Kordofan lead to a north/south conflict. That would now be interstate, not intrastate.

Daniel Serwer
www.peacefare.net

 

GRANT

7:28 PM ET

December 6, 2011

True, but this was

True, but this was specifically about areas that are legally inside Sudan and not South Sudan. South Sudan might get dragged in anyway, which would turn it into an interstate war as well as an intrastate one.

 

DRDJJL

9:01 PM ET

December 6, 2011

South Sudan is already

South Sudan is already heavily involved in the fighting in Blue Nile and Southern Kordufan. Anyone who thinks otherwise is ignorant of Sudan or malevolent. Less than a year ago they were 1 army. The SPLM-N still wear the uniform of the SPLM and raise the flag of South Sudan. The heads of the SPLM-N are all currently in Juba. Where else do you think they get their weapons! Ofcourse the US has a big hidden hand in this too. All these calls for intervention and 'no-fly zone' nicely fits the US's next plan.

 

GRANT

7:26 PM ET

December 6, 2011

It seems a bit odd to ask

It seems a bit odd to ask whether or not there will be civil war in Sudan, much like Iraq and Afghanistan civil war is already occurring. The question is whether or not it will intensify.

 

DRDJJL

9:08 PM ET

December 6, 2011

The real question is; will

The real question is; will Sudan fall into this US plot for it to fight South Sudan directly. Then you will hear the cry's to invade or attack Sudan directly and openly by Western governments. You cannot call it a civil war. It involves a small group of renegade rebels looking for power. Each one of these rebels from Darfur, Kordufan or Blue-Nile represents a small tribe and they appointed themselves to speak on behalf of these tribes or the Sudanese people. The majority of Sudan is stable no matter how gloomy you portray it in the west.

 

GRANT

10:18 PM ET

December 6, 2011

Of course, because genocide

Of course, because genocide is such a stable phenomena. And why would the 'West'* which put so much effort (even the U.S) into convincing north and south Sudan to split peacefully want a full war, especially now of all times? The 'West' has nothing to gain from further chaos in Sudan, higher oil prices and the possibility of the war spilling out across the region.

*I love how apparently part of Europe, the U.S and possibly Japan (depending on your definition of the West) are just inherently conspiratorial and will plot with each other for no reason whatsoever. Apparently it works under the same logic that the 'East' must be plotting with each other in full ignorance of cultures, nations, history, economics and domestic politics.

 

Longtime Washington Post correspondent Colum Lynch reports on all things United Nations for Turtle Bay.

Read More