1
   

United nations, EU, where are you??

 
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Jul, 2004 02:13 pm
Walter
I had already at your suggestion checked the web and gotten that chronology of events. Thanks.
0 Replies
 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Jul, 2004 11:46 pm
Annan Urges Sudan to Disarm Militias



Quote:
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan urged Sudan on Wednesday to take immediate action to disarm Arab-backed militias and warned that the international community may step in if it doesn't move quickly.

Annan and his special representative in Khartoum, Jan Pronk, made clear they want a speedy restoration of security in the vast region where a 15-month conflict has killed up to 30,000 people, forced over a million to flee their homes, and left 2.2 million needing food and medicine. But neither set a deadline.

"The urgency is there, and the Sudanese government doesn't have forever," Annan told a news conference after Pronk briefed the U.N. Security Council on Darfur.

The rebels promised Annan in a July 3 agreement that they would crack down on the Janjaweed militia and other outlawed rebel groups, but Pronk said the government has made "no progress whatsoever" in honoring its pledge.

(AP) United Nations Special Representative for Sudan, Jan Pronk, is framed by Picassos's "Guernica",...
Full Image
Annan said the Sudanese government should deploy the 6,000 police to Darfur called for in the agreement and protect people, "many of whom are living in sub-human conditions."

Pronk said a body set up with Sudan to monitor implementation of the July 3 accord is sending a joint mission to Darfur for three days early next week to assess what's happening with the Janjaweed, and what's happening with the relocation or return of those who fled the fighting. The mission will include U.N. representatives, government officials and some ambassadors, he said.

The United States is pressing for Security Council action, and Pronk said he wants members to back the agreement and "to give teeth" to the implementation body.

U.S. Ambassador John Danforth said Washington has put the finishing touches on a revised draft resolution, which will be discussed Thursday by council experts. The initial draft called for an arms embargo and travel ban on the Janjaweed and would require the council to decide after 30 days whether these sanctions should be extended.


source
0 Replies
 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Jul, 2004 11:58 pm
Blair draws up plans to send troops to Sudan

Quote:

· Army could be used to protect camps
· A million lives at risk from starvation

Tony Blair has asked Downing Street and Foreign Office officials to draw up plans for possible military intervention in Sudan, where more than a million refugees are at risk from famine and disease.

Despite a heavy commitment of British armed forces in Iraq and other troublespots, the prime minister has had discussions with advisers for on-the-ground involvement of troops.

The prime minister is still hoping that diplomatic and political pressure on the Khartoum government will resolve the crisis without the need for military involvement.

But with conditions in hundreds of camps sharply deteriorating this week with the onset of torrential rain, governments across Europe as well as the US are facing calls for action to prevent a repetition of the Rwanda genocide 10 years ago that claimed a million lives. A government official involved in the discussions said Mr Blair was being given regular updates on the condition of the refugees in the Darfur region.

"The prime minister has asked to look at all options that will save lives and not to rule out the military services," the official said.

Three options for military action have been put forward in Downing Street:

· British servicemen to help with the delivery of aid if the humanitarian agencies can no longer cope. At present, the Belgian air force is helping to fly in aid. Britain is using civilian planes because they are cheaper.

· British logistical support for an African Union force of 60 monitors and 300-strong protection force being deployed in the Sudan. The AU force is short of equipment, including helicopters, vital given the poor state of Darfur's roads.

· British troops to protect refugee camps being harassed by marauding militias. This creation of safe zones would be the most risky of the options and would require the agreement of the Khartoum government, which would be reluctant to give it.

The fact that Mr Blair is prepared to consider military options, even limited ones, so soon after the Iraq war may create controversy, not least among critics who already regard him as too interventionist. It would be his sixth military venture since becoming prime minister in 1997.


source
0 Replies
 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jul, 2004 01:45 am
Sudan angered by "genocide" label

Quote:
Sudanese Arabs have attacked a U.S. congressional resolution describing atrocities in Darfur as "genocide", while people driven from their homes are asking how Washington can make it safe for them to return.

"The international concern over Darfur is actually a targeting of the Islamic state in Sudan," Sudan President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, not commenting directly on the resolution, told a public meeting after Friday prayers south of Khartoum.

In Khartoum, 34-year-old driver Ismail Gasmalseed said: "Is Iraq not enough? Do they want to destroy us too? ...America wants everyone who is Arab to pay. They do not understand anything."

Rebels and human rights groups say Khartoum has armed and backed Arab militia known as the Janjaweed who have been forcing non-Arab African villagers off their land in Darfur in an extension of a long conflict over farmland and grazing.

Supporters of the resolution approved by the U.S. Congress on Thursday hope it will help mobilise the international community to protect Africans from the militias.

