For two years, since 1999, Dr Eric Reeves, an English teacher
at Smith College in Massachusetts, has been active in seeking
to disrupt the Sudanese oil project, focusing particularly
upon Western involvement in that industry. A specific target
of his has been the only Western company involved, Talisman
Energy of Canada: Reeves is seeking to force the company
to leave Sudan. In the course of this campaign Dr Reeves
has written dozens of articles making serious allegations
about events within Sudan, and especially the Sudanese oil
industry. On examination many of these claims have fallen
apart at the seams, in some instances appearing to be nothing
more than the disinformation so often associated with war,
and particularly civil war. This clearly reflects on his
research skills, and his reputation therefore as an academic.
Dr Reeves' obvious shortcomings also reflect badly on the
reputation of Smith College, an institution previously noted
for the high caliber of its staff, research and teaching.
Of even more concern perhaps has been the abusiveness and
ungentlemanly coarseness he has shown in responding to measured
criticisms of his activity. These also reflect badly on
Smith College, particularly as he has used Smith College
as an address and they have been published by Smith College's
own email facilities.
Dr Reeves' arrogance is immediately apparent. Sudan is one
of the poorest countries in the developing world, a country
wracked with famine, disease and civil conflict. Sudan's
oil revenues, which are closely monitored by the IMF, offer
a way out of all three of these difficulties. Yet Dr Reeves,
a well-fed, middle-class white American believes that the
black and brown people of Sudan should not be able to benefit
from their own natural resources, and that their oil industry
should be smothered, inaccurately claiming its revenues
are paying for the war. In so doing he has single-handedly
managed to revive the image of the "Ugly American" within
the developing world. (1) His long distance commentaries,
and the demands he makes within them, are in stark contrast
to the reality of events and attitudes within Sudan and
the region.
Firstly, his main allegation, that the Sudanese government
has displaced all the population around the oil fields,
"orchestrating a ferocious scorched-earth policy in the
area of the oil fields and pipelines" (2) and that "[h]uge
swaths of land around the oil fields and pipelines are presently
cleared of all human life and sustenance" (3) has been comprehensively
refuted by a detailed analysis of satellite pictures taken
over a number of years of the very areas of Sudan about
which Dr Reeves makes his assertions. Presumably at least
in part in response to these claims, Talisman Energy commissioned
a leading British satellite imagery analysis company, Kalagate
Imagery Bureau, to study a series of satellite photographs
taken of oil concession areas in Sudan. The images analysed
by the Kalagate Imagery Bureau included military and civilian
satellite images collected over several years. Ground resolution
in the images varied between about three feet and 10 feet.
(4) The images were analysed by Geoffrey Oxlee, a former
head of the United Kingdom Joint Air Reconnaissance Intelligence
Centre and Britain's leading expert in the field. (5) Mr
Oxlee stated: "there is no evidence of appreciable human
migration from any of the seven sites examined." (6) On
the contrary, he further stated that analysis revealed that
"once the sites were developed, then people did come into
the area, and in fact it looked as if people developed around
the oil sites rather than going away from it." (7) He further
stated that he is prepared to stand by his conclusions in
court, if needed. It is inconceivable that massive "scorched
earth" displacement on the scale repeatedly claimed by Reeves
would not have been immediately noticeable in the satellite
pictures studied. Responding to Dr Reeves' somewhat lame
suggestions that the images may have been tampered with,
Mr Oxlee stated that the satellite photographs examined
"are genuine pictures. Having looked at hundreds of thousands
of satellite pictures, there's no way these pictures have
been doctored. Absolutely none. We check these things out."
(8)
Secondly, Dr Reeves' claims that oil revenues are buying
weapons spending has been contradicted by, amongst others,
the British government, which has publicly stated that they
did not "have any evidence of such expenditure". (9)
In his attempts to undermine the Sudanese oil industry,
and particularly to force the withdrawal of the Canadian
company, Dr Reeves is demonstrably out of step with opposition
opinion within Sudan itself. In June 2001, for example,
The Washington Post reported in an article entitled 'Activists
in Sudan Fear Loss of Western Oil Firms' Influence' that
human rights activists within Sudan "emphasize that as long
as the companies involved are Western, their concerns about
corporate citizenship provide valuable leverage to ...many
critics. Talisman Energy, the Canadian firm...has quietly
pressed human rights concerns on a Sudanese government over
which the West has little other influence, the opposition
figures say." The paper quoted key Sudanese human rights
and opposition activist Ghazi Suleiman: "If Talisman were
to pull out of Sudan, this doesn't mean the oil business
will come to an end. Talisman will be replaced by some company".
