Google Earth of Sudan

[Michael]

The differences between Northern and Southern Sudan are stark.

I'm curious to see how things turn out in the end. Apparently some people in the North have paid tribes in the South to attack other tribes in the South and stir up trouble. I wonder if the people in the North realize that once the people in the South leave, they can wave bye bye to the food?

 

[nietzschefan]

South is land locked and dependent on it's "allies", North would be fine(assuming a stable gov).

 

[Michael]

It is true that the south is land locked, and I was thinking about that. But there's a lot of other land locked nations around it too and most people would probably prefer to grow food rather than live off the desert's kindness. I'm guessing, most people of Sudan don't go to the beach much anyway Seriously, if you're never likely to leave your village, probably cargo planes will bring in what's needed. I mean, Colorado's land locked... they seem fine.

 

[S.A.M.]

The Sudanese have been manipulated by divide and rule for several hundred years. Until they determine a policy to deal with ethnic diversity and religious pluralism, they will always be at the mercy of external forces. This is all very familiar to me because in India, Bihar suffers from similar manipulations along tribal rather than religious routes. And just like Sudan, the mineral wealth of Bihar is not sufficient to bring prosperity to the people.

Violent conflict has many causal factors, each one a strand in a complex web of causes that both individually and collectively precipitate, aggravate and prolong fighting. As individual factors, each functions within a multi-layered matrix of historic, economic and political dimensions, and is most acute where reinforced by other factors. Unequal access to resources or population pressures, for example, may not in themselves cause conflict, but may react with ethno-cultural prejudice or political manipulation to fuel fighting.

The economic development of the country’s regions has been uneven since at least the colonial era, but successive national governments since independence have deepened existing regional disparities and marginalization by favouring northern regions when allocating development projects and investment opportunities. Foreign debt, capital flight and the deterioration of the prices of primary commodities have had economic, social and ecological implications. Unequal access to resources nationwide is also reflected at regional and local levels. All the armed groups in Sudan have stressed the importance of access to natural and social resources, expressed in terms of justice, fairness, and equitable resource-sharing and development.

With population growth, environmental degradation and drought, the scarcity of environmental resources such as cropland, fresh water, marine resources and forests is becoming more significant as a cause or catalyst of armed conflict. Environmental factors and scarcity do not lead inevitably to violent confrontation, yet in situations where the prevailing scarcity is aggravated by social and economic injustice and mismanagement, the confrontational aspect of environmental scarcity appears to predominate, as in the case of Darfur or Kordofan.

The popular assumption that violent conflicts in Africa emanate from ethnic, tribal, religious, or cultural differences is seriously flawed. Most ethnic dichotomies appear to be a consequence rather than a cause of violent conflicts. However, ethnic, religious and cultural dichotomies are potent in determining perceptions of violent conflicts by fighters on both sides, even if such factors are weak or non-existent as root causes of ‘new’ conflicts. The longer a conflict persists, the more these ethnic, religious and cultural factors come into play as a principle of political solidarity and mobilization. In a long-standing conflict, even when the initial causes have petered out or died away, abstract, ideological ethnicity becomes an active material and social force. In Sudan, these ethnic and ideological identities have been deliberately encouraged and instrumentalized, stiffening resistance and serving as a catalyst to the internationalization of Sudan’s wars.

http://www.c-r.org/our-work/accord/sudan/politics-conflict.php

 

[Trippy]

So are we going to talk Geography, or politics?

 

[S.A.M.]

I think we are discussing how geography impacts politics. I think its a good idea to look at geographical limitations as a possible source of conflict. It is after all what is the most significant source of conflict today- what we call geopolitics. At least that is what I am aiming for, but there doesn't seem to be too many discussion points in the OP.

edit: another way of looking at the conflict in Sudan, is as a conflict between farmers and herders

politically:

The three largest African tribes in Darfur are the Fur, the Masalit and the Zaghawa. Generally speaking, most people of African descent in Darfur are farmers, and most people of Arab descent in Darfur are nomadic herders.

There is fierce competition for land between herders and farmers, including violent battles between Fur farmers and Arab herders from 1987 to 1989. This competition has fueled the present conflict in Darfur.

