AU reacts to ICG report on Darfur peace deal
The African Union reacted to a report issued last week by the International Crisis Group "Darfur's Fragile Peace Agreement" on the signed peace deal between the Sudanese government and the Sudan Liberation Movement led by Minni Minawi.Note, when ICG's report appeared a few days ago, I decided against publishing it until something else emerged that refuted the erroneous misleading statements made by ICG, enabling me to blog more balanced information. I am more than irked at ICG. As far as I am concerned, ICG's name is mud. Last year, when I vented about them here at Sudan Watch, I decided to take what they say with a pinch of salt. In my eyes they have no credibility. If ever I feel up to it, I shall get on their case here and look into what's behind ICG's perspective and why in an effort to try and understand who, as an unelected body, they think they are.
The African Union in the following press statement tries to respond to the issues raised in the ICG report:
"The Darfur Peace Agreement, signed on 5 May, faces many difficulties of implementation. Efforts by the Parties, the African Union and international partners are not assisted by serious misrepresentation of the contents, process and context of the DPA. Unfortunately, the International Crisis Group "Policy Briefing" on Darfur contains some serious errors of fact and interpretation, which are extremely unhelpful to the process of implementation.
This press release seeks to correct the errors of fact and interpretation in the ICG Report. 
The AU expresses its regret at the misrepresentations of the DPA in the ICG Report of 20 June and its hope that the ICG will correct those factual errors without delay.
MORE MEDDLESOME ARMCHAIR CRITICS
Excerpt from June 23, 2006 Sapa report via Africast US presses for international force in Darfur::
In a report released on Tuesday, the International Crisis Group (ICG) recommended that the UN adopt a binding resolution on the matter.IRIN report Concerns Over Implementation of Peace Deal - via Coalition for Darfur:
"The Security Council should authorise deployment of a robust UN force, starting with a rapid reaction component, ... by 1 October 2006," with a clear mandate to "use all necessary means to protect civilians, ... including to act militarily as necessary," the group said.
Other analysts prescribed sanctions for Khartoum.
"It is time to put serious sanctions on the Sudanese government," said Princeton Lyman of the Council on Foreign Relations. "There will be resistance from China and Russia, but one has to confront them on this issue, because if the Security Council vote a peacekeeping operation and the Sudanese resist, there has to be some reaction from the council."
"There is nothing, there is no progress on the implementation of the DPA," Hafiz Mohamed, Sudan programme director for the London-based advocacy group Justice Africa, said. "That is a great worry - a lot needs to be done." [Note, no criticism of SLM-Nur or JEM]
"For there to be peace, the deadlines set by the Darfur Peace Agreement must be followed," said Maureen Byrnes, Executive Director of Human Rights First. "In the month since the peace agreement was signed, the people of Darfur have not seen a cessation of violence. Instead, in some parts of Darfur there's actually been a major escalation of the violence," Byrnes noted.
"You can blame the government for it, but Minni Minnawi’s group also deserves some of the blame, due to its lack of cohesion - the movement continues to splinter," Mohamed said.