ME and Ophelia

Friday, August 13, 2004

 
BLOG CAMPAIGN FOR SUDAN
Reaches toward a new level of awareness

Jim Moore's latest posts at Passion of the Present are saying what I am thinking and posting about here: countries that do not believe in human rights, and that have long records of abuses, are joining with the Sudanese government to "calm" the situation. I've noticed too how quickly China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt have come together to prop up the government in Sudan - and also, within the past week, the actions of these countries and their allied powers have become much more obvious and critical to the outcome in Sudan.

Jim has dubbed it the Genocide Bloc and says many experts believe that dealing with Sudan - and now the Genocide Bloc - is as relevant as Iraq to overall world security concerns. In his latest post he writes "we are witnessing in Sudan the coming together of a power bloc, anchored by China and operating across the middle east and Africa that does not share western values of democracy and human rights, that is economically powerful and controls a great deal of oil, and that can bring very great problems for the United States, not unlike those of the pre-war Iraq."
- - -

WE NEED AN ANTI-GENOCIDE BLOC
The world could use a pro-human-rights bloc

In a reply to a comment at Passion of the Present, Jim Moore writes: "The world could use a pro-human-rights bloc. In a certain sense, for nations this is one of those situations where the old slogan applies: 'You are either [actively] part of the solution, or you are [consciously or unconsciously] part of the problem.' I agree with him when he says "the frightening thing about the Genocide Bloc is that it is achieving substantial influence over the situation in Sudan and in the international community." Which is why I've spent past few days writing posts on the UN's Declaration of Human Rights and Obligations - and posting comments at the blog of Clive Soley, a British Labour MP who is planning to write a Fabian paper on failing states.

Note Jim's telephone conversation with Jerry Fowler of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in a post on a blog campaign for Sudan.
- - -

Note to self: Here's my latest question: When does a crime rise to the level at which sovereignty has been forfeited by the government in question?

# posted by Ingrid J. Jones @ 8/13/2004 0 comments  
- - -

STARVING SUDAN TOLD KREMLIN IT HAS 3 BILLION U.S. DOLLARS
TO SPEND ON MILITARY HARDWARE
Buying 12 MiGs from Russia may be just the tip of the ice-berg

Russian weaponry may already be playing a direct role in Darfur. The recent acceleration of Russia-Sudan links goes beyond the military sphere. Sudan told Kremlin it has three billion U.S. dollars to spend on military hardware. Here is an excerpt from August 12, 2004, report:

Russia, one of the countries blamed for watering down the wording of last month's United Nations resolution on the conflict by insisting that the word "sanctions" be removed, has been delivering MiG fighter planes to Sudan throughout the bloodshed in Darfur. The latest delivery of two jets came in late July, just days before the weakened UN resolution was passed by the Security Council, and amid concern that the planes could be used against civilians.

On July 29, the day before the UN resolution was passed, the Russian company Stroitransgaz won a contract to build a 366-kilometre pipeline in the Melut basin in southeast Sudan, a region abandoned four years ago by the Canadian junior oil company Fosters Resources Ltd. because of pressure from human-rights groups.

Pavel Felengauer, an independent defence analyst based in Moscow, said Russia has never tied arms sales to buyers' human-rights records, and suggested that the 12 MiGs may be just the tip of the iceberg. He said the Sudanese government recently notified the Kremlin that it has $3-billion (U.S.) to spend on military hardware.

Mr. Felengauer said a recent visit to Minsk by Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir is likely aimed at laying the groundwork for more weapons deals in the former Soviet Union; Belarus is a major player in the international arms trade.

"Often, if Russia says it can't, Minsk says it can. Russia often sells through Minsk," Mr. Felengauer said.

