You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Africa Horn
Darfur refugees hack up AU translator, force UN aid chief to flee
2006-05-09
Followup from yesterday.
Residents of a Darfur refugee camp hacked an African Union translator to death Monday shortly after the U.N. humanitarian chief rushed out of the same camp when demonstrators attacked another translator who was part of his entourage, U.N. spokesmen said. Both attacks were in Kalma camp near the city of Nyala in south Darfur, visited by Jan Egeland, the U.N. undersecretary-general for humanitarian affairs.

U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said in New York said he was told there were two attacks.

The first attack was against a non-governmental organization staffer, which prompted the departure of Egeland and his staff, Dujarric said. The second occurred after Egeland left, when the African Union compound in the camp was destroyed by its residents, he added. "It is our understanding that an African Union translator was hacked to death," Dujarric said.

Earlier, U.N. spokeswoman Dawn Blalock said Egeland and his entourage had rushed out of the camp when demonstrators demanding the deployment of U.N. peacekeepers attacked a translator. They accused the translator of supporting the feared Janjaweed, the pro-government militia blamed for widespread atrocities in Darfur, she said.

An Associated Press reporter in the camp said Egeland was met by a huge crowd chanting pro-U.N., pro-U.S. and anti-government slogans. The demonstrators, mostly women, shouted: "Yes to international troops!" - a reference to the Western proposal for U.N. peacekeepers to be deployed in Darfur.

As the entourage was leaving, they attacked a U.N. vehicle with sticks and knives because they thought the translator had said something that did not reflect what they had said in Arabic against Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir. The translator was not injured, but colleagues put him into a van for his own safety, Blalock said in a phone call to The Associated Press. The translator with Egeland is employed by Oxfam, but was not further identified. The British-based NGO promptly withdrew its six staffers from Kalma camp.

"We did not evacuate," Blalock emphasized. "The program was cut short because tensions were too much."
"We just ran away, that's all."
Egeland had gone to Kalma to meet leaders of at least 90,000 residents of the camp, as well as representatives of the NGOs. His visit came days after Sudan's government and the main rebel group in the country's western Darfur region signed a peace agreement to end fighting that has killed nearly 200,000 people since 2003.

Blalock said there had been tension in the Kalma camp because of the absence of a camp co-ordinator. The government expelled the last coordinator, an official of the Norwegian Refugee Committee, in early April, she said.
See, just what they need, a bunch of Euros in charge ...
Egeland is scheduled hold meetings with U.N. and NGO officials in Khartoum, and in two days, he will head to Chad, Dujarric said.

After his arrival in Darfur on Sunday, Egeland warned that the peace treaty would not be easy to implement. "We are now in the center of the war which is still going on," Egeland told AP Television News. "The world should have no illusions that peace will break out easily here in Darfur. We have to have an enormous effort from the international community and the parties themselves to enforce this peace agreement."
Posted by:Dan Darling

#17  No way, no how, not us.

How about Amnesty International, Oxfam et al send their army since anyone that goes their willbe under their unwritten ROE.

Sorry we are all out of men and women to commit to this kind of charity work.Chain is pretty flush right now ask them.

Sending US personel beyond the present level or more money doesn't have my moral or political support.
Posted by: SPoD   2006-05-09 22:06  

#16  The Sudan has been a sh*thole for a century, plus a whole lot of change. If we go in there, we will have to kill all of the bad guyz, then we will have to rewire all the screwed up citizens, which will make everyone go apesh*t, because it's a cultural thang. I feel for these people, but we are talking about a major committment for a decade at least, and there will have to be a consensus of how this will be done. Sudan is a true Quagmire™. Sorry to say, but that's the way I see it.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2006-05-09 21:50  

#15  Sudan dose not appear on the list of Axis of Evil states, so there is no way America will be drawn into the true quagmire called Darfur. Lots of lefty and transnational types would love to see America intervene, but understandably Bush is keeping his eye on the vital strategic concerns created by Iran and North Korea. The Administration can also use UN inaction in Sudan as a wedge against Kofi and Company: "You got your peace accord, so you go manage it."
Posted by: john   2006-05-09 21:21  

#14  They're Muslim, so we don't care.

