By Daniel Allott on 8.21.06 @ 12:08AM
As the U.N. deploys troops to Lebanon, it dithers in Darfur.
Jan Egeland, head of United Nations humanitarian operations,
describes the region as "going from real bad to catastrophic" and
"headed toward total chaos."
The top U.N. aid official says the level of violence faced by
humanitarian workers is "unprecedented."
U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan refers to the situation as
"one of the worst nightmares in recent history," "the world's worst
humanitarian crisis," and "little short of hell on earth."
No, they're not talking about the crisis in the Middle East,
where the United Nations has just announced plans to dispatch a
15,000-strong international force to enforce a cease-fire in
southern Lebanon. These are the latest reactions of U. N. officials
to the unfolding genocide in Darfur.
Sadly, the alacrity with which the U.N. has taken action in the
Middle East stands in stark contrast to its dithering in Darfur,
where for three years the world body has used strong language to
talk about a solution but done very little of substance to quell
the violence.
In May, the U.N. did help broker the Darfur Peace Treaty,
requiring the Sudanese government to disarm its genocidal militias
and allow U.N. troops in to restore peace. Unfortunately, not only
has the Darfur treaty deal failed to bring peace, it has actually
triggered an increase in violence against civilians.
Only days after the agreement was signed, Sudanese Dictator Omar
al-Bashir reversed course, declaring that the installation of U.N.
peacekeepers, "shall never take place." He also promised to make
Darfur "a graveyard" for any outside force, further emboldening the
government militias that roam the countryside, seizing every
opportunity to rape, pillage and kill, their attacks becoming more
frequent and more deadly each day. After a July exploratory mission
to Darfur, U.N. Head of Peacekeeping Jean-Marie Gueheno warned that
the risk of "major violence...after the rainy season is quite real,
very real." The violence over the last 100 days has displaced more
than 50,000 Dafuris, forcing many to seek refuge in Chad, Sudan's
western neighbor, where hundreds of thousands are already seeking
refuge.
What's more, the Sudan Liberation Movement, the only rebel
faction to sign the peace agreement, now stands accused of carrying
out bloody raids in northern Darfur in an attempt to punish those
rebel groups that did not sign on. These attacks include rape and
murder of innocent civilians, the familiar weapons of Bashir's
militias.
Adding to the misery, international aid agencies report a marked
increase in the number and severity of attacks on international aid
workers providing water, food and medical care to the 3.5 million
refugees who depend on them to survive. A new U.N. report states
that more aid workers in Darfur have been killed in the past month
than in the previous three years combined. Citing security
concerns, aid workers have effectively ended relief efforts in many
areas. Oxfam recently announced closure of two of its six offices
in the north of Darfur because of the abduction of a Sudanese staff
member. Meanwhile, insufficient funding has forced the World Food
Program to cut food rations in half for the six million it
feeds.
Spiraling violence, fewer aid workers, and the onset of the
raining season have also caused a rise in malnutrition and the
spread of water-borne disease, and there is an outbreak of cholera
on the verge of exploding in a number of refugee camps.
While the situation on the ground deteriorates, the United
Nations is sending mixed signals. On the one hand, the U.N.
continues to reiterate its plan to install a large and highly
mobile peacekeeping force in Darfur "as soon as possible." On the
other hand, it recently pushed back until January 2007 its
estimated time of arrival in Darfur.
The U.N. justifies its inaction by periodically calling for
increases in funding for the African Union force already on the
ground in Darfur. But the African Union cannot bring peace. Seven
thousand troops currently patrol Darfur, a sprawling piece of
desert the size of Texas. This means each soldier patrols an area
roughly the size of Manhattan. Worse, when A.U. soldiers witness an
attack, they do not have a mandate to intervene, just to observe
and report. Not surprisingly Mr. Bashir has welcomed extending the
A.U.'s presence in Darfur, even offering to pay for it. Meanwhile,
the A.U. itself realizes how outmatched it is and, facing
bankruptcy, has appealed to the U.N. to deploy its troops "as soon
as possible."
Despite its lack of success, the May peace agreement is the
last, best hope for peace in Darfur. Too much time and too many
resources were expended (including considerable efforts by the
United States) to see it come to nothing. But, as Kofi Annan and
much of the international community readily admit, the window of
opportunity provided by the agreement is quickly closing. A minimum
of 20,000 troops is needed in Darfur, and these troops need robust
rules of engagement and authorization to use force against the
government’s marauding militias and restore
peace.
At a time when much of the world's diplomatic efforts are
focused on the crisis in the Middle East, there is a real danger of
forgetting that genocide persists in Darfur. Nicholas Kristof
recently reported that the war in Lebanon has received more airtime
in the media each week than the Darfur crisis has gotten in total
since it commenced in 2003. There are also fewer calls for U.N.
intervention in Darfur. According to LexisNexis, the media have
mentioned "U.N. peacekeepers" and "Lebanon" in the same news
article over one thousand times in the last month, while "Darfur"
and "U.N. peacekeepers" have been mentioned together just 144
times.
It took the U.N. just four weeks to negotiate a "cessation of
hostilities" in Lebanon. As the genocide in Darfur enters its
fourth year, it's past time the world body enforced the peace
agreement that would end the bloodshed in the most hostile place on
earth.
Daniel Allott is a writer and policy analyst for
American Values, a Washington, D.C. area public policy
organization.
topics:
United Nations, Africa