January, 28 2011, 10:41am EDT

Sudan: New Attacks on Civilians in Darfur
South Sudan Referendum Should Not Distract From New Abuses
NEW YORK
Sudanese government and rebel attacks on civilians in Darfur have
dramatically increased in recent weeks without signs of abating, Human
Rights Watch said today. The government of Sudan, its allied forces, and
rebel factions should end abuses against civilians, and concerned
governments - still focused on South Sudan's referendum - should press
for an end to unlawful attacks and accountability for abuses, Human
Rights Watch said.
"While the international community remains focused on South Sudan,
the situation in Darfur has sharply deteriorated," said Daniel Bekele,
Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "We are seeing a return to past
patterns of violence, with both government and rebel forces targeting
civilians and committing other abuses."
On January 25, 2011, Sudanese government air and ground forces fought
rebel troops in and around the town of Tabit, North Darfur. The
fighting reportedly destroyed eight villages and caused thousands of
civilians to flee the area.
At Tabit, and in other clashes in Darfur since early December 2010,
both government and rebel forces carried out targeted attacks on
civilian populations based on their ethnic affiliations, Human Rights
Watch said. The fighting has caused civilian deaths and injuries,
destruction and looting of civilian property, and mass displacement of
tens of thousands of people to displaced persons camps and safe havens.
The renewed fighting began after the Sudanese government severed ties
with the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) rebel faction loyal to Minni Arko
Minawi, who signed the Darfur Peace Agreement in 2006 and was appointed
special adviser to President Omar al-Bashir and head of the Darfur
Transitional Regional Authority. Relations between the government and
Minawi soured in late 2010, resulting in Minawi's dismissal from
government in early December.
According to the United Nations, the violence in December alone
caused 40,000 people to flee their homes. Many are taking refuge near
African Union/United Nations Mission in Darfur (UNAMID) bases in Khor
Abeche, Shearia, and Shangil Tobayi.
Sudan has continued to restrict UN and humanitarian agencies from
accessing conflict-affected areas, including Tabit, the site of the
January 25 clash. The government also still bars access to much of
eastern Jebel Mara where, since early 2010, government forces and militias have clashed with the SLA faction led by Abdel Wahid al-Nur,
and attacked civilians from the majority Fur ethnicity. Humanitarian
agencies have also been denied access from the Wada'a and Khazan Jedid
areas, between North and South Darfur.
December Clashes and Attacks in North-South Corridor
Fighting in the corridor between North and South Darfur started
on December 8, when rebels from the Minni Minawi faction of the SLA
ambushed a convoy containing the governor of North Darfur at Shangil
Tobayi on the road to El Fasher, North Darfur's capital. Two government
soldiers and three rebel fighters were killed.
The ambush was possibly in retaliation for comments made by the
North Darfur governor, Youssif Kibir, in a speech delivered at the
graduation ceremony of a group of Popular Defense Forces (PDF) - a
government paramilitary force that fought alongside the Sudanese army
during Sudan's long civil war and throughout the Darfur conflict.
The corridor is strategic for its transport route linking the
North and South Darfur state capitals and for its access routes to the
mountainous region of Jebel Mara, a rebel stronghold dominated by the
Fur ethnic group where there was heavy fighting in 2010 between
government and SLA forces loyal to Abdel Wahid.
In response to the ambush, on December 10 the government began
large-scale attacks on the SLA-controlled area of Khor Abeche and
surrounding villages in South Darfur. The attacks included aerial
bombing by Antonov aircraft, followed by ground attacks led by
government soldiers in more than a dozen military vehicles and hundreds
of militia members on camels and horseback. The attacks killed at least
two civilians, injured dozens, and caused massive damage to civilian
property, particularly that of ethnic Zaghawa, who the government treats
as being linked to the SLA.
Villagers told Human Rights Watch that SLA forces were not in the
area during the government attacks. Under international humanitarian
law, which is applicable in Darfur, armed forces must take all feasible
precautions to ensure that targets of attack are military objectives and
not civilians. Civilians and civilian property may never be
deliberately attacked - those responsible are committing war crimes,
Human Rights Watch said.