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/sudan/facts.html

It is an area the size of France and one of the most remote regions in the world.

Mohamed Majzoub Fideil, country director of the Intermediate Technology Development Program, says when his group first went to North Darfur in the 1980s, even government officials had not been there yet.

“We managed to reach those places and provide some development support like building of feeder roads, where after our roads were completed, vehicles reached there for the first time in life,” he said.

The ITDG, as Mr. Fideil’s group is known, is a British NGO run entirely by Sudanese, one of the few like it in the country, and one of the only ones that has been working in Darfur for more than 20 years.

Even during his childhood in eastern Sudan, Mr. Fidiel remembers hearing stories of disputes between pastoralists and farmers in the Darfur region – stories that only grew worse as he became involved in development work.

“During the mid-80s, as a result of the drought, so the size of pastures decreased,” he said. “The animal herders, mostly nomads - and most of the nomads are from Arab origin - they find it important for them to invade into farmers’ farms, to get their cattle grazing there.”

The dispute was about water and land resources, which aggravated ethnic tension.

“Since most of the animal herders are Arabs, so it became like an Arab against non-Arabs fighting,” said Mr. Fideil.

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/a-13-Darfur-Crisis-from-Land-Conflict-67507722.html?refresh=1

environmentally:

Sudan is environmentally prone to drought which result in famines. Farmers and herders compete for limited resources

The paper presents 20 cases of stalemate competition or open conflict over natural resources in Kordofan. The cases center on (1) conflicts between farmers and herders over stock routes, gum arabic forests, gardens, watering points, and the use of dars (tribal homelands); (2) conflicts between herders and small farmers and government agents or large private investors over mechanized farming areas, oil infrastructure, and other private investments.

In their analysis of natural resource governance in Sudan, the authors find that natural resources policies have often been weak foundations for sustainable resource use, and in some cases they have actually contributed to conflict. In addition, the volatile path of government devolution efforts concerning natural resources has undermined governance of these resources.

While conflicts between farmers and herders were managed relatively successful in the past through customary land tenure systems, this is less and less the case today as a result of larger herds, reduced water and pasture, instability and prejudices stirred up by the war, and a proliferation of arms among herders. In addition, patron-client politics, weak natural resource management and development policies, and top-down government institutions have encouraged ethnic polarization and social divisions. The authors find that measures are needed to reform the process of natural resource management, making land use planning more comprehensive, building on local livelihood systems, and increasing public spending on infrastructure. In addition, sustainable property rights on farmland and on mobile resources should be redefined, and informal conflict management mechanisms restored to the extent that this is possible.

http://www.ifpri.org/publication/managing-conflict-over-natural-resources-greater-kordofan-sudan

The link between poverty, development, geography and conflict

The incidence of poverty varies considerably according to region. In part because
economic growth has been unevenly distributed, but also because of the economic and
social devastation caused by the conflict in certain parts of the country. Severe
inequalities in terms of access to education, sanitation and clean water, to infrastructure
and natural resources, income opportunities, justice and political protection exist
between regions. For example, health services in southern Sudan only reach about
25 per cent of the population. People living in areas that have been or continue to be
affected by drought and conflict – particularly the south and Darfur – are the most
vulnerable to poverty.

A rapidly growing population is putting significant pressure on already fragile
ecosystems, a situation which has been exacerbated by the displacement of peoples,
either by drought or conflict. More than two million have been displaced by the Darfur conflict alone.
In addition, erosion, loss of soil fertility and damage to watersheds are affecting resources.
Agricultural productivity is decreasing as a result of a lack of technological breakthroughs in rainfed
agriculture, and food security and livelihoods are threatened in turn. Malnutrition, tuberculosis and
malaria have become rampant. The World Health Organization estimates that 22 per cent of children
in the South and Darfur are suffering from acute malnutrition, and the incidence of diarrhoea in
children may be as high as 45 per cent in southern Sudan.

In general, small-scale farmers and herders in the traditional rainfed farming and livestock sectors are
more prone to poverty than those in irrigated areas. Those without land are dependent on cash
earnings from casual labour, such as collecting firewood and making charcoal. Many depend on
humanitarian aid. In 2006 about 2.5 million people in Darfur, and nearly 3 million in the south, east
and transitional areas required food assistance.

