Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Security Council Approves 26,000 Strong Peacekeeping Force to Help End Durfur Bloodshed
AP ^ | 7/31/07 | AP

Posted on 07/31/2007 2:15:00 PM PDT by aShepard

Security Council Approves 26,000-Strong Peacekeeping Force to Help End Darfur Bloodshed 07-31-2007 4:22 PM By EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writer

UNITED NATIONS (Associated Press) -- The U.N. Security Council approved a 26,000-strong peacekeeping force for Darfur on Tuesday to try to help end four years of fighting that has killed more than 200,000 people in the conflict-wracked Sudanese region.

The force _ the first joint peacekeeping mission by the African Union and the United Nations _ will replace the beleaguered 7,000-strong AU force now on the ground in Darfur no later than Dec. 31. The council urged that the AU-U.N. "hybrid" force achieve "full operational capability and force strength as soon as possible thereafter."

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called it a "historic and unprecedented resolution" that will send "a clear and powerful signal" of the U.N.'s commitment to help to the people of Darfur and the surrounding region "and close this tragic chapter in Sudan's history."

Britain's U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry called it "an unprecedented undertaking in scale, complexity and importance."

The conflict in Darfur began in February 2003 when ethnic African tribes rebelled against what they consider decades of neglect and discrimination by the Arab-dominated government. Sudan's government is accused of retaliating by unleashing a militia of Arab nomads known as the janjaweed _ a charge it denies.

The poorly equipped and underfunded African Union force has been unable to stop the fighting, and neither has the Darfur Peace Agreement, signed a year ago by the government and one rebel group. Other rebel factions called the deal insufficient, and fighting has continued.

The U.N. and Western governments have pressed Sudan since November to accept a U.N. plan for a joint force. After stalling for months, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir agreed in April to a "heavy support package" to strengthen the AU force, including 3,000 U.N. troops, police and civilian personnel along with aircraft and other equipment.

The resolution lays the groundwork for the deployment of the much larger 26,000-strong hybrid force, which will be called UNAMID. The force will have up to 19,555 military personnel, including 360 military observers and liaison officers, a civilian component including up to 3,772 international police, and 19 special police units with up to 2,660 officers.

Sudan's U.N. ambassador, Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem Mohamad, reacted harshly to earlier versions of the resolution, calling one circulated last week "ugly" and "awful." Britain and France, the key sponsors of the resolution, stripped harsh language in an attempt to win approval.

The final draft has one section under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which deals with threats to peace and security and can be militarily enforced.

It authorizes UNAMID to take "the necessary action" to protect and ensure freedom of movement for its own personnel and humanitarian workers.

It also authorizes the hybrid force to take action to "support early and effective implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement, and prevent the disruption of its implementation and armed attacks, and thus to protect civilians, without prejudice to the responsibility of the government of Sudan."

But the final resolution dropped Chapter 7 authorization to monitor the presence of arms in Darfur in violation of U.N. resolutions and the peace agreement, which Sudan strongly objected to.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: africa; bluehelmuts; darfur; geopolitics; sudan; un; unamid; unpeacekeepers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last
Well finally!

Sorry guys at the UN, we won't be sending troops, we're kinda busy here on our own!

1 posted on 07/31/2007 2:15:06 PM PDT by aShepard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: aShepard

Are the French going?


2 posted on 07/31/2007 2:16:20 PM PDT by RSmithOpt (Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aShepard
Are they sending “Rape Counselors” in with them?
3 posted on 07/31/2007 2:17:00 PM PDT by Red_Devil 232 (VietVet - USMC All Ready On The Right? All Ready On The Left? All Ready On The Firing Line!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aShepard
"an unprecedented undertaking in scale, complexity and importance."

Moreso than that little incident in Korea 55 years ago?

4 posted on 07/31/2007 2:18:13 PM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aShepard

And exactly WHO is it that is going to provide the troops, and the material, here?

Red China, maybe?

Or the gentle Iranians?

Maybe the Russian Federation?

Who do you think was stirring up the unrest in the first place?

Talk about grabbing a tar baby (reference is to Br’er Fox, of the Uncle Remus tales).

The US should not touch this with a 40-foot pole.


5 posted on 07/31/2007 2:19:45 PM PDT by alloysteel (Never attribute to ignorance that which is adequately explained by stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aShepard
seem to recall the last time the UN sent forces into a civil war in one of the countries in Africa, some of them were charged with raping children.
6 posted on 07/31/2007 2:19:48 PM PDT by mware (By all that you hold dear..on this good earth... I bid you stand! Men of the West!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aShepard

4 years and 200,000 people dead later...


7 posted on 07/31/2007 2:21:48 PM PDT by Anitius Severinus Boethius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red_Devil 232
From Daily Telegraphy of January 2007....

This paper has gathered more than 20 victims' accounts claiming that peacekeeping and civilian staff based in the town are regularly picking up young children in their UN vehicles and forcing them to have sex.

It is thought that hundreds of children may have been abused.

