[Peace-discuss] Bushwar in Africa

[C. G. Estabrook]

[There is more (or less) to the following report than meets the eye 
(although I love the first reporter's name).  Why are the USUK forces at 
the UN, led by the ridiculous John Bolton, so concerned about Darfur? 
Does the specter of attacked and brutalized people move them to action? 
  It didn't seem to in Lebanon, where they perpetrated the attacks and 
brutalization.  And the far worse situation in the Congo seems not to 
have come to their notice.  Why then Darfur?  The answer is clear from a 
decade of Neocon writing, summed up by "counterterrorism expert" Richard 
Clarke in his 2003 book: "As I went back through the Pentagon in 
November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a 
chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But 
there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign 
plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with 
Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.”  --CGE]

     U.S., Britain seek vote on UN troops for Darfur
     Aug 29, 4:47 PM (ET)
     By Opheera McDoom and Irwin Arieff

KHARTOUM/UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United States and Britain plan 
to push for a vote on a U.N. resolution sending peacekeeping troops to 
Darfur, despite a fresh rejection by Sudan on Tuesday of any deployment 
of U.N. troops there.

The U.S. and British sponsored resolution would authorize the deployment 
of 20,000 U.N. troops and police in Darfur to take over from some 7,000 
African Union troops, who have been unable to end bloodshed in the 
western Sudanese region.

Though the resolution, likely to be put to a vote on Thursday, would 
state that Sudan would need to agree to the deployment, it was expected 
to add pressure on Khartoum to drop its opposition to U.N. peacekeeping 
troops.

"Our judgment here is that we think we've found a formulation that would 
win acceptance on the (Security) Council," U.S. Ambassador John Bolton 
told reporters at the United Nations.

U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Jendayi Frazer 
also made a fresh plea on Tuesday to Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir 
to agree to U.N. troops, though her meeting with him in Khartoum ended 
without any sign of progress.

In Washington, State Department spokesman Tom Casey told reporters 
Frazer had delivered a message from President George W. Bush that Sudan 
needed to accept a U.N. force in Darfur.

"She made a very clear case of what U.S. policy is and he certainly 
listened to what she had to say," he said.

Frazer canceled all meetings with the media, which one Sudanese official 
said was because she had "nothing new to report." She had waited nearly 
two days to meet Bashir.

Bashir on Tuesday reiterated his opposition to the deployment of U.N. 
troops, instead praising the AU troops in Darfur in a speech. "We are 
not calling for confrontation or war but we are calling for peace and 
stability," he said.

His comments followed a decision by Sudan to boycott U.N. Security 
Council talks on Monday on Darfur, where tens of thousands of people 
have been killed and 2.5 million forced from their homes since a revolt 
began in early 2003.

U.N. TROOPS IN SOUTH

Sudan has likened the deployment of U.N. troops in Darfur to a Western 
invasion that it says would attract militants and cause an Iraq-style 
quagmire.

But analysts say Khartoum objects because it fears U.N. troops would 
arrest any officials or militia leaders likely to be indicted for war 
crimes by the International Criminal Court.

Sudan has however already agreed to the deployment of U.N. troops in 
southern Sudan monitoring a separate peace deal there, raising hopes 
that it might eventually drop its opposition to U.N. troops in the west 
of the country.

Security Council members China and Russia have traditionally resisted 
any talk of imposing sanctions on Khartoum to force it to accept U.N. 
troops.

Casey said Bashir would send an envoy to Washington to reply directly to 
Bush's message, which according to one U.S. official had included 
incentives if Sudan accepted a U.N. force.

Casey declined to comment on the contents of the message.

Despite a peace deal signed by one of three rebel negotiating factions 
in May, violence has increased in Darfur.

U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland warned the Security 
Council on Monday of the risk of fresh violence in Darfur. "We may well 
be on the brink of a return to all-out war," Egeland said, according to 
a text of his remarks.

     ###