UN's shame over Sudan

ANOTHER month, another 10,000 dead. The United Nations will today let down the people of Darfur again.

On 30 July, the UN Security Council warned Sudan that it had 30 days to clean up its act and end the persecution of its people in the region. A month later, a damning UN report demonstrated that it had done no such thing.

Today, more than two weeks on from the publication of that report, and after days of diplomatic wrangling, the Security Council is to vote on a fresh resolution which many hoped would leave Khartoum in no doubt it had run out of time.

It will do no such thing. China and Russia have seen to that, along with a handful of other states with their own idiosyncratic reasons for letting Sudan off the hook. What the Security Council will vote on will be a watered-down resolution backed only by the vaguest of threats.

The US and Britain had demanded sanctions against Sudan’s oil industry to focus its mind on the demands of the international community. But Sudan is the fourth-largest supplier of oil to China, and Beijing would not tolerate that. It threatened to veto the resolution.

Now, when the resolution goes before the Security Council today, it will call only for member states to "consider taking additional measures ... such as actions to affect Sudan’s petroleum sector". Just as it did in July, the UN has backed away from reinforcing its words with the threat of sanctions and demonstrated once again why it has earned a reputation as a toothless talking shop, a League of Nations with smarter offices and bigger expense accounts.

Human rights organisations expressed their frustration at the failure to tackle Khartoum. Peter Takirambudde, the executive director of the Africa division of Human Rights Watch (HRW), said: "The Security Council must make good on its threat and impose further measures on Sudan.

"The international community must demonstrate that it will not tolerate continuing atrocities committed by Sudanese armed forces and allied Janjaweed militias."

In a letter to the Security Council, HRW urges the imposition of an arms embargo on Sudan. It also calls on the Security Council to endorse plans for a significant increase in the African Union force in Darfur and to give it a mandate to protect civilians.

Earlier this month, the World Health Organisation warned that as many as 10,000 people were dying every month in Darfur from disease and violence.

Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, has described what is happening in Darfur as genocide. The European Parliament this week branded it "tantamount to genocide" and called for UN sanctions and an international arms embargo.

But there are still Security Council members who are reluctant to take action which they consider might harm their own commercial interests.

China threatened to veto the original US draft and it is unclear whether Beijing will veto or abstain on the latest version while

Pakistan and Algeria, too, are unhappy with anything that smacks of action.

The new resolution calls on Sudan to co-operate with an expanded African Union force, but sets no size for such a force. The UN envoy to Sudan, Jan Pronk, reporting on the situation earlier this month, said that a force in excess of 3,000 would be necessary.

The US is confident that it can win at least nine "yes" votes - the minimum needed for approval in the 15-member council - to push through its resolution.

Yesterday, Kofi Annan, the US secretary general, urged the council to act "without delay and to be as united as possible in the face of this crisis". It was a welcome intervention.

America’s UN ambassador, John Danforth, describing Mr Annan’s statement as "very important", said it helped create a sense of urgency: "When the reports are that 10,000 people are dying every month, then every day counts."

------------------------------------------------------------

Definately time for the UN to fold. Once again it shows its impotence.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

Yup - tens of thousands dieing and the rush of condemnation is deafening. Where are the UN supporters? What do they have to say?













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

Head in the sand?













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

I know that our Prime Minister Paul Martin is going to address the UN this week or weekend to dennounce the lack of UN intervention in Sudan. He will announce that peace keeping troops must be deployed to Sudan...

... although Canada itself is not going to send any. We can't - they're all out somewhere else. Martin will back up his rally-cry with aid and financial support for whichever country decides to send troops. :eek7:

lol, Yogs posting 3 trimes after himself. I never said that I support the UN 100%. I dont think anyone supports anything to it's fukll degree.
Anyways, I await Mr.Martin's speach to the UN....