PDA

View Full Version : Sudanese Leaders Still Rejecting U.N. Protection for Darfur



ManchesterFolk
09-11-2006, 10:41 PM
Sudanese Leaders Still Rejecting U.N. Protection for Darfur
(New York, August 14, 2006) – The United Nations Security Council should impose sanctions on Sudan’s top officials for blocking U.N. efforts to protect civilians in Darfur, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter to Security Council members.

The Secretary-General’s July 28 report to the Security Council, now under consideration, strongly urges that a U.N. peacekeeping force assume the protection role of the beleaguered 7,000-plus African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) forces already in Darfur.

“The Sudanese government has no basis on which to reject a more effective international protection force,” said Peter Takirambudde, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “Civilians in Darfur are in urgent need of protection and the Sudanese government admits it can’t save them from the violence.”

The Sudanese government reportedly assured international negotiators at the Darfur peace talks in April that it would agree to a U.N. peacekeeping force once a peace agreement was signed. On May 5, the Sudanese government and the largest Darfurian rebel faction signed a permanent ceasefire and peace agreement in Abuja, Nigeria.

But the government reneged on its assurances about U.N. troops for Darfur almost immediately, with President Omar El Bashir threatening to personally lead Sudanese troops against U.N. “foreign troops” attempting to “occupy” or “colonize” Darfur.

The agreement was to end the three-year Darfur conflict that has forced some 2 million people from their homes. But a recent U.N. human rights report said that human rights abuses were ongoing, by “Janjaweed” militia, government forces and rebels.

The rebels have split badly over the May peace agreement; two rebel groups did not sign. The signing and non-signing rebel groups have been fighting each other and committing yet more human rights abuses.

“In the three months since the peace agreement, the Darfur conflict has warped into a bloody three-sided free-for-all,” said Takirambudde. “All are to blame: the original rebel groups, the new one, the Janjaweed militias and Sudan’s government. Civilians are still the victims.”

Bashir is the most powerful actor in the Sudanese government, but there are other officials who support U.N. troops in Darfur, including First Vice President Salva Kiir Mayardit and the newly inaugurated Senior Presidential Advisor Minni Minawi Arkau, who heads the Darfurian rebel group that signed the peace accord.

“Foreign governments, including the U.S. and the U.K., also bear responsibility for this tragic state of affairs as members of the Security Council,” said Takirambudde. “The Council should impose personal, targeted sanctions on top Sudanese officials responsible for preventing U.N. troops from being sent to Darfur.”

The Sudanese government has defied the Security Council for two years. In July 2004, it promised that it would disarm the Janjaweed militias, which it has backed. But although Sudan failed to neutralize its abusive militias by the promised deadline, the Security Council has not responded.

The Secretary-General’s July 28 report recommends that the U.N. bolster the AMIS forces in the short run, before the U.N. forces deploy on January 1, 2007.

Human Rights Watch specifically urged the Security Council to:

Apply targeted sanctions to Sudanese officials should the government not consent by August 15 to the U.N. deployment in Darfur;

Expand the arms embargo to cover all of Sudan, not just Darfur;

Provide a robust mandate for the U.N. force for Darfur, including Chapter VII powers to use “all necessary means” to protect civilians;

Have the U.N. force assume the duties of AMIS; and,

Authorize at least 17,300 U.N. troops and 3,300 civilian police for Darfur.
Background

Sudan is the largest country by area in Africa, with an estimated population of at least 36 million. Darfur is the size of France, with a population estimated at 6 million and very little infrastructure or economic development.

Two million civilians have been forcibly displaced from their burned and looted homes and farms, most by government forces and proxy militias committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. Those displaced largely remain in camps because security has not been restored; more than 208,000 refugees are in Chad, where cross-border attacks in 2006 have produced 50,000 Chadian internally displaced persons.

The 7,000-plus AU forces grew out of 300 personnel initially sent to Darfur to observe an April 2004 ceasefire between the Sudanese government and two rebel groups, the Sudan Liberation Army/Movement and the Justice and Equality Movement. Its mandate was expanded to include “protection of civilians” in October 2004, and its forces were gradually increased almost to the authorized strength of 6,171 military personnel and 1,560 unarmed civilian police.

An AMIS transition to U.N. forces in Darfur had been under discussion for months. In March 2006, the AU’s Peace and Security Council recognized that U.N. forces should assume the AU’s protective mandate for Darfur and extended the AMIS mandate until September 30.

On May 5, the African Union brokered a peace agreement signed by one major rebel group and gave the unwilling rebels until May 31 to sign on. Individual commanders joined, but the two other main rebel factions did not. At the June 27 AU Summit in Banjul, the AU Peace and Security Council reiterated its decision to end its Darfur mandate on September 30 in part because it did not have funding to extend its mission.

