A Handy Guide To What the Hell Just Happened in Darfur
Published March 05, 2009 @ 02:20PM PT
Exciting past few days in Darfur-land, if by excitement you mean the very real possibility of millions of people suddenly starving. A quick guide to what happened, and what it means.
Basic Background - The Situation in Darfur
Darfur is a region in western Sudan. The conflict in Darfur erupted in 2003, when rebel groups drawn primarily from the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa tribes attacked Sudanese military bases in the region. In response, the Sudanese military began a brutal counter-insurgency campaign, including the use of Janjaweed militias. The Janjaweed - drawn primarily from nomadic tribes - were unleashed against Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa villages.
Though Darfur is often portrayed as a conflict between "African" and "Arab" tribes, this is misleading - the conflict defies any simplification. In fact, Darfur can best be understood as a series of over-lapping conflicts: a conflict between the Sudanese military and Darfur-based rebel groups, a counter-insurgency campaign carried out by the Sudanese military and the Janjaweed against the civilian population, and a conflict between primarily agricultural and primarily nomadic tribes over resources. Not to mention increasing conflicts between and among rebel groups themselves. And banditry, lots of banditry.
In short, a cross between Mad Max and a Hobbesian war of all against all. Or, put another way, not a nice place to be.
As for the impact - there's an ongoing debate about how many people have died, but the number is at least 200,000, and likely far more. [The UN, for instance, tends to cite around 300,000 killed.] Almost three million people have fled their homes; 2.7 million are internally displaced within Darfur, while another 200,000 have sought refuge in Chad. Most of these people live in overcrowded camps, where they're depended on the international community to provide food, water, and other basic services.
Darfur is (was) the largest humanitarian relief operation in the world. As of October, there were over 16,000 aid workers in Darfur, the vast majority of them Sudanese nationals (i.e. local or national staff). Approximately 76 NGOs are operating in Darfur, as well as UN agencies and the Red Cross / Red Crescent Movement.
For more background information, see this excellent summary by International Crisis Group.
What Happened Wednesday Morning
In July, the Prosecutor for the International Criminal Court submitted an application for an arrest warrant against Sudanese President Omar Bashir. The warrant stated that Bashir committed the crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in Darfur.
On Wednesday morning, a panel of judges on the International Criminal Court finally ruled on the Prosecutor's application, issuing an arrest warrant for Bashir on charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes. (They did not act on the genocide charge.)
This is the first time that the Court has issued an arrest warrant for a sitting head of state.
And Then the Fit Hit the Shan
Perhaps not surprising, Bashir did not react well to being called a war criminal. In retaliation, he immediately began expelling NGOs responsible for providing humanitarian assistance in Darfur.
As of Thursday, he's expelled twelve large NGOs, as well as one for-profit development organization.
So far, twelve agencies have issued statements confirming that they've had to stop operations: Action contra la Faim (ACF), CARE, CHF International, International Rescue Committee (IRC), Norwegian Refugee Council, Medecins Sans Frontieres - France (MSF France), Medecins Sans Frontieres - Holland (MSF Holland), Mercy Corps, Oxfam and Save the Children UK, Save the Children US, and Solidarities.
The Sudanese Government has also closed at least one Sudanese NGO. (SUDO, for those keeping score at home.)
It hasn't been pretty on the ground. According to the Guardian:
"Today police and officials from the state Humanitarian Aid Commission swarmed over the affected organisations' offices in Khartoum and Darfur, confiscating laptops and mobile phones, and even escorting staff to banks to verify account numbers."
The UN reports that aid workers are being "harassed and detained by Sudanese security forces," who were acting "very intimidating, very aggressive."
"I spent this morning getting play by play accounts of what is going on right now out there. Offices seized, files destroyed, projects stopped. A terrified friend sat skyping as she listened on the security channel to the sound of another NGO, one who was kicked out, being assaulted by gunmen as they tried flee."
There are also uncomfirmed reports that a mob attacked an NGO compound in Khartoum, burning three vehicles.
What Does It Mean On The Ground?
Bad, bad things. According to Amnesty International, the expulsions mean that "2.2 million people face the risk of starvation and disease."
Keep in mind, millions of people in the camps rely on international assistance in order to survive. And Bashir targeted many of the largest aid organizations operating in Sudan.
According to the Guardian: "The expelled organisations carry out at least 50 per cent of the work [in Darfur."
(ACF - one of the expelled NGOs - estimates that "the ten NGOs that have been expelled [now thirteen] represents 60 - 80% of the total humanitarian aid that reaches Darfur.")
The UN reports that the affected NGOs comprise "40 percent of the aid workers in Darfur, roughly 6,500 national and international staff."
A recent statement by Catherine Bragg, the UN Deputy Emergency Relief Coordinator, explains the impact in terms of the numbers of beneficiaries affected: "With the loss of those non-governmental organizations, 1.1 million people would go without food aid and health care, she said, adding that more than 1 million would have no access to water."
Aid agency operations by the numbers:
- ACF provides assistance to 450,000 people in Sudan, of whom 80% are in Darfur
- CARE provides assistance to 1.5 million people in Sudan
- CHF provides assistance to over 170,000 people in Sudan
- IRC provides assistance to 1.75 million people in Sudan (650,000 in Darfur and 1.1 million in North and East Sudan)
- Mercy Corps provides assistance to nearly 200,000 people in Darfur
- MSF France: “The sudden halt of our medical programs, including vital surgical, nutrition, and basic healthcare programs in large areas of Darfur will have an immediate and devastating impact on the population.”
- Oxfam provides assistance to 600,000 people (400,000 of whom are in Darfur)
(I haven't seen numbers for NRC, Solidarities or PADCO.)
Simply adding all these numbers together is somewhat misleading, as people can receive different assistance from different organizations at the same time (i.e. one organization providing food, and another providing water and sanitation services, etc.) Also, some of these assistance figures might include beneficiaries in South Sudan, who might or might not be affected.
At the very least, though, these expulsions affect millions of people across North Sudan and in Darfur. And by affect, I mean leaving millions of people in the camps without access to food, clean water, or basic health services.
Finaly, even though the Sudanese Government has not expelled the UN, the UN still relies on large NGOs as implementing partners - so, expelling NGOs suddenly renders any number of UN operations untenable, at least in the short-term.
For more information on the impact - including fears for national staff - see this excellent article by Emma Batha of Reuters Alert.
But Why Would Bashir Do Such A Thing?
A few simple facts to keep in mind:
A) The Sudanese Government doesn't particularly care about the health, safety and welfare of the people of Darfur. Or at least they don't seem to have lost much sleep after slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians there over the past six years.
B) Keep in mind, Bashir is now an accused war criminal. And we're surprised that he'd respond by inflicting further suffering on innocent civilians? Sort of like being surprised that an aronist responds to being called an arsonist by burning down another home. This is not, after all, rocket science.
C) Further, to say that the Sudanese Government and the NGO community have had a fraught relationship would be something of an understatement. Fear and loathing is probably a more accurate description of how both sides view the other. In fact, if I were to venture a guess, I'd say that the Sudanese Government jumped at the chance to kill two birds with one stone. Perhaps on this one it's best to let Bashir himself explain:
"We say to our guests from the voluntary NGOs, our guests from the diplomatic missions, that if you follow the serious way, and you respect your selves, we will hold you over our heads, otherwise those who step out of line should only blame themselves.
Today we chased out ten foreign organizations, among them Americans and British because all of them are being used as tools by other organizations, our guests should respect us, or we will humiliate them.”
Such a charming man.
D) As someone with a great deal of Sudan experience once told me, Sudanese leaders aren't guided by ideology so much as a simple, overwhelming desire to stay in power. The only question that really matters is "what do I have to do to ensure that I stay in power today, and hopefully tomorrow".
E) And, tactically, it's actually a rather brilliant move. The debate now is whether the UN Security Council should invoke Article 16 of the Rome Statute, suspending an ICC investigation or prosecution for one year. Both the Arab League and the African Union are already arguing that the UN should suspend the prosecution, arguing that the ICC's actions threaten to further destabilize Sudan. (Because, after all, the ICC is a colonialist plot to keep Africa down.)
As I understand the situation, if another Security Council member brought a resolution to suspend the prosecution, it would fall on the US, the UK or France to veto the resolution. Tough choice to make, especially if Bashir lets it be known that he'll allow aid agencies to resume operations if the prosecution is suspended. In other words, the US, the UK and France would have to decide between justice (yay, justice) and potentially letting millions of people starve.
Good times.
And, In Case You Still Harbored Some Warm Feelings Towards the Sudanese Government
Clearly, some in the Sudanese Government are quite enjoying the spectacle. For instance, BBC reports that Akuei Bona Malwal, Sudan's deputy permanent representative to the AU, has said that "it was a 'coincidence' that the agencies had been expelled on the same day as the ICC issued the warrant."
Murderous and condescending. It's a wonderful combination.
[Many thanks again to Eric Jon Magnuson for helping provide many of these links.]
[Photo from AFP / Getty / Time Magazine]
Share this Post
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
EmailRelated Posts
-
Did NGOs in Darfur Pass Information to the ICC - Redux
-
Did NGOs in Darfur Pass Information to the ICC?
-
Darfur Update - Things Still Bad
Comments (18)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Michael has worked for NGOs in Afghanistan, across east and central Africa, and Iraq. Prior to going overseas, he worked on a project providing assistance to the United Nations on the application of International Humanitarian Law to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.
Featured War and Peace Actions
-
-
Help Children and Widows In Gaza
284 People
-
Help Children and Widows In Gaza
-
More