European Coalition on Oil in Sudan is a coalition of European organisations working for peace in Sudan. ECOS is calling for action by oil companies to ensure that Sudan's oil wealth ceases to fuel war in the country. The organisation is asking the oil companies operating in Sudan, including ONGC Videsh, to suspend their operations until there is peace. In this interview, Egbert G.Ch. Wesselink, Coordinator, European Coalition on Oil in Sudan, tells Prashant C. Trikannad how ONGC Videsh can contribute to peace in Sudan.

How is Sudan's oil wealth fuelling war in that country?
To secure the oil exploitation, the Government Of Sudan (GOS) has resorted to massive killings and forced depopulation of vast territories. Also, oil revenues have been behind the escalation of war and they fortify the position of a failing and despotic government.
Oil not only became a major focus of the war, it also paid for it. Sudan's military spending in 2001 soaked up 60 per cent of the 2001 oil revenue; the military budget rose 39.6 per cent. Oil money changed a low-budget bush war into modern counter-insurgency warfare.
In your opinion, what are the moral and ethical responsibilities of ONGC Videsh in Sudan? 
When buying its Sudanese assets, ONGC Videsh inherited its moral debts. It has become widely accepted among the international business community that companies are responsible, not just for their actions, but also for their impact and their positive and negative implications for regional and global development. All human beings would agree that it is immoral to profit from crime and human suffering. Unless ONGC Videsh wishes to dissociate from universal human values, the company will have to ensure that its operations are supportive of the principles that underlie the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As long as there is no peace in Sudan, oil exploitation will be a source of war. That is why the European Coalition on Oil in Sudan calls upon the oil companies to suspend their operations until there is a just and sustainable peace. ONGC Videsh seems to believe that Sudan's wars are none of its business. In fact, the company is in business because of the war. Unless the company adopts a strategy of active support for peace and respect for human rights, its social basis will remain limited to a military regime that can lose power at any moment.
The government's reaction to the discovery of oil in southern Sudan by Chevron in 1978 was to aim at changing the internal borders and take oilfields out of the southern administrative region. In 1985, the SPLA/M (Sudan People's Liberation Army/Movement) declared oil operations a military target and Chevron had to pull out.
When the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company (GNPOC) was established in 1997, its areas of operation were not controlled by the government. By 2001 they were. Government forces and allied militia had chased away hundreds of thousands of people, burning houses, stealing livestock, and raping, killing and enslaving many people. During 1999-2003, similar events occurred further south in Block 5A. Vast stretches of land on both sides of the oil road to Adok were cleared from its population. Members of the oil consortium never protested publicly. On the contrary, individual companies actively assisted the government's offensive. GNPOC conceded in 2002 that its infrastructure had played a key role in the military operations.
Public and in-company outrage about GNPOC's complicity with these crimes had become so damaging for its operating company, Talisman Energy from Canada, that it pulled out. There were no private takers and ONGC Videsh took advantage. Talisman's 25 per cent interest in GNPOC was bought with a big war discount. Neither the Indian press nor the Indian Parliament noticed that fact or its implications. They presented the deal as proof of India's competitiveness, while the rest of the world saw it as a proof that corporate cynicism was taking root in India. 
In 2003, the Austrian company, OMV, sold its Sudanese assets. The company had failed to convince its Chinese and Malaysian business partners, CNPC and Petronas, that burning and killing was no sustainable security policy. In 2003, ONGC Videsh bought OMV's Sudanese assets with a big war discount. 
The Swedish operator of Blocks 5A, Lundin Petroleum, pulled out in 2003. 
All these companies regretted to have stepped into Sudan on the basis of technical and financial considerations only, without making an adequate assessment of its political, social, security and reputation dimensions.
Why do private oil companies believe that Sudan is a bad investment and Asian state-owned companies do not? Maybe it is because individuals care more about their money, while state-owned companies obey political agendas first. ONGC Videsh's $1 billion investment in Sudan is driven by the Indian government's desire to attain oil security for India's growing economy. The company chose to ignore the mistakes of others, as shown by Mr. Subir Raha's astonishing comment (in a leading Indian newspaper) on August 6, 2003, when asked about the political risks of the Sudanese acquisition, "You have risks in all businesses. We go by the advice of the external affairs ministry, as we don't have a process in place specifically for political risk analysis. But, of course, we do our due diligence on technical and financial issues." Currently, the company is seeking political risk insurance with the Indian government for the Port Sudan-Khartoum pipeline project. In other words, the Indian taxpayer will pay for risks that private companies consider madness and that ONGC Videsh does not know how to assess.
What should ONGC Videsh do?
ONGC Videsh can still become a force for good in Sudan. Its future will ultimately depend on the success of an imminent Sudan Peace Agreement. Hopes are high, but expectations are modest. There is a strong business case for support for the peace process and for the values and rights where it's based on.
A sustained international commitment will be needed to defuse Sudan's many internal tensions. ONGC Videsh can contribute. It will have to assess its impact and secure a broad social basis. It is urgent to show concern for the suffering people in Sudan, starting, for instance, with the hundreds of thousands who were driven away from their land to secure access to oil for the consortiums in which ONGC Videsh now participates. Many of those who survived the forced displacements live in desperate conditions. It is still not safe to return home. The companies that do business on their lands must spare no effort to assure their safe return.
Companies that play the global game must go with the global rules, including human rights standards. A large group of European NGOs has recently developed a set of business principles for Sudan. It was very well received by major international companies. ONGC Videsh never reacted. The invitation is still open, but time is running out. There is a lot of resentment in Sudan against ONGC Videsh and its business partners. ONGC Videsh can steer away from trouble if it changes course right now.
What is the impact of Sudan's oil business on the social and economic well being of its people? 
On the one hand, oil has been instrumental in opening up Sudan's economy, attracting foreign direct investment and realising an average of 5 per cent GDP growth over the past years. Oil has tripled government income, bringing it to almost $1 billion in 2003. Unfortunately, very few people have profited. The $989 million oil export in 2003—out of a total of $1.2 billion in export revenues—has had no noticeable impact on the quality of public services or on the average standard of living.
Oil will only be an engine for sustainable economic growth in Sudan if its revenues are used equitably, if there is political stability, and if the international community agrees to normalise its relations with Sudan. It does not look like this is going to happen in the near future. International sanctions against Sudan are now openly discussed. Investment in Sudan is a gamble.
Oil revenues have boosted the military strength of the regime to the point that it no longer wishes to compromise. As long as there are companies willing to work behind the barrel of the gun, and as long as there are countries willing to buy oil at any human price, the government may be tempted to continue to rule by force. ONGC Videsh and India de facto support the hawks inside Sudan's military regime; people who loath the defining features of the Indian nation: the principles of secularism, social justice and the equality of all 
before law.