Resolution 1706 Divides Sudan: Analysts
By Ahmed Fathi, IOL Correspondent
"Washington is seeking to seize control of the oil wealth in Darfur and whole Africa," said Ashaal.
KHARTOUM — UN Security Council Resolution 1706 approving the deployment of UN troops in Sudan's troubled Darfur region despite fierce Sudanese opposition is a bid to divide Sudan and entrench US interests in Africa, Egyptian experts said.
"The US-backed Darfur troops are nothing but an international military alliance to divide Sudan by force and take away the Darfur region from the Sudanese authority," Ambassador Abdullah Al-Ashaal, a former assistant to Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit, told IslamOnline.net Saturday, September 2.
"This also benefits the US schemes in the Arab world and Africa," he added.
The UN Security Council approved on Thursday, August 31, an Anglo-American draft resolution to send international troops to Darfur, despite fierce Sudanese opposition and pledges from senior officials to resist the "occupiers."
The resolution links the deployment of UN troops to the consent of the Khartoum government, which is seen by pundits as symbolic.
Senior US State department official, Kristen Silberberg, said that the Sudanese approval was "unnecessary" for deploying the UN troops in Darfur.
US Schemes
Ashaal said a US-backed multi-national force in Sudan serves best American interests in a region rich in untapped natural resources.
"Washington is seeking to seize control of the oil wealth in Darfur and whole Africa as the US is expected to consume nearly 30% of the world oil production during the next decade," Ashaal said.
"The US, additionally, eyes Darfur's agricultural wealth as the province makes up one-fifth of Sudan's agricultural area."
Ashaal said Washington also wants to use uranium found in Darfur in its nuclear activities.
The Egyptian expert maintained that the Bush administration was also seeking to take advantage from the geographical location of the area.
"Darfur is considered the main gateway to many key African countries such as Egypt, Libya, Chad and Congo.
"Once Darfur is taken away, Sudan will be isolated from its neighbors," Ashaal warned.
Ashaal warned that Egypt will take the brunt of US schemes in Sudan, noting that "75% of Egypt's waters are coming from South Sudan."
"Therefore, any US control on South Sudan will make Egypt more subservient to the US and its chief ally Israel. Sudan further forms a strategic depth to Egypt and is key to the Egyptian national security as well as standing as a strategic food store."
Violation
The deployment of the UN troops in Darfur despite the Sudanese opposition was also seen a violation of the UN Charter as the United States was perceived determined to send troops to Darfur without Khartoum's consent.
"The deployment of international troops in Sudan without its permission runs counter to the UN Charter approving rights of the countries to maintain their sovereignty," Ashaal told IOL.
Ahmed Abul-Wafa, professor of international law, agreed.
"Legal rules stipulate that international troops should be deployed with the consent of the host country," he noted.
"International law also gives Sudan the right to reject the deployment of international troops on its territories as long as it affects the Sudanese sovereignty."
Ashaal called on the Arab, African and Muslim countries to support the Sudanese position.
"Arab and African states should stand up and be counted," he said.
The Khartoum government and the main rebel group, Sudan Liberation Army, signed a peace deal on May 5 to end a three-year conflict that has claimed up to 300,000 lives and displaced some 2.4 million others, according to UN estimates.