"There will be a lot more weapons going [to Sudan]. That's why Russia is resisting the sanctions: It would complicate matters," he said.
- - -

CHINA IGNORES HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES AND SAYS "BUSINESS IS BUSINESS"
China blocks UN action against genocide because it has its oil interests in Sudan

The oil interests that China has in Sudan are not owned by Chinese oil companies - they are owned by the Chinese government itself. China ignores human rights abuses and says "Business is business". Here's snippet from an Aug 9 report on Sudan and how to define compliance of the UN resolution:

"But even if the U.S. judges that Sudan’s efforts have ultimately fallen short of what is required, Washington will still need to convince China – and other opponents of sanctions – that punitive measures should be taken. Aside from any other consideration, given the size of Chinese investments in Sudan’s burgeoning oil sector, Beijing will need a lot of convincing."
- - -

Note to self to find out: Do U.N. members tie arms sales to buyers' human-rights records? If not, would it be possible for U.N. members to be assigned ratings for their human-rights records? Countries with zero points are not to be sold arms (or oil?) and if they do and are found out, the seller will lose points. Maybe such a rating system already exists. Blacklists and so on. Whatever, it seems corrupt that Russia and China - with their huge vested interest in Sudan but no care for human rights - sits on the U.N. Security Council - and gangs up with likeminded countries to make the U.N. impotent. What is the point of the U.N.? Ruthless thugs and rejectors of human rights controlling the U.N? Sorry, I don't get it.
- - -

Other news: The Sudanese army denied it has resumed air attacks in Darfur, saying in a statement that the armed forces are adhering to an April 8 ceasefire agreement and not using helicopter gunships for raids, as the United Nations charged Tuesday.

Millions of locusts may be heading for Darfur from neighbouring Chad, UN pest-control experts said in Rome, warning that the continuing insecurity in the remote western region would prevent an effective control operation.
- - -

QUOTES FROM SUDAN -
You couldn't make this stuff up if you tried

Aug 12: Sudanese President Bashir tells a Lebanese newspaper the U.S. and Europe are exploiting the situation in Darfur, - and they are not interested in the well being of the people there. Bashir said Sudan is being victimized by a media campaign that aims to "divert attention from the violence in Iraq and the Palestinian territories." He said world media and international organizations have exaggerated the situation in Darfur.

A U.S. State Department spokesman, Adam Erelim, said Wednesday the U.S. gets its information on Darfur from African Union observers who are there, as well as aid workers and U.S. resources. He said they report major security and humanitarian aid problems in the region.

Sudan's president has also accused the West of exploiting the Darfur conflict in the hope of seizing the country's gold and oil, but Washington replied its only aim was to halt mass murder and starvation. Ismail is too on the propaganda trail. Beware of any news out of Khartoum. They are spreading ugly lies about the West, saying we are evil and they are good. Like all other psycho dictators they are pathological liars and expert at PR - which is how they've gotten away with mass murders over past 15 years.

# posted by Ingrid J. Jones @ 8/13/2004 0 comments

Thursday, August 12, 2004

 
THE CHALLENGE OF THIS CENTURY
Is global warming and to get better policies
in the area of failing states

Clive Soley MP, in his recent post on the Sudan and failing states (note also his responses here and here), says that apart from the problems of global warming, the challenge of this century is to get better policies in the area of failing states.

He makes the point that "currently the world lurches between doing nothing as in Rwanda or intervening with heavily armed troops as in Afghanistan and Iraq ...in between there are cases like Somalia where the world’s intervention failed and East Timor where it succeeded but not until much of the damage had been done".

He feels Sudan is just the latest in a long line of failed or failing states, and very much fears this is going to be the pattern for many years yet.

And notes that Kofi Annan has a high level panel looking at this problem and it may be ready to report at the end of the year.

It makes me wonder why has it taken the U.N. 60 years to look into the problem - especially after genocide in Rwanda and Bosnia took place ten years ago - and the West, including Kofi Annan, said "never again".

The U.N. administration needs to get its priorities straightened and work more efficiently if they want to be seen as good value for money (which I think they are not - the whole business needs looking at, along with the UN refugee agency and World Food Programme).