Isolation is one of the key factors affecting poverty. Settlements located away from main
thoroughfares have little or no access to social services and markets. Within rural communities,
households without assets and labour power are the poorest – consisting of elderly or disabled
people, or households headed by women with young dependants. Women and girls are the most
disadvantaged members – less than one third of them have access to education.

Inadequate development strategies, slow adaptation to climatic volatility, and erosion of natural
resources are the root causes of poverty. These causes have also fuelled the prolonged civil conflicts
that have had a devastating effect on the rural population.

Poverty levels in the country are closely linked to the strengths and weaknesses of agricultural
productivity. In the 1970s the Sudan, along with many countries of sub-Saharan Africa, began to
introduce large-scale mechanized farms and to expand the irrigation sector in a bid to increase crop
production, especially cash crops. The new farming systems and land allocation policies displaced
subsistence farmers and nomads from their land, and dismantled traditional systems of communal
ownership and management that had previously discouraged local conflict. They proved
inappropriate for ecologically fragile areas that are much better suited to traditional agricultural
methods characterized by livestock herding and the mobility of farmers.

Smallholder farmers are hindered by the limited size of their land holdings, low rates of productivity
and an inability to improve their incomes. Because of the lack of rainfall and domestic water supplies,
for most farmers the growing season is brief and crop failures are frequent. Pests and disease are
problems they are ill-equipped to combat. Existing systems for research and agricultural support are
unable to produce and disseminate new technical packages capable of overcoming these problems.
Because they have limited access to credit, distribution and marketing channels, and because of their
inadequate technical knowledge and poor skills in production and marketing, farmers find it difficult to
break out of the cycle of low productivity and income. Seasonal migration in pursuit of wage labour
opportunities on mechanized and irrigated farms and in urban areas has become widespread.

http://www.ifad.org/operations/projects/regions/Pn/factsheets/sd.pdf

 

[Michael]

That satellite photo really makes the land in the north look stark relative to the south. Are most of the people in the North culturally "Arabs"? Why?

 

[S.A.M.]

That satellite photo really makes the land in the north look stark relative to the south. Are most of the people in the North culturally "Arabs"? Why?

I wondered about that. Could it be because they lived in the desert and were nomadic herders? Would the Arabs feel culturally closer to people who lived like them?

 

[Trippy]

I wondered about that. Could it be because they lived in the desert and were nomadic herders? Would the Arabs feel culturally closer to people who lived like them?

There's Ethopia to consider.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

another way of looking at the conflict in Sudan, is as a conflict between farmers and herders

In the long run, farmers have always dominated because of sheer biology. Raising crops on an acre of land and letting humans eat the crops will feed a whole lot more humans, than letting livestock eat the crops and then feeding the meat of the livestock to humans.

We had the same conflict in the Frontier Days of the United States. Cattle ranchers regarded themselves as the "traditional" owners of the vast expanses of grazing land. As the population increased, farmers began moving into the area and putting up fences--with the encouragement of the government through the Homestead Act. There was considerable hostility among the ranchers toward the "sodbusters" which often erupted into violence.

The population density of the U.S. is still ridiculously low by world standards and in fact we still have a considerable amount of rangeland for grazing cattle. Nonetheless, the farmers prevailed and much of the "Wild West" is now farmland. As a result we are a net exporter of food.

Are most of the people in the North culturally "Arabs"?

The Nubians were the original civilization in Sudan, roughly contemporary with the Egyptians. The Nubian language is a member of the Nilo-Saharan family, a native African language group. So based on linguistic analysis the Nubians were an African people, not an Afroasiatic people like the Egyptians, Arabs, Berbers, Canaanites, etc. (It's hard--but not always impossible--to do DNA analysis in Africa because there has been so much migration and mingling of populations.)

Another people, the Funj, migrated to the Sudan in the 16th century and ended up in charge for quite a while, as they blended into the melting pot. No one really knows their origin. But they adopted the Arabic language and Arab culture.

