'Broken Hope' in Darfur
UNITED NATIONS — “Darfur is a story of broken hope,” lamented UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon: in an address before Washington’s Center for Strategic and International Studies. Conceding that “We must work to end the violence and scorched-earth policies adopted by various parties, including militias, as well as the bombings which are still a terrifying feature of life in Darfur,” Ban stressed that he will make solving the Darfur issue his priority for the United Nations.
The percolating Darfur crisis in western Sudan has thus assumed front and center early in the tenure of Ban Ki-moon who has inherited a plethora of political, social and humanitarian problems primarily in Africa. Darfur holds the classic elements of a gruesome global tragedy. Since Sudan’s government started the ethnic cleansing of its own people in 2003, at least 200,000 have died and more than two million have become displaced. Yet despite the collective angst and hand wringing of the international community, the Islamic rulers in Khartoum have effectively blocked serious UN peacekeeping efforts to stem the violence.
UN aid agencies working in the beleaguered region have themselves become the target of attacks by regime sponsored Arab militias. A scathing report by aid agencies warned that they may not be able to “hold the line” against attacks and the blocking of “safe humanitarian access.” The document added, “In the last six months alone, more than 250,000 people have been displaced by fighting, many of them fleeing for the second or third time.” Many people have been driven into neighboring Chad, expanding the crisis.
Khartoum’s regime is pursuing its policy the old fashioned way; “Villages have been burnt, looted and arbitrarily bombed and crops and livestock destroyed. Sexual violence against women is a occurring at alarming rates. This situation is unacceptable.”
I could not agree more but what is to be realistically done? We are reminded of Sudan’s “sovereignty” which of course means that the thug regime in Khartoum must first agree to allowing the UN peacekeeping forces into Darfur. Every time this issue has come before the UN Security Council over the past few years, Khartoum could count on the political backing of Beijing, Moscow and sundry Islamic states.
Back in September there was another breathless countdown, as the current undermanned African Union peacekeeping force in the region was on the verge of pulling out. While the UN stopped the clock on the departure with a creative piece of diplomacy allowing for a “heavy package” international force to reinforce the African Union, little has since transpired on the ground. In other words the UN blue helmets would not actually enter Sudan but in fact would reinforce the already in place African Union forces. So far only Bangladesh has signed up for this murky mission.
Let the West cry for Darfur, let George Clooney make his righteous appeals for justice, and let the humanitarian agencies keep working on the symptoms. BUT when it comes to solving the root problem, inserting militarily robust UN protection forces into Darfur, it’s back to timidity.
Still many people who demand a precipitous withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq are among the first to then support massive American military involvement in a civil conflict in a remote region of Islamic Sudan.
Let’s have a little geography; Sudan is Africa’s largest country with the forsaken Darfur region itself bigger than France! Dafur is arid, remote and has few roads and would thus pose a logistical nightmare. Now consider that Sudan is primarily Islamic (the Christians the south have long been persecuted) and the fight in Darfur is between Muslim ethnic factions The black nomadic farmers are being run off their land by their fellow Muslim Arab militia the Janjaweed.
Most people assume that Sudan remains a remote dictatorship with little international clout. But when you consider that the People’s Republic of China maintains close commercial relations with Sudan and is a major purchaser of the country’s petroleum, and weapons supplier to its military, it become crystal clear why Khartoum can count on Beijing’s veto in the Security Council!
In a somewhat similar case, recently both China and Russia used a rare double veto in the Security Council to stop American and European efforts to promote human rights in Burma. Here too one would assume that the socialist military regime in that South Asian land would not exactly have the global clout to counter international pressure.
Ban Ki-moon will now visit the African Union Summit in Addis Ababa Ethiopia to make a fresh initiative for peace in Darfur and Somalia. Secretary General Ban beseeches, “the Life-saving humanitarian work must be allowed to resume and civil society in Darfur must have a voice in the peace process.” But will the Khartoum rulers cooperate?
|