Suleiman said that any replacement company will be less
interested than Talisman in the Sudanese people. The Washington
Post also reported that Suleiman credited Talisman's presence
with some of the freedoms now enjoyed by opposition parties
in Sudan. Another voice on the issue has been that of Alfred
Taban, himself from southern Sudan. Taban, the publisher
of Sudan's only independent English language newspaper,
stated that Talisman has acknowledged some of the difficulties
the oil project has brought with it: "The way forward is
not to take away companies that admit some of this is going
on and have been working to try to end some of that abuse."
(10) It should be noted that both Suleiman and Taban have
been held in prison for periods of time, and are infinitely
closer to the reality of events within Sudan than Dr Reeves
will ever be, writing as he does from a comfortable office
thousands of miles away.
Dr Reeves' demands also bring him into direct conflict with
the other countries within the Horn of Africa region. Although
he has never visited Sudan, his arrogance apparently leads
him to believe that he knows not only what is in the best
interests of the Sudanese people, but that he also knows
what is in the best interests of peoples of the Horn of
Africa. His campaign to stop Sudanese oil production would
not only destabilise Sudan economically but also several
of its neighbours. Ethiopia and Kenya are but two examples.
Sudan is to provide Ethiopia with 85 percent of its oil
requirements, saving the weak Ethiopian economy millions
of dollars which would otherwise have been paid for imports
from outside Africa. Ethiopia intends to build a fuel depot
inside Sudan to ensure a steady supply of oil and kerosene
by road. (11) Ethiopia, recovering from its devastating
war with Eritrea, has built up ever closer economic links
with Sudan. (12) Kenya, is also set to import
crude oil from Sudan. (13)
Several measured, scholarly criticisms of Dr Reeves' approach,
methodology and especially the sources he has relied upon
for his claims have been published and republished. (14)
Quite simply, anyone examining Reeves' material on Sudan
hoping to find the calibre of work one would expect from
a professor of English at a reputable institution such as
Smith College will be disappointed. It is the standard of
work one would expect from a naive and excitable undergraduate.
Dr Reeves' choice of sources has been particularly poor.
Far from demonstrating the objectivity, discernment and
research skills one would have expected from a Smith College
professor, he has embraced very questionable sources. He
has, for example, unreservedly relied upon claims made by
one side to the Sudanese conflict, namely, the Sudan People's
Liberation Army (SPLA). The New York Times, a vigorous critic
of the Sudanese government, has said of the SPLA that they
"have behaved like an
occupying army, killing, raping and pillaging." (15) The
New York Times has also described the SPLA leader John Garang
as one of Sudan's "pre-eminent war criminals". (16) It would
be akin to unreservedly relying on Slobodan Milosevic as
the source on events in Yugoslavia and Kosovo. With regard
to the SPLA's reliability as a source of information, Dr
Peter Nyaba, a SPLA national executive council member, has
described the SPLA's "sub-culture of lies, misinformation,
cheap propaganda and exhibitionism" vividly: "Much of what
filtered out of the SPLM/A propaganda machinery...was about
90% disinformation or things concerned with the military
combat, mainly news about the fighting which were always
efficaciously exaggerated." (17)
Dr Reeves has also on several occasions cited South African
Derek Hammond as one of his sources on events in Sudan.
(18) Hammond heads the South African-based 'Faith-in-Action'
organisation, and can only but be described as a Christian
fundamentalist Islamophobe. At one stage his website overtly
championed the "Christian" fight against "the evil of Islam",
referring to the "anti-Christian religion of Islam." (19)
And. more recently, in one of his publications Dr Reeves
posted material published by a British magazine calling
itself Searchlight. He chose to refer to Searchlight as
a "British investigative publication". A British Magistrate
in a court of law preferred to describe Searchlight as "scurrilous
and disreputable" and denounced its attempts to incite "racial
violence", "disorder and public violence". (20)
Dr Reeves' questionable choice of sources was also demonstrated
in his seeming acceptance of the outlandish London Sunday
Telegraph newspaper story that China was deploying 700,000
soldiers to Sudan to protect Chinese interests in the Sudanese
oil project. (21) Reeves called it an "explosive report"
stating "it is highly doubtful that the report comes from
thin air, or that important sources are not behind it."