A Khor Abeche resident told Human Rights Watch that he saw
government soldiers looting the town's market and beating civilians with
sticks. Among the victims were the man's wife, who sustained injuries
to her head, as well as many other women and children. He said that on
December 11, he saw soldiers shooting into populated areas with mounted
machine guns, injuring more than a dozen civilians and killing two.
A 30-year-old mother of four gave a similar account: "The
soldiers went to the market and started beating the people, including
women and old men, with sticks and the butts of their guns. I was able
to take my children and some clothes and flee. All our remaining things
were completely burned."
The government's looting of the town resulted in more than 60
homes being burned and caused thousands of people to flee the area. Many
sought refuge at the United Nations/African Union mission's compound,
and government forces shot at civilians moving toward the compound,
presumably to prevent them from entering. Government troops positioned
themselves in front of the camp, also in an apparent effort to block
civilians seeking safety.
Attacking civilians and preventing them from seeking safe haven
are serious violations of international humanitarian law. Blocking
civilians from entering the UNAMID compound is also a violation of the
Status of Forces Agreement between the Sudanese government and the UN.
Human Rights Watch urged UNAMID to press Sudan to guarantee the security
of peacekeepers and the civilians who seek their assistance.
Following the attacks on Khor Abeche, the government and various
rebel factions clashed throughout December in numerous areas, causing
further civilian displacement. In mid-December, government forces began a
series of attacks on the town of Shangil Tobayi, which is host to large
displaced populations, and surrounding villages, displacing thousands
more. On December 26, government forces in Land Cruisers and on camels
and horses attacked the ethnic Zaghawa section of the town, killing at
least two civilians. The soldiers also harassed civilians and raped one
16-year-old girl, which required her to seek medical treatment.
At the same time, SLA forces carried out attacks on the ethnic
Birgid communities, whose members are in the Sudanese army and PDF
paramilitary, and are seen as pro-government. Rebel attacks on Jaghara
and surrounding villages caused numerous civilian casualties, said
Birgid and government sources interviewed by Human Rights Watch. In one
incident on December 18, rebel fighters attacked Nigaa and Jaghara,
killing at least eight civilians.
Attack on Displaced Persons Camp
On January 23, heavily armed government forces surrounded and
entered the Zamzam displaced persons camp in North Darfur. They rounded
up and detained 37 people; at least 27 men remain in detention
facilities. Human Rights Watch received reports that the government
forces entered civilian homes, looted properties and beat several
people, killing one man.
The government publicly stated that the operation aimed to
retrieve arms and drugs, and arrest "criminal elements." It did not give
notice to the UN mission, despite requirements in the Status of Forces
Agreement between Sudan and the peacekeeping mission that require
consultation on actions related to displaced persons camps.
Background
The peace process for Darfur has stalled, with government and
rebel factions unable to agree on key terms. In early December 2010, the
SLA's Minawi, who signed the Darfur Peace Agreement in 2006, formally
broke ties with the government after the federal minister of defense,
Ibrahim Mohammed Hussein, said that SLA fighters were "a legitimate
military target." Government forces arrested several of Minawi's cadres
in North and South Darfur, and President al-Bashir dismissed Minawi from
his position in government.
Meanwhile, the government has pursued a new strategy for Darfur,
calling for "domestication" of the peace process, development and
reconstruction, accelerated returns of displaced persons, and
government-provided security across the region. Rebel movements and the
vast majority of displaced communities oppose the plan based on the
continued conflict and lack of security on the ground.
Despite the recent surge in fighting and attacks on civilians,
the head of the UN humanitarian operation in Sudan, Georg Charpentier,
on January 23 said that the security situation in Darfur was improving.
The UN Security Council met on January 26 to discuss peace and security
in Sudan.
The Sudanese government has not carried out its commitments to
disarm militias or improve accountability for past and ongoing human
rights violations. It has yet to prosecute anyone who participated in a
brutal attack on Tabrat, North Darfur in early September that killed
more than 37 civilians. The government has also not taken concrete steps
to carry out the justice recommendations of High-Level Panel of the African Union on Darfur
- the so-called Mbeki panel - which recommended the establishment of
hybrid courts and promoted legal reforms to bring justice to this
troubled region of Sudan.
