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
By nightfall, the Council was back in the capital for a planned meeting with Bashir. Police blocked off intersections as the Council entourage sped through darkened streets and along the Nile River to the Friendship Hall. A large conference room had been set up for the encounter. The Council members were on one side of the long table, Sudan’s ministers on the other, and Bashir’s seat was at the head. Everyone stood as they waited for the president to arrive. Five minutes passed, then 15. The duly authorised guardians of international peace and security shifted their feet. The Sudanese ministers bantered among themselves.
Finally Bashir arrived, resplendent in white headdress and robe. He smiled at the ambassadors and thanked them for coming. ‘Sudan is fully committed to the path of dialogue,’ he said. ‘Peace has become an irreversible strategic choice.’ But he warned the delegation that Sudan had become the victim of an ‘unfair and ill-intentioned campaign’ and he complained that the UN, not his government, was responsible for the slow deployment of the peacekeepers. In the private meeting that followed his speech, he made it clear that Sudan would never surrender any of its citizens to the ICC.
Early the next morning, the ambassadors boarded their plane for the trip to neighbouring Chad. As the plane left Khartoum in the distance, Costa Rica’s ambassador appeared deflated. The statement condemning Sudan for its defiance on war crimes had stalled. Several Council members, including China, apparently thought that its language was too tough.
More articles from: David Bosco | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
Martin Vander Weyer looks ahead to next week’s Pre-Budget Report and reflects on George Osborne’s contentious remarks about the devaluation of sterling. It looks like Gordon Brown is getting away with his borrowing binge — leaving the Tories isolated
The movie W. did not provide the crude anti-Bush agitprop that the reviewers craved, says Rod Liddle. This was precisely its strength: we need to get inside the minds even of those we most deplore
In the wake of Cameron’s decision to drop his pledge to match Labour spending, Fraser Nelson and Daniel Fin kelstein of the Times trade rhetorical blows over the issue that is gripping and troubling the Conservative party as it adjusts to the transformed economic context
Bryan Forbes remembers listening to Churchill as a 14-year-old evacuee and now looks with envy at Obama’s capacity to galvanise hope. Where are his UK counterparts?
The first takeaways originated about 150 million years ago, says Christopher Lloyd; global travel is pretty ancient, too. And as for democracy...
Philip 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
The 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
In 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
Robert 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
When Leo McKinstry objected to his neighbours’ plan to build two blocks of flats, he quickly discovered the limits of ‘community empowerment’ under New Labour
Build your own Sky package online. Sky TV, Broadband & Talk only £17.
Subscribe to Sky from £16 a month. Get free equipment and free broadband - Join Now. Sky HD - be amongst the first to have it - order now.
Build your own Sky package online. Sky TV, Broadband & Talk only £17.
Subscribe to Sky from £16 a month. Get free equipment and free broadband - Join Now. Sky HD - be...
PORTA METRONIA, ROME Standing high on the top of one of the seven hills of Rome- the Coelian- this unique
ROME and PARIS: over 350 holiday rentals apartments listed: visit www.romanreference.com and www.parisreference.com or call +39 0648 903612.
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.