Since Clive is planning to write a Fabian pamphlet on failing states, and I am hoping the Bill of Human Rights forms the basis of debates, papers and policies on failing states - I shall now go over to his blog and post a comment (consisting of my last two posts here) as a contribution to the discussion.
- - -

Update: Note the comment left in a post below by top British blogger Alistair Coleman of Scaryduck fame who is studying human rights and democracy at Britain's Open University.

Alistair writes: "The problem with world human rights is that any judgement handed down by the UN do not carry legal weight. This means countries can - and will - ignore them. The only way enforcement can occur is by concerted pressure by the world community, hoping to either embarrass a country into compliance, apply sanctions or act militarily. In the case of Darfur, the whole world is being embarrassed into grudging action. What a mess."

Why is it that a judgement handed down by the U.N. carries no legal weight - is it too difficult to introduce? What would it take for judgements to carry legal weight -- is it being worked on, and if not, why not -- does anyone know?

# posted by Ingrid J. Jones @ 8/12/2004 0 comments  
- - -

THE BILL OF HUMAN RIGHTS REQUIRES MATCHING OBLIGATIONS
As the prerequisite for enjoying the privileges listed

This post is in response to recent ones by Jim Moore and Clive Soley involving Human Rights, the Sudan and failing states.

Today, I received an email from the non-blogging friend I spoke of in my previous post (see below) re the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It was in reply to mine that explores "Why we should help our fellow man when in need - whether he is next door or in Africa?" Part of the reply from my friend says:

"The Bill of Human Rights is largely silent about requiring matching obligations, as the prerequisite for enjoying the privileges listed.  Why don't you try and compose a corresponding list of logical Human Obligations?"

By writing: "The Bill of Human Rights requires matching obligations as the prerequisite for enjoying the privileges listed", my friend has unwittingly put into a nutshell what I was trying to suggest here in yesterday's post about the Declaration forming the basis of all new U.N. policies, papers, debates, etc. In my first draft, I did use the word "obligations" but changed it to "responsibilities" because I had no idea if "obligations", in relation to the Declaration, existed in a legal sense.

As I know nothing about international law on human rights, I can't see how I alone can compose a corresponding list of "logical Human Obligations". Hopefully, Jim and Clive might be willing to open a discussion at their blogs where readers could contribute thoughts and ideas to such a list for putting forward to the U.N.

As stated before, in previous posts here, I am planning to follow through on my friend's suggestion of June 26, to make contact with the U.N. to ask them about the official guidelines which clearly delay UN action until matters (like Darfur) have reached disgraceful proportions. Maybe it can be put forward with the list.

# posted by Ingrid J. Jones @ 8/12/2004 0 comments  
- - -

ALL HUMAN RIGHTS FOR ALL
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Here, for the record, is a BBC news online report "Sudan under pressure over Darfur". A non-blogging friend in England emailed it to me on the day it was published, and wrote me: "You might find it rewarding to make contact with the UN and to ask them about the official guidelines which clearly delay UN action until matters (like this one) have reached disgraceful proportions."

The report, dated June, 26, 2004, is copied here in full:

"The US and the EU have expressed "grave concern" about Sudan's conflict-torn Darfur region, saying the government in Khartoum must rein in Arab militias. "We strongly condemn the human rights violations... particularly by Jingaweit militias," the leaders said in a joint declaration at their summit in Ireland.

Human rights groups accuse Khartoum of backing Arab militia groups that have killed thousands of Africans in Darfur. The fighting in Darfur has driven more than a million people from their homes.

"We express grave concern at the continuing humanitarian crisis in Darfur, western Sudan, where the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians, who live in desperate conditions and require immediate life-saving relief, are at great risk," the declaration said.

At the end of their summit at Dromoland Castle, in County Clare, US President George W Bush and EU leaders again urged the Sudanese government to disarm the militias and allow full access for humanitarian workers.

"We also reiterate that those responsible for the atrocities must be held accountable," the declaration said.

The document was issued as the international community has been gradually increasing pressure on Khartoum to stop with the violence in Darfur that erupted 16 months ago.

