Slavery in The Sudan

In northern Sudan, children are bought and sold for as little as fifteen dollars. Women are taken captive and their genitals are mutilated. Their masters use them as sexual concubines. Christians and animists are forced to convert to Islam. Black African bloodlines are mixed with Arabian in an attempt to eradicate the black race. It is modern-day slavery.

“There are two key elements to the story of slavery in the 20^th century,” says Charles Jacobs of the American Anti-Slavery Group (AASG). “One is that it exists at all. The other is what I call the scandal of silence – the fact that people don’t want to even acknowledge that it exists.”[1]  In fact, slavery has existed in the Sudan for many years; however, the number of those enslaved has recently grown to shocking proportions. Tens of thousands of black African Christian and animist women and children have been sold into slavery in the northern Sudan.[2] Used by their masters for work as well as for sexual purposes, slaves report that they have been beaten, forced to convert to Islam, required to speak only in Arabic, and cruelly tortured. Genital mutilation is common among the women used as concubines.[3] Other slaves report having boiling water thrown in their eyes, being branded with hot objects, and being left without food.[4]

Though denied by the radical Islamic regime in Khartoum and its allies overseas (including Louis Farrakhan and the United Nations), numerous reputable sources have documented the existence of modern-day slavery in the Sudan. In 1987, Ushari Ahmad Mahmud and Suleyman Ali Baldo, two fearless Muslim professors at the University of Khartoum, became the first to document the Sudanese slave trade.[5] Though these men were jailed for their work, others have presented concurrent, first hand testimony of slavery’s existence, and all agree that the government of the Sudan not only allows but also encourages trade in human cargo. The evidence is clear. Eyewitness accounts and tales of ex-slaves point to an enormous human slave trade in the Sudan.

Slavery begins with the destruction of southern villages and homes by Mujahadeen groups, bandits who support the government in Khartoum. Because the government is unable to pay these fighters, they are allowed to steal anything – including human beings – from the destroyed villages. Taken to the north by Mujahadeen slavers, women and children are sold to northern Muslims as house slaves, farm laborers, and sexual chattel.[6] The Sudanese government in Khartoum does nothing to halt the process. In fact, Mahmud and Baldo wrote in 1987, “We believe the government policy of arming Rizeigat militias and sending them into [indigenous] areas has created favourable conditions for the re-emergence of slavery.”[7] Later, in mid-1998, the government adopted a new constitution in which Article 65 recognized slavery as a legitimate institution protected by [Islamic] law.[8]

Beyond the politics, however, are the personal stories like this one from a police officer: “I once witnessed a woman who came to the police station. I was there. She said ‘I have found my son with someone. They had taken him from me, and then they dug a hole. They wanted to kill me and bury me in that hole. I escaped, and the man took my son. I came to you to bring my child back to me.’[9] The police did nothing and her son was never returned.

When Dateline NBC sent Sarah James to cover the story of slavery in the Sudan, she interviewed countless eyewitnesses. One ex-slave told her that “she was raped repeatedly and is now pregnant by her Arab master. It seems no one is too young to be a slave. Some of these children say they were held for more than five years – forced to tend cattle and goats, fed only table scraps. Some even ate grass to survive.”[10] Others told James that, since a recent coup, slavery had increased dramatically. They recounted stories of beatings and macabre tortures. While in the Sudan, James witnessed the purchase of 15 slaves by a slave-redemption organization. She also had the opportunity to interview a captured Mujahadeen officer who confirmed that women and children were indeed captured, sold, and used as slaves in the north.[11]

Slaves and redeemers alike tell incredible stories of the horror in the Sudan. Yet the total number of the enslaved in Sudan remains unknown and the suffering continues.

Slave Redemption

Slave redemption, or paying masters for the freedom of their slaves, is one very controversial solution to the problem of slavery. As of October 1999, over 15,547 human beings have been recovered through the efforts of American and European human rights activists.[12] Though it would seem that the West would be in unanimous support of slave redemption, a 1999 article published in The Atlantic Monthly attacked the practice, projecting the debate onto the national scene and raising the specter of slave redemption to previously unprecedented heights.

