Harsh sanctions for Sudan?
Let us thank China for pressuring Sudan to finally accept the deployment of some 26,000 peacekeeping troops in the Darfur region. However, it is not without a bargain. At this time, Sudan wanted that all the troops be made up of Africans. Of all countries, it seemed only China has the clout and influence to exert pressures on the Sudanese government, which was believed to be one of the prime sources of oil for China.
Needless to say, Sudan has not choice at all except to kneel down to what China wanted, considering that the latter has a big stake in Sudan's oil development projects. And who knows, maybe, China is also supplying arms and ammunitions to Sudan, in exchange for oil? Whatever it is, it seemed the ball is now in the hands of the U.N. body. However, the U.N. is still facing a dilemma on how to deal with the political crisis head on. The crux of the matter now is that lies as to whether the U.N. is capable of sourcing our the 26,000 peacekeeping troops that it needed for deployment to end the conflict in Darfur, where some 200,000 have been killed already since the war erupted there.
According to the Aug. 4th issue of The Economist, the African Union is having trouble finding the 8,000 troops for Somalia and some 17,000 troops for Congo. The question now is whether Sudan is really serious in its efforts to attain peace in Darfur or not? Otherwise, it should not be given ample leverage to do its share of the bargain by imposing its will on the U.N. It appears that Sudan has still the upper hand in the decision-making process, which could be misconstrued by the international community as nothing but highhandedness and hypocrisy on the part of the Sudanese government. But it is in the position to do such?
And it isn't fair and uncalled for that a government that has committed murders against innocent people is still given the leeway to pick a choice for its own advantage. Why can't they just agree squarely on getting things done and instead source out troops from outside Africa, whom they feel are neutral for the cause of international humanitarian peace. Until the Sudanese government and the U.N. meet halfway to iron out a concrete solution, the grim nightmares that haunt many Darfuris will continue to be a great concern for the world to see. A good suggestion, perhaps, is for the U.N. to give harsh sanctions to Sudan, should it fail to commit to peace and harmony in Darfur, in consonance to the U.N. Security Council resolution. At least, it will give Sudan and other rogue nations a lesson to learn from their mistakes.
Needless to say, Sudan has not choice at all except to kneel down to what China wanted, considering that the latter has a big stake in Sudan's oil development projects. And who knows, maybe, China is also supplying arms and ammunitions to Sudan, in exchange for oil? Whatever it is, it seemed the ball is now in the hands of the U.N. body. However, the U.N. is still facing a dilemma on how to deal with the political crisis head on. The crux of the matter now is that lies as to whether the U.N. is capable of sourcing our the 26,000 peacekeeping troops that it needed for deployment to end the conflict in Darfur, where some 200,000 have been killed already since the war erupted there.
According to the Aug. 4th issue of The Economist, the African Union is having trouble finding the 8,000 troops for Somalia and some 17,000 troops for Congo. The question now is whether Sudan is really serious in its efforts to attain peace in Darfur or not? Otherwise, it should not be given ample leverage to do its share of the bargain by imposing its will on the U.N. It appears that Sudan has still the upper hand in the decision-making process, which could be misconstrued by the international community as nothing but highhandedness and hypocrisy on the part of the Sudanese government. But it is in the position to do such?
And it isn't fair and uncalled for that a government that has committed murders against innocent people is still given the leeway to pick a choice for its own advantage. Why can't they just agree squarely on getting things done and instead source out troops from outside Africa, whom they feel are neutral for the cause of international humanitarian peace. Until the Sudanese government and the U.N. meet halfway to iron out a concrete solution, the grim nightmares that haunt many Darfuris will continue to be a great concern for the world to see. A good suggestion, perhaps, is for the U.N. to give harsh sanctions to Sudan, should it fail to commit to peace and harmony in Darfur, in consonance to the U.N. Security Council resolution. At least, it will give Sudan and other rogue nations a lesson to learn from their mistakes.
Comments