|
|
There are potential solutions however. One is to have an intercontinental peacekeeping force intervene, probably through the UN. (Power) Many experts agree, “What is most needed in Darfur is an international peacekeeping and protection presence.” (Power) There has been a large amount of debate on whether Darfur qualifies as genocide by the definitions of the “1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.”
To be classified as genocide, the crisis must be against a definable group with the intent of significantly harming or eliminating it. (Reeves) The general consensus is “yes”, and the term has been used by major figures including Bush and Kofi Annan, recent head of the UN. US Congress has ratified a declaration that it is genocide and should be treated as such. (Reeves) A UN peacekeeping force holds promise, but it has plenty of drawbacks as well.
If a peacekeeping force is even formed, will it be allowed in? “This is what the Sudanese government most wants to avoid.” (Power) Surprisingly few countries will describe it as genocide or believe it deserves international attention. France, Russia, Germany and more have refused to make donations to the UN humanitarian aid fund for Darfur. (Power) The process of convincing them isn’t made any easier by the fact that the UN body counts are unrealistically low. All other estimates have been 10,000-100,000 bodies higher. (Reeves)
Will an international force even help? Sudanese government officials, though they have a biased view, say, “It will make things worse. Sudanese do not like foreigners to control them. They would love to fight them.” (Power) It seems unlikely that there could even be an international force. Most of the debate “has focused not on how to stop the crisis, but on whether or not it should be called genocide.” If this does not seem likely to work, there are other options.
Another possibility is to have African Union Peacekeeping troops. (Power) The AU is willing to send several thousand troops to Darfur, and Rwanda and Nigeria have each offered a couple hundred also. (Power) (Power) And unlike UN troops, Sudanese government officials have allowed a small amount of AU troops. They are told to negotiate and enforce ceasefires, but are not allowed to protect citizens from the Janjaweed. (Power) Currently there are 7000 AU troops and an offering for more. (Jones)
Many other African countries are having financial or military problems though, and AU troops are “hampered by lack of equipment and funds.” (Jones) The US and other first world countries refused to do their part by equipping or transporting AU troops. (Power) Will African troops even help? Darfurians, who know them best, say that the Africans are too likely to take bribes. (Power) All agree that the safest option is to wait in the refugee camps. Abdum Shogar Adem, a refugee, sums up the group’s thoughts: “We will not return to our homes until the white people come and make us safe.” (Power)
It’s also possible to let Sudan work it out themselves. If there is no genocide, no crisis, no ethnic cleansing, why are peacekeeping forces needed at all? (Power) Simply let Khartoum (government) work it out. Officials assure the world that they will solve their own problems. The government is attempting ceasefires, even if they aren’t successful. (Reeves) Kofi Annan claimed in 2004 that the killings and purgings are “only bordering on ethnic cleansing.”(Power) Why are we searching for solutions if there is no problem?
It’s hard to deny, though, that there is a problem, and Sudan needs help. This is “the first great episode of genocidal destruction in the twenty-first century.” (Reeves) It can’t be ignored. The government, who we expect to fix the problem, has destroyed ½ of Darfur’s African villages in combination with the Janjaweed. (Power) The SLA, the other major negotiating faction, has given up hope in the government. Says a spokesman, “This regime has failed to implement a single other previous agreement.” And, it is Khartoum’s fault there is no relief for victims. They are “deliberately obstructing aid.” (Reeves) How can we expect the government who started this crisis to solve it?
Darfur cannot be dealt with without care and consideration. A single solution cannot solve their problems. The UN and most foreign countries refuse to provide enough assistance in the forms necessary. Darfurians do not believe African troops can help enough, and Khartoum cannot be trusted. What Darfur needs is a mixture of AU and UN peacekeeping forces. AU troops can be supplied and the citizens trust UN troops. Khartoum can be left to govern the rest of Sudan. Stopping the bleeding, bandaging the cuts, and allowing the wounds to heal may be a long process, but it can be done.
Darfur is a monumental crisis, a genocide that cannot be ignored. Hundreds of thousands of Darfurians are being murdered daily, by and with the support of the government. International help is needed, whether through the AU, UN, or both. Still, the problem is being minimized or ignored. Encourage action yourself. Write to the president, your senators and congress people, the UN; maybe even Khartoum. Inform people about this tragedy and eventually it will be solved.
|
Tags
You must be logged in to add tags.
|
Writer Profile
Kayla
Hello! I'm kayla. I love writing and reading, particularly writing research articles and poetry. I am very proud to have a published article here, please read it!!
|
Comments
fresh boi swag | Nov 13th, 2010
you sound like a very cool person to be with
You must be a TakingITGlobal member to post a comment. Sign up for free or login.
|
|