Victor Davis Hanson summmed it up best:

"...I think the United States is saying look, we're willing to step forward, but we're not going to do this anymore where we get hung out to dry [as] in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Balkans, and Panama.

"Every time we try to do something to stop a dictator or a thug, we have these triangulators who want it to be done, but not us to do it.

"So I think we're sort of seeing an American zen now, where the United States is trying to say you wanted this type of world, you have it. And then yet not being completely nihilistic, in the sense that we will act, finally, if no one else will, but we want this other dialogue to play out."

What I find so absolutely ironic is the cacophony from 'Those That Care' that the "U.S. should do something". What, unilateralism is now suddenly popular and correct?
Posted by: Pappy   2006-05-09 18:55  

#13  Or, "We care, but not enough to send the very best."
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-05-09 18:44  

#12  They're Muslim, so we don't care.

That statement is bloody nonsense, Mike N. A truer statement is, "We're awfully busy in other parts of the world right now, but at least we've been trying to get the world to acknowledge the attempted genocide that nobody else cares about." We know there are Marines in Chad, and other Special Forces units doing things to strengthen anti-terror efforts throughout North Africa -- most of whose citizens follow Mohammed rather than Jesus Christ or the local pantheon.
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-05-09 18:32  

#11  Everybody knows a U.S. force would be immeasurably more aeffective than a U.N. force. But you're right LH, ther is zero chance of that happening. They're Muslim, so we don't care.
Posted by: Mike N.   2006-05-09 17:21  

#10  So UN troops are buy sex in Liberia. In Darfur women are raped when they go out for firewood.

Are you suggesting a US force, instead of a UN force? I dont think thats in the cards.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2006-05-09 16:42  

#9  What they want is a large blue helmeted UN force on the ground, so they arent killed, and can gather firewood without being raped.

Yeah, also because, with the UN's Itty Bitty Titty for Food Program, their kids can get fed.
Posted by: badanov   2006-05-09 14:28  

#8  I've been looking for pix of Egeland being chased out of the camp. No luck so far. I s'pose he didn't bring any photographers 'cos he wanted to keep a low profile and just jump in and help.

/yeah right
Posted by: Seafarious   2006-05-09 09:48  

#7  it makes perfect sense.

These people are being victimized by the janjaweed, and the AU troops are not effective at protecting them. What they want is a large blue helmeted UN force on the ground, so they arent killed, and can gather firewood without being raped. They know the people who are pushing hardest for that UN force are AMERICANS (Bush called for that just yesterday, and Rice will be going to NY to ride herd on the UNSC to deliver it)


And yes, this group behaved badly. But theyre kinda at the ends of their ropes. Living far worse than the usual MSM poster children, like the Palestinians, for ex.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2006-05-09 09:15  

#6  Wow, you're right! Pro UN (well not so sure about that one), Pro US and anti-government crowds??? There's hope for Darfur yet.
Posted by: mcsegeek1   2006-05-09 09:14  

#5  Indeed, CU8745... I had to read that 3 times before it even began to register. And I don't believe it. I'm going back to bed.
Posted by: Sneremble Elmitch8614   2006-05-09 09:10  

#4  "a huge crowd chanting pro-U.N., pro-U.S. and anti-government slogans."

Boy, you don't see those words together very often.
Posted by: Clavish Ulack8745   2006-05-09 09:07  

#3  People who attack UN personnel cannot be completely bad.
Posted by: JFM   2006-05-09 08:58  

#2  The PC CNN TV news report made no mention of anyone hacked to death - only showed Egeland strutting about.
Posted by: Duh!   2006-05-09 07:54  

#1  Residents of a Darfur refugee camp hacked an African Union translator to death Monday shortly after the U.N. humanitarian chief rushed out of the same camp when demonstrators attacked another translator who was part of his entourage, U.N. spokesmen said.

Nice people.
Posted by: gromgoru   2006-05-09 05:25  

00:00