"President Bashir and the people of Sudan should be congratulated
for holding a peaceful referendum on southern secession, but that
smooth process does not exonerate Sudan's leaders for ongoing abuses in
Darfur," Bekele said. "Concerned governments should urgently and
forcefully press both Khartoum and rebel movements to end their abuses
of civilians in Darfur, grant humanitarian access to affected areas, and
ensure accountability for war crimes."
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
LATEST NEWS
Trump Regulators Ripped for 'Rushed' Approval of Bill Gates' Nuclear Reactor in Wyoming
"Make no mistake, this type of reactor has major safety flaws compared to conventional nuclear reactors that comprise the operating fleet," said one expert.
Dec 03, 2025
A leading nuclear safety expert sounded the alarm Tuesday over the Trump administration's expedited safety review of an experimental nuclear reactor in Wyoming designed by a company co-founded by tech billionaire Bill Gates and derided as a "Cowboy Chernobyl."
On Monday, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) announced that it has "completed its final safety evaluation" for Power Station Unit 1 of TerraPower's Natrium reactor in Kemmerer, Wyoming, adding that it found "no safety aspects that would preclude issuing the construction permit."
Co-founded by Microsoft's Gates, TerraPower received a 50-50 cost-share grant for up to $2 billion from the US Department of Energy’s Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program. The 345-megawatt sodium-cooled small modular reactor (SMR) relies upon so-called passive safety features that experts argue could potentially make nuclear accidents worse.
However, federal regulators "are loosening safety and security requirements for SMRs in ways which could cancel out any safety benefits from passive features," according to Union of Concerned Scientists nuclear power safety director Edwin Lyman.
"The only way they could pull this off is by sweeping difficult safety issues under the rug."
The reactor’s construction permit application—which was submitted in March 2024—was originally scheduled for August 2026 completion but was expedited amid political pressure from the Trump administration and Congress in order to comply with an 18-month timeline established in President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14300.
“The NRC’s rush to complete the Kemmerer plant’s safety evaluation to meet the recklessly abbreviated schedule dictated by President Trump represents a complete abandonment of its obligation to protect public health, safety, and the environment from catastrophic nuclear power plant accidents or terrorist attacks," Lyman said in a statement Tuesday.
Lyman continued:
The only way the staff could finish its review on such a short timeline is by sweeping serious unresolved safety issues under the rug or deferring consideration of them until TerraPower applies for an operating license, at which point it may be too late to correct any problems. Make no mistake, this type of reactor has major safety flaws compared to conventional nuclear reactors that comprise the operating fleet. Its liquid sodium coolant can catch fire, and the reactor has inherent instabilities that could lead to a rapid and uncontrolled increase in power, causing damage to the reactor’s hot and highly radioactive nuclear fuel.
Of particular concern, NRC staff has assented to a design that lacks a physical containment structure to reduce the release of radioactive materials into the environment if a core melt occurs. TerraPower argues that the reactor has a so-called "functional" containment that eliminates the need for a real containment structure. But the NRC staff plainly states that it "did not come to a final determination of the adequacy and acceptability of functional containment performance due to the preliminary nature of the design and analysis."
"Even if the NRC determines later that the functional containment is inadequate, it would be utterly impractical to retrofit the design and build a physical containment after construction has begun," Lyman added. "The potential for rapid power excursions and the lack of a real containment make the Kemmerer plant a true ‘Cowboy Chernobyl.’”
The proposed reactor still faces additional hurdles before construction can begin, including a final environmental impact assessment. However, given the Trump administration's dramatic regulatory rollback, approval and construction are highly likely.
Former NRC officials have voiced alarm over the Trump administration's tightened control over the agency, which include compelling it to send proposed reactor safety rules to the White House for review and possible editing.
Allison Macfarlane, who was nominated to head the NRC during the Obama administration, said earlier this year that Trump's approach marks “the end of independence of the agency.”
“If you aren’t independent of political and industry influence, then you are at risk of an accident,” she warned.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Report Shows How Recycling Is Largely a 'Toxic Lie' Pushed by Plastics Industry
"These corporations and their partners continue to sell the public a comforting lie to hide the hard truth: that we simply have to stop producing so much plastic," said one campaigner.