The accusation of "genocide" is highly controversial. The United Nations has declared the situation in Darfur the world's worst humanitarian crisis but has not called it a genocide, which would force it to take action.

The world body estimates that the 15-month-old conflict between Arab nomads and non-Arab farmers has killed at least 30,000 people and displaced more than a million, many of them driven from their homes by marauding Janjaweed militia.




source
0 Replies
 
Rick d Israeli
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jul, 2004 07:55 am
Could the Sudanese government be afraid of the fact connections between them and the Janjaweed militia could be discovered?
0 Replies
 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jul, 2004 12:09 am
That´s the crackpot answer:
Sudan Tribune
Beshir accuses world of targeting Islam in Sudan

Quote:
Sudanese President Omar al-Beshir has accused the international community of targeting Islam in his country as the government struggles to fend off mounting international pressure over the Darfur crisis, the pro-government Al-Anbaa reported Saturday.


Omar al-Beshir
The paper quoted Beshir as telling supporters in the central region of Gezira following Friday prayers that the real aim of the campaign against his country was not the situation in the troubled western region of Darfur, but to derail the growth of Islam in the country.

Sudan has come under increased pressure from the international community in recent days to resolve the situation in Darfur, where the UN says at least 30,000 people have died in the 16-month-old conflict between government forces and Arab militia allies and two main rebel groups in the region.

"The international concern about the Darfur issue is targeting the status of Islam in Sudan," claimed Beshir, who seized power in a bloodless Islamist coup in 1989.

Khartoum has brushed off criticism that it is not doing enough to help alleviate the humanitarian situation in Darfur, described by the United Nations as the world's worst, and pledged to improve the access of international aid agencies to the region and the needy.

The Sudanese president insisted, however, that his government's concern for Darfur was first and foremost because of the responsibility it felt for the people before God and not aid agencies or other countries.

He said his national "salvation" government, as the regime's supporters refer to it, will continue "to adhere to Islamic sharia (law), set an example for social cohesion and bring humanity out of darkness to the light of Islam."

The president's comments came as legislators denounced ongoing consultations in the UN Security Council for action against Khartoum, dismissing the moves as interference in the internal affairs of Sudan.

MPs also called on the government to take its case to the Sudanese people.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jul, 2004 05:44 pm
Where is the famed International Criminal Court? Could it be that it was all just an illusion, an act of 'belling the cat' by the hypocritical signatories of the treaty of Rome?

Our European "friends" castigated the U.S. for rejecting the ICC as ineffective in real problems and merely a source of mischef for others. Where are they now?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jul, 2004 11:39 pm
The ICC is still in Den Haag ... and George, you forget perhaps during the past few weeks, what it is about, how it works etc.
0 Replies
 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 12:50 am
crackpot... But it is also a war of the words:
Sudan to 'fight' military intervention

Quote:

Sudan will physically resist any attempt at outside military intervention in the crisis-torn Darfur region, a top Sudanese politician has said.

The official al-Anbaa newspaper on Sunday quoted Ibrahim Ahmad Omar, secretary-general of the ruling National Congress, as saying that force will be met by force.

"Anybody who contemplates imposing his opinion by force will be confronted by force," Omar said. "Any power that intervenes in Darfur will be a loser."

The Sudanese Foreign Minister Mustafa Usman Ismail also questioned the need for foreign troops in Darfur, saying his government was doing all it could to disarm militias.

"Why should we have to rush and to talk about military intervention as long as the situation is getting better?" Ismail asked. "My government is doing what can be done in order to disarm the militia."

Rebel plea

But a Darfur rebel movement called for a rapid deployment of international troops to deal with the situation in the western Sudanese region, described by the United Nations as the world's worst humanitarian crisis.

"Anybody who contemplates imposing his opinion by force will be confronted by force"

Ibrahim Ahmad Omar,
Secretary-general of the National Congress

The UN says up to 50,000 people have died since a revolt against the government in Khartoum broke out in February 2003.

"The National Congress firmly rejects any foreign threats targeting Sudan and its people and is opposed to any foreign intervention in Sudan," Omar said. He insisted Sudan was capable of solving its problem by itself.

Omar also called for general mobilization among the Sudanese people and political parties and organisations to "stand up against this unfair campaign which targets not only the National Congress and the government but all of the Sudanese people and their values".

Another ruling party official and federal government minister Nafie Ali Nafie said Sudan "will not be a playground or a park of entertainment for foreign troops".

But Abdel Wahed Muhammad Nur, spokesman for the rebel Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) called for speedy deployment of foreign troops.

"We are asking the United States, the United Nations secretary general, the European Union and the African Union for the urgent deployment of troops in the coming days to ensure the delivery of food aid to millions of refugees," he said.