The Secretary-General’s July 29 report to the Security Council stated that the best configuration for a U.N. force would be a 17,300-strong U.N. military force and 3,300 police officers take over the AU mission in Darfur as of January 1, 2007, with a robust mandate that gives priority to civilian protection.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/08/14/darfur13976.htm
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
therebbe
09-13-2006, 12:20 AM
Sad. I hope the Islamic community will rise up and tell there fellow nation to let peace keepers enter, and stop the Murder.
Reply

QuranStudy
09-13-2006, 12:37 AM
^^They're already sick worrying about Israeli occupation.
Reply

therebbe
09-13-2006, 01:21 AM
Originally Posted by QuranStudy
^^They're already sick worrying about Israeli occupation.
Right. Muslims are not rising up and demanding Sudan end a Genocide because of Israeli occupation. Anymore apologies you would like to bring up? Should the Americans have not saved Bosnian Muslims because they were "worrying" about Soviet power?
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
AHMED_GUREY
09-13-2006, 06:10 PM
funny how they claim they don't have the resources to extend the AU mandate to protect or ''claim'' to protect the innocent muslims of darfur who die at a rate of 5/10 thousand deaths a month but they do have the money to send 3 thousand soldiers to somalia wich is recently been freed from warlords and is nothing compared to Darfur

The so-called mission is expected to cost 34 million $ a month

loool they will pay dearly for this grave mistake and it clearly shows AU is an incompetent org and doesn't care about the muslims of darfur
Reply

therebbe
09-13-2006, 07:37 PM
loool they will pay dearly for this grave mistake and it clearly shows AU is an incompetent org and doesn't care about the muslims of darfur
I don't think you understand that it is Muslims who are commiting the atrocities against there brothers and sisters to. Could Islamic world pressure not solve this?
Reply

AHMED_GUREY
09-13-2006, 08:46 PM
Originally Posted by therebbe
I don't think you understand that it is Muslims who are commiting the atrocities against there brothers and sisters to. Could Islamic world pressure not solve this?
the part of my post that you quoted was directed at the so-called future peace keeping mission of the AU in somalia

they leave a place where people are killed everyday by the hundreds(darfur) and claim they have no money and then plan to spend 30 million a month on
a place(somalia) that just found peace and is now under controll of one force wich can bite back

there asking for body bags and that's what they will receive

and about the islamic world being silent on darfur i'm not going to sugarcoat it

but it's like the suicide bombers of iraq

there's not much you can do about it
Reply

ManchesterFolk
09-16-2006, 03:23 PM
a place(somalia) that just found peace
Somalia is still war torn. Don't just assume that everythin is peaceful there all of a sudden.
Reply

AHMED_GUREY
09-16-2006, 04:27 PM
Originally Posted by ManchesterFolk
Somalia is still war torn. Don't just assume that everythin is peaceful there all of a sudden.
what do you mean assume?

i receive phone calls every two days from family members who are on the ground

and they say it's peacefull

i rather take there words then from some western media reporting from outside
Reply

Trumble
09-16-2006, 05:03 PM
Originally Posted by AHMED_GUREY
what do you mean assume?

i receive phone calls every two days from family members who are on the ground

and they say it's peacefull

i rather take there words then from some western media reporting from outside

Fair enough, as long as you only want a report on where those family members happen to be. You have no reason to assume that applies to the whole of Somalia, and indeed it doesn't. Nonetheless I am very glad to hear that your family are safe, and in an area where there is no conflict.
Reply

AHMED_GUREY
09-16-2006, 05:31 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Fair enough, as long as you only want a report on where those family members happen to be. You have no reason to assume that applies to the whole of Somalia,and indeed it doesn't
Somaliland and Puntland are both stable regions they have been like that now for over a decade

there you go that's allready 11 districts of the 18

Lower Juba with it's booming kismayo port has been stable for a decade

that's another 4 districts on top of the 11

that's 15 districts of the 18 being stable the rest is know as the south with mogadishu as it's capital

my family lives in what was know as the no go area ---> Mogadishu Wardhiigley and it's stable

people can go to work without checkpoints stopping them

foreign ships can dock the mogadishu port safely cause there aren't any thugz

somalis from the diaspora are investing because there is law and order

for some it's dificult to believe that these changes were made in such a small space of time

but it's true

so i'm not assuming anything

Nonetheless I am very glad to hear that your family are safe, and in an area where there is no conflict.
thanks i'm very happy 2!

and i have to thank ICU for destroying the thugz that took my people in the capital hostage for a decade

they changed everything in such a small space of time

:happy:
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-07-2014, 02:11 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-13-2013, 11:41 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-05-2009, 12:51 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-09-2007, 05:54 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!