The UN is Not Good for Darfur

What would it take to end the genocide in Darfur?

Not much, as it happens; just a little bit of determination from the “international community” (via Instapundit).

Some non-military options may otherwise be proposed. Travel bans may be imposed on military and civilian leaders, while assets held by Sudanese leaders overseas may be frozen. Most effective might be measures to target Sudan’s oil revenues, which provide the government with most of its cash. Sales of equipment to maintain the country’s oil infrastructure could be limited, for instance. And in extremis Port Sudan could be blockaded, thus choking off all of Sudan’s oil exports at one stroke.

But most of would depend on getting an international consensus. China, Malaysia, India and Russia are all deeply involved in Sudan’s booming oil industry. These are unlikely to support any sanctions that would hurt their own considerable interests. China, which imports about 5% of its oil from Sudan, has been a staunch supporter of Khartoum. Western countries might try unilateral action, but this is rarely effective. America has maintained comprehensive economic sanctions against Sudan since the mid-1990s, yet the economy is booming.

Nor, even if outsiders could agree on rhetoric for a plan B, is there any guarantee that action would follow. Too often, foreign (and in particular Western) countries have talked tough on Darfur but done nothing. In the past the West has bullied the Sudanese government into making commitments, such as to disarm the janjaweed, but when Khartoum failed to do so there was no follow-up. One reason for Khartoum’s assertiveness against the UN in Darfur is that it has learnt that the West, bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, seems to be full of empty threats on this issue. If that perception does not change, nothing else will move fast.

Of course, oil is the big economic factor here and, contrary to the left’s tired chants, it’s not the United States that’s being greedy.

So with most of the world either sitting this one out, or helping the Sudanese butchers in exchange for their resources, the African Union has been doing all of the heavy lifting. The UN has some troops and other personnel in southern Sudan, but that does not seem to be going well for the Sudanese at all.

Members of the UN peacekeeping forces in southern Sudan are facing allegations of raping and abusing children as young as 12.

The abuse allegedly began two years ago when the UN mission in southern Sudan (UNMIS) moved in to help rebuild the region after a 23-year civil war. The UN has up to 10,000 military personnel in the region, of all nationalities and the allegations involve peacekeepers, military police and civilian staff.
…
This paper has gathered more than 20 victims’ accounts claiming that peacekeeping and civilian staff based in the town are regularly picking up young children in their UN vehicles and forcing them to have sex.

Of course, it’s not the UN’s fault at all. It’s the fault of the dirty, ignorant natives.

The British regional co-ordinator for UNMIS, James Ellery, has refuted the claims, arguing that there is no substantiating evidence.

“I will refute all claims made on this issue,” he said in an interview last May. “We investigated all allegations made and no evidence was forthcoming. None of these claims can be substantiated. This is the most backward country in Africa and there are lots of misunderstandings as to the UN’s role. Over 90 per cent of people here are illiterate and rumours therefore spread very quickly.”

I wonder if Mr. Ellery can clarify what part of “the UN’s role” rape and child prostitution falls under. I’m fairly sure that’s not part of the UN peacekeeping mandate, though it does seem part of the standard operating procedure, which can be broadly defined in three steps.

1) Deploy to heavily-protected bases where there is no danger you will engage hostile forces.
2) Set up child prostitution rings the better to get a more convenient “freak on”.
3) Watch from a safe distance as the people you were deployed to protect are slaughtered.

This is pretty much the pattern we’ve seen from the UN all over Africa and in Kosovo.

Whatever answer may be forthcoming from the “international community”, let us hope it is enough to save the broken remnants of what is left of the people of Darfur.

No related posts.

Category: The World At Large