On Friday, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said he would meet US Secretary of State Colin Powell in Khartoum next week to deal with the conflict. [end of BBC report]
- - -

Note to self - and readers: (1) Does the U.N. have official guidelines which delay U.N. action until situations like Darfur have reached disgraceful proportions? (2) Why is Sudan a member of U.N. Human Rights panel? What are the benefits and responsibilities of membership? What qualifies Sudan as a member?
- - -

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948.

Sudan is a member of the U.N. Human Rights panel but is in breach of the Universal Declaration. Why has Sudan been getting away with murder for so many years? Why is it calling the shots (excuse the pun), and being treated, like it is in a negotiable position?

How come countries like China (interests in Sudan's oil) and Russia (just delivered 12 new MiGs to Sudan) get to block a draft UN resolution imposing sanctions on Sudan? And how much, if anything, have these countries contributed towards humanitarian assistance for Darfur -- if they have not contributed, why is this so?

Just thought I would ask the questions here, incase anyone can throw any light on the way these things work. Meantime, I'll keep on looking for answers - while keeping an eye on other countries that were (or still are) onside with Khartoum -- including Pakistan, India, Algeria, Brazil - those within the Arab League. I've mainly mentioned China because they have drilling rights - and so do France - in Darfur (but I haven't mentioned this clearly in a post yet because I am still checking my facts and sources). Germany has a huge contract to build a railway from Sudan to Kenya -- loads of development funding is poised for Sudan as soon as the Peace Accords are signed. Banks are opening -- New Sudan Pound is being minted - flags and vehicle licence plates are being sorted - oil pipelines on the drawing board...
- - -

Clive Soley's recent post "Sudan and failing states", reminds me of another email I'd received from my non-blogging friend in England. The email, dated June 26, 2004, contained a link to a BBC report of the same date, "Screams of Sudan's starving refugees" - along with this message: "The pattern of human life, I'm afraid, and likely to be so for many thousands of years. All that 'technology' has done so far is to enable us to participate in these horrors. I repeat: humans in the mass are savages, preying on each other and desperate to survive. That will always be the case as long as there are too many of them competing for limited resources."

In his post (note also his responses here and here) Clive writes that he thinks the challenge of this century is to get better policies in the area of failing states; he thinks Sudan is just the latest in a long line of failed or failing states, and says he very much fears this is going to be the pattern for many years yet (my friend thinks the pattern will be for at least another 5,000+ years).

Clive's post, and my friend's email, made me think again about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I'd like to see it form the basis of all new U.N. policies, papers, debates etc. To my mind, it is a masterpiece - an historic document that serves as a great global message. Surely if we could all aim to adhere to it, the world would be a better place for everyone during their short stay on beautiful planet Earth.
- - -

Further reading:

Aug 11: Jim Moore's post on the Genocide Bloc of China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt clubbing together to help block sanctions, keep out African Union peacekeepers, spread disinformation (such as that Israel is behind the rebels in Sudan), while the genocide burns on.

Aug 11: Passion's post re blog campaign for Sudan reaches toward a new level of awareness ... "Many experts believe that dealing with Sudan, and now the Genocide Bloc, is as relevant as Iraq to overall world security concerns. We are witnessing in Sudan the coming together of a power bloc, anchored by China and operating across the middle east and Africa that does not share western values of democracy and human rights, that is economically powerful and controls a great deal of oil, and that can bring very great problems for the United States, not unlike those of the pre-war Iraq. Imagine, for example, a redrawing of the oil market that brings Saudi oil to China and ends the dependence of the Saudi royal family on interests in the United States. What little leverage we currently have with the Saudis could be gone in a Texas minute."

Aug 11: Interesting view (and unusual too - usually he only writes a few lines) from Patrick - who also points out Jim Moore has suggested that bloggers following this issue should turn their attention to the nations that are acting to enable Sudan's actions: China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. Glad to see Patrick has added Russia to his list. I'm still not over Russia's recent rush delivery of MiGs to Sudan.