Entitled “The False Promise of Slave Redemption,” The Atlantic Monthly article provoked followers of differing ideologies to argue their views more strongly, creating the largest rift yet between abolitionists and other Sudan activists. Many organizations joined the fray. Journalists wrote articles on the debate, and national magazines published cover stories on the question of redemption.

James Jacobson, formerly of Christian Solidarity International, was the first Sudan advocate to become concerned about slave redemption practices. After breaking away from CSI and founding his own organization, Christian Freedom International, Jacobson made his first trip to the Sudan. There, he interviewed ex-slaves and witnessed the physical scars of atrocities perpetrated upon them. Yet, he started to question slave redemption as a valid means of ending the crisis. After subsequent trips to the Sudan, Jacobson concluded that redeeming slaves actually supports the perpetrators, continues the civil war in Sudan, and encourages slavery.[13]

He cites three reasons for his about-face regarding slave redemption. First, redeeming slaves with money serves as a powerful incentive to continue taking slaves. Second, some so-called “slaves” have been redeemed many, many times, just filling the pockets of the slave traders. Third, the United Nations aid programs draw slave raiders to profitable areas.[14]

Each of these concerns receives some support from the facts and logical assumptions. The per capita income in the Sudan is $500 per year. The going slave redemption rate ($50 per person or about the price of a cow) causes slave traders to sell their booty in the south rather than in the north where the rate is less (only $15 or about the price of a goat). In the Atlantic Monthly article, author Richard Miniter writes, “No matter how the price for redeemed slaves is justified, the simple fact is that redemption makes the trade much more lucrative.”[15] Miniter also claims that the Dinka leaders oppose slave redemption practices upon this basis.[16] Redemption, he says, “reduces the incentive for owners to set slaves free, [and] rewards slave traders.”[17]

Moreover, Jacobson and Miniter believe that slave redemption encourages hoaxes. In the article, Miniter recounts a trip the two took together to the southern Sudan. When the two men arrived, local officials told them that 4,000 slave children were nearby awaiting redemption. The officials demanded $100 per slave, double that paid by CSI, because, the latter “buy[s] in much larger quantities.”[18] When the two men approached the agreed-upon rendezvous site later that evening, however, officials there informed them that no slaves were available to be bought. Another official said that the entire scenario was a hoax designed to extort money from the two men. That official was summarily dismissed from his post.[19]

Despite these reservations, Jacobson has contemplated other forms of practical and compassionate aid to the slaves. These include giving trucks and jeeps to the Sudanese villages to flee the horse-back riding raiders, paying slave rescuers a regular salary, and concentrating on stopping the “Train of Death” that transports the raiders, their supplies, and their horses.[20]

Jacobson is not alone in this belief. Several other organizations, most notably the United Nations, agree with him. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) has outspokenly condemned slave-redemption practices in the Sudan. The group issued a statement proclaiming that the Sudanese government had requested it to decry slave- redemption practices and to call for Christian Solidarity International to cease its efforts. UNICEF spokeswoman Marie Heuze said, “The situation in southern Sudan is one of civil war. Every time these traders have liquid cash, especially dollars … it feeds the arms market.”[21] UNICEF also acknowledges that slave redemption does not address the root of the problem. Claiming that redeeming slaves for money merely exacerbates the slave trade, UNICEF is encouraged that the Khartoum government has asked the group to conduct a study of slavery in the southern Sudan, in spite of the fact that the government claims that slavery does not exist.[22]

Christian Solidarity International and its defenders have responded forcefully to the charges against slave redemption. Claiming a moral imperative to conduct their work, CSI has continued its trips to the Sudan. After hearing the United Nations report calling slave redemption “intolerable,” CSI’s executive director John Eibner exclaimed, “What would be intolerable would be to leave the children in slavery. That they should remain where they are beaten, raped, mutilated – that is intolerable.”[23] Charles Jacobs of the American Anti-Slavery Group (AASG) added, “It would be intolerable to let those people sit there and rot.”[24] In fact, AASG has published a list of press releases in which it systematically argues the case against UNICEF and its defenders. Jacobs argues that buying back slaves does not encourage more raids, raise the market price, or encourage repeated slave raids. In fact, he claims that no redeemed slave has yet been recaptured. Jacobs and his group argue that American abolitionists during the Civil War faced the same ethical dilemma, yet they continued to free slaves from the Antebellum South. Jacobs intends to continue to free slaves from the Sudan.[25]

