The genocide in Darfur has not only led to the deaths of many, but it has displaced numerous Sudanese. An article from the Washington Post mentions how the refugees in Sudan believe that an African Union peacekeeping mission is not providing protection. It is a problem that peacekeepers in Darfur are only there to monitor the violence and not fight it, similar to the U.N.’s presence in Rwanda. Therefore, many believe the African Union mission has been ineffective in protecting and improving the conditions of the refugees. At one of the refugee camps near Kassab, a health clinic had shut down, so refugees were forced to seek treatment from nearby towns. The female refugees are extremely vulnerable because they are exposed to robbery and rape while having to search for firewood and go to surrounding villages. Other refugees have trouble sleeping at night for fear they will need to flee at any instant.
Fighting between the Sudanese army and rebel groups has been ongoing sine 2003. After 3 years, the people of Sudan are still not safe. Even those seeking refuge are exposed to unsafe conditions. Should forces outside of the African Union be sent to Darfur? Or, should others ignore the situation in Darfur and let the Africans help themselves? Should we be allowed to sit around and let others suffer when the situation is not their fault? How is it that a peacekeeping mission does not provide the protection the Sudanese need? Is peacekeeping altogether ineffective?
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
War against Euphoria
Hate Hope and Human Rights At least that's what the addicts describe it as. In 2020 alone, an estimated 9.5 million Americans, just A...
-
The United States has consistently tiptoed around Chinese human rights issues. An American politician may occasional issue a condemnation ...
-
The UN will celebrate its 60th birthday on October 24th. But as Meg L., suggests below, not many will be celebrating. Chris B, goes a step f...
2 comments:
I agree that those who went to fight in Spain believed that they were doing the right thing and should be commended; however, their actions ultimately came to naught. I want to think that a new Abraham Lincoln Brigade would get the world's attention; perhaps it might even do some good. However, their chance of stopping the genocide is essentially nil. Of course, it's unfair for us to expect that of them; if they can save one village from destruction, that would be a truly heroic and important act. I don't want to badmouth the idea because it's a noble one, but we've seen time and time again that untrained amateurs generally aren't the answer when you want to stop a superior fighting force.
This blog and its comments raise some very important issues and questions about the nature of genocide and peacekeeping. I absolutly believe that a peacekeeping force which can not use force is ridiculous. It is foolish to send in troops who cannot protect the innocent civilians, let alone defend themselves. The situation in Sudan reminds me of the situation in Rwanda in the 90s. The similarities are frightening. The film, "The Ghosts of Rwanda" paints a stunning picture of the state of affairs in Rwanda. Under the capable hands of Gen Dellaire, I think that peacekeeping troops could have been successful. The major problem was that countries would not send peacekeeping troops. Perhaps the success of peacekeeping depends on the leader. Perhaps it depends on the circumstances of the country. For example, I think that the Holocaust was so well orchestrated that peacekeeping troops would have failed to stop it. Or maybe, most of all, the success of peacekeeping in the investment of the international community. Without the support of world states, peacekeeping missions lack the resources and manpower to be succuesful.
Peacekeeping missions can be successful. The more countries which contribute to them, the less dammage will be done by the killers. If many countries pledge money and troops, then the genocide can be stopped quickly and few will lose their lives. It is time to stop standing by. We must take action.
Post a Comment