|
UN Radio
UN and Africa
Programme Number: 115
Week of: Sunday, 27th August, 2006
Recording Date: Thursday, 31st August, 2006
Topical Issue(s):
• DARFUR, SUDAN: The UN Security Council
votes unanimously to deploy peacekeepers to
Darfur to take over from the under-funded African
Union force. But President Omar Hassan Al-Bashir
and his government in Khartoum remain defiant
and refuse to agree to the UN’s plans.
So, is the stage now set for a confrontation
between the Sudanese government and the international
community over the world’s responsibility
to protect the vulnerable 3 million suffering
Darfurians?
Editor / Presenter: Ben Dotsei Malor
Producer: Derrick Mbatha
Production Assistant: Chuck Appel/Nyi Nyi Teza
Studio Engineer: Carlos Macias/Willie Correa
Duration: 15’00”
PRESENTER: Greetings from United Nations Radio
in New York.
*** SIG TUNE *** (Please, play briefly, dip
upon wave, and hold under narr.)
PRESENTER:
Hello, I’m Ben Dotsei Malor. Welcome to
UN and Africa.
*** SIG TUNE ***: (Bring Sig Tune up briefly,
dip and hold under)
PRESENTER:
A divided Security Council votes to authorise
the deployment of UN peacekeepers to Sudan’s
troubled Darfur region. But the government of
Sudan has been defiant and opposed to this UN
move. So, is there an international confrontation
looming over Darfur?
CLIP 1 – EGELAND WE NEED A FORCE YESTERDAY
“… We need a UN force on the ground
yesterday. And we are frustrated more and more
by the day by seeing that we do not get a UN
force which could protect the civilian population
and which could also protect humanitarian work”
Jan Egeland, the UN’s Emergency Relief
and Humanitarian Coordinator. China, Russia
and Qatar abstain from this vote … we
find out why?
And, the Tanzanian envoy, Augustine Mahiga,
explains why the Sudanese government must accept
help.
“…By its own admission,it’s
overwhelmed and overstretched by the magnitude
and complexity of restoring peace to Darfur.”
Plus, the views of the Security Council President
for the month of August, Nana Effah-Appenteng
of Ghana.
“Although the resolution is not a magic
wand that would heal the situation in Darfur
overnight, its passage nonetheless is timely
and gives the Sudanese government an opportunity
to cooperate with the UN in seeking a peaceful
and negotiated settlement of the crisis in Darfur.”
PRESENTER:
That’s all coming up in this special
edition of UN and Africa, dedicated to finding
a solution to one of Africa’s worst bleeding
sores - the crisis in Darfur .
*** SIG TUNE *** (Bring up briefly, dip and
hold under until first sentence.)
UN SECURITY COUNCIL VOTES TO DEPLOY UN PEACEKEEPING
TROOPS IN DARFUR, BUT SUDAN GOVERNMENT REMAINS
OPPOSED
PRESENTER:
A divided UN Security Council has voted by
majority decision to deploy UN peacekeepers
to the troubled region of Darfur in Sudan, to
replace the current African Union force, AMIS.
China, Russia and Qatar abstained and raised
objections but the other twelve members of the
council voted in favour of the deployment. Over
the past three years an estimated 200,000 people
have been killed in Darfur as rebel groups took
up arms to end what they described as the marginalisation
of their peoples. Nearly 3 million people have
been displaced – some into neighbouring
Chad. A peace agreement signed in the Nigerian
capital, Abuja, earlier this year has not succeeded
in resolving the crisis. But with the government
of President Omar Hassan Al-Bashir strongly
opposed to a UN deployment in Darfur, we examine
whether the UN now set on a collision course
with the government of Sudan? And why are China,
Russia and Qatar opposed to the resolution?
First, let’s examine the urgency of current
situation in Darfur as explained by the envoy
of the USA to the United Nations, John Bolton.
“Well, specifically the African Union
mission in Darfur expires on September 30th
and we need to transition to a UN force as soon
as possible thereafter so that the displaced
persons, the people in the camps, can be protected
and the Darfur Peace Agreement can be implemented.
And that’s what this resolution does.”
And implementing this resolution cannot happen
quickly enough for the UN Emergency Relief and
Humanitarian Coordinator, Jan Egeland.
“Many aid organizations are now debating
internally whether they should leave Darfur
because they cannot any more provide assistance
in an effective manner and because they have
lost too many colleagues. In July we had nine
humanitarian colleagues killed. We have new
colleagues killed this month. We have had dozens
of vehicles hijacked. We have had colleagues
abducted. We have a dramatic increase in the
number of displaced again, 50, 000 in the last
few weeks alone, and we have a dramatic increase
in the amount of rape and violations of basic
human rights.”
Mr. Egeland added that the operations of the
United Nations in Darfur were in freefall. He
said this was the worst security situation since
2004.
So the situation on the ground in Darfur has
been getting much worse lately. But what more
worrying to the UN and the international community
is the Sudanese government’s massive military
build-up in the area, raising more concerns
about a fresh outbreak of fighting. Nana Effah-Appenteng
is Ghana’s Ambassador to the UN. He is
also the Security Council President for the
month of August.
“The Sudanese government is party to the
Darfur Peace Agreement and therefore it is difficult
that that government alone should implement
the Darfur Peace Agreement alone. That is that
difficulty we have. And then, of course, the
whole approach also creates doubts in the minds
of some delegations. It is evident form the
proposal that they are embarking on a military
approach. We think that the solution should
be political.”
The need for a political rather than a military
approach to solving the Darfur crisis is a sentiment
shared by Jan Egeland.
“We are very disappointed with the government’s
reaction so far. They should be the first to
see that their population is dying, that their
population is not even getting assistance at
the moment. There was half a million people
this month as last month that did not get even
food. Colleagues on the ground report of lots
of troops coming in. Even armoured vehicles
and other that should perhaps signal a much
greater war. A military solution attempted by
the government is a prescription for disaster
as we see it. It’s only through political
measures and reconciliation measures we can
get out of this absolutely vicious cycle where
we are caught in.”
So with the cycle of violence in Darfur becoming
etched on the conscience of the world, why would
China be opposed to a resolution that seeks
to save lives in the Sudan? China’s Envoy
to the UN, Wang Guagya.
“We have consistently urged the sponsors
to clearly put in, with the consent of the government
of national unity a fixed and standardized term
of the Council on deploying UN missions to the
test of the resolution. We have also urged the
cosponsors to carefully reconsider the timing
of the vote. Regretably, the cosponsors have
failed to earnestly adhere to China’s
sincere efforts. Due to our principal reservation
on the timing of the vote and the test itself,
China cannot but abstain from the vote.”
Russia maintains a similar diplomatic position.
On his part, the Envoy of Qatar to the UN, Nassir
Abdulaziz Al-Nasser, said his country abstained
because the consent of the Sudanese government
has not been received.
“On our part, we would have preferred
a different approach to this sensitive issue
before taking up a resolution that would have
bearing on the sovereignty of Sudan, a member
state of the United Nations. More efforts should
have been made on the political arena to prepare
the grounds for a voluntary consent by Sudan
to the expansion of the mandate of the UN forces;
they increase strength on the deployment to
Darfur. Regrettably, the council did not provide
the government of Sudan with its response to
the plan nor has it submitted any explicit proposals
by way of amendments, despite the fact that
the plan included many positive aspects deemed
so by the relevant department of the United
Nations Secretariat. The delegation of Qatar
could not support the draft resolution given
its repercussions and the modality of its implementation
in the prevailing political atmosphere.”
But the UK diplomat who spoke in the Council,
Karen Pierce, welcomed the adoption of the resolution
and said the Sudanese government had nothing
to fear from the international community.
“The resolution today is a very strong
signal of the Security Council’s determination
to live up to its responsibilities to the people
of Darfur. It provides for a transition for
a UN force and it provides a timetable plan
for that transition. It immediately offers prospects
of help and support to the African Union forces
already on the ground. And very importantly,
it also offers a cooperative way forward for
the government of Sudan to work with the UN,
with the Security Council, if the government
of Sudan chooses to do that. We now look to
the government of Sudan to live up to its responsibilities.
The consent of the government of Sudan is an
important part to the resolution. We hope the
government of Sudan we be able to give that
consent quickly. I want to underscore that there’s
no hidden agenda in the international communities’
action here. We want to work cooperatively with
the government of Sudan.”
