China Given Credit for Darfur Role

[quote]BEIJING, Jan. 12 – The U.S. special envoy to Sudan said Friday that China has pushed the Sudanese government recently to help resolve the bloody Darfur conflict and ease the plight of the region’s nearly 3 million refugees.

The Chinese intervention marked a shift from past policy under which Beijing seemed reluctant to use its influence in Sudan, according to the envoy, Andrew S. Natsios. “I think they’re engaging much more aggressively,” Natsios said at a news briefing after four days of talks here with Chinese officials.

President Hu Jintao announced during a Chinese-African summit conference last November that he had urged the Sudanese president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, to work with U.N. and other envoys to end the fighting, Natsios recalled. In addition, he said, China’s U.N. ambassador, Wang Guangya, was critical to securing Sudan’s participation in a recent international accord aimed at replacing a flagging African Union peacekeeping force in Darfur with a larger U.N. contingent.[/quote] … 01924.html

Money talks. China is bleeding a lot of money/oil/natural resources out of Africa and helping prop up a few governments with their “trade.” I really hope they step up soon and put some serious pressure on The Sudanese government to stop the massacres.

This can only help their face in the years/months before the Olympics.

A little history: … 25-06.html

In fact, Mia Farrow was on Real Time a coupla weeks ago and laid the blame for Darfoor squarely on the shoulders of BeiJing. Apparently, The Sudan is the main supplier of oil to China. When taken into consideration the other atrocities that regime is responsible for, I have to shake my head in dismay at the IOC rewarding them with such a coveted event. Kinda makes me sick.

[quote]Zanaba Ousman, a young mother described the attack:

“What happened to us deserves to be told. The rebels came at 4:00 in the morning. They were many many men, at least 2000. They broke our doors. They beat us. They raped all the women. All. They drank from our breasts. Then they burned our breasts so that we cannot feed our babies. Our husbands could do nothing. The rebels have guns. Some of our husbands were killed, some ran into the bush. The women had to stay in the village for three days. Many women were badly injured. We were terrified. We had our babies with us. The older children ran away. Some are lost-we still cannot find them. We hid in the bush for weeks. Some women gave birth to babies. There was no one to help. My friend died while giving birth to two babies. The babies were eaten by lions. We wish we could tell other women, other mothers, it is hard here for our children. There is no school now. No clean water. The children are getting sick. They have no shoes. The rebels have taken everything, our clothes and blankets and our cooking utensils. We need clothes. We have nothing. Because of the massive rapes and the HIV/aids rates we women would like to be screened. Could you ask for that? And please, would you ask for tools and seeds? Our crops were burned.”[/quote]

From Mia’s site, which I am reading right now.

Ironic that she doesn’t any fucking breath asking the UN to get their asses in there in FORCE!

Well…UN “forces” do not have a very good rep in the hinterlands of Africa…now do they?

Support the local Land Rover dealerships and do a bit of raping and pillaging on their own.

Darfur’s a mess - no doubt about that - but isn’t Zimbabwe nearly as bad? Is there some reason in particular that non-African countries must intervene and try to end the killing while richer and more powerful African nations like South Africa sit on their arses saying “it’s OK for Mugabe to kill Blacks because he’s Black”? If so, what is it?

Well, that is very true, but I don’t think it’s possible to unfuck all of Africa at once.

But in The Sudan, it IS possible to get China to play some international ball by putting pressure on the government to do something to end the absolute slaughter of the folks in Darfur.

If China wants to be a playa, and they do obviously, it’s a great chance to swing some diplomatic dick, threaten to cut off the oil trade and just get it from Iran or Iraq.

TC, I hear you about the UN. But really, what’s to be done? And weren’t most of THOSE UN troops/staff from African countries? And if not the UN, then who can do it? Realistically that is.

Get some Chinese troops in there. THAT would be something to see!

Could end up with a situation very like Angola but much softer: China instead of Russia and Cuba; and economic pressure rather than military. Still, we (the West) are supposed to have had a policy since the mid-70s of no overt operations in Africa. (How long did that last?) It appears to be acceptable to many Africans that Blacks killing Blacks is tolerable however once the White (or Yellow!) Man goes in it will be the same boring old argument about colonialism and it won’t fly with Congress (for one thing).

There is no upside.

Certainly not for the 2 million or so living in “displacement camps.”

[quote=“jdsmith”]From Mia’s site, which I am reading right now.

Ironic that she doesn’t any fucking breath asking the UN to get their asses in there in FORCE![/quote]Remind me, where’s the UN’s army stationed?

Certainly not for the 2 million or so living in “displacement camps.”[/quote]

I’m told there are hundreds of thousands dead in Zimbabwe, there is basically a famine there, and there are two million refugees as a result of Madgrabbee. As Britain and America handed the place to him on a plate, knowing full well he’d turn the place into his own personal fiefdom, we have some reason to feel guilty there. (We’re talking about negotiations started in 1974.) But can we really tell the Orgy of African Apathy or whatever it’s called to get stuffed while we pile in there to sort these guys out? Anyway, where do we start? Which ruthless murdering dictator first?

[quote=“Jaboney”][quote=“jdsmith”]From Mia’s site, which I am reading right now.

Ironic that she doesn’t any fucking breath asking the UN to get their asses in there in FORCE![/quote]Remind me, where’s the UN’s army stationed?[/quote]
I guess you’ve never heard of UN backed forces. :unamused: Take a read at Miafarrow’s site. A camp of 130,000 people is being “run” by 10 aid workers; no protection from the militias.
And why not use UN-AU troops? … sudan&Cr1=

[quote]The High-Level Mission’s report, published on Monday, calls on the Sudanese Government to cooperate with the deployment of the proposed hybrid UN-African Union (AU) force without delay and to give its full cooperation with the International Criminal Court (ICC), which may hold war crimes trials.[/quote]Personally, I think it’s stupid to attach a war crimes tribunal to the troops being put in. Do that later.

