The British Ambassador: Admits and Beautifies

Behind the News
Mohamed Widaa

British law prohibits providing such direct financial support.
Funding “Tagaddom” directly supports conference participants who have committed war crimes.
The “Tagaddom” conference included known militia leaders.
The “Tagaddom” conference elected Hadi Idris as Hamdok’s deputy, while his forces attacked El Fasher, killing women and children and destroying civilian infrastructure.
Hadi Idris and Taher Hajar’s forces destroyed the children’s hospital in El Fasher, killing children and women.

Mr. Giles, the British Ambassador to Sudan, admitted that his country provided support to “Tagaddom” and that his government will continue to support “Sudanese anti-war activists and those working towards democratic transition.” Assuming this support was provided without violating British laws, which is not true, the ambassador has made a significant contradiction and a grave mistake. Supporting a conference attended by those who contribute to the killing of Sudanese people is a war crime. If the ambassador is unaware, it is a disaster; if he is aware, it is a greater disaster.

According to diplomatic norms and Sudanese and international laws, what the ambassador did is considered interference in Sudan’s internal affairs. Sudanese party laws prohibit parties from receiving any funds from foreign entities. By admitting this, he has exposed these parties to accountability, which could lead to their dissolution and confiscation of their properties.

The ambassador’s country funded a conference attended by Taher Hajar and Hadi Idris, leaders of movements fighting alongside the Rapid Support Forces militia. These leaders are accused of attacking the children’s hospital in El Fasher, killing women and children, and causing significant damage. This is documented by the residents of El Fasher and the confessions of captured movement soldiers. Moreover, the conference supported by the ambassador’s country elected Hadi Idris as Hamdok’s deputy while his forces attack El Fasher, killing women and children, and destroying civilian infrastructure, which are war crimes punishable under international and humanitarian laws.

The conference funded by the ambassador’s country was attended by several leaders of the Rapid Support Forces militia, including:

  • Bala Abdul Said, Head of the Rapid Support Forces Liaison Committee
  • Adam Hasab Al-Rasoul, Representative of the Rapid Support Forces in Britain
  • Ezzedine Al-Safi, Member of the Rapid Support Forces Negotiation Delegation in Jeddah
  • Mustafa Bakht, who presented himself as a representative of the herders, affiliated with the Rapid Support Forces, and attacked the armed forces during his speech

Is the ambassador unaware of their participation? Does he know that a representative of the farmers was prevented from speaking simply because he condemned the Rapid Support Forces? Did the ambassador fall for the claims of “Tagaddom” being neutral and aiming to stop the war? How does he explain the participation of several Janjaweed leaders in the founding conference of “Tagaddom”?

Whether the British Foreign Office will hold its ambassador to Sudan accountable or not, whether Mr. Giles remains in his position, resigns, or is dismissed, is not the point. The important thing is that he admitted to providing direct financial support to the conference, which undermines the claims of “Tagaddom” and its concealment behind intelligence fronts of “organizations.” We argue that British law prohibits providing such direct financial support. By doing so, the ambassador is inciting against the vast majority of Sudanese people. The mere presence of militia leaders and Taher Hajar and Hadi Idris at the conference prohibits funding it.

If the ambassador is unaware, then former Prime Minister Hamdok received widespread support from the Sudanese people after the glorious December revolution but failed to lead the transitional period and wasted an irreplaceable opportunity for the Sudanese people. He is now trying to return through the back door.

We present these facts about the participation of militia leaders and confirmed evidence of the involvement of Hajar and Idris’s movements in the battles to besiege El Fasher and starve thousands of civilians to the ambassador. He bears the burden of proving otherwise, but he will not do so because he knows all this. This has been his country’s policy towards Sudan since Irfan Siddiq was the ambassador, starting with insisting on imposing the framework agreement through the Quartet and ending with obstructing his country’s representative in the Security Council from considering Sudan’s complaint against the UAE. The ambassador is trying in vain to beautify his act against diplomatic norms. He said he supported and will support “Tagaddom,” which includes militia members and their partners in committing war crimes and crimes against humanity.

June 2, 2024

Back to top button