Aug 10: Passion's post re "China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Sudan - these nations are charter members in the Genocide Bloc. You have heard of the "Soviet Bloc," the "Eastern Bloc," and so forth. Now there is a new bloc, the Genocide Bloc. The nations named above have come together in a dramatic and powerful fashion over the past few weeks, and blazed onto the world scene last weekend in defense of the government of Sudan. These nations share one thing in common in addition to uncritical support for the government of Sudan: they do not respect human rights in their own countries."

# posted by Ingrid J. Jones @ 8/12/2004 0 comments

Wednesday, August 11, 2004

 
BRITISH MP CLIVE SOLEY
Blogs about indictments and no fly zone for Darfur

This morning I posted a comment at Clive Soley's blog in response to his post on "Sudan and failing states". Clive has raised two possibilities (1) no fly zone for Darfur (2) indictments. This is a rushed post. More later. Meantime Clive has published a response to the comments received - note his interesting suggestion about an Arab regional group.

In a previous comment at Clive's blog, I found Random Ramblings who feels, quote : "what we should do is put a whole lot of pressure on the African Union to take some action and pay for and heavily support that action in anyway possible (including commitment of troops, even if it's not on a huge scale." - and adds, "there's no time for pussyfooting about because every day we dely another 1000 people die."

Further reading:

Aug 9: Arab resolution on Darfur calls for disarming of militias. The unanimously adopted resolution by Arab foreign ministers on Darfur crisis sets an example of regional and international coordination and cooperation between regional organizations and the UN. This is the first time the UN, AU [African Union] and AL to meet under the AL umbrella to discuss an issue of such importance.
- - -

UK AID EFFORT FOR DARFUR:
Charity bosses have praised UK Government as "brilliant"

Aug 10: Yay for top U.N. donor countries Australia, Canada, Britain, The Netherlands, and U.S.A. It's good to see the UK getting some credit for everything it is doing for Sudan. It's about time Khartoum showed some appreciation and said a word of thanks for all the aid and work being carried out by aid workers from all over the world who are risking their lives to help the people of Sudan, against all odds. Don't hold your breath though, the government of Sudan resents the world's help because it does not want the displaced people saved. The Arabs have moved in to the villages of Darfur and moved into the good homes of those that have fled, sort of like what the Germans did when the Jews were forced from their homes and exterminated.

Charity bosses have praised the UK Government's aid provisions for Sudan's humanitarian crisis as "brilliant". The UK is the third largest donor to the UN's effort in the Darfur region, already giving over £36m - and overall the government has pledged £62.5m.

Christian Aid praised the UK Government for "taking the lead" with humanitarian aid - and told BBC News Online: "The UK did take the lead in terms of aid. But they also took the lead by brokering the deal which got round the bureaucratic barriers and allowed aid agencies access to the people in Darfur."

CA spokeswoman said UK Government could use the same brokering skills to get parties in the Sudan dispute around the negotiating table. But added: "Obviously the most important thing is to get the aid into the areas where it is need - the UK has done brilliantly with that."

"We feel we have been doing as much as we can" - UK Government.
- - -

154 RWANDAN TROOPS INTO DARFUR ON SATURDAY
Nigerian troops could follow on August 25

Aug 10: About 100 African Union (AU) monitors are deployed in Darfur to record and investigate attacks and the Dutch ambassador to Ethiopia said the Netherlands would begin to airlift 154 Rwandan troops into Darfur on Saturday to protect them. Nigerian troops could follow on August 25, the ambassador said.

The AU hopes to increase the proposed number of AU forces protecting the monitors from 360 to about 2,000 and extend their mandate to peacekeeping, which Sudan refuses.

The African Union said rebels and Khartoum had agreed to peace talks in the Nigerian capital Abuja on August 23, but the rebels said they had not received formal invitations and the date was unsuitable, although they welcomed the location.
- - -

SOUTH AFRICA TO SEND TRAINS TO SUDAN
To assist with transportation of aid to Darfur

Aug 10:: President Thabo Mbeki says government will send trains to the war-torn Sudan to assist with the transportation of humanitarian aid in the devastated southern region of Darfur. He said the South African Railways was already hard at work ensuring that the engines were delivered in the strife-torn country.