Dec 03, 2025
A report published Wednesday by Greenpeace exposes the plastics industry as "merchants of myth" still peddling the false promise of recycling as a solution to the global pollution crisis, even as the vast bulk of commonly produced plastics remain unrecyclable.
"After decades of meager investments accompanied by misleading claims and a very well-funded industry public relations campaign aimed at persuading people that recycling can make plastic use sustainable, plastic recycling remains a failed enterprise that is economically and technically unviable and environmentally unjustifiable," the report begins.
"The latest US government data indicates that just 5% of US plastic waste is recycled annually, down from a high of 9.5% in 2014," the publication continues. "Meanwhile, the amount of single-use plastics produced every year continues to grow, driving the generation of ever greater amounts of plastic waste and pollution."
Among the report's findings:
- Only a fifth of the 8.8 million tons of the most commonly produced types of plastics—found in items like bottles, jugs, food containers, and caps—are actually recyclable;
- Major brands like Coca-Cola, Unilever, and Nestlé have been quietly retracting sustainability commitments while continuing to rely on single-use plastic packaging; and
- The US plastic industry is undermining meaningful plastic regulation by making false claims about the recyclability of their products to avoid bans and reduce public backlash.
"Recycling is a toxic lie pushed by the plastics industry that is now being propped up by a pro-plastic narrative emanating from the White House," Greenpeace USA oceans campaign director John Hocevar said in a statement. "These corporations and their partners continue to sell the public a comforting lie to hide the hard truth: that we simply have to stop producing so much plastic."
"Instead of investing in real solutions, they’ve poured billions into public relations campaigns that keep us hooked on single-use plastic while our communities, oceans, and bodies pay the price," he added.
Greenpeace is among the many climate and environmental groups supporting a global plastics treaty, an accord that remains elusive after six rounds of talks due to opposition from the United States, Saudi Arabia, and other nations that produce the petroleum products from which almost all plastics are made.
Honed from decades of funding and promoting dubious research aimed at casting doubts about the climate crisis caused by its products, the petrochemical industry has sent a small army of lobbyists to influence global treaty negotiations.
In addition to environmental and climate harms, plastics—whose chemicals often leach into the food and water people eat and drink—are linked to a wide range of health risks, including infertility, developmental issues, metabolic disorders, and certain cancers.
Plastics also break down into tiny particles found almost everywhere on Earth—including in human bodies—called microplastics, which cause ailments such as inflammation, immune dysfunction, and possibly cardiovascular disease and gut biome imbalance.
A study published earlier this year in the British medical journal The Lancet estimated that plastics are responsible for more than $1.5 trillion in health-related economic losses worldwide annually—impacts that disproportionately affect low-income and at-risk populations.
As Jo Banner, executive director of the Descendants Project—a Louisiana advocacy group dedicated to fighting environmental racism in frontline communities—said in response to the new Greenpeace report, "It’s the same story everywhere: poor, Black, Brown, and Indigenous communities turned into sacrifice zones so oil companies and big brands can keep making money."
"They call it development—but it’s exploitation, plain and simple," Banner added. "There’s nothing acceptable about poisoning our air, water, and food to sell more throwaway plastic. Our communities are not sacrifice zones, and we are not disposable people.”
Writing for Time this week, Judith Enck, a former regional administrator at the US Environmental Protection Agency and current president of the environmental justice group Beyond Plastics, said that "throwing your plastic bottles in the recycling bin may make you feel good about yourself, or ease your guilt about your climate impact. But recycling plastic will not address the plastic pollution crisis—and it is time we stop pretending as such."
"So what can we do?" Enck continued. "First, companies need to stop producing so much plastic and shift to reusable and refillable systems. If reducing packaging or using reusable packaging is not possible, companies should at least shift to paper, cardboard, glass, or metal."
"Companies are not going to do this on their own, which is why policymakers—the officials we elected to protect us—need to require them to do so," she added.
Although lawmakers in the 119th US Congress have introduced a handful of bills aimed at tackling plastic pollution, such proposals are all but sure to fail given Republican control of both the House of Representatives and Senate and the Trump administration's pro-petroleum policies.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Platner 20 Points Ahead of Mills in Maine Senate Race as Critics Spotlight Her Anti-Worker Veto Record
The new poll, said the progressive candidate, “lays clear what our theory is, which is that we are not going to defeat Susan Collins running the same exact kind of playbook that we’ve run in the past."
