What are Darfur's agricultural practices?

Question

What are Darfur's agricultural practices?

Answer 1

There has been tension in Darfur for many years over land and grazing rights, however, after two years of conflict, drought and failed harvests, very few farmers in North Darfur have seeds to plant. The seeds that are available are not enough to cultivate even a third of the area that was under crops before the conflict.

"This is the third agriculture season missed by farmers," says Bashir Abdel Rahman, FAO Agriculture Field Officer in North Darfur. "Seeds were looted, lost during the escape to displaced persons camps, eaten or simply damaged due to improper storage. The harvest for the last two years was poor because of displacement, insecurity and erratic and below average rainfall."

Most of the population of North Darfur are dependant on locally produced grain for food. Last year's harvest met only 15 percent of the region's food needs, thus increasing the caseload for the already protracted food aid distributions.

http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2005...

Answer 2

Hope this helps you understand Darfur Issue:

The following  is what I found:  (All materials are based on the Economist, a British weekly journal, a staunch supporter for Iraq Invasion)

1) Sudan is running the longest civil war on Earth. Wars were waged among the tribes in the South, the West and partly the North. They had been in fighting since the 1950s, when the old colonial masters, the English and French, left. This Sudan government, sovereign in name, had never been in full control.

2) The Sudan government is of  black-Islamist, who took side with the Arabs whenever the Israel-Arab conflicts flared up. That certainly cannot be tolerated by Israel and US. Sudan once gave refuge to Bin Laden but drove him out under US pressure. It also tasted US bombs during the Clinton Administration in 1998 when a pharmaceutical plant was a target. Sudan was still under US embargo.

3) In the South, non-Arab blacks, with American support , gradually got the upper hand in the struggle, and negotiated a peace treaty with the  Sudan government under Colin Powell’s watch. To Americans’ credit, the peace treaty would not come into being without Colin Powell’s perseverance and occasional show of intimidation.  Before, Sudan was one piece. Now, it is partitioned into two. A new geopolitical unit is added to the map by the US, it is called Southern Sudan.

4) Oil was discovered. They were the bones of contention between the South and the Sudan Government. The Sudan Government made oil concessions to French, Canadian and other European oil companies, which, under US pressure, many quit and sold concession rights to Malaysia and China and India. China came in 2006. with 40% of investment share in one oil adventure only. Within that adventure the rest is shared between Malaysia, 40%,  and the Sudan government.

5) If you ask,  why does the civil war never end in Africa? Answer: the boys had no jobs!  What else can they do?! So it is obvious that an investment by any country would create job opportunities for the young Sudanese. But here comes an obstacle:  the US embargo had never been lifted. It was the Executive Order 13067 issued in 1997.

6) But why did US try very hard to negotiate a peace treaty between the South rebels and the Sudan Government?  This question can be answered only in this way:  a) US pressed for a peace treaty only to see that the Southern rebels would not  be crushed by the government; 2) the US and UK did not like oil companies coming in other than Exxon and BP.

7) Then what about Darfur? It is a region, the size of a France, in West Sudan. Practically speaking, it is beyond Sudan government control. Unlike in Southern Sudan, where fighting is between the Government and the local rebellions, in Darfur it is the locals who fight the locals.

8) So how exactly can you put pressure effectively on a party that is not involved in the other two parties’ fight?  If you argue that the Sudan Government is a sovereign which should bear a direct responsibility, then you face this problem: the Sudan government cannot be considered an effective government , not effective at all since it could not even end a civil war that has lasted for the past 50 years.  As a matter of fact, this Sudan government is not even in full control of its own northern territory, where the revolt is looming large.

9) Oil makes poor nations rich.  This is a proven example as we see the Arabs and Latin Americans on their way to wealth. So China’s investment in Sudan is a plus to African people . Furthermore, the Chinese are also building roads, digging wells and doing other infrastructures work. Pressuring them out of Sudan is disserving the interests of Sudanese people.  Killings shall go on in Darfur even if the Chinese quit Sudan.

After a month-long research on Darfur issue, it has indeed amazed me to see how the UK and the US flex their mind-manipulation power against China.

Same as their swindling the whole world into accepting the Iraq invasion on a trumped-up WMD-plus-biochemical pretense,  a mind-manipulation campaign has been under way to make the world believe that Darfur is China’s fault.