Humanitarian organisations working in the area have cited logistics such as transportation as a major obstruction to delivering aid to victims of the civil war. South Africa is leading efforts to ensure the post-conflict reconstruction of Sudan under the auspices of the African Union (AU).

President Mbeki said government had already started work in that regard and had had contacts with other countries beyond the continent. President Mbeki will be visiting Sudan in December.

Sudanese Ambassador Kuol Alor Kuol expressed appreciation for South Africa's efforts to rehabilitate Darfur, reaffirming his country's pledge to resolve the catastrophe that has claimed the lives of over 50 000 people have been killed and displaced 1.2 million others.
- - -

INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION FOR MIGRATION (IOM)
To work out a plan for voluntary return of refugees to Darfur

Aug 10: The International Organization for Migration (IOM) said Tuesday it will oversee and assist the voluntary return of internally displaced persons (IDPs) to safe areas in the troubled Darfur region in western Sudan. The announcement came as part of a recent agreement between the Sudanese government and the United Nations.

The IOM is dispatching a senior official to Khartoum, capital of Sudan, on Tuesday to discuss the terms of the agreement with the Sudanese government and to work out a plan for the voluntary return of IDPs, IOM spokesman Jean Philippe Chauzy said.

The plan calls on Khartoum to identify parts of Darfur that can be made safe and secure for the return of IDPs, to control the activities of government forces and armed militiamen, to agree to the deployment of military observers, and to demonstrate a political commitment to peace talks.

The plan, drawn up by Sudanese Foreign Minister Mustafa Ismail and UN envoy Jan Pronk, will be implemented within 30 days in linewith UN Security Council Resolution 1556. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, there are some 1.2 million IDPs in the Darfur region.

Sudan joined the IOM as an observer in 1993 and became a memberof the Geneva-based organization in 1998.
- - -

KHARTOUM INSISTS SECURITY OF DARFUR
Is the responsibility of Sudan alone

BBC report Aug 9: UN had been unable to reach children behind rebel lines in Darfur. African Union has delayed any decision on plans to deploy African peacekeepers to Darfur. Sudan rejected an AU proposal to send some 2,000 peacekeepers in the region saying it could amount to colonialism. Ahead of the AU talks, Sudan's Foreign Minister Ismail warned that the "security of Darfur is the responsibility of Sudan alone".

Note you can't believe a word Ismail says - he is not as wonderous as old Iraq's funny Minister for Information, but he is just as informative. Take any reports out of Khartoum with a pinch of salt - 99.9% of it is total propaganda, utter rubbish, outrageous lies and not even amusing - so it's a waste of reading time. Beware though, the fork tongued lying thugs - will say and do anything to save their own skins -- they are cunningly slick at covering their tracks these past 15 years and are wicked masters of PR -- watch out: the propaganda pops up in the most unexpected places - question reports, even from top news agencies.
- - -

SUDAN STAGES HELICOPTER ATTACKS IN DARFUR
While Janjaweed attack refugees trying to escape

Aug 10: Sudan has carried out fresh helicopter attacks in Darfur while Janjaweed Arab militia forces attacked refugees trying to escape the conflict, the United Nations said in a strongly worded statement. "Fresh violence today (Tuesday) included helicopter gunship bombings by the Sudanese government and Janjaweed attacks in South Darfur. The violence has already led to more displacement," the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said in a statement in Geneva.

"Janjaweed attacks on internally displaced persons in and around IDP settlements continue to be reported in all three Darfur states," it added. Civilians have previously said Sudan used helicopters and other military aircraft to attack villages in Darfur.
- - -

SUDAN HAMPERING RELIEF WORK
And pressurising refugees to return to unsafe villages

Aug 10: The U.N. in Geneva said the Sudanese government was hampering access to hungry Darfuris by restricting relief flights and causing "major delays" in deployment of aid workers.

