The European Union and Gold Sanctions… I’m Losing My Mind!

Ambassador Abdel Mahmoud Abdel Halim
The sanctions imposed by the European Union banning the import of Sudanese gold bring to mind the famous phrase from an old school reading textbook: “Gold, gold… I’m losing my mind!” While the person who uttered those words was overwhelmed by the abundance of gold, the phrase comes to mind today for precisely the opposite reason: the philosophy behind the EU’s decision is to dry up this source of revenue and deprive Sudan’s national budget of the means to feed hungry mouths through the proceeds of this precious metal.
Gold replaced the oil revenues that disappeared with the secession of our beloved South Sudan, and Sudan has since become, thanks to this resource, the largest gold producer in the Arab world and the third largest in Africa. Indeed, the European decision prohibiting the purchase, import, or transport of Sudanese gold has also banned the export of mercury and cyanide compounds used in gold mining to Sudan. Sudan’s artisanal mining sector has provided employment opportunities for more than two million citizens who have travelled from all parts of the country in search of the precious metal.
Sanctions relating to mineral resources, whether imposed by the United Nations Security Council or unilaterally by major powers in response to various African conflicts, have generally distinguished between the government of the country concerned and the rebel movement operating within it. Such sanctions have targeted rebel groups and the external actors supporting them. By contrast, the gold sanctions announced by the European Union target the government, the state treasury and the national budget, as well as the rebels.
In the case of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, sanctions were not imposed on the government. Rather, they targeted specific lists of rebel leaders, mining companies and gold refineries in Rwanda and Uganda that were found to have been involved in monetising conflict gold or smuggling it for the benefit of armed groups. International sanctions relating to the Congolese conflict targeted the M23 movement, which swept across eastern Congo, as well as the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR).
In Sierra Leone, sanctions were imposed on the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), led by Foday Sankoh, and on the movement’s external backer, Liberian President Charles Taylor. Taylor was subsequently convicted by the Special Court for Sierra Leone of war crimes and sentenced to a lengthy term of imprisonment in a British prison because of his role in exploiting Sierra Leone’s diamonds to support the rebel movement.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1306 of 2000 addressed this issue. It contributed to the development of the international Kimberley Process Certification Scheme, designed to trace the origin of diamonds and prevent conflict diamonds from entering global markets.
Under this system, Sierra Leone’s legitimate government was permitted to exploit and trade its diamonds, while Liberia was sanctioned for undermining the peace and stability of the country. Measures included restrictions on the import and export of diamonds under Security Council Resolution 1343 of 2001, as well as sanctions on timber under Resolution 1478 of 2003. These measures ultimately contributed to the isolation of Charles Taylor and the collapse of his regime.
The foregoing demonstrates that, unlike every other African conflict in which sanctions have been imposed, the European Union has effectively placed the Government of Sudan and the rebel movement on the same footing.
The European sanctions therefore represent a significant qualitative escalation which, unless handled effectively, could cause severe damage to an economy already suffering from the depreciation of the Sudanese currency—an economy in which gold constitutes one of the principal pillars supporting monetary and financial stability.
The irony is that while Sudan’s “Western partners” repeatedly speak of the need to address humanitarian conditions they themselves describe as deteriorating, their punitive prescriptions will make achieving that objective even more difficult.
I can also produce a more literal diplomatic translation, suitable for official circulation, or a tighter newspaper-style English version for publication.

Shortlink: https://sudanhorizon.com/?p=15886