This is a guest post by Michelle Sieff, Assistant Director of the American Jewish Committee’s Africa Institute.

Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir has announced a unilateral ceasefire in Darfur, promising to disarm pro-government janjaweed militias that have killed and displaced hundreds of thousands of civilians. The pronouncements were a result of the Sudan People’s Initiative, which brought together government, political opposition parties and civil society - but not the rebel groups - to brainstorm solutions to the crisis.

The rebel groups have dismissed the ceasefire announcement. IRIN reports that one of the most powerful rebel groups, the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), said it would not agree to a ceasefire without a framework of agreement, declaration of principles and a timeframe for ceasefire. Abdulwahid Elnur, the exiled leader of another rebel group, the Sudan Liberation Movement, told AP that “We need action not words from them…It’s not a matter of the ceasefire, it’s a matter of stopping the genocide … We don’t trust these people.”

The critical question is will Bashir’s ceasefire announcement improve the situation on the ground in Darfur? Darfur advocacy groups responded with wary skepticism. Jerry Fowler, president of the Save Darfur coalition, said in a statement that history clearly shows us that al-Bashir’s promises must be “presumed empty” unless proven otherwise.

Save Darfur contends that Bashir is scrambling to make peace gestures in order to avoid indictment by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for genocide and war crimes. “With their latest batch of hollow proposals and promises, Khartoum’s smoke and mirrors show it is in overdrive trying to suspend the ICC case against President al-Bashir,” said Fowler.

In July, ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo requested an arrest warrant for Bashir on ten counts of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. But the UN Security Council could suspend legal proceedings for a year and give the Sudanese government time to make concrete progress towards peace.

Mediators to the conflict greeted Bashir’s announcement with cautious optimism. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon welcomed the announcement, but stressed that a successful ceasefire depends on the actions of all combatants. The joint United Nations-African Union peacekeeping mission in Darfur (known as UNAMID) adopted a similar tone, saying that this ceasefire “could signal the start of a new phase in the search for a just and lasting peace in Darfur.”

One of the more optimistic responses was issued by Darfur expert Alex de Waal, on his informative blog Making Sense of Darfur. He opined: “The most important reality today is that the denial and self-imposed political paralysis that have marked the Sudanese political establishment’s approach to Darfur have been decisively overcome. Sudanese leaders are back at doing what they do best-talking through their issues. There’s a glimmer of hope.”

De Waal correctly argues that even if Bashir is now motivated by his desire to avoid an ICC indictment, his actions might still be meaningful. Some Darfur advocacy groups that support Bashir’s indictment have already made the same argument. In an important briefing paper released in September, the Enough project argued that to indict Bashir would not only be a moral action, but would provide the leverage to induce Bashir to change his behavior on the ground. It is possible that Bashir’s announcement - coming at a moment when Bashir and his inner circle have displayed their preoccupation with the ICC charges - is evidence that Ocampo’s request has created a new opening for peace.

Without engaging in political futurology, we do know that several steps must be taken in order to translate Bashir’s promise into greater security for civilians in Darfur. First, in order to disarm the janjaweed militias, there will have to be increased monitoring and verification. The responsibility for doing this falls on UNAMID, and as De Waal notes, the first test of Bashir’s good faith will be his willingness to allow an intrusive and more robust monitoring role for UNAMID.

Second, the larger political issues, such as the role of Darfurians in the national government, must be addressed. This will require the creation of a negotiation platform that brings in all of Darfur’s rebel groups, especially those that did not sign the 2006 failed peace agreement.

The next three months will be critical. The ICC is all but certain to indict Bashir. How will Bashir - who has a history of portraying Darfur and other challenges to his regime as Zionist plots - react when the ICC indicts him? If he is indicted, furious lobbying of the Security Council to suspend legal proceedings will continue. How will the Security Council respond?

Add to this the uncertainty over America’s Darfur policy created by the transition to the Obama Administration. It’s likely to be a tougher policy, but how tough? Stay tuned.