8 posted on 07/31/2007 2:22:42 PM PDT by mware (By all that you hold dear..on this good earth... I bid you stand! Men of the West!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: aShepard
Do they have WMD's? Are they an immediate threat to World Peace? No? Well it sounds like a civil war to me. And who wants to put our brave warriors in the middle of a civil war?

sarc so obvious I don't really need the /sarc command

9 posted on 07/31/2007 2:22:56 PM PDT by bikerMD (Beware, the light at the end of the tunnel may be a muzzle flash.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aShepard

Look out Darfur! The UN is on the way.


10 posted on 07/31/2007 2:23:40 PM PDT by RightWhale (It's Brecht's donkey, not mine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bikerMD

.................Do they have WMD’s? Are they an immediate threat to World Peace? No? Well it sounds like a civil war to me. And who wants to put our brave warriors in the middle of a civil war?................

A most excellent point! Thank you


11 posted on 07/31/2007 2:24:54 PM PDT by aShepard (Oh little Mohammad, Couchy, Couchy Coo; your momma is so proud, you'll be the cutest suicide bomber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: aShepard

So who are the 26,000 going to support? The government that is killing everyone or, the people trying to get rid of the government killing them?


12 posted on 07/31/2007 2:29:34 PM PDT by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aShepard

The tribes just have to kill one of them and the UN will be out of there.


13 posted on 07/31/2007 2:33:19 PM PDT by tobyhill (The media lies so much the truth is the exception)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aShepard
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
14 posted on 07/31/2007 2:36:50 PM PDT by rfp1234 (Nothing is better than eternal happiness. A ham sandwich is better than nothing. Therefore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Unless it’s one of our guys. Then they’ll want more of our troops. As I have said, I would resign from the military if they wanted to send me there. Those people are animals and have never stood up for themselves. Even if the conflict stopped, the wrong people would take over and it would start again.


15 posted on 07/31/2007 2:41:56 PM PDT by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: aShepard

http://www.cbn.com/CBNNews/CWN/041604sudan.aspx

Older article but basically shows the kiss of Islam again shows its colors of terror, crime, mahem, murder, rape, and other fine attributes.

Another place turned into a thing of beauty by the presence of Islam....when will the world get the picture???


16 posted on 07/31/2007 2:44:13 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aShepard
Unfortunately, they’re gonna get their asses kicked and by Tuesday of next week, the dhimmicrats will be calling for their withdrawal.
17 posted on 07/31/2007 2:45:03 PM PDT by Beckwith (dhimmicrats and the liberal media have chosen sides -- Islamofascism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anitius Severinus Boethius
4 years and 200,000 people dead later...

That was my initial reaction as well.

My next thought is what happens if Arab and African jihadis decide to fight the UN peacekeepers on behalf of the Islamic government in Khartoum? After all, wouldn't the jihadis see this UN mission as yet another example of white Christian crusaders invading an Islamic nation to rescue fellow Christians? Will Iraq become a less desireable destination for jihad, especially now that they're getting an ass-whooping by US forces there?

I wonder if there's still some clever spooks in the US capable of shifting the focus of worldwide Jihad to the Sudan so we can wrap up Iraq and keep this island-hopping tour of cleansing Islamic nations going...

I guess we'll know if the rats at DU start defending and cheering on the murderous Janjeweed like they do with every single other villainous group in the world.

18 posted on 07/31/2007 2:58:34 PM PDT by The KG9 Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: aShepard

This is why I am a strong advocate of the US creating a Foreign Legion outside of the US. Acting as an instrument of US foreign policy, but not part of the US military, there would be far less resistance to them being sent all over to do the crap jobs we don’t want our military doing, like peacekeeping missions in Africa.

For a fraction of the cost of a US military division, we could have 30,000 of some of the best fighters on the planet on an island, with a shoestring budget. Gurkhas, Sikhs, ex-ROK soldiers, Iraqis, etc. All would be thrilled to be on our payroll.

In addition to their pay, we could give them all sorts of low cost incentives, such as classroom instruction in English and all sorts of other useful classes to make them the highest quality mercenary force around.

When we needed to ship them somewhere, they would take regular US military transport, be fed on military rations, be issued a lot of surplus equipment like tents, field kitchens, etc.

By just supporting them, instead of using our own personnel, the US would save enormous sums of money, and be able to commit forces to situations of marginal interest that today we take a pass on.

Most of what they would do would be light engineering, to build their base wherever, peacekeeping duties, guard duties, and relief operations. None of which are appropriate uses for our military.

The costs would be similar to a major prison set up in a populous US State. Which means that after start-up costs, it would not be a budget buster.

Again, as the French learned the hard way, it is not a good idea to keep such an army in country; but the US has plenty of places that would do just fine for such a force.


19 posted on 07/31/2007 3:08:14 PM PDT by Popocatapetl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aShepard

We’ll see how this goes, but I’m guessing this will turn into UNAMUD, not UNAMID.

I’m sure the left will give the UN about two weeks to solve all of Sudan’s problems, then call for a unilateral pull-out. As if...

Nah, the UN is the left’s idea of heaven on earth. They can do no wrong, whether it’s raping the kids or the women of Darfur.

Good luck people of Darfur. This just isn’t your day is it...


20 posted on 07/31/2007 3:08:43 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Victory will never be achieved while defining Conservatism downward, and forsaking it's heritage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson