In a surprise move, the U.S. State Department tried a new tactic to mitigate the longest-running civil war in Africa. Rather than recommit to its previous support of the peace process in Sudan, the State Department announced last week it would suspend discussions with the Sudanese government in Khartoum.

After a Sudanese government helicopter opened fire on a group of civilians waiting for food in southern Sudan, the U.S. State Department decided its most effective protest of the attacks would be to shelve peace talks with the Sudanese government.

The attack happened during a four-week cease-fire agreement. At best, the move seems counterintuitive – protesting aggression by postponing peace talks. However, given the current world situation, the U.S. government may be trying to walk the line between using the Sudanese government as a conduit for messages to the “Axis of Evil” and condemning its attacks on its own civilians.

The same week that the Sudanese government opened fire on the several thousand civilians in the rebel-held area of Bieh, it also urged Iraq to allow United Nations weapons inspectors into the country. Sudan opposes any U.S. aggression against Iraq, and during the opening ceremony of the Sudanese embassy in Baghdad, Sudan urged its long-time friend to allow U.N. inspectors in to avoid American attacks on Iraq.

If Sudan can wheel and deal with Iraq on our behalf, we can certainly overlook the “technical fault” which resulted in six bombs being dropped on a crowd of several thousand civilians collecting food relief. The Sudanese government apologized for the “accident” and promised to return to its current agreement not to bomb civilians for four weeks. One bomb is an accident. Six bombs are not an accident.

Postponing peace talks between the factions in Sudan is hardly an option. Sudan desperately needs to end its civil war. The longest running civil war in Africa, the continent’s largest nation, and home of the confluence of both tributaries of the Nile, Sudan’s conflict represents the fissure between urban and rural, Muslim and Christian, and Arab and black. The predominantly Muslim government, seated in Khartoum, is trying to suppress rebellion from the southern Sudanese, predominantly Christian and animist people who live in underdevelopment. Added to the mix is the discovery of oil reserves in southern Sudan, a lucrative source of income for Sudan, and perhaps even the south.

While the United States may think it needs the Sudanese government as a mouthpiece, we can hardly ignore the situation in the south. John Garang, the leader of the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army, is a Grinnell College graduate and holds a Ph.D from Iowa State University. He was trained at Fort Benning, Georgia – home of the School of the Americas – during the 1970s before getting his doctorate in agricultural economics.

The south Sudanese have managed to keep their cause alive under the leadership of Garang and others in rebel factions. After nearly two decades of struggle against the government in Khartoum, the rebels are hardly going to acquiesce to anything less than a peace agreement that ensures the safety of civilians. The current four-week cease-fire between the Sudanese government and hungry women and children is the perfect opportunity for U.S. intermediaries to redouble their efforts for peace in Sudan rather than letting a cease-fire expire under a U.S. State Department protest.

The United States need to protest the attacks in Sudan not by pulling out of the peace process, but by bringing the Sudanese back to the table.

Rachel Faber Machacha is a graduate student in international development studies from Emmetsburg.