 

[Michael]

The population density of the U.S. is still ridiculously low by world standards and in fact we still have a considerable amount of rangeland for grazing cattle. Nonetheless, the farmers prevailed and much of the "Wild West" is now farmland. As a result we are a net exporter of food.The Nubians were the original civilization in Sudan, roughly contemporary with the Egyptians. The Nubian language is a member of the Nilo-Saharan family, a native African language group. So based on linguistic analysis the Nubians were an African people, not an Afroasiatic people like the Egyptians, Arabs, Berbers, Canaanites, etc. (It's hard--but not always impossible--to do DNA analysis in Africa because there has been so much migration and mingling of populations.)

Are you saying Egyptians are not Arabs? SAM, didn't you state in a different thread that the people who built the pyramids were Arabs?

 

[S.A.M.]

The Egyptians are Arabised rather than Arabs. The Sudanese Arabs are indigenous Sudanese who were converted to Islam

Sudanese Arabs are a black Arab population of indigenous Africans who were converted to Islam and became Arabized. They are believed to be the largest group living in Northern and Central Sudan, with a population currently numbering around 22,000,000. For centuries, many muslim tribes of Sudan intermarried and gradually mixed with the Nubians and Bejas who had already been living there. Sudanese Arabic is their spoken dialect.

Most Sudanese Arabs are "Arabs" in linguistic and cultural association but also many of them have Arab blood traced mainly through their paternal side. In addition, many descended primarily from the pre-existing indigenous populations; that is, the ancient Nubians

In common with much of the rest of the Arab World, the gradual process of Arabization in northern Sudan led to the predominance of the Arabic language and aspects of Arab culture,[1] leading to the shift among a majority of northern Sudanese today to have an Arab ethnic identity. This process was furthered both by the spread of Islam and an emigration to Sudan of genealogical Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula, and their intermarriage with the Arabized indigenous peoples of the country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudanese_Arabs

Culturally, as a group, Sudanese peoples are more Arab than African

Not sure what any of that has to do with geographical limitations in Sudan

SAM, didn't you state in a different thread that the people who built the pyramids were Arabs?

[

 

[Giambattista]

Well, what is the deal with the opening post? Not sure what it is asking. It seems to ask a question with a picture. Satellite seems to show alot of green in the south, although no one asks about it. So I will just be a jerk and post something.

Precipitation map.


As far as I'm concerned, water alone would cause a huge difference, as well as animosity. Very difficult to do anything without water.


Here is one of Sudan in detail.
http://www.grid.unep.ch/product/map/images/www_2006_ddp_pre_yearb.jpg

. Yambio, close to the border with Zaire, has a nine-month rainy season (April-December) and receives an average of 1,142 millimeters (45.0 in) of rain each year; Khartoum has a three-month rainy season (July-September) with an annual average rainfall of 161 millimeters (6.3 in); Atbarah receives showers in August that produce an annual average of only 74 millimeters (2.9 in).

In some years, the arrival of the southwesterlies and their rain in central Sudan can be delayed, or they may not come at all. If that happens, drought and famine follow. The decades of the 1970s and 1980s saw the southwesterlies frequently fail, with disastrous results for the Sudanese people and economy.

Now then, hope that didn't help anyone. Climate was the first thing that came to my mind when I saw that satellite image.



Oh, and Michael, or SAM (or even Trippy): if anyone of you wants to fight me, right here, right now, about Sudan, geopolitics, the weather, or my offensive avatar, I'm motherf***in available.

Let's go. Right now. In the Errordome.

Or else...

Lolz. PEACE!

 

[Giambattista]

Agricultural productivity is decreasing as a result of a lack of technological breakthroughs in rainfed agriculture, and food security and livelihoods are threatened in turn.

It was quoted by SAM a few posts up.

Just wondering what is meant by "technological breakthroughs in rainfed agriculture"? Does that mean regular agriculture that depends on precipitation in situ as opposed to river-based irrigation channels or other body of water that feeds localized farming?

Anyone know?

 

[Trippy]

It was quoted by SAM a few posts up.

Just wondering what is meant by "technological breakthroughs in rainfed agriculture"? Does that mean regular agriculture that depends on precipitation in situ as opposed to river-based irrigation channels or other body of water that feeds localized farming?

Anyone know?

