The UN and Darfur: Watching, but still waiting

[Caano Geel]

The UN and Darfur

 

Watching, but still waiting

Mar 16th 2007 | NEW YORK

From Economist.com

 

Darfur continues to bleed while outsiders, including a UN human rights body, look on

 

AT A summit in 2005, all the member countries of the United Nations agreed on a principle of a “responsibility to protect” civilians from atrocities. The fine idea suggested that if a state would not protect its own, outsiders must step in, with force if necessary. That same UN summit created a new Human Rights Council which would replace a discredited predecessor, and name and shame abusers of human rights. In May 2006, Sudanese leaders signed a peace deal with some rebels in Darfur, to halt the violence, and later in the year the UN agreed with Sudan to send peacekeepers to monitor the deal.

 

These facts could give the impression that the world in general, or the UN in particular, has grown serious about putting an end to murder and repression in Darfur, in western Sudan. Yet almost nothing has changed there, except for the worse. International aid agencies reckon that the humanitarian situation has deteriorated markedly since last year’s partial peace deal. (Only one big Darfuri faction has signed on, and may now be helping the Sudanese government carry out its crimes.) The Sudanese government continues to refuse the actual deployment of the UN force. Rape and murder remain commonplace, along with the slow starvation of many more victims.

 

This week, the newish Human Rights Council finally received a strongly worded report on Darfur, documenting abuses recounted by refugees (the mission was denied entry to Sudan). Yet the council’s 47-country members are expected to reject the report, largely with the help of votes of the Arab and Muslim states. This will leave the council—after its fourth full session, in a year of operation—having condemned the human-rights record of just one state: Israel. Ban Ki-moon, the UN’s secretary-general, has suggested that “the world is watching” to see if it will live up to its commitments. If there is no resolution on Darfur by the close of session on March 30th, it would be right to conclude that the new body is an utter sham.

 

A vastly more important bit of the UN, the Security Council, could do more than just condemn Sudan; it has the power to authorise sanctions, even, ultimately, the use of military force. Alas, China continues to resist any resolution that would apply real pressure, so the August 2006 resolution, authorising a mixed UN/African Union (AU) force for Darfur, is blithely ignored in Khartoum. China is not only prickly about sovereignty, it also imports a lot of oil from Sudan. Mr Ban described “growing frustration” among Security Council members, but frustration plus a Chinese veto equals no action.

 

Darfur-watchers are calling on states to act in smaller groupings if the UN cannot. The International Crisis Group (ICG), an NGO, has said that the United States, AU, European Union and other should take measures to squeeze the murderous janjaweed militias and their guardians and enablers in Khartoum. These would include an asset freeze and travel ban on leaders of Sudan’s ruling party, the National Congress Party, and sanctions on Sudan’s oil exports.

 

Khartoum has become something of a boom-town of late, thanks to high oil prices. In other words, such a squeeze might actually cause pain. But would it save lives? It is not clear that the truculent regime of Omar al-Bashir will be persuaded easily by targeted sanctions from rich countries of Europe and America, which they would surely dismiss as imperialist meddling. As for the neighbourhood, African countries remain divided between a desire to take responsibility to stop bloodshed and the desire to protect sovereign rulers from outside pressure.

 

Article background

 

source

[ansaar17]

Darfur is a tribal war, there is no genocide.

 

The darfurians want to secede from sudan, and sudan won't let them do it for they have oil.

[Caano Geel]

so should they kill them in the mean time...

[Taliban]

Originally posted by abu ansaar17:

Darfur is a tribal war, there is no genocide.

 

The darfurians want to secede from sudan, and sudan won't let them do it for they have oil.

That's true. Some Darfurians have been brainwashed by the West to fight and seek secession. This is about oil, nothing to do with genocide. Energy resources are dwindling, plus the West wants to profit from the oil. There's true genocide in Congo where 4 million of its citizens perished. Most of them were Christians, yet, the UN, US, Europe and others could care less, because there's no oil there.

[Fabregas]

Darfurians do not want to seccede fromt the West. But they might want to after this nightmare. All they wanted was more rights for their part of Sudan. There was lack of infrastructure and development in that region. Even thought there is oil in their part, the northerners have been developing their little part nicely.There was even a small insurgency in Eastern Sudan, which has know been sorted out. The people who have secceded from Sudan are the Southerners. And there is deep underlying racism in Sudan.....You can't blame everything one the West you know..........

[Taliban]

Originally posted by Geel_Jire12:

But they might want to after this nightmare.

There's no nightmare in Darfur; it's minor problems that have been magnified by the West. There's a nightmare in Congo, but the West isn't interested in solving it because there are no profits there.

[Fabregas]

Thousands of people killed, raped and made refugees, am sure they don't see it as minor problems.

[Kashafa]

There's no nightmare in Darfur; it's minor problems that have been magnified by the West.

I gotta call you out on that one, akh. Atrocity after atrocity has been committed by the Sudanese goverment(who aren't applying Islamic law nor care for it's principles, these are naked army men) and it's affiliates against unarmed civillians, predominately women and children. Mass rape, for example. Unspeakable horrors have and are happening in Darfur. Let's not belittle it just to stick one to the West.

