Month: August 2006

The United Nations has passed a resolution to send peacekeeping troops — amounting to 20,500 men — to the devastated Darfur region of western Sudan. Twelve Security Council members voted in favor of the resolution, while China, Russia and Qatar abstained from the vote, and Sudan boycotted the session entirely.

Even though activists and human rights groups have been pleading with the United Nations or NATO to intervene in the on-going violence, there is little cause to celebrate this resolution, as it requires the cooperation of the Sudan government. Khartoum has continuously resisted outside efforts of intervention.

Meanwhile, the situation on the ground continues to deteriorate as the African Union is reporting that they have insufficient funds to pay the 7,000 troops currently in place. As they attempt to patrol an area roughly the size of France, rebel groups continue to kill aid workers as the violence begins to encroach on Chad and the Central African Republic.

As Kingsley Amaning, the UN representative in Chad stated:

[The Darfur conflict] is creating armed groups that are destabilising entire populations in the east, and now it is moving towards the south, towards Central Africa.

[Ongoing attacks] may continue to weaken government institutions and apparatus and certainly make the life of ordinary citizens almost impossible, creating vulnerability all round.

With the restrictions placed on the United Nations resolution, it’s doubtful that any progress will be seen in the near future.

Not surprisingly, the Sudanese government has rejected the latest UN proposal for peacekeeping forces. Representatives issued a harsh warning to the sponsors of this resolution — the United States and Britain — asserting that it was an attempt at re-colonization.

“The draft resolution is worse than previous ones as it is an attempt to impose complete tutelage on the Sudan,” National Congress Party chairperson Ghazi Salah Eldin Atabani was quoted as saying after a meeting on Wednesday.

“Any state that sponsors this draft resolution will be regarded as assuming a hostile attitude against the Sudan,” said the official, describing the draft as “unacceptable and not negotiable under any sort of pressure”.

Meanwhile, the International Rescue Committee (IRC) has warned that 200 of the refugees living in camps have been raped in the last five weeks.

In Kalma – Darfur’s biggest camp for internally displaced people – there used to be two to three reports of sexual violence a month, the IRC says.

But in the past five weeks, the figures has spiralled to 200 women and young girls, some as young as 13.

It is yet further evidence, relief workers say, that security is worsening in one of the most troubled regions of the world.

There has also been an escalation of attacks against humanitarian aid workers, some of whom have had to cease operations.

At the beginning of August, it was reported that at least seven humanitarian workers had been slain in the region after the African Union peacekeeping force was reduced because of a lack of funding. The Sudanese government continues to say that all of these reports of violence are old, and that there’s no longer bloodshed happening in Darfur.

John Edwards’ One America Committee has started their own petition to urge the Bush Administration to take action for Darfur. Even though this is not unlike so many other petitions circulating out there, John Edwards probably has a bit more “Washington clout” than most of us.

This, of course, is rather serendipitous coming just three days after I commented — I’d be surprised to find a candidate speaking out against our lack of intervention in past genocides or calling for new initiatives in handling these egregious acts of violence… It’s always good to see someone in politics paying attention.

I recently weighed in on the problems in Darfur in the local fishwrap:

I found Nat Hentoff’s recent column on the crisis in Darfur particularly timely. As he points out, “the world was silent” when Polish Jews were murdered during the Kielce massacre, and now we’re silent as the Sudanese government (backing militia forces) renews its attack on Darfur’s people, even after signing a May 2006 cease-fire agreement.

Worse still, Congress continues to play politics with the issue, while the African Union, the only peacekeepers on the ground, prepares to pull out of the region this fall. Even though the existing forces have been too few in number to adequately curb the violence, and the death toll has continued to climb, the U.S. and the UN continue to sit complacently and watch.

Like Hentoff, I’d be surprised to find a candidate speaking out against our lack of intervention in past genocides or calling for new initiatives in handling these egregious acts of violence. All of which begs the question — when will we finally stand up and defend those who can’t defend themselves?

I would provide a bit of editorial, but that seems rather redundant, don’t you think?