(22) When asked about this allegation, however, the British
government stated that "We have no evidence of the presence
of any Chinese soldiers in Sudan, let alone the figure of
700,000 alleged in one press report". (23) Even the Clinton
Administration, as hostile as it was to the Sudanese authorities,
dismissed the claims, stating that even "the figure of tens
of thousands of troops is just not credible based on information
available to us". (24) Dr Reeves' judgement with regard
to sources was once again clear for all to see. These above
cited are just a few of the questionable sources upon which
Dr Reeves has based his campaign which has in turn misled
others.
Dr Reeves' responses to measured and doubtlessly sincere
critiques of his claims on Sudan have been unscholarly to
say the least. In April 2001, Sven Bankel, a 60 year-old
Swedish IT consultant, publicly queried some of Reeves'
statements. (25) In an astonishingly boorish response, entitled
A Reply from Eric Reeves to a Very Foolish and Nasty Man,
Sven Bankel, Reeves called Mr Bankel an "ugly soul" and
stated "I must say I smell the odor of the distinctly humanly
inept". (26) He also said that Mr Bankel's criticisms were
"so obtuse, so illogical, so ignorant" and referred to Mr
Bankel as "very foolish... exceptionally foolish and ill-informed",
also describing him as a "befuddled Swede". Reeves sought
to dismiss Mr Bankel's concerns about his claims as a "fatuous
and mindlessly tendentious bit of mental drool". Perhaps
even more boorish was Reeves' mocking of Mr Bankel's use
of English. He stated that Mr Bankel's English was "execrable",
that he had "a painfully difficult time with English punctuation
rules", and that his English rose "only occasionally to
the status of the fully serviceable". Reeves did concede
that English was not Mr Bankel's native language but was
"simply the one he has chosen to butcher". For someone teaching
at a college such as Smith Reeves shows remarkably little
finesse or polish. This coarseness has sadly been all too
typical. Dr Reeves' vulgar behaviour also extends to referring
to other scholarly criticisms of his research skills and
methodology as "farts in the wind". (27) All in all it is
hard to imagine more ungentlemanly and unacademic behaviour
or a clearer example
of bad manners, all using the Smith College address and
published via ereeves@smith.edu
, the Smith College email facility.
It is clear that Smith College has already shown some unease
with criticisms of Dr Reeves' Sudan activity. In February
2001, for example, the college chose to block all European-Sudanese
Public Affairs Council queries about, or critiques of, his
work from reaching Dr Reeves and others at the college.
Smith College's commitment to free speech is therefore in
some question. Is Smith College also going to try and cover
up Mr Reeves' abusive attitude towards foreigners?
It can safely be said that Dr Reeves is not the best product
of the American educational system. His work on Sudan has
been remarkably unscholarly. There is much, however, that
can be forgiven in life. Weak research and arrogance (never
a good combination) are to be found in academic life from
time to time. What is far less forgivable are bad manners.
Dr Reeves' boorishness and vulgarity reflect on himself,
his upbringing, his alma mater and very much, of course,
on Smith College's reputation as a very selective, elite
teacher of young ladies. There are several questions which
must be asked of Smith College, especially given the fact
that Mr Reeves continues to make extensive use both of Smith
College's email facilities and his office within the College.
* Does Smith College wish to continue to be associated with
Mr Reeves' poorly researched campaign on Sudan?
* Does Smith College wish to continue to associate itself
with the conceited view that well-fed white middle-class
people living in comfortable affluence know what is in the
best interests of underdeveloped countries in Africa?
* Is Smith College comfortable with the unscholarly approach
taken by Dr Reeves with regard to his Sudan "work" given
that the college continues to be closely identified with
his work, not least of which because he continues to use
the College's address and have free use of Smith College's
email facilities?
* Does Smith College agree with its facilities being used
to belittle foreigners because of their command of English,
or to articulate uncouth responses to measured scholarly
criticism of his stance?
Should Smith College not at the very least require that
Dr Reeves uses e-mail facilities of his own with which to
further his clearly questionable campaign and through which
to send his abusive and lewd comments?
Notes
1 See, The Return of the "Ugly American": Eric Reeves and
Sudan, The European-Sudanese Public Affairs Council, London,
November 2000.
2 'Investors Fuel Humanitarian Crisis in Sudan', The Catholic
New Times, Toronto, 31 October 1999.
3 Eric Reeves, 'Silence on Sudan', The Chicago Tribune,
29 July 1999.
4 'Talisman Fights Back on Sudan Displacement Claims Releases
Aerial Images', The Financial Post, Toronto, 19 April 2001.