Anyway, where do we start? [/quote]
Well, I don’t think the world is all up for regime change again. Start with humanitarian aid. Start with political pressure on the Sundanese government to allow aid to reach the “displaced.” Tell them to stop their own militia rape raids on the refugee camps. Cut off their money in the international world. Get China to lead the way.

There are lots of things to do, but it seems to me that the only people putting pressure on them are lowly little humanitarian groups. That won’t do.

[quote]Darfur: with camps for internally displaced nearing capacity, UN seeks new sites

20 March 2007 – Camps for internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Sudan’s conflict-torn Darfur region are almost at full capacity due to a continuing influx of people fleeing violence, with 30,000 people uprooted last month alone, the United Nations reported today.

Since January 80,000 people have fled, on top of half a million others displaced in 2006. Since fighting between the Sudanese Government, allied militias and rebels seeking greater autonomy erupted almost four years, more than 200,000 people have been killed and some 2.5 million more displaced, 230,000 of them seeking refuge in neighbouring Chad.

The most recent UN humanitarian update from Darfur noted the need to locate a site for a new camp in the vicinity of El Fasher, capital of North Darfur province. A new site has been identified near Zam Zam camp, which is nearing maximum capacity.

Last week, the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) reported that IDP camps were sheltering 50,000 to 100,000 people apiece. “We simply cannot absorb any more displaced,” UNICEF country representative Ted Chaiban said on his return from a visit to Darfur. [/quote] … sudan&Cr1=

And how Sudan is refusing to do anything:

[quote]Jean-Marie Guéhenno, Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations, told a Security Council meeting that the latest written response from Sudanese President Omar Hassan Al Bashir to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s letter detailing the planned force indicated there may be “fundamental strategic differences” over Darfur.

“We still have, unfortunately, a long way to go because there may be some fundamental misunderstandings on what are the expectations of the Government of Sudan and what is on offer,” he told journalists following the closed-door meeting.

Mr. Guéhenno said the international community has already “waited much too long,” given the level of suffering across Darfur, where more than 200,000 people have been killed and at least 2 million others forced from their homes since 2003. A peace deal signed last year by some of the parties failed to end the fighting between Government forces, allied Janjaweed militias and rebel groups, and the conflict is starting to spill over into neighbouring Chad and the Central African Republic (CAR).

We do believe that it’s important to have a strong peacekeeping presence there,” he said. “We believe that it’s important to have a political process, but that political process needs to be supported by a solid peacekeeping presence. One supports the other. One without the other will not be sustainable.”[/quote]

Why are these meetings being held behind closed doors? What are the strategic differences that Sudan has with the UN plan?

And why isn’t China being mentioned EVERY time this issue is brought up?

some progress…

RIYADH (Reuters) - Sudan has signed an agreement with the
United Nations and the African Union (AU) on the deployment of African and U.N. forces in Darfur, the official Saudi Press Agency reported on Sunday.

Saudi Arabia’s “King Abdullah received a telephone call from Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir in which he informed him that the Sudanese government has signed an agreement with the United Nation and the AU that determines the duties and role of the African and U.N. forces in the Darfur region,” SPA said.[/quote] … ur_deal_dc

However, there is some confusion (on my part)

China IS a playa already in the Sudan - it is supporting the government; i.e., it is supporting the raping, pillaging and genocide in Darfur.

[quote]BEIJING, May 8 – China will send a military engineering unit to help strengthen the overtaxed African Union peacekeeping force in Darfur, the Foreign Ministry announced Tuesday.

A spokeswoman, Jiang Yu, did not say how many Chinese soldiers would be dispatched or what their duties would be, describing them as “multifunctional” military engineers. U.S. officials in Washington estimated the number at around 300, the Reuters news agency reported.[/quote]

How’s that for interesting?
In recent weeks, the Darfur crisis has become particularly sensitive in China because of suggestions in the United States and Europe that people should boycott the 2008 Beijing Olympics to demonstrate opposition to Chinese policies in Sudan. China, which has deep economic and military ties there, has been widely criticized for failing to bring strong pressure on the government to persuade it to accept a large force of U.N. peacekeepers in Darfur.

The ties include large oil purchases and extensive arms sales, which the human rights group Amnesty International charged recently have been continuing despite U.N. calls for an embargo. Jiang, the Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, declined to respond to questions about the Amnesty charges. But she said China’s arms sales to Sudan are strictly controlled, include only conventional weapons and do not violate U.N. regulations.[/quote]

Given the Chinese government’s attitude to separatism in China, they probably instinctively back the government of Sudan, and view the people in Darfur and other southern regions of Sudan as troublesome rebels who should be slaughtered.

Well, I thought it was interesting that China is sending in troops to protect her oil. Deja view, eh?

Sudan won’t listen to China. The only country that could sort this out is Britain and the average bloke on the street in Khartoum wants the British to return. The streets of central Khartoum are laid out like a Union Jack in readiness to welcome back the nation that brought them railways, peace, stability and Benson & Hedges.


I think it’s funny how liberals hold up the Sudan as an example of American hypocrisy. After all, if we were really concerned about liberating oppressed people, should we be in the Sudan.

Yes, but if we were to invade the world would hold that up as yet another example of American hegemony. We can’t win.