Sudan and the Pitfalls of Advocacy Driven Policy

As the highly publicized rollout of the new U.S. policy on Sudan made clear, Sudan has become an unlikely foreign policy priority for the Obama administration. For this, the Sudanese can thank the Darfur advocacy movement, which effectively put the nation on the map for the American public over the past six years.

Sudan certainly deserves every bit of attention it receives. If Africa's largest nation again implodes, it threatens to further destabilize what is already an unstable region of the world.

But the internal tension hidden within President Barack Obama's newly formulated Sudan policy is that Darfur is no longer the main attraction. Not even close.

To be sure, the Darfur conflict is not yet resolved. But the crisis is no longer actively boiling over either. Instead, a fragile equilibrium has emerged, in which clashes between Khartoum-linked militias and the splintered rebel forces have become few and far between. The Darfuri people, meanwhile, lack a definitive voice, and the numerous feuding rebel groups make any chance to forge a political peace deal elusive.

Millions of Darfuris remain in refugee camps across the border in Chad and the Central African Republic. They point to the ongoing insecurity back home to explain why they are not returning. While there's truth to that rationale, the underlying and often unspoken reality is that there is now little for them to go back home to. While this is certainly an unpleasant situation, it is hardly a unique one in a continent filled with unresolved refugee and IDP issues. By this measure, Darfur no longer demands the urgent priority it once deserved.