UN Votes To Create Darfur Force

How many years too late is this? The Darfur genocide had been raging for years, and Kofi Annan refused to lift a finger, let alone call the ethnic cleansing and violence genocide, which would have triggered action under the Genocide Convention. Hundreds of thousands are dead, millions displaced, and the UN finally acts now - as the African Union mandate is set to expire at the end of September.

Shameful doesn't begin to describe this situation. Ed Morrissey coined a phrase that fits: Kofi Annan works for the peace of annihilation.

And the kicker is that this force, while authorized by the UN, cannot be deployed until the government in Khartoum agrees to the deployment.

But the troops will not be deployed until Sudan agrees. The United Nations wants to replace or absorb an African Union force in Darfur, which has only enough money to exist until its mandate expires on September 30 and has been unable to end the humanitarian crisis in the lawless west of the country, which the United States has called a "genocide."

The resolution calls for up to 22,500 U.N. troops and police officers and an immediate injection of air, engineering and communications support for the 7,000-member African force.

The measure, drafted by Britain and the United States, is designed to allow planning and recruitment of troops for an eventual handover.

"While it is preferable to have unanimity, we are not going to sacrifice the need to take a stronger hand to try and stop the genocide in Sudan just because we can't get unanimity," U.S. Ambassador John Bolton told reporters.

Russia, China and Qatar - the only Arab member of the Security Council abstained, which permitted the force to be authorized. Why did these three countries oppose such a force? Simple. Money and geopolitics. Russia and China have oil deals with Khartoum, and Qatar is pushing the Arab/Islamist agenda.

Meanwhile, the Sudanese government is beating the drums of war - going after the various groups that refused to sign a peace deal. That means that a full scale war could erupt in the region and unleash more death and destruction in Darfur and neighboring areas. How many people will die and suffer because the UN refuses to take action until all the death and destruction has occurred?

Once again, it's another sign that the UN is completely incapable of managing crises.

UPDATE:
Sudan rejects the UN resolution.

Technorati: human rights, genocide, darfur, sudan, un, african union