In March of 1999, Jacobs went on the offensive when he rebuked UNICEF for “abandoning child slaves.”[26] He claimed that UNICEF not only reported false information but actually refused to intervene in the slave crisis, despite promises to do so. “If UNICEF thinks it is wrong to free slaves with cash, then what is their alternative? UNICEF must end its shameful silence on the black slave children of Sudan,” Jacobs said.[27]

CSI has defended itself against journalistic criticism. In an August 2, 1999 press release, CSI officials stated that the Atlantic Monthly article by Richard Miniter was a “hoax.” CSI claimed that he used false information, misrepresented the statements of southern Sudanese leaders, and neglected important facts. The organization accused Miniter of shoddy investigation, poor journalistic skills, and complete avoidance of the truth.[28] Others, too, including the Sudanese Catholic Bishop Macram Gassis, claim that Miniter gave false information – actually and purposely lying in the article.[29]

Other journalists have come out in support of slave redemption. Editorials have appeared in the Boston Phoenix, the New York Times, and the Boston Globe supporting the practice. The Boston Phoenix’s July 1, 1999 editorial, “Shame on the UN,” claims “Despite a cynical move against Christian Solidarity International, slave redemption in Sudan will continue.”[30] A.M. Rosenthal of the Times published a biting editorial on May 25, 1999, declaring, “The decisions on … the Sudanese resistance will live on as a UN message to nations weak, isolated and persecuted: Slaves, stay out.”[31]

In addition to journalists and activists, others support slave redemption. American political groups and leaders have spoken out in favor of slave redemption practices. Faith McDonnell of the Institute on Religion and Democracy says, “I think that those who criticize it [slave redemption] have not done enough criticizing of the government of Sudan itself.”[32] Michael Horowitz of the Hudson Institute, one of the pioneers of the American movement against international religious persecution, favors slave redemption. Congressmen Frank Wolf (R-VA), Donald Payne (D-NJ), Chris Smith (R-NJ), Barney Frank (D-MA), and Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) all support slave redemption.

Despite the obstinate silence and cowardly apathy exhibited by the United Nations and others, many groups have courageously spoken out on behalf of the enslaved southern Sudanese. Though not yet a strong force, modern abolitionism is growing. With support from leading religious and political leaders, these human rights advocates are promoting the cause of the truly destitute and needy peoples of the world.

STOP (Slavery that Oppresses People) Campaign is one unusual group that is determined to make a difference. STOP was founded by elementary school children and their teacher, Barbara Vogel, to end slavery in the Sudan and to raise money to purchase slaves. When Vogel first informed her class of the story of modern slavery in the Sudan, the children were appalled. Unsure of how to proceed, but desperate to do something, the class became young abolitionists. After writing to the President (who sent them a signed picture of himself and a letter that never mentioned slavery) and to Oprah Winfrey (who said the issue was too complex and the children should focus on their studies), the class began to raise funds and awareness on their own. The class got its first big break when the chairman of Viacom broadcast the story on Nickelodeon.[33] At first, Vogel’s class of fourth graders raised more than $1,000.00 to free Sudanese slaves. Then, when CBS News heard of the class project and did a televised report with Dan Rather, donations sprang to more than $50,000.[34] One thousand Sudanese slaves returned to the south due to the efforts of the fifth graders. The class’s story even served as background for an episode of a hit television show.

Probably the most unusual abolitionist effort appeared through the television drama Touched By An Angel. When Martha Williamson, producer of the top-rated CBS drama was approached at the national prayer breakfast by United States Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Representative Frank Wolf (R-VA) about dedicating an entire episode to the crisis in the Sudan, she had to confess that she knew nothing of the issue. After being thoroughly briefed, however, Williamson became the first major entertainment figure to turn Sudan activist. Assuring the statesmen that she would do something, Williamson quickly found herself committed to a cause that she had previously never known existed.