5 It should be noted that Mr Oxlee retired from the Royal
Air Force with the rank of Group Captain (in American terms
a full Colonel). He has 45 years experience as an analyst
and is the author of Aerospace Reconnaissance, (published
by Brasseys in 1997). Mr Oxlee is a member of the Royal
Aeronautical Society and the Institute of Expert Witnesses.
He lectured at the United Kingdom School of Photographic
Interpretation for six years.
6 'Talisman Energy Says Study Disproves Sudan Allegations',
Dow Jones Newswire, 18 April 2001.
7 'Talisman Fights Back on Sudan Displacement Claims Releases
Aerial Images', The Financial Post, Toronto, 19 April 2001.
8 'Talisman Fights Back on Sudan Displacement Claims Releases
Aerial Images', The Financial Post, Toronto, 19 April 2001.
9 House of Lords Official Record, Written Answer, 22 March
2000, column WA28; also see Written Answers on 11 January
2000 and 23 March 2000.
10 'Activists in Sudan Fear Loss of Western Oil Firms' Influence',
The Washington Post, 24 June 2001.
11 'Sudan Becomes Key Oil Provider', United Nations Integrated
Regional Information Network, 29 June 2001. Also see 'Ethiopian-Sudanese
Oil Cooperation', News Article by ArabicNews.com on 24 June
2001, and 'Ethiopia to Buy Fuel from Sudan', The Addis Tribune,
23 February 2001.
12 See, for example, 'Ethiopia Wants Economic Ties with
Sudan Strengthened', News Article by the Panafrican News
Agency on 28 February 2001.
13 'Kenya to Import Oil from Sudan', News Article by Xinhua
News Agency on 5 July 2001.
14 See, for example, Eric Reeves' "Reporting Credibility"
on Sudan Devastated by Reuters Report, European-Sudanese
Public Affairs Council, London, 16 February 2001; Eric Reeves,
The World Food Programme and Displacement, European-Sudanese
Public Affairs Council, London, 23 February 2001; Allegations
of Oil Development Displacement Assessed Against Independent
Sources, European-Sudanese Public Affairs Council, London,
March 2001; Eric Reeves' Credibility on Sudan Further Damaged
by British Satellite Picture Analysis of Sudanese Oil Fields,
Media Monitors Network, May 2001; Eric Reeves Against Africa,
Media Monitors Network, May 2001; Eric Reeves, Sudan, Displacement
and Double Standards, European-Sudanese Public Affairs Council,
London, 15 June 2001
15 'Misguided Relief to Sudan', Editorial, The New York
Times, 6 December, 1999.
16 'Misguided Relief to Sudan', Editorial, The New York
Times, 6 December, 1999.
17 Peter Nyaba, The Politics of Liberation in South Sudan:
An Insider's View, Fountain Publishers, Kampala, 1997.
18 Eric Reeves, 'An Up-Dated Report on the Government of
Sudan Attack on the Elementary School in Upper Kaoda', 25
February 2000.
19 'African Christian Faith in Action',
http://www.liaafrica.org . Hammond's exaggerations are
obvious: he also claimed that "Christians make up...over
80% of Southern Sudan." (This figure should be compared
with the figures of 10-15 percent carried in official American
government studies, Economist Intelligence Unit briefings
or Human Rights Watch material).
20 The Birmingham Evening Mail, England, 31 December 1976.
21 'China Puts "700,000 Troops" on Sudan Alert', The Sunday
Telegraph, London, 26 August 2000.
22 Eric Reeves, 'China "Flexing Its Muscle" in Sudan: Its
time for SEMA!', Smith College, 30 August 2000.
23 House of Lords Hansard, Written Parliamentary Answer,
5 March 2001, column WA 10.
24 'U.S.: Reports of China's Role in Sudanese War Are Overstated',
News Article by UPI on 29 August 2000.
25 Sven Bankel, Christian Aid and the Eighth Commandment,
April 2001.
26 Eric Reeves, A Reply from Eric Reeves to a Very Foolish
and Nasty Man, Sven Bankel, Smith College, 10 May 2001,
available at
http://freeworldnow.com/ER%205-10-2001.html
27 Such was his e-mailed response to Another Reeves' 'Own
Goal': Dr David Hoile Responds to Dr Eric Reeves, The European-Sudanese
Public
Affairs Council, London, 22 June 2001.