‘If we die today, you will be responsible’
David Bosco accompanies the UN Security Council on its visit to Darfur and finds that even meeting the victims of the conflict can’t stiffen the Council’s resolve
Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem was holding court last Thursday in the VIP lounge at Khartoum International Airport. Sudan’s voluble United Nations ambassador was accompanying the UN Security Council as it prepared for the short flight to northern Darfur. Many hoped that the Council’s visit to the war-torn region would bring diplomats of the member states face to face with the suffering, and so provoke a strong condemnation of Sudanese war crimes. Instead, all our mission really served to highlight was the lack of resolve among UN officials and the lack of contrition from the Sudanese.
From the outset, Abdalhaleem cast the Darfur crisis as little more than a Western plot to weaken Sudan. ‘If Darfur is over tomorrow, they will find a new Darfur. They want to keep us in the intensive care unit.’ The images of horror that prevail in the West are a fabrication, he said. ‘We don’t think there’s a humanitarian crisis in Darfur.’ (The death toll in Darfur is calculated at some 210,000, and 2.1 million people have been forced from their homes by the fighting.) The refugee camps are ‘five-star camps’, he said with a laugh. ‘You’ll see.’
Across the room, America’s deputy UN ambassador, Alejandro Wolff, took in the spectacle. ‘I’m not sure why anyone would be proud of hosting the largest humanitarian operation in the world,’ he said. Wolff and several of his Western colleagues hoped that the mission might help convince Khartoum to remove obstacles to the deployment of peacekeepers. The Council has authorised a force of 20,000, but sluggish contributions and Khartoum’s blocking tactics have kept them from reaching full strength. Just 8,000 mainly African peacekeepers are struggling to secure the region. Several Council members also wanted to remind Sudan of its obligation to comply with the International Criminal Court’s rulings. The court has indicted two Sudanese officials — one a serving minister. But the Council was not united in its determination to ratchet up the pressure. Moscow and Beijing have consistently opposed confrontation. They dispatched diplomats on the trip, but they kept a low profile.
More articles from: David Bosco | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
Here’s how McCain can beat Obama to the White House
Reihan SalamThe acclaimed young Republican writer, Reihan Salam, says that McCain can win the presidency if he appeals relentlessly to the non-college-educated white middle class, pursues family-friendly tax reform and stands for global peace through American strength
Beijing Notebook
Boris JohnsonBoris Johnson recalls his recent jaunt to China on the occasion of the Olympic games
Our obsession with paedophilia is more dangerous than Gary Glitter’s return
Rod LiddleRod Liddle says that the hunt for this foul child molester is the symptom of an unhealthy and disproportionate fixation that has spawned all sorts of absurd rules and regulations
Confessions of a travelling non-dom
O`ar PaliO’ar Pali says it isn’t easy being on planes next to strangers all the time — and you quickly find there are a series of character types, dying to tell you about themselves
Reading on the web is not really reading
Susan JacobySusan Jacoby laments the intellectual crisis now gripping America and says that the torrent of digital infotainment is threatening basic literacy and news knowledge
Russia’s aggression in Georgia is a portent of perils to come
Philip BobbittPhilip Bobbitt says that the crisis reflects Russia’s determination to remain an old-fashioned nation state, dominating its region. Intellectual imagination will be needed to thwart that ambition: a recognition that the post-Cold War world needs new global institutions
Monty Python’s guide to the Darfur conflict
Justin MarozziThe genocide publicised by movie stars is over, says Justin Marozzi. What must now be resolved is a civil war with unlimited breakaway factions — and Hollywood cannot help
Very discreetly, Cameron is writing his first Queen’s Speech
Fraser NelsonIn spite of their commanding poll lead, the Tories are terrified of seeming complacent. But, as Fraser Nelson discloses, work is well advanced on a first-term plan for government in which education reform and a welfare revolution will be the centrepieces
We have a duty to protect Zimbabwe
Peter OborneRobert Mugabe is murdering, starving and brutalising his people in the run-up to the presidential elections next week, says Peter Oborne. We should act now to prevent civil war and ethnic cleansing
Naked commercial greed meets Stalinist control
Leo McKinstryWhen Leo McKinstry objected to his neighbours’ plan to build two blocks of flats, he quickly discovered the limits of ‘community empowerment’ under New Labour
Latest blog posts
sponsored links
Sky TV, Broadband & Talk from £16 a Month
Sky TV & free broadband packages available from £16 a month. Choose from a standard free sky box, sky plus or sky hd.
Sky TV, Broadband & Talk from £16 a Month
Sky TV & free broadband packages available from £16 a month. Choose from a standard free sky box, sky plus...
ROME CENTRE
PORTA METRONIA, ROME Standing high on the top of one of the seven hills of Rome- the Coelian- this unique
City Breaks. ROME and PARIS
ROME and PARIS: over 350 holiday rentals apartments listed: visit www.romanreference.com and www.parisreference.com or call +39 0648 903612.
Jewellery. RUFFS (Estd. 1904).
Goldsmiths by Design Welcome to Ruffs! You have found a company of Goldsmiths that specialises in the manufacture, amongst other
Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine
Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2008 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
sebastian
June 13th, 2008 6:53amThe failed litmus test for that expensive talking shop and vote mart called the UN. David has done well to describe this charade so vividly. And so......is it better to have a largely useless organisation; or none at all? Would it be better to abandon the Darfur (and millions of other) victims the UN can do little or nothing for; or to continue with breadline rations for a few and false promises for most?
How much did that visit cost? Lots. How much was gained? Nothing.
The UN's often a cruel and wasteful disgrace. It talks itself into regular inertia. There's much interest in national (or private) profit - minerals; ore; oil; cheap labour; contracts drafted and sold; mining rights peddled - not humanitarian matters. It's disgusting. Our continued payments to it should be linked to reforms.
Riaz Ahmad
June 15th, 2008 10:18pmDavid Bosco, you and others like you know extremely well why UN is incapable of preventing mass murder and suffering; for the sake of national vested interest, you all are conveniently very silent. The problem is the scurity council deliberately designed to serve the vested interest of the powerful at the expanse of fairness and justice for the weak and poor. If there was a free vote of the member states, things will be totally different. If the powerful, like the USA failed to act, then all this talk of spreading democracy and human rights will sound very hollow and fake.