Some say the rebels are
obstructing peace efforts

"Intervention would avert a humanitarian disaster of great proportions," Nur said.

Australia has in the meanwhile expressed willingness to contribute troops to any UN peacekeeping mission in Sudan.

"There's a good chance that we will send some trooops to Sudan," Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said.

Some observers also accused the rebels in Darfur of obstructing peace efforts in the expectation that that the international community will intervene.
0 Replies
 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 01:19 am
..and at present

EU Joins U.S. in Threat of Sudan Sanctions


Quote:
Joining the United States, the European Union threatened sanctions against Sudan unless it quickly disarms Arab militias blamed for "massive human rights violations" against black Africans.

German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said Sunday that "Sudan's government has the duty to guarantee people's security and the responsibility of bringing the militias before the courts and taking their weapons to end the violence."

Fischer's office said he and Secretary of State Colin Powell agreed in a phone call that Sudan should face the sanctions unless it quickly disarms Arab militias responsible for the killings.

The 25-nation European Union, the United States and humanitarian groups have accused the Sudanese government of backing the militias - a claim it denies.

The violence began 15 months ago when two rebel groups from Darfur's African tribes took up arms in a struggle over land and resources with Arab countrymen. Arab militias known as Janjaweed then began a brutal campaign to drive out the black Africans.

As many as 30,000 people, most of them black Africans, have been killed and more than 1 million people have fled their homes. Some 2.2 million are in urgent need of food or medical attention.

Citing "grave concern" at reports of "massive human rights violations" that some have called genocide, EU ministers scheduled a Monday meeting in Brussels to push the government and rebel groups to resume peace talks as well as improve access for relief groups.

"It's almost certain the international community will take further measures if this situation does not improve," Dutch Foreign Minister Ben Bot, whose country holds the EU's rotating presidency, said late Saturday after meeting his Sudanese counterpart, Mustafa Osman Ismail.

Ismail insisted his country would prosecute the militias but again denied the attacks amounted to genocide. The U.S. Congress last week labeled them as such.

Pope John Paul II urged the international community Sunday to help end the Darfur conflict, saying it "brings with it ever more poverty, desperation and death."

"How can we remain indifferent?" the pontiff said, addressing pilgrims in the courtyard of his summer residence in Castel Gandolfo, outside Rome, and made a "grief-stricken appeal" to African leaders and world organizations for aid and diplomacy.

The United Nations plans to send a peacekeeping mission by the end of 2004 to Darfur, a region the size of Iraq with a population of 6.7 million. Australia and New Zealand said they would be willing to contribute troops to the force. The African Union is sending 300 troops and 150 unarmed observers.

Also, a flight carrying sanitation and water purification equipment left Britain for Darfur on Sunday, the third flight to be organized by the aid group Oxfam.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 05:10 am
Walter,

Though I may well be mistaken, I do believe that if any of the Sudanese victims were to bring an action before the court against either the militias for their actions, or against the Sudanese Government for its inaction or perhaps hidden support, a case could indeed be made under the Provisions of the Treaty of Rome. Of course the Sudanese government could quickly claim jurusdiction and that it is doing all it can (a claim it is making now), and therefore prevent the court from direct intervention.

I believe all this points to the fundamental, and fatal, defect of the ICC. It is ineffective in dealing with serious issues, but a source of mischief in others.

Perhaps we could refer the matter to the Belgians. They claimed that their courts had jurisdiction over all mankind. That, however did not prevent them from turning a blind eye to the grotesque situation developing a decade ago in their former Ruwandan colony.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 05:38 am
georgeob1 wrote:

Perhaps we could refer the matter to the Belgians. They claimed that their courts had jurisdiction over all mankind. That, however did not prevent them from turning a blind eye to the grotesque situation developing a decade ago in their former Ruwandan colony.


The Belgian democratically elected parliament/government made such laws, which the courts follow.

Belgium's 1993 universal jurisdiction law, which permitted victims to file complaints in Belgium for atrocities committed abroad, had made Belgium a leader in the struggle for international justice.

However, by now (= since August last year) the Belgian law resembles that of other European countries.
Belgian courts have only jurisdiction over international crimes
- if the accused is Belgian or has his primary residence in Belgium,
- (o) if the victim is Belgian or has lived in Belgium for at least three years at the time the crimes were committed
- (or) if Belgium is required by treaty to exercise jurisdiction over the case.
The [new] law also considerably reduces victims' ability to obtain direct access to the courts - unless the accused is Belgian or has his primary residence in Belgium, the decision whether or not to proceed with any complaint rests entirely with the state prosecutor.
Belgium has thus restricted the reach of universal jurisdiction in its courts by adopting a law similar to or more restrictive than most European countries.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 06:32 am
Walter,

You are. of course, correct in your recitation of the details of the evolution of Belgian law. However, that doesn't make Belgium a " ... leader in the struggle for international justice..." as you suggest.