The world body also said Sudanese authorities were pressuring traumatised refugees to return to unsafe villages. "We have interviewed people in hospital who tell us they have gone back to the villages, believing the government commitment, and have been shot by Janjaweed raiders," said United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees spokesman Peter Kessler in Geneva.

"We can't tell if people are being led into a trap -- we would hope not," he added.
- - -

HIGH FLYING AMERICAN DOCTORS
Doctors without Borders in Darfur war zone

American blogger Nick has just started working in emergency medicine. It involves crazy hours and shifts that include being on call to attend emergencies by helicopter. Here's wishing him best of luck that the helicopter gets a shout while he's on call so he can blog about it -- and maybe post pictures. It'd be interesting to read the ins and outs of such an operation. Do the patients have to pay for the whole deal if a helicopter and emergency team comes to their aid? Is the helicopter pad on the roof - or in the grounds of the hospital - do the medics have to learn emergency procedures - like parachuting in case of a bail out.

In Nick's latest post, he writes about his buddy from Boston, Jonathan Spector, who is in the war zone of Darfur right now where he has spent the past two months working for Medecins Sans Frontieres. Best of luck to Jonathan, and best wishes for a safe return home.
- - -

SUDAN IMPRISONING REFUGEES
For talking to foreigners

A human rights group said civilians in Darfur are being routinely imprisoned or harassed by Sudanese authorities for talking to foreigners about the conflict in the remote western area bordering Chad. London-based rights group Amnesty International said in a report Sudan had rounded up scores of people who spoke to journalists and foreign leaders, including U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, on recent visits to Darfur. Amnesty counted at least 50 people arrested, including 15 men detained at the Abu Shouk camp after Powell's June 30 visit, and another five taken from there after French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier's July 27 trip.

A U.S. State Department official called the reports "of serious concern".
- - -

GENOCIDE UNDERWAY IN DARFUR
Despite EU statement

EU Business - US Senate leader insists "genocide" underway in Darfur, despite EU statement:

In Brussels on Monday, the head of the returning EU delegation, Pieter Feith, said "it is clear there is widespread, silent and slow killing going on and village burning of a fairly large scale" in Darfur, but said: "We are not in the situation of genocide there."

Feith, the personal representative for Sudan of EU foreign affairs chief Javier Solana, added that there were "considerable doubts as to the willingness of the government of Sudan to protect the civilian population".

Pressed to justify his use of the word genocide, Frist replied: "The United States through our commander in chief and our secretary of state will make an official stance, whether it is genocide" or not."

Last month, both houses of the US Congress adopted a resolution which declared that "the atrocities unfolding in Darfur, Sudan, are genocide."

Frist said that interviews with about 12,000 refugees and leaders in the region also justified the term.

"The raping of women, the purposeful killing of hundreds of civilians, the widespread burning of villages and the destruction of lives and the racial overtones... all of which put together qualifies as genocide," he said.
- - -

Aug 9: China View reports flash: independent inquiry finds allegations of misconduct by UN oil-for-food serious.
- - -

U.S. TALKS OF DARFUR AS GENOCIDE
But does not consider military intervention as appropriate

Aug 11: Senator majority leader Dr Bill Frist, who has been on a visit to Darfur, described as "genocide" the murder and displacement of thousands of the indigenous black community by Janjaweed Arab militias said to enjoy government backing. Based on accounts of survivors in refugee camps, it was impossible not to conclude the crisis amounted to genocide, Frist said, arguing he disagreed with the European Union report that declined to qualify the atrocities as such.

The US Government will, however, not send soldiers to the region because it does not consider military intervention as appropriate, Frist said. It would instead support an African-sourced peace keeping force that should ideally constitute an equal representation from Khartoum, Sudanese People Liberation Army (SPLA) and the African Union (AU), Frist said. He said the crisis would be easier to tame if the Islamic Government severed links with the Janjaweed and that any continued support for the militia could only worsen the crisis.

# posted by Ingrid J. Jones @ 8/11/2004 0 comments Newer›  ‹Older