Comments

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.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Africa Horn

Sudan Opposes U.N. Troops in Darfur

2006-02-21

KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) - Sudan's vice president told a visiting U.S. delegation that the country opposed a proposal to deploy international peacekeepers to Darfur, but was committed to negotiations to end tensions in the region, state media reported Monday.

"Just as soon as the Janjaweed finish up, tensions will be a lot lower!"

Despite the Sudanese objections, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton on Monday accused the U.N. and some Security Council members on Monday of moving too slowly toward setting up the U.N. force. Bolton expressed frustration with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan and U.N. officials over the pace of preparation for the mission, which would replace 7,000 African Union troops. He also said African and Arab diplomats on the Security Council needed to move more quickly.``We're prepared, but the main thing, I think, is to get the internal U.N. operation to be moving more quickly, which we'd like to see,'' he said.

"I'm disturbed at your lack of ... movement."

U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said United Nations officials were in talks with African leaders about the force and that planning for the mission ``is moving full-steam ahead.'' The African Union's mandate in Darfur expires on March 31.

``Sudan rejects replacement of the African Union forces with United Nations forces,'' Vice President Ali Osman Mohamed Taha told the 11-member U.S. congressional delegation Sunday night after they returned from Darfur, according to a Monday report by the state-run Sudan News Agency.

Even if they're the same troops.

SUNA said Taha told the delegates that Sudan was committed to resolving the Darfur problem through peaceful negotiations, and blamed the rebels for procrastinating in the ongoing peace talks in Nigeria.

Samani Al-Wasilla, state minister of Foreign Affairs, said Taha told the U.S. delegation the conflict in Darfur was ``a situation of security violations and intertribal fighting over water and grazing areas and could not under any circumstance be described as a genocide.''

"No, no! Certainly not!"

The delegation, led by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, left Sudan Sunday night.

Oh, there's a big help.

Posted by:Steve White

#8 How does this jibe with the "UN forces are always useless" meme?

I don't think the meme was 'always useless'. More like 'generally useless'. 'Generally useless' means that there may be a smidge of competence, more if Western troops are used.

Sudan doesn't like that.

Posted by: Pappy 2006-02-21 19:12

#7 UN forces can be useful when backed by British paratroopers, as in Sierra Leone.
The default approach seems to be to send ill-equipped, ill-trained, ill-lead troops with no authority to shoot back or go in hot pursuit. But you could imagine a parallel universe where somebody with sense had a say in the selection of the forces and the rules of engagement.

Posted by: James 2006-02-21 13:43

#6 Aw, can't we just bomb the crap outta Khartoum and have done?

Posted by: mojo 2006-02-21 13:09

#5 After March 31, the AU forces won't be witnesses anymore.

Posted by: Robert Crawford 2006-02-21 11:10

#4 i cant see how the UN forces are any better witnesses than the AU forces.

Posted by: liberalhawk 2006-02-21 11:07

#3 I don't see the conflict. UN forces might be witnesses, which the Sudanese government doesn't want, but they'd do bugger-all to stop the murder.

Posted by: Robert Crawford 2006-02-21 11:06

#2 "``Sudan rejects replacement of the African Union forces with United Nations forces,'' "

How does this jibe with the "UN forces are always useless" meme?

Posted by: liberalhawk 2006-02-21 11:00

#1 This had to have had delgation's undies in a twist. On one hand, it's the kind of deployment they would support. On the other, if they do...

Posted by: Pappy 2006-02-21 10:54

00:00