Sudan Crisis

[Donnervogel 0]

Too bad the U.N. Are only gonna impose 'sanctions' they should replace the government like they're doing in Iraq. A government that supports ethnic-genocide should be removed, right?

The UN doesn't do much in Iraq. And for sure they did not replace the government. It was the US. remember ;)

The UN is no military power. Offensive military action can only be taken by a nation/alliance under UN mandate. But the UN can't force the nations to do it.

[denoir 0]

Too bad the U.N. Are only gonna impose 'sanctions' they should replace the government like they're doing in Iraq. A government that supports ethnic-genocide should be removed, right?

Actually, the US blocked the use of the 'S' word ('sanctions') in the UN resolution. So it isn't looking very bright, but that's hardly a surprise when it comes to Africa. I don't see an intervention coming anytime soon.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Actually, the US blocked the use of the 'S' word ('sanctions') in the UN resolution. So it isn't looking very bright, but that's hardly a surprise when it comes to Africa. I don't see an intervention coming anytime soon.

No, the United States did not block it but deleted the word "sanctions" . It was in the original draft written by the US but was taking out because it might be "objectionable" to certain security members (i.e. China which calls the approved "watered down" resolution has not helpful and may further complicate the situation in Sudan.)

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/africa/07/31/unvote.sudan/index.html

[pandalefou 0]

why they do the war ?

it killing me (it's an expresion)

they have a lots of problems and they fight each others

[hellfish6 7]

The more people who pay attention to the fighting means the less people who pay attention to the other problems.

[BoweryBaker 0]

I think there should be more forms of government. More options to choose from. Democracy doesn't work in a day, a week, or even a month to a people who have been living under something else for years. There needs to be a pickup form of government where the leaders, entire government is set up on another land, then moved in and stays there forever to run things. Preset this and that already in place and then moved in. But only on destabilized countries such as the aforementioned Sudan or any country that can't support its population anymore.

[Balschoiw 0]

Rwandan soldiers arrive in Sudan

Quote[/b] ]Rwandan troops have arrived in Sudan to help protect African Union (AU) ceasefire monitors in the war-ravaged western region of Darfur.

"We welcome the 150 Rwandan soldiers," Sudanese Foreign Minister Mustafa Ismail told reporters.

He said 150 Nigerian soldiers would join the protection force this month.

The small AU team is overseeing a ceasefire between Khartoum and two rebel groups in Darfur, where fighting has claimed 50,000 lives.

Desert town

BBC correspondent Ishbel Matheson says there has been an upsurge of Sudanese refugees fleeing across the border into Chad on Sunday amid reports of renewed military activity in Sudan.

The United Nations refugee agency UNHCR said about 500 people crossed the border close to the Chadian village of Berak and further north in Bahai.

I´m afraid they won´t change much.

[MilitiaSniper 0]

Quote[/b] ]I'd like to see China get involved with boots on the ground. No, really - I mean it. They want to be a superpower and this is the perfect opportunity for them to get their feet wet in the international scene.

I agree. But fat chance for this.

Bottom line is, esspecially... for the U.S.A. No one wants another Mogadishu/Somali, "Black Hawk Down". You can't win a civil war if your outsider. (My opinion.)

These African countries have been having these internal conflicts for years. Other African countries can't interven. Because they are having the same problems.

If peacekeepers could bring the peace. Once they leave. Within 6 months they're at it again.

Peacekeepers need to go on the offensive. Not trying to be policemen. Eliminate these fire starters.

So what is the, "RIGHT" sollution? These African governments need to govern. And stop trying to line their pockets. Stop the internal corruption. Govern for the peoples best interest. And maybe..? These warlords won't have a leg to stand on.

Sincerely, MilitiaSniper

"OFF the WALL Team"

[SpongeBob 0]

Quote[/b] ]<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>UN scaling back Darfur food aid</span>

BBC

The UN World Food Programme (WFP) is scaling back its projects in northern Darfur in Sudan because of deteriorating security.

The WFP says 50,000 people will be affected by the suspension of aid.

The decision comes after two aid workers from Save the Children were killed on Sunday by a land mine.

An estimated 50,000 people have died in 20 months in Darfur, in what the UN says is the world's worst humanitarian crisis, and the US calls genocide.

Some 1.4 million have also been made homeless as a result of attacks by pro-government Arab militias called Janjaweed.

Fresh violence

The Janjaweed are accused of killing thousands of black African civilians and emptying villages as part of a campaign against rebels in Darfur.

The WFP recently said access to refugees was improving.

But on Tuesday the UN said a month of fresh violence had driven more than 200,000 people from their homes.

The growing insecurity was making distribution of aid to the displaced more difficult, it said.

Fear of attack

Aid agencies have also reported robberies and armed attacks on their convoys.

"Internally displaced people remain nervous and fearful of attack when they leave locations where they have gathered for shelter," the WFP said in a statement.

The group hopes to be getting food to 2m people a month by the end of the year, but it says deteriorating security is making that prospect less likely.

No WFP staff have yet been killed or injured in the violence, though some contracted drivers had been wounded by gunfire, the group said.

[BoweryBaker 0]

@MilitiaSniper: That's right. This is definitely one conflict we can stand to stay out of.

[theavonlady 2]

/bump

Interesting how no one thinks the latest new isn't worth discussing.

[red oct 2]

are you talking about the UN ruling that it wasn't genocide being commited in Sudan?

[hellfish6 7]

It's not worth discussing largely because, I think, Africa as a whole is rarely worth discussing. Genocide, starvation, corruption, ethnic tension, violence, peace talks that promise a lot but rarely deliver - what else is new?

