Suliman Baldo, Apr 6, 2017
Large-scale migration to Europe has precipitated a paradigm shift in relations between the European Union (EU) and the government of Sudan, and closer ties between both entities. This new partnership has resulted in the EU disbursing millions of euros to the Sudanese government for technical equipment and training efforts geared toward stopping the flow to Europe of migrants from Sudan and those from Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, and other countries in sub-Saharan Africa who come through Sudan.
Omer Ismail, Apr 4, 2017
Testimony of Omer Ismail, Enough Project Senior Advisor, given on April 4th, 2017 before the U.S. Congress’ Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission hearing on “Sudan: Human Rights and Sanctions.”
Enough Forum: A Way Out? Models for negotiating an exit plan for entrenched leadership in South SudanMar 28, 2017
There is an urgency to bring an end to South Sudan’s conflict, particularly with reports warning that the country is on the “brink of genocide,” and the recent declaration of famine where 100,000 risk starvation and 1 million more are on the brink of this “man-made” famine. This research paper will review and analyze case studies of countries where measures such as the offer of asylum, amnesty, and financial leverage were employed as a means of conflict resolution.
John Prendergast, Mar 21, 2017
War has been hell for South Sudan’s people, but it has been very lucrative for the country’s leaders and commercial collaborators, South Sudan’s war profiteers. South Sudan has been torn apart by three wars in the last 60 years. Two and a half to three million people have perished as a result of these wars. This legacy has finally caught up to the world’s newest country, as the United Nations declared a full-blown famine in February 2017, a rare declaration that the U.N. hadn’t made for any part of the world since 2011, and multiple U.N. officials have asserted that South Sudan stands on the brink of genocide.
Enough Project, Feb 24, 2017
On January 31, Acting Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Michael Piwowar welcomed interested parties to submit comments in response to a statement calling into question the current Conflict Minerals Rule. In the weeks following, numerous companies, investors, activists, NGOs, and others have come out publicly in support of the Rule. The Enough Project strongly opposes any suspension, weakening, or repeal of the current Conflict Minerals Rule, and urges the SEC to increase enforcement of the Rule. Our full comment can be found below.
Nathalia Dukhan, Feb 15, 2017
The Central African Republic (CAR), a country that has seen more than four years of deep political crisis and unprecedented violence against civilians, is undergoing a process of de facto partition. In February 2014, then-U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned the international community that CAR was at risk of splitting apart, stating that, “[T]he situation continues to worsen. Both Muslims and Christians have been murdered and forced to flee their homes. The sectarian brutality is changing the country’s demography. The de facto partition of the CAR is a distinct risk.” Despite his warning, CAR did not escape this fate. In 2017, more than 14 armed groups compete for the control of the territory and its natural resource wealth.
Weapons of Mass Corruption: How corruption in South Sudan’s military undermines the world’s newest countryEnough Team and edited by Jacinth Planer, Jan 26, 2017
“Weapons of Mass Corruption” is the fifth in a series of in-depth, field research-driven reports on the dynamics of profit and power fueling war in the Horn, East and Central Africa. Violent kleptocracies dominate the political landscape of this region, leading to protracted conflicts marked by the commission of mass atrocities by state and non-state actors. Enough's Political Economy of African Wars series will focus on the key players in these conflicts, their motivations, how they benefit from the evolving war economies, and what policies might be most effective in changing the calculations of those orchestrating the violence–including both incentives and pressures for peace.
Sasha Lezhnev, Nov 29, 2016
Testimony of Sasha Lezhnev, Enough Project Associate Director of Policy, given on November 29, 2016 before the U.S. Congress’ Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission hearing on “Democracy and Human Rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.”
Peter Harrell, Nov 17, 2016
Economic sanctions, the steps a government takes to prohibit certain types of economic activities with a foreign country, company, or individual, have become a preeminent tool of U.S. foreign policy. They are used to combat threats ranging from nuclear proliferation in Iran or North Korea to civil strife and mass atrocities in Central Africa. In past decades, sanctions were typically “comprehensive,” in which the United States would ban nearly all trade and economic activity with an adversary. This approach is rarely taken anymore, with only a few countries, like Syria, Sudan, and North Korea, subject to these types of comprehensive embargoes. Today, most U.S. sanctions programs are “specific” or “targeted,” in which the United States will freeze the assets of specific, named individuals and companies overseas and ban U.S. citizens and companies from doing most business with them. For example, targeted sanctions might freeze the assets of specific government officials, who commit human rights abuses in a country and prohibit U.S. companies from dealing with businesses they own, while still allowing most trade with the country that the government officials control.
: Adapted from Peter Harrell, Nov 17, 2016
Economic sanctions, the steps a government takes to prohibit certain types of economic activities with a foreign country, company, or individual, have become a preeminent tool of U.S. foreign policy. They are used to combat threats ranging from nuclear proliferation in Iran or North Korea to civil strife and mass atrocities in Central Africa. In past decades, sanctions were typically “comprehensive,” in which the United States would ban nearly all trade and economic activity with an adversary. Today, most U.S. sanctions programs are “targeted,” in which the U.S. will freeze the assets of specific, named individuals and companies overseas and ban U.S. citizens and companies from doing most business with them without discontinuing trade with the countries they are located.