Ambiguity Mars U.N. Effort To Begin Relief of Genocide Victims in Darfur

This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

The New York Sun

UNITED NATIONS – As an assessment team travels to Darfur next week to prepare for the deployment of U.N. troops to protect genocide victims, Sudan watchers say the United Nations and the Security Council are handling the ongoing crisis with too much ambiguity.

Secretary-General Annan’s envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, reached an agreement on Thursday to allow the U.N. assessment team to enter Sudan. But in announcing the agreement, he left much unclear, saying the United Nations is not planning an Iraq-like “invasion” of Sudan while telling listeners that the planned Darfur mission will have no enforcement capacity.

“The fact that there is much ambiguity surrounding what was actually agreed means that Khartoum has won another round,” the International Crisis Group’s point man in Darfur, John Prendergast, told The New York Sun yesterday. “Everything continues to be delayed, and Darfurians continue to wonder if they will ever see the day when their lives will be protected.”

Granting entry visas to the U.N. team does not indicate Sudanese government agreement to let a future U.N. force enter Darfur, Mr. Brahimi said at a press conference in Khartoum last week. No council resolution specifies “a future role for the U.N.,” he said. The council “only requests the secretary-general to send a mission to Sudan.” What Khartoum agreed, he added, is to strengthen the African Union force currently in Darfur.

The divided Security Council, where China, Russia, and Qatar have opposed a confrontation with Khartoum, nevertheless has agreed that a U.N.-backed multinational force will replace the overwhelmed 7,000-troop A.U. force. Khartoum has opposed the transition so far, threatening an Al Qaeda-led opposition.

Mr. Brahimi, who prior to serving in various U.N. mediation roles was a top official in the Arab League, told Sudanese reporters not to compare the United Nations with what he termed the “U.S. invasion of Iraq.” Although it has not yet been determined by the council, he told his listeners that the planned U.N. deployment “is not and will never be an enforcement mission.”

The International Crisis Group, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch issued a rare joint statement over the weekend, urging the council to “ensure the urgent deployment in Darfur of a strong U.N. mission authorized to use force to protect civilians.” Once established, the U.N. force must be able “to halt attacks on civilians, not just stand by and watch the killings continue,” the executive director of Human Rights Watch, Kenneth Roth, said.

A U.N peacekeeping official, Hedi Anabi, who accompanied Mr. Brahimi to Khartoum, is expected to represent Mr. Annan this week in a briefing to the Security Council on last week’s agreement. Diplomats expect no action before a planned trip to Sudan by council ambassadors scheduled for next week.

America, which has led the efforts to deploy a U.N.-authorized force in Darfur, will continue to press for a resolution that will establish the force, Ambassador John Bolton’s spokesman, Richard Grenell, said. “We strongly believe that there will be a transition to a U.N. force soon,” he told the Sun.


The New York Sun

© 2024 The New York Sun Company, LLC. All rights reserved.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. The material on this site is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used.

The New York Sun

Sign in or  Create a free account

By continuing you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use