The recent scare in the UK over a dye not intended for consumption but accidentally added to processed foods has caused anger in Khartoum. The dye is called Sudan 1 and research has shown it to be possibly carcinogenic. The Sudanese ambassador in London has written to the UK Food Standards Agency, saying that the dye’s name harms Sudan’s reputation and must be changed.
To say that this is damaging Sudan’s good name is a gross exaggeration. There are far more pertinent issues that damage its reputation and which demand immediate attention — Darfur, for example. In any event, there are plenty of examples of colors and dyes being named after places: Burnt Sienna, Prussian Blue and Congo Red. We also know just how fatal it would be if Burnt Sienna or Prussian Blue were accidentally added to food. But the mayor of Sienna or what is left of the Prussians in Germany are not going to take personal offense were that to happen.
The importance of this sideshow, however, is that it demonstrates the extent to which Sudan has developed a persecution complex. It is hardy surprising. It has been under massive pressure in recent years. Not even Syria or Iran or North Korea have been targeted with such intensity. It has been accused of sponsoring terrorism, been bombed in consequence, has seen the international community take the side of the south in its decades-old civil war, been forced by sanctions and threats into a deal with the south that probably will see its disintegration in six years’ time and it has been constantly accused of complicity in genocide in Darfur.
Rightly or wrongly, it feels battered. Things could be about to get much worse — although if it does, it will not be wholly Sudan’s fault. January’s peace agreement with the south now threatens to unravel because of the world’s failure to provide promised aid to the war-torn region; there is a serious threat of resumed fighting as a result. Up in Darfur, the situation is likewise on a knife-edge — in part because of African unwillingness to provide sufficient numbers of peacekeepers there but also because of continuing militia attacks on the local population — attacks for which the UN says it holds Khartoum responsible.
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has now summoned an emergency session of the Security Council to debate both the south and Darfur. The ball is not altogether in Sudan’s court, but it could gain a lot of good will, if it were to actively suppress the militias and agree to those accused of genocide being prosecuted in an international court where justice could be seen to be done.
Last week’s announcement by Vice President Ali Osman Taha that government forces would be withdrawn from Darfur is an important step but it will not be enough if the militias are not stopped. Actions not promises are what the UN wants. If Sudan is seen to be doing nothing other than complaining the pressure is going to intensify. And complaints about a dye invented long before the Republic of Sudan was ever dreamed of are in danger of being seen as a red herring (no pun intended).