Following the September 1999 showing of the Touched by an Angel episode, The Institute on Religion and Democracy advertised a web site, www.angelsinsudan.com, designed to educate the show’s viewers on what is happening and what they can do about it. Within the first week, the site sustained over 3,000 hits. Still active as of February, “Angels in Sudan” has received more than 11,532 hits.[35]

Even the show’s guest star Lindsay Crouse had not planned to become an instant abolitionist. However, while strolling through Harvard University’s campus with her daughter, Crouse happened upon an American Anti-Slavery Group booth where she learned of the horror of modern-day slavery. Somewhat skeptical, she refused to sign the group’s petition. Upon returning home that day, however, Crouse found the Touched By An Angel script in her mailbox.[36] And abolitionism became her cause.

In the story, Crouse plays a United States senator from a Western state who is facing a tough re-election battle. Lacking support from her decidedly non-political husband, her marriage is little more than a sham. The couple’s young son, however, keeps them together despite the senator’s long trips to Washington. When the son discovers pictures of slaves in her briefcase, pictures she had ignored, he begins his own abolitionist campaign at the local elementary school. Much to his mother’s dismay and his father’s delight, the son raises over $2,000 to purchase the freedom of Sudanese slaves. After he makes a special trip to Washington to give the money to his mother, she informs him that she cannot go to the Sudan. Her biggest contributor, a candy manufacturer, receives cheap gum arabic from the Sudan, and he has threatened to cut his support from her campaign, effectively destroying it, if she goes. After being convicted by the show’s regular cast of angels, the senator decides that redeeming these slaves, after all, may be her divinely appointed destiny. The episode ends by showing her purchasing the freedom of over sixty-five Sudanese slaves.

The Touched By An Angel episode, viewed by millions of Americans, did more to raise awareness about the Sudan than nearly any previous effort. Nevertheless, certain Muslim groups objected to its content, claiming the story was Muslim bashing. The Sudan activists, such as William Saunders of the Family Research Council, flatly reject that notion. Saunders, along with Rabbi David Sapperstein, believes that the liberation of southern Sudan will free even its Muslim inhabitants to worship and live freely without fear of recrimination from the radical north.[37]

The slave redemption debate has seized the imagination of the American journalist community, Christian political activists, humanitarian groups, and even Hollywood. Nevertheless, the debate has dampened the enthusiasm of grassroots supporters and threatened to marginalize the slavery issue. One thing all activists agree upon, however, is that slave redemption and humanitarian aid will not end the crisis. They are short-term remedies to the symptoms. The problem will not be resolved without an end to the war, self-determination for the south, and the fall of the present regime in Khartoum. Only then will the southern Sudanese be allowed to grieve and rebuild in peace and freedom. Most activists agree, though, that until peace comes, humanitarian aid and slave redemption are essential for the survival of the south.

Despite the efforts by many dedicated organizations, the story of modern-day slavery in Sudan remains the world’s most underreported human rights tragedy. Without significant political pressure and humanitarian aid by those Western groups that have a keen interest in the enslaved Sudanese, the rabid forces of radical Islam will certainly overwhelm the Black Christians and animists, enslaving and destroying the entire population. Slavery is not, as some would believe, a question of economics. It is a question of evil. Unless the church intervenes to protect the southern Sudanese, the rampant rise of modern slavery will engulf east Africa and ultimately bring greater tyranny to those peoples and nations that desire justice and freedom. The church brings the hope of spiritual, personal, and political freedom. If she refuses to bring that message quickly and forcefully to the south Sudan, the message of freedom and human dignity through the image of God will be significantly tarnished in the eyes of the world. For if the Western church neglects the enslaved of Sudan, it is clear that she will ultimately neglect the cause of Christ throughout the world.