 

Iraq, another example where many of us are in denial and blame the West. Fact of the mattter is, there are misguided Sunnis who have xalaal'ised the blood of civillians(why ? cuz they happen to be Shiites). Of course, we don't want to acknowledge this ugly fact so we saÿ "Well, it's probably the CIA/Jews/(insert any group you hate) that are behind the killing"

 

Won't fly, akh. There are some sick-minded killers and rapists out there who claim to share our faith. I'd be happy if masterminds of the Darfur killing campaign were tried and hung from the highest tree, even at the hands of the West.

[Caano Geel]

Talib,

The congo 'affair' has been the most diabolical travesty against humanity in recent times, but it has come to an end and if not fully has waned down significantly, to such an extend that elections have been held and Joseph Kabila is now in power. This at least means that there isnt the free for all. The days were troops from Zimbabwe, Sudan, Uganda, Angola, Rwanda, Burundi Namibia, Chad were slaughtering each other but mainly the local people are long gone. And its a disgrace on the conciousness of all that the situation was allowed to get were it got to.

 

Now the Darfur is very different, its happening now and the issue is that we should do something now rather than dismay over the tragedy when the otherwise inevitable has happened and we are comparing it to the congo

[Taliban]

Originally posted by Caano Geel:

The congo 'affair' has been the most diabolical travesty against humanity in recent times, but it has come to an end and if not fully has waned down significantly, to such an extend that elections have been held and Joseph Kabila is now in power. This at least means that there isnt the free for all. The days were troops from Zimbabwe, Sudan, Uganda, Angola, Rwanda, Burundi Namibia, Chad were slaughtering each other but mainly the local people are long gone. And its a disgrace on the conciousness of all that the situation was allowed to get were it got to.

 

Now the Darfur is very different, its happening now and the issue is that we should do something now rather than dismay over the tragedy when the otherwise inevitable has happened and we are comparing it to the congo

Congo isn't yet stabilized; it could ignite with full intensity at anytime, plus there are still atrocities such as rape, torture, killing, iwm. Congo is just one example I have mentioned where the West wouldn't get involved because there are no profits. Another example is Rwanda; where about a million of its citizens were let to be bludgeoned to death. The West wasn't interested to rescue Rwandans even though most of them are Christians, because there's no oil or profits.

 

With regard to the allegations in Sudan; who or what agencies are reporting it? The UN, the US, the EU, iwm? The UN lost whatever little credibility & integrity it had; didn't it countless times report outright lies and unfounded reports like the one alleging 720 ICU mujahideens helped Hezbollah win its last war against Israel? As to the credibility & integrity of the US and EU; it can't be trusted, especially where it concerns Muslims or Muslim countries. Didn't the US allege Iraq possessed WMDs? Didn't the UK allege Iraq can carry out a nuclear attack in 45 minutes? As a result of the lies of the US and its allies, it led to the massacre of more than 600,000 Iraqis.

 

Recently, Sudan begun exporting oil. It's Chinese, Malaysian and other non-Western companies that are developing Sudan's oil wells and infrastructures. That's where the West comes, creating hoax problems and magnifying it, brainwashing certain Darfurians and arming them, iwm.

 

I know many Sudanis and trust what they report about their country. I would never trust the West where it concerns Muslims or Muslim countries, because the West only cares about oil, dollars, profits, iwm.

 

We have to honestly ask ourselves a question. The West doesn't care about African Christians losing their lives; are we supposed to believe they care about African Muslims?

[roobleh]

The Darfurians have a valid claim on their land where the government-backed Janjaweeds are butchering the black Muslims. This merciless genocide claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of Darfurians and more than two million have been rendered homeless.

 

The silence and indifference of the Islamic world is against the compassion shown by our Prophet (peace be upon him).

[Taliban]

Originally posted by Roobleh:

This merciless genocide claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of Darfurians and more than two million have been rendered homeless.

That's what the UN, US, EU or the West alleges. What each alleges cannot be trusted.

[Caano Geel]

I got to run Talib, but a couple of points:

 

1. The congo is the most natural resource rich country in africa - everything from timber, uranium, copper, gold and diamonds ... are found, its why the Belgian King Leopard faught so hard for, its also why so many parties were fighting over it.. So, though resources have a huge influence i dont think their lack of was the determinant factor in teh congo.

 

2. A sizeable factor if Dafur in muslim so i don't think its a specifically muslim thing

 

3. The arab silence has always had more to do with regional power games than justice

[Taliban]

Originally posted by Caano Geel:

1. The congo is the most natural resource rich country in africa - everything from timber, uranium, copper, gold and diamonds ...

However, those aren't energy resources.

 

2. A sizeable factor if Dafur in muslim so i don't think its a specifically muslim thing

Nearly everyone in Darfur is Muslim.

 

3. The arab silence has always had more to do with regional power games than justice

Arab governments wield little influence on regional power games, because each is based on secularism. Secularism makes each Muslim country weak.

[Caano Geel]

Walaal,

you cant bring everything down to secularism. Look at theocratic, need we remind you of the behaviour of the people you have named u're self after [actually you probably think they were great don't you] ..

 

wrt the congo, oil is not everything. Resources such as copper, cobalt, coltan and uranium are immensely valuable, rare and widely sought

 

wrt the sudan, why do you say its 'minor' when millions are in refugee camps, what does it take to become major?