On the contrary, I would say that the record of Belgian colonialism in the Congo and Rwanda, and the indifference it has shown to the mess it left behind, all manifest a high degree of international injustice. Passing after-the-fact, pious laws that cannot be enforced does not compensate for years of exploitation, murder, and theft. Moreover, it doesn't accomplish anything in the real world. Perhaps it does salve Belgian consciences and provide them an undeserved sense of new found virtue, however.

I believe my point above about the ICC is correct.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 06:41 am
georgeob1 wrote:


I believe my point above about the ICC is correct.


I completely agree with your conclusin(s).




(Just quoting again some facts about the ICC)
Quote:
The International Criminal Court will complement national courts so that they retain jurisdiction to try genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

If a case is being considered by a country with jurisdiction over it, then the ICC cannot act unless the country is unwilling or unable genuinely to investigate or prosecute.

A country may be determined to be "unwilling" when it is clearly shielding someone from responsibility for ICC crimes. A country may be "unable" when its legal system has collapsed.

Proceedings before the International Criminal Court may be initiated by a State Party, the Prosecutor or the Security Council.

The ICC Statute has strict conditions for when jurisdiction can be exercised, such as complementarity and the requirement for a territorial or nationality link.

The jurisdiction of the ICC is based on "complementarity", which allows national courts the first opportunity to investigate or prosecute.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 07:27 am
Damn ! We agree !

I have a hard time dealing with that.

However, perhaps the agreement involves only the details of the Treaty of Rome and the evolution Belgian law, and not our interpretations of them.

I believe the ICC is, at best, an illusion that masks the need for real action. The U.S. is right to reject it and to refuse its jurisdiction. I also believe the Belgian government has distinguished itself far more by its hypocricy than by any zeal for international justice.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 08:10 am
Stop, George stop!


Of course we don't agree completely (you weren't so long away to get this award! :wink: ): I still think totally different about the ICC.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 08:15 am
Ehem, about this Belgium law, especially in the old version, well, the Belgians ...
(I don't like there frites, too, but their 'flam' [rice cake], truffels ... :wink: )
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 06:20 pm
Walter,

Glad to hear we don't agree completely - I was worried about that.

I will concede that the cuisine in Belgium is among the best anywhere - almost as good as that in San Francisco & Napa Valley in California.
0 Replies
 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 12:12 am
Families 'burnt alive by Sudanese militia'

Quote:
Women and children are being chained together and burnt alive by Sudanese militias rampaging in Darfur. The groups, known as the janjaweed, arrived in villages on horseback, rounded up men, women and children, and set them alight in the market-place.

One man, sitting in the devastated village of Dugu in south Darfur, said: "The janjaweed came, they grabbed these people; men, women, everyone and they burnt them. They even killed my son. He was only eight. There was at least one other child there too."

Witnesses say they found between 10 and 15 bodies smouldering. Observers from the African Union found similar burnings in Sulei and Ehda in western Darfur, where "the entire village had been burnt and deserted, except for a few men". The AU observers added: "This was an unwarranted and unprovoked attack on the civilian population by the janjaweed."

The international community is increasing pressure on the Sudanese government to disarm the janjaweed, which has been accused of raping women and girls, and massacring villages that are non-Arab.

The African Union, made up of all the African states, is considering turning its military observer mission into a fully fledged peace-keeping force, with particular emphasis on disarming the Janjaweed. African leaders meet in Ghana today, to try to find an "African solution" to the Darfur crisis.


full report

inhumanity goes ahead...
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2004 07:27 am
I guess the UN and all the powers will continue talking until the Janjaweed complete their massacres. It is just another example of how evil continues to triumph over justice in the world we live in and the ineptitude or unwillingness of those who should to do anything about it. While they talk and supposedly agonizing over the situation people die and are otherwise brutalized by the thousands. Shame on the UN, shame on the EU and the rest of the nations of the world for standing by while this is happening.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Africa is a dying continent - Discussion by Pharon
Congo: The World Capital of Killing - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Notes from Africa - Discussion by dagmaraka
Tunisia From October 5 to 18, 2007 - Discussion by cicerone imposter
I hope this works out for Darfur... - Discussion by ossobuco
Let's see how well you know Africa - Discussion by gustavratzenhofer
Anyone know a lot about Sierra Leone? - Discussion by dlowan
Sudanese find peace? - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/01/2025 at 08:46:39