After El Geneina and El Fasher, What Is Left of Africa’s Promise of ‘Never Again’?
Mubarak Mahgoub Musa
The timing of the visit by the African Union’s Envoy for the Prevention of Genocide to Sudan has, in itself, raised serious questions about the effectiveness of the African mechanisms designed to protect civilians.
This mechanism, established specifically in the aftermath of the Rwandan tragedy, is supposed to function as both preemptive and proactive tool, activated the moment early warning signs appear — not after alerts have turned into horrifying realities.
Yet, in the Sudanese case, the shortcomings went far beyond the absence of early warning. They extended to an almost complete disregard for overwhelming international evidence that clearly documented the commission of genocide, particularly in the city of Geneina and in other areas of western and central Sudan, ending with the untold horrendous atrocities and genocide in El Fashir.
The Human Rights Watch report, for example, described what took place in Geneina as a “genocidal campaign against the indigenous African population,” and this was followed by unequivocal statements from the U.S. Secretary of State and other senior officials affirming that the events in Geneina amount to a full-fledged act of genocide.
Despite this, the African Union mechanisms failed to take even the minimal protective or deterrent measures for which they were created.
There should be no mistake, Sudan’s suspension from the African Union cannot—under any circumstances—justify such weak engagement, for this reasoning contradicts the very essence of the Responsibility to Protect doctrine.
In essence, this mechanism does not deal with governments; it deals with civilians facing the threat of annihilation. Suspension of membership does not nullify its responsibilities — rather, it should impel immediate action when the population is left without protection.
In light of all this, the envoy’s visit to Sudan concluded last week, no matter how strongly it conveyed sentiments of condemnation or concern, remains far too little to correct a course the African system has already failed to address. It is closer to a delayed acknowledgment that warnings were ignored, and that innocent lives — were left to their fate in the face of a lawless militia and unmistakable atrocities.
Ultimately, the African Union’s Genocide Prevention Mechanism today appears not as a body activated to prevent such crimes in line with its mandate, but as one that hesitates even as clear international evidence and testimonies accumulate — confirming that genocide has already taken place. In doing so, the mechanism risks transforming from an instrument of protection into a belated witness to tragedy, in stark contradiction to the purpose for which it was created.
