Viewing cable 09KHARTOUM249, SUDAN COMPLAINS OF “PROBABLY AMERICAN” BOMBING

Viewing cable 09KHARTOUM249, SUDAN COMPLAINS OF “PROBABLY AMERICAN” BOMBING

 

Reference ID	Created	Released	Classification	Origin
09KHARTOUM249	2009-02-24 10:10	2010-12-06 21:09	SECRET//NOFORN	Embassy Khartoum

S E C R E T KHARTOUM 000249 

NOFORN 
DEPARTMENT FOR AF A A/S CARTER, AF/SPG, NEA/IPA, ISN/CATR, 
NSC FOR MGAVIN AND CHUDSON 

EO 12958 DECL: 02/24/2019 
TAGS ETTC, MASS, PARM, PGOV, PREL, SU 

SUBJECT: SUDAN COMPLAINS OF “PROBABLY AMERICAN” BOMBING 
ATTACKS IN EASTERN SUDAN

REF: A. KHARTOUM 120  B. KHARTOUM 107  C. KHARTOUM 82  D. KHARTOUM 59

Classified By: CDA Alberto M. Fernandez for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).

¶1. (S) CDA Fernandez was summoned to the Foreign Ministry on the morning of

February 24 by Americas Department head Ambassador Nasreddin Wali. Wali said 

that he had sensitive and worrisome information to relate to the Charge. Reading

from hand-written notes in Arabic and referring to a large dog-eared map brought

in for the occasion, Wali said that there had been two air attacks on Eastern 

Sudan in January and February. In the January attack, 43 people were killed and

17 vehicles destroyed. This occurred near Magd, in the Gebeit region of Red Sea

state, “the Northern part of an area known as Oku” (phonetic). It is roughly at

the latitude of 17 degrees and longitude of 33.5, according to Wali.

¶2. (S) The second attack occurred on February 20 at Bir al-Mansurab (latitude

of 17 degrees and longitude of 34, according to Wali). The second attack was

15 kilometers from the site of the January attack. In the February attack,

45 Sudanese were kalled and 14 vehicles destroyed. Both attacks occurred 150

kilometers deep inside Sudan, not near any international border.

¶3. (S) Wali said that “we assume that the planes that attacked us are your

planes.” He said that Sudan has had “tight cooperation” with the United States

on security matters and any concerns that the USG has about security related

issues can be raised within the context of bilateral diplomatic and intelligence

relations between the two countries. He added that “Sudan would like to have 

clarification about this matter. We protest this act and we condemn it. Sudan 

reserves the right to respond appropriately, at the right time, in a legal

manner consistent with protecting its sovereignty.”

¶4. (S) Comment: This complaint by Sudan comes on the heels of the Embassy 

being tasked by Washington to demarche Khartoum on weapons smuggling issues

possibly involving Iran and Hamas (reftels a-c). So it is easy for the regime

to assume that the demarches and these kinetic incidents are somehow connected.

The initial attack is already the object of gossip by elements of Sudan’s 

political elite, even outside the tight confines of the regime’s inner circle

(reftel d). CDA had already scheduled an Emergency Action Committee meeting on

February 24 to discuss the Embassy’s security posture in the runup to the March

4 ICC announcement and this latest news is an additional concern in a very 

volatile political environment. Embassy requests Washington guidance on what -

if any - formal response should be given to the Sudanese. And should this

potentially explosive story somehow leak to the sensationalistic Sudanese press,

it could very well turn our security situation here from bad to worse.

End comment.
FERNANDEZ

O 241054Z FEB 09
FM AMEMBASSY KHARTOUM
TO SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 3064