The US Senate Foreign Relations wants the Obama Administration to create a comprehensive strategy for Sudan. Senators are pushing for a plan prior to the 2011 referendum, that they say, could break the country apart. Such is the folly of Senators. There is no compelling reason to hold the Sudan together other than to facilitate the exploitation of the country's vast mineral wealth and to not offend Arab interests. The other argument is that it would spur secessionist pressures elsewhere. While that can't be denied, the costs of forging nations out of unwilling populations are not insignificant.

The Southern Sudan is scheduled to hold an independence referendum on whether or not it should remain as a part of the Sudan sometime before March 2011. This is part of the 2005 Naivasha Agreement between the central government in Khartoum and the Sudan People's Liberation Army that brought a cessation in a bloody 22 year long civil war that has left hundreds of thousands dead and millions displaced. The Southern Sudan is approximately 45% of the country.

The US has historically been against redefining colonial borders in Africa and Asia. It has long been my thesis that these borders, drawn of European whim and fancy, contribute to instability across the world. Artificial states, and the Sudan is a prime example, are inherently unstable, and it is my view that the interests of peace and development are better served when borders reflect the wishes of their inhabitants.

There's more...