Dec 03, 2025
It's been more than a month since a media firestorm over old Reddit posts and a tattoo thrust US Senate candidate Graham Platner into the national spotlight, just as Maine Gov. Janet Mills was entering the Democratic primary race in hopes of challenging Republican Sen. Susan Collins—a controversy that did not appear at the time to make a dent in political newcomer Platner's chances in the election.
On Wednesday, the latest polling showed that the progressive combat veteran and oyster farmer has maintained the lead that was reported in a number of surveys just after the national media descended on the New England state to report on his past online comments and a tattoo that some said resembled a Nazi symbol, which he subsequently had covered up.
The Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), which endorsed Platner on Wednesday, commissioned the new poll, which showed him polling at 58% compared to Mills' 38%.
Nancy Zdunkewicz, a pollster with Z to A Polling, which conducted the survey on behalf of the PCCC, said the poll represented "really impressive early consolidation" for Platner, with the primary election still six months away.
“Platner isn’t just leading in the Democratic primary. He’s leading by a lot, 20 points—58% are supporting him,” Zdunkewicz told Zeteo. “Only 38% are supporting Mills. There are very few undecided voters or weak supporters for Mills to win over at this point in the race."
Platner has consistently spoken to packed rooms across Maine since launching his campaign in August, promoting a platform that is unapologetically focused on delivering affordability and a better quality of life for Mainers.
He supports expanding the popular Medicare program to all Americans; drew raucous applause at an early rally by declaring, “Our taxpayer dollars can build schools and hospitals in America, not bombs to destroy them in Gaza"; and has spoken in support of breaking up tech giants and a federal war crimes investigation into Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over his deadly boat strikes in the Caribbean.
Mills entered the race after Democratic leaders including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) urged her to. She garnered national attention earlier this year for standing up to President Donald Trump when he threatened federal funding for Maine over the state's policy of allowing students to play on school athletic teams that correspond with their gender.
But the PCCC survey found that when respondents learned details about each candidate, negative critiques of Mills were more damaging to her than Platner's old Reddit posts and tattoo.
Zdunkewicz disclosed Platner's recent controversy to the voters she surveyed, as well as his statements about how his views have shifted in recent years, and found that 21% of voters were more likely to back him after learning about his background. Thirty-nine percent said they were less likely to support him.
The pollster also talked to respondents about the fact that establishment Democrats pushed Mills, who is 77, to enter the race, and about a number of bills she has vetoed as governor, including a tax on the wealthy, a bill to set up a tracking system for rape kits, two bills to reduce prescription drug costs, and several bills promoting workers' rights.
Only 14% of Mainers said they were more likely to vote for Mills after learning those details, while 50% said they were less likely to support her.
At The Lever, Luke Goldstein on Wednesday reported that Mills' vetoes have left many with the "perception that she’s mostly concerned with business interests," as former Democratic Maine state lawmaker Andy O'Brien said. Corporate interests gave more than $200,000 to Mills' two gubernatorial campaigns.
Earlier this year, Mills struck down a labor-backed bill to allow farm workers to discuss their pay with one another without fear of retaliation. Last year, she blocked a bill to set a minimum wage for farm laborers, opposing a provision that would have allowed workers to sue their employers.
She also vetoed a bill banning noncompete agreements and one that would have banned anti-union tactics by corporations.
"In previous years," Goldstein reported, "she blocked efforts to stop employers from punishing employees who took state-guaranteed paid time off, killed a permitting reform bill to streamline offshore wind developments because it included a provision mandating union jobs, and vetoed a modest labor bill that would have required the state government to merely study the issue of paper mill workers being forced to work overtime without adequate compensation."
Speaking to PCCC supporters on Wednesday, Platner suggested the new polling shows that many Mainers agree with the central argument of his campaign: "We need to build power again for working people, both in Maine and nationally.”
The survey, he said, “lays clear what our theory is, which is that we are not going to defeat Susan Collins running the same exact kind of playbook that we’ve run in the past—which is an establishment politician supported by the power structures, supported by Washington, DC, coming up to Maine and trying to run a kind of standard race... We are really trying to build a grassroots movement up here."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