I would have thought it woud have been pretty self evident, taken in context:

In general, small-scale farmers and herders in the traditional rainfed farming and livestock sectors are more prone to poverty than those in irrigated areas

First sentence of othe third paragraph of one of the quoted portions you're referring to, it's even bolded.

 

[Trippy]

Another people, the Funj, migrated to the Sudan in the 16th century and ended up in charge for quite a while, as they blended into the melting pot. No one really knows their origin. But they adopted the Arabic language and Arab culture.

I think this is on the right track, the Funj were arabised by the tiime of the collapse of their monarchy, but they were never able to absorb Alodia - they conquered it, but it retained its identity.

Admittedly, the borders of Alodia were further north than the borders of Southern Sudan, but that's what you get when you get conquered.

 

[Trippy]

Well, what is the deal with the opening post? Not sure what it is asking. It seems to ask a question with a picture. Satellite seems to show alot of green in the south, although no one asks about it. So I will just be a jerk and post something.

Precipitation map.


As far as I'm concerned, water alone would cause a huge difference, as well as animosity. Very difficult to do anything without water.


Here is one of Sudan in detail.
http://www.grid.unep.ch/product/map/images/www_2006_ddp_pre_yearb.jpg



Now then, hope that didn't help anyone. Climate was the first thing that came to my mind when I saw that satellite image.



Oh, and Michael, or SAM (or even Trippy): if anyone of you wants to fight me, right here, right now, about Sudan, geopolitics, the weather, or my offensive avatar, I'm motherf***in available.

Let's go. Right now. In the Errordome.

Or else...

Lolz. PEACE!

And this you adequately demonstrate the dangers of cosnidering averages or totals out of context of the bigger picture.

The danger is this. In Sudan, the dry season is dry everywhere. The differences in total rainfall reflect differences in the length of the dry season, and how far north the wet South west winds reach.

For example, Yambio - near the border with Zaire, recieves a a 9 month rainey season, Khartoum recieves a three month rainey seasons, and Atbarah gets a few showers in August.

Southern Sudan is wetter because it's closer to the source of that water.

North Sudan includes the Sahel.

Yes, there is a lot of Desert in Sudan. Yes, the desert in Sudan is particularly harsh, however it only forms part of the story - for example the central clay plains, if water can be aquired are very fertile, and capable of supporting cotton - for example, the Jazirah scheme, responsible for the majority of sudans export earnings, lies in what is to become part of North Sudan (according to the image in the OP).

 

[Trippy]

Of course, the boundary also happens to match the 1956 boundary between British controled Sudan, and Egyption controled Sudan.

And South Sudan does have one majo economic advantage - 85% of the countrie oil production - of course, Sudan's only oil port is in North Sudan...

 

[Giambattista]

I would have thought it woud have been pretty self evident, taken in context:

Thank you for taking up the challenge to fight!

Okay that's what I thought, I've just never heard that particular term.
But also, I didn't make clear, what is meant by advances in technology in those areas. I would assume that means storing of water, like in reservoirs, and artificial irrigation.

And this you adequately demonstrate the dangers of cosnidering averages or totals out of context of the bigger picture.

The danger is this. In Sudan, the dry season is dry everywhere. The differences in total rainfall reflect differences in the length of the dry season, and how far north the wet South west winds reach.

Yeah. I kind of figured that when reading about the area in south Sudan designated as the largest swamp, or whatever. Apparently half of that water evaporates routinely before it can be used.

I know very little about Sudan or its travails.

Of course, the boundary also happens to match the 1956 boundary between British controled Sudan, and Egyption controled Sudan.

And South Sudan does have one major economic advantage - 85% of the countries oil production - of course, Sudan's only oil port is in North Sudan...

Sounds treacherous. I saw a map just recently of Sudan's petroleum and gas production. Basically in the south.

I guess this means war between the two halves?

I've only paid $.05 attention to Sudan. I guess I'm a typical Amer$can.

 

[fedr808]

The Egyptians are Arabised rather than Arabs. The Sudanese Arabs are indigenous Sudanese who were converted to Islam



Culturally, as a group, Sudanese peoples are more Arab than African

Not sure what any of that has to do with geographical limitations in Sudan



[

xkcd ftw