I think people have come to expect things are always going to be like this in Africa (and have been like this for nearly 40 years) and that since there's little to do about it, there's little worth discussing.

It's collective cynicism, methinks.

[USSRsniper 0]

this what US should do..  tehy need help but not fight for OIL

[billybob2002 0]

this what US should do..  tehy need help but not fight for OIL  

HAHA...You know what happened to the last guy that said something about oil, USA and Sudan in the same sentence...HAHA

Quote[/b] ]It's not worth discussing largely because, I think, Africa as a whole is rarely worth discussing. Genocide, starvation, corruption, ethnic tension, violence, peace talks that promise a lot but rarely deliver - what else is new?

I think people have come to expect things are always going to be like this in Africa (and have been like this for nearly 40 years) and that since there's little to do about it, there's little worth discussing.

It's collective cynicism, methinks.

Yep and that is sad.

[Balschoiw 0]

Annan suggested though that the ones responsible should be taken to the ICJ. Right place for people like that.

[Homefry 0]

Annan suggested though that the ones responsible should be taken to the ICJ. Right place for people like that.

Lots of action being taken by the UN here.... I forgot why they were even an orginization anymore....

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Lots of action being taken by the UN here....

You seem to ignore that there are already UN troops in the region.

[theavonlady 2]

And the world turns.

Because of the article's pics, I cannot post a link here but it's from the NY Times. You don't need the pics. The description is sickening enough anyway.

Quote[/b] ]February 23, 2005

OP-ED COLUMNIST

The Secret Genocide Archive

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

hotos don't normally appear on this page. But it's time for all of us to look squarely at the victims of our indifference.

These are just four photos in a secret archive of thousands of photos and reports that document the genocide under way in Darfur. The materials were gathered by African Union monitors, who are just about the only people able to travel widely in that part of Sudan.

This African Union archive is classified, but it was shared with me by someone who believes that Americans will be stirred if they can see the consequences of their complacency.

The photo at the upper left was taken in the village of Hamada on Jan. 15, right after a Sudanese government-backed militia, the janjaweed, attacked it and killed 107 people. One of them was this little boy. I'm not showing the photo of his older brother, about 5 years old, who lay beside him because the brother had been beaten so badly that nothing was left of his face. And alongside the two boys was the corpse of their mother.

The photo to the right shows the corpse of a man with an injured leg who was apparently unable to run away when the janjaweed militia attacked.

At the lower left is a man who fled barefoot and almost made it to this bush before he was shot dead.

Last is the skeleton of a man or woman whose wrists are still bound. The attackers pulled the person's clothes down to the knees, presumably so the victim could be sexually abused before being killed. If the victim was a man, he was probably castrated; if a woman, she was probably raped.

There are thousands more of these photos. Many of them show attacks on children and are too horrific for a newspaper.

One wrenching photo in the archive shows the manacled hands of a teenager from the girls' school in Suleia who was burned alive. It's been common for the Sudanese militias to gang-rape teenage girls and then mutilate or kill them.

Another photo shows the body of a young girl, perhaps 10 years old, staring up from the ground where she was killed. Still another shows a man who was castrated and shot in the head.

This archive, including scores of reports by the monitors on the scene, underscores that this slaughter is waged by and with the support of the Sudanese government as it tries to clear the area of non-Arabs. Many of the photos show men in Sudanese Army uniforms pillaging and burning African villages. I hope the African Union will open its archive to demonstrate publicly just what is going on in Darfur.

The archive also includes an extraordinary document seized from a janjaweed official that apparently outlines genocidal policies. Dated last August, the document calls for the "execution of all directives from the president of the republic" and is directed to regional commanders and security officials.

"Change the demography of Darfur and make it void of African tribes," the document urges. It encourages "killing, burning villages and farms, terrorizing people, confiscating property from members of African tribes and forcing them from Darfur."

It's worth being skeptical of any document because forgeries are possible. But the African Union believes this document to be authentic. I also consulted a variety of experts on Sudan and shared it with some of them, and the consensus was that it appears to be real.

Certainly there's no doubt about the slaughter, although the numbers are fuzzy. A figure of 70,000 is sometimes stated as an estimated death toll, but that is simply a U.N. estimate for the deaths in one seven-month period from nonviolent causes. It's hard to know the total mortality over two years of genocide, partly because the Sudanese government is blocking a U.N. team from going to Darfur and making such an estimate. But independent estimates exceed 220,000 - and the number is rising by about 10,000 per month.

So what can stop this genocide? At one level the answer is technical: sanctions against Sudan, a no-fly zone, a freeze of Sudanese officials' assets, prosecution of the killers by the International Criminal Court, a team effort by African and Arab countries to pressure Sudan, and an international force of African troops with financing and logistical support from the West.

But that's the narrow answer. What will really stop this genocide is indignation. Senator Paul Simon, who died in 2003, said after the Rwandan genocide, "If every member of the House and Senate had received 100 letters from people back home saying we have to do something about Rwanda, when the crisis was first developing, then I think the response would have been different."

The same is true this time. Web sites like www.darfurgenocide.org and www.savedarfur.org are trying to galvanize Americans, but the response has been pathetic.

I'm sorry for inflicting these horrific photos on you. But the real obscenity isn't in printing pictures of dead babies - it's in our passivity, which allows these people to be slaughtered.

During past genocides against Armenians, Jews and Cambodians, it was possible to claim that we didn't fully know what was going on. This time, President Bush, Congress and the European Parliament have already declared genocide to be under way. And we have photos.

This time, we have no excuse.

E-mail: nicholas@nytimes.com