... has apparently been a member of the CSIS Task Force on U.S.-Sudan Policy, "launched in July 2000 with the aim of revitalizing debate on Sudan and generating pragmatic recommendations for the new administration."
The Task Force compiled a report in February 2001, outlining their findings and recommendations for the Bush administration with respect to US involvement in the Sudan conflict:
http://www.csis.org/africa/sudan.pdfSome quotes from their findings (emphasis mine):
"(...) In the future, as Sudan becomes a medium-scale oil exporter, ...
Eventually, Sudan might provide to the United States an additional source of energy supply. (...) Since 1998, oil has flowed in Sudan, generating for Khartoum 200,000 barrels per day and an estimated $500 million in 2000. Production will double in the next two years, exceeding 400,000 barrels per day. Proven reserves, widely thought to exceed 1 billion barrels, could double or triple in the period of the Bush administration. Under this scenario,
Sudan will emerge as a new medium-scale oil exporter.
(...)
The United States today possesses significant leverage in regard to the Sudan crisis. Among major powers, the United States is the lone holdout in renewing a dialogue with Khartoum.
It is also the principal external backer, in humanitarian and diplomatic terms, of the southern Sudanese opposition. In combination, these create considerable inherent leverage.
(...)
Southern Sudanese rely on over $100 million per annum in U.S. humanitarian transfers. Opposition leaders have cultivated ties with key members of Congress and will not countenance serious reentry into negotiations unless confident of international protection and guarantees.
The central questions for the Bush administration are how to use its leverage, ..."
From the conclusions:
"(...) Resume full operations of the U.S. embassy in Khartoum, including assignment of a senior talent as U.S. ambassador. This will require
making the case forcefully that embassies exist to advance U.S. national interests, in friendly and unfriendly environments. All efforts should be made to strengthen embassy staff and Washington line officers. In addition, the Bush administration should see the compelling need to appoint a special envoy to conduct roving consultations in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East and sustain consultations with Capitol Hill and interest groups in Washington. That person should be high level and provided with the necessary authority, access, and financial support to make an effective difference (
à la Northern Ireland,
Bosnia, and Kosovo)."
------------------
So this was well thought out for years? First they heavily support insurgent groups, oversee a peace process - never losing sight, of course, of their well-defined self-interest, the long planned diversification of their energy supply.
And when, oops, due to some unforeseen twist in the script (I'm not into conspiracy theories here), some insurgents just carry on, the enlightened Western power simply waits for the next government crackdown, duly followed by righteous denouncements in the Western press, invades - if their forces are not already stretched too thin - and perhaps never leaves?