UNITED NATIONS – America circulated a draft for a new toughly worded Security Council resolution yesterday, threatening the government of Sudan with specific sanctions on its lucrative oil industry and calling for a larger African presence to intervene in the crisis in the Darfur region.

Officially planning to present the draft to the Security Council this afternoon, American officials said both new elements in the resolution are important, stressing that the draft is meant to “maintain the pressure on Sudan” and “address the immediate situation on the ground.”

At the State Department, spokesman Richard Boucher, however, conceded yesterday that “imposing new sanctions at this time may or may not help people on the ground in Sudan. We know that adding African Union monitors will make them safer.”

A European diplomat told The New York Sun that some members of the council are already working on a revision that would highlight the role of the African Union force, a provision with a good chance to pass, and dilute the reference to sanctions, which is strongly resisted by prominent council members.

Like a similar resolution that passed over a month ago, the new American draft proposes “further actions” – diplomatic language for sanctions – if Khartoum fails to comply. But the new threat goes a step further, specifically referring to sanctions against Sudan’s “petroleum sector.”

This reference is especially tricky, as China, which in the past threatened to veto a resolution that directly threatened Sudan with any sanctions, has strong oil interest in the North African country.

The European diplomat, who asked for anonymity, said that many on the council assume China – as well as other interested council members, such as Algeria and Pakistan – would resist the new addition to the sanction threat.

He said however that the proposal to “enhance and augment” the existing African Union observer mission has sufficient support among the council’s 15 members. While tentatively agreeing to the enlargement of the African Union force, Khartoum made clear that the mandate of these troops should not be changed from “observation” to “peacekeeping.”

U.N. officials have proposed beefing up the force to as many as 3,000 troops in the hope that the mere presence of the A.U. on the ground would help stop atrocities in Darfur, where some 50,000 already died, and an additional 1.5 million have fled and are in danger of dying of disease and hunger.

Mr. Boucher said that Secretary of State Powell is studying new reports that determine that the pattern of attacks on Darfur villages still exist, but he has not yet decided whether to call the Sudan situation “genocide” in a testimony scheduled for today. The term carries legal grounds for sanctions on the Sudanese government.

The new draft resolution was circulated one week after Secretary-General Annan told the council that there is “some” improvement in Khartoum’s cooperation regarding Darfur, but that it has failed in “some” areas. The American draft declares that the Sudanese government failed to “fully comply” with the previous resolution.

Khartoum, for example, promised to provide lists of members of the Janjaweed who have committed atrocities and bring them to justice, and the new draft demands it do so. Last week, Mr. Annan’s special representative, Jan Pronk, told reporters that no such list was provided despite numerous assurances by Khartoum to make it available.