Further assurances were given by two key African
countries in the Security Council. First, Tanzanian
envoy, Augustine Mahiga.
“As African members of this council
we want to send a message or assurance and solidarity
with the brother state of Sudan. We assure Sudan
that the soul purpose of this resolution is
to facilitate a peaceful resolution to the Darfur
crisis and to strengthen the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of Sudan. The solution
can only come with full cooperation and partnership
with Sudan.”
And Ghana’s envoy, Nana Effah-Appentang,
says that already the deployment of UN forces
UNMIS in Southern Sudan has not compromised
Sudan’s sovereignty.
“We have UNMIS in southern Sudan and the
presence of UNMIS in southern Sudan has not
in any way to my knowledge compromised the sovereignty
and territorial integrity of Sudan. And therefore,
we expect that if we deploy a UN mission in
Darfur, it is not going to affect the sovereignty
of Sudan. And therefore that argument for me
is highly debatable. And therefore we look forward
to the cooperation of the government of Sudan.”
The United States envoy, John Bolton, called
on the government in Khartoum to give its consent
and agreement quickly.
“I expect that as they objected to the
deployment of UN peacekeepers in the southern
part of Sudan, right up until the deployment,
there may be a pattern here. But, that’s
the whole point of not waiting until there’s
final consent from them on the deployment. Why
we need to pass this resolution and then the
operational steps will unfold and further discussion
will take place.”
Mr. Bolton is hopeful that a change of heart
could come soon from Sudan.
“We’ve said from the outset that
we didn’t contemplate that the UN peace
keeping force was going to fight its way into
Darfur. We need the assent, at least, of the
government of Sudan for logistical reasons,
among others. But what we think is important
is that the question of consent not hold up
the operational steps that need to be taken
to get this force deployed as rapidly as possible.”
The Ghanaian envoy out of the negotiations would
continue to get the Khartoum government’s
agreement.
“It doesn’t mean that we’re
shutting the door to discussions or negotiations
with the government of Sudan because it’s
not feasible to have a peace keeping mission
in Darfur without the acquiescence of the government
of Sudan. But this council also has certain
responsibilities that it’s got to live
up to.”
And the Ghanaian envoy appealed strongly to
president Bashir and his government in Khartoum
to work closely with Africa, the United Nations
and the international community, to save the
lives of vulnerable people in Darfur.
“Although the resolution is not the magic
wand that will change the situation in Darfur
overnight, its passage, none the less, is timely
and gives the Sudanese government an opportunity
to cooperate with the UN in seeking a peaceful
and negotiated settlement of the crisis in Darfur.
If the Sudanese government persists in conducting
literal processes in Darfur, that will be in
clear breach of the undertakings, both under
the Darfur peace agreement and previous security
council resolutions. Ghana believes that by
voting for the resolution we have done our deed
to the sovereign victims of war in Darfur and
in deed, to all of Africa. We have reservations
about the inclusion in the draft text of explicit
language that implies the government of Sudan
can take all the time it wants before allowing
the UN deploy in Darfur or if they refuse to
do so, regardless in the cost of human lives.
So, once again, we call the government of Sudan,
to heed the voices of its own sovereign people
and of international community because from
all indications we have not acted swiftly enough.”
So, now, the ball is firmly back in the court
of the government of Sudan. And even with the
passing of this resolution, more diplomatic
efforts will be needed in the coming days to
ensure that it is implemented. UN Humanitarian
Coordinator Jan Egeland would like to see more
action from non-Western member states of the
United Nations.
“Maybe more can be done by the Arab group.
Maybe more can be done by Islamic countries.
Maybe more can be done by China. Maybe more
can be done by others. This should not be a
Western cause. This should be a global cause
to help the Darfurian population.”
CLOSING PAGE
*** CLOSING MUSIC ***
(Bring music up and play till the end.)
PRESENTER:
Jan Egeland, the UN’s Emergency Relief
and Humanitarian Coordinator,
ending this special edition of UN and Africa,
dedicated to the crisis in Darfur, Sudan.
We thank you for listening.
I’m Ben Dotsei Malor, with Nyi Nyi Teza,
Chuck Appel, Derrick Mbatha, Carlos Macias and
Willie Correa. Thank you and Goodbye.
*** CLOSING MUSIC ***
(Bring music up and play till the end.)
|