1. Joseph R. Gregory, First Things, 1996, quoted by Andrew Boyd in Baroness Cox: A Voice for the Voiceless, 259.
2. Charles Jacobs, “In Sudan, A 12-Year-Old Girl Can Be Bought For $50,” Los Angeles Times, 28 December 1998. Online. Available; http://www.anti-slavery.org/pages/artlit/la_times.html
3. Ibid
4. J.M. Lawrence, “Freeing the Slaves … in 1999,” The Boston Herald, 25 February 1999. Online. Available: http://www.anti-slavery.org/pages/artlit/herald.htm
5. Ushari Ahmad Mahmud and Suleyman Ali Baldo, “The Al Diein Massacre,” Human Rights Violations in the Sudan, University of Khartoum, 1987 (translated from the Arabic). Online. Available: http://www.anti-slavery.org/pages/reports/diein.htm
6. Ann Huiskes, interview by author, tape recording, Washington, DC., 14 October 1999.
7. Mahmud and Baldo, “The Al Diein Massacre,” 2.
8. All Africa News Agency, “Outcry Over Slavery In Sudan,” 14 December 1998.
9. Mahmud and Baldo, “The Al Diein Massacre,” 3. Dr. Joseph Kickasola translates the Arabic word “arida” as a written “petition.”
10. “Spotlight on Slavery,” Dateline NBC, 12 December 1996, 3.
11. Ibid, 6.
12. D. Pearson, “Slave Redemption Serves Several Important Purposes,” The London Free Press, 26 June 1999. Online. Available: Electric Library.
13. Richard Miniter, “The False Promise of Slave Redemption,” Atlantic Monthly, 5.
14. Ibid, 7.
15. Ibid., 8.
16. Ibid.
17. Ibid.
18. Ibid., 10, 11.
19. Ibid., 11.
20. Ibid., 14-15.
21. “UNICEF Criticizes Buying Freedom for Sudan Slaves,” Press Release, 5 February 1999. Online. Available: http://www.anti-slavery.org/pages/updates/unicef-debate.htm
22. Statement of Carol Bellamy, in Geneva, Switzerland, 16 March 1999, cited in “Sudan Slave Trade Must End, says UNICEF,” Press Release, 16 March 1999. Online. Available: http://www.anti-slavery.org/pages/updates/unicef-debate.htm
23. Charles Jacobs, “In Campaign to Liberate Sudan’s Slaves, Money Talks,” Boston Globe, 19 February 1999. Online. Available: http://www.anti-slavery.org/pages/artlit_index.html
24. Gardner, “Slave Redemption,” Christianity Today, 2.
25. Jacobs, “In Campaign to Liberate Sudan’s Slaves, Money Talks,” Boston Globe.
26. “Anti-Slavery Group Slams UNICEF for ‘Abandoning Child Slaves’,” Press Release, 10 March 1999. Online. Available: http://www.anti-slavery.org/pages/updates/unicef-debate.htm
27. Ibid.
28. Christian Solidarity International, “The Atlantic Monthly Slavery ‘Hoax’ Revealed,” Press Release, 2 August 1999. Online. Available: http://www.anti-slkavery.org/pages/updates/atlantic.html
29. Faith McDonnell, interview by author, tape recording, Washington DC., 14 October 1999.
30. “Shame on the UN,” Boston Phoenix Editorial, 1 July 1999. Online. Available: http://www.anti-slavery.org/pages/artlit/csi-un.htm
31. A.M. Rosenthall, “Slaves, Stay Out,” New York Times, 25 May 1999. Online. Available: Expanded Academic.
32. Ibid.
33. Richard Woodbury, “The Children’s Crusade,” Time, 21 December 1998. Online. Available: http://www.anti-slavery.com/pages/artlit_index.html
34. Richard Miniter, “The False Promise of Slave Redemption,” Atlantic Monthly, July 1999, 4. Online. Available: http://www.theatlanticmonthly.com/issues/99jul/9907sudanslaves.htm
35. Faith McDonnell, interview by author, tape recording, Washington, DC., 14 October 1999.
36. “CBS ‘Touched By An Angel’ Touched by Student Activists in Boston,” The Anti-Slavery Report, Fall 1999, 4.
37. William Saunders, interview by author, tape recording, Washington, DC., 14 October 1999.