Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Relief Workers Curse "Save Darfur"

Expand Messages
  • World View
    Women displaced from their homes lined up one morning in February to get water from a pump in the Hamadiya camp at Zalingei in West Darfur. Darfur Advocacy
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 2, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Women displaced from their homes lined up one morning in February to
      get water from a pump in the Hamadiya camp at Zalingei in West Darfur.

      Darfur Advocacy Group Undergoes a Shake-Up
      June 2, 2007

      Even as advocacy groups attained the seeming triumph of President
      Bush's new sanctions against Sudan, the organization that helped bring
      the conflict in Darfur to the world's attention is in upheaval, firing
      its executive director, reorganizing its board and rethinking its

      At the heart of the shake-up are questions of whether the former
      executive director of the organization, the Save Darfur Coalition,
      wisely used a sudden influx of money from a few anonymous donors in an
      advertising blitz to push for action.

      The advertisements strained relationships with aid groups working on
      the ground in Darfur, the western region of Sudan, where at least
      200,000 people have been killed and millions have fled their homes.
      Many of the groups opposed some of the tone and content of Save
      Darfur's high-decibel advocacy campaign.

      Coalition board members sought to minimize the dispute, saying that
      tensions had existed between advocates and aid workers in previous
      crises, like Kosovo, and that the organization's rapid growth and
      changing membership had motivated the board's decision to remove the
      director, David Rubenstein.

      "We are grateful for the extraordinary job he has done and wish him
      the best in his search for new opportunities for public service," said
      Ruth W. Messinger, president of the American Jewish World Service and
      a Save Darfur board member, who declined to discuss the reasons for
      Mr. Rubenstein's dismissal. Allyn Brooks-LaSure, a spokesman for the
      organization, said Mr. Rubenstein was not available for comment.

      Perhaps no cause in Africa since the campaign to end apartheid in
      South Africa has drawn such wide and deep grass-roots support across
      the political spectrum. Many activists, politicians and policy makers
      praise Save Darfur in particular for its role in raising awareness
      about the crisis.

      "It is extraordinary," said Samantha Power, a professor at the Kennedy
      School of Government at Harvard. "The fact that Darfur is even on the
      policy map along with Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, North Korea, global
      warming, the fact that Darfur merits an 8 a.m. statement by the
      president, is testament to one thing and one thing alone, and that is
      this movement."

      The group says it has delivered more than a million postcards to Mr.
      Bush, organized mass rallies that have drawn tens of thousands of
      participants and urged its members to wear green wristbands emblazoned
      with the anti-genocide motto "Not on our watch."

      But Save Darfur has gotten into hot water with aid groups helping the
      refugees of the conflict.

      In February it began a high-profile advertising campaign that included
      full-page newspaper ads, television spots and billboards calling for
      more aggressive action in Darfur, including the imposition of a
      no-flight zone over the region.

      Aid groups and even some activists say banning flights could do more
      harm than good, because it could stop aid flights. Many aid groups fly
      white airplanes and helicopters that may look similar to those used by
      the Sudanese government, putting their workers at risk in a no-flight

      Sam Worthington, the president and chief executive of InterAction, a
      coalition of aid groups, complained to Mr. Rubenstein by e-mail that
      Save Darfur's advertising was confusing the public and damaging the
      relief effort.

      "I am deeply concerned by the inability of Save Darfur to be informed
      by the realities on the ground and to understand the consequences of
      your proposed actions," Mr. Worthington wrote.

      He noted that contrary to assertions in its initial ads, Save Darfur
      did not represent any of the organizations working in Darfur, and he
      accused it of "misstating facts." He said its endorsement of plans
      that included a no-flight zone and the use of multilateral forces
      "could easily result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of

      Another aid group, Action Against Hunger, said in a statement last
      week that a forced intervention by United Nations troops without the
      approval of the Sudanese government "could have disastrous
      consequences that risk triggering a further escalation of violence
      while jeopardizing the provision of vital humanitarian assistance to
      millions of people."

      Aid groups also complain that Save Darfur, whose budget last year was
      $15 million, does not spend that money on aid for the long-suffering
      citizens of the region.

      The tension between aid and advocacy is not unique to the Darfur
      conflict, though it is almost always papered over by the code of
      silence that governs relations among nonprofit groups.

      "I think these agencies probably agree on many more questions than
      they disagree on, but clearly there is a different perspective between
      people who are on the ground and having to deal with local security
      and harassment, and advocacy groups," said Ken Bacon, president of
      Refugees International, an advocacy group and member of the Save
      Darfur Coalition. "We travel into areas like Darfur for a month or so,
      then leave, and therefore we face different pressures."

      At the same time, the relationship is also symbiotic: brazen advocacy
      groups help put pressure on governments and raise awareness among
      donors, thus supporting the work done on the ground by more diplomatic

      The Sudanese government is adroit at exploiting that tension. It
      deploys a variety of tactics to impede aid workers, including delaying
      approval for visas, refusing to allow shipments of necessary supplies
      and prohibiting the workers from boarding planes, and it blames
      advocacy for its actions.

      When the International Rescue Committee issued a press release last
      summer noting an increase in rapes and other sexual violence based on
      what it was seeing in refugee camps, its workers were hauled before
      government officials, and its efforts to get visas and travel permits
      became mired in red tape.

      "The Sudanese are very astute, and they following what's going on in
      the U.S. press," Mr. Bacon said. "When I met with President Bashir, he
      mentioned Save Darfur specifically and said it was treating his
      government unfairly and preventing the U.S. from dealing with him or
      granting him concessions for what he is trying to do to improve things."

      So some relief agencies said they were horrified when Save Darfur's
      ads in February reported that "international relief organizations,"
      among others, had agreed that the time for negotiating with the
      Sudanese government had ended.

      Mr. Rubenstein and Mr. Worthington and other executives of relief
      organizations have met to discuss the concerns he expressed. "We've
      had good conversations with Save Darfur and have seen changes in their
      ads that reflect a better understanding of the evolving reality on the
      ground," Mr. Worthington said.

      Mr. Bacon said similar tension had flared publicly during the 1998-99
      war in Kosovo, when relief groups had staff members in the Balkans at
      the same time advocacy groups were calling for bombing and more
      aggressive military action.

      "Not only were there concerns among relief agencies that their workers
      would be hit if there were bombing, but they were also fearful that
      more aggressive action could provoke a counterattack against aid
      workers, who might be seen as representative of the Western powers
      doing the bombing," Mr. Bacon said.

      John Prendergast, a member of the board of Save Darfur and a leading
      activist on Darfur, said the changes that the board decided to make
      were part of an effort to reorganize and re-energize the movement
      along the lines of its earliest conception: to be a broad, permanent
      alliance of many different types of organizations working together to
      prevent atrocities and genocide.

      "The growth was so fast in the coalition, as was interest in the issue
      of Darfur and in the budget, that it was hard to kind of manage the
      difference between an organization and a coalition," Mr. Prendergast
      said. "People felt that the time had some to go back to the roots of
      the coalition of groups that is so rich and so diverse."

      Stephanie Strom reported from New York, and Lydia Polgreen from Dakar,



      To subscribe to this group, send an email to:


      Need some good karma? Appreciate the service?
      Please consider donating to WVNS today.
      Email ummyakoub@... for instructions.

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.