UN needs an expanded mandate to intervene when nations fail to stop internal violence
After genocide in Rwanda, Bosnia and Sudan, many bloggers have lost respect for the UN and Kofi Annan. Even Instapundit thinks the time is right now for Annan to step down and not to continue in office until 2006, and says if Kerry had called for Kofi Annan's resignation, he might have won more votes in Ohio [see next post, above].
Clive says Kofi Annan's "High Level Panel" (on intervention and failed states) reports next Thursday. But it won't help the people of Darfur. For every four weeks that go by, another 10,000 Sudanese die.
After the past seven months of blogging almost daily on Darfur, I no longer believe much what the politicians are saying or doing. Sudan is one of many issues where I am starting to get completely disillusioned in the political process and wondering what is so great about democracy. All it seems to be is a handful of men in each country doing what they will. Our voices only count at election times.
On Sudan, the only thing that makes sense to me as to what is really going there, is that the international community is supporting the rebels. How else can one explain the UN Security Council's inaction and the six weeks of delay between its last meeting in Nairobi (must have cost millions of pounds) to the expected signing of Sudan's agreement on December 31 which does not include Darfur? What are the warring parties in Sudan to do in those six weeks: twiddle their thumbs?
If the international community is not behind the rebels trying to overthrow Bashir's regime, there's no way there will be peace. It's a hellhole. The rebels are as bad as the regime they are trying to overthrow. The international community (or we the people more like) have been - what one news report referred to as - "duped".
At least the Prime Minister of Canada Paul Martin is trying to do something. He's invited 47 Francophonie member-states to a Canadian summit aimed at reforming the UN to better protect suffering peoples. He's spoken of his visit to Sudan this week and pointed to it as proof the UN needs an expanded mandate to intervene when nations fail to stop internal violence.
The only way to help those in Sudan is to intervene militarily. Several months ago I felt Sudan should have been declared a state of emergency and Darfur turned into a UN Protectorate so that people could go home and start planting their food. Now, it will turn out far more costlier in terms of lost lives and the huge amount of aid needed to keep two million or more people in camps over the next 1-2+ years.
Germany and France ought to send troops asap. What about China? Why is there no news as to why China is getting away with not doing anything. Why can't they be made to send 70,000 police? China has just struck a 30-oil deal with Iran which means if the UNSC has to take action against on Iran on nuclear issues, China will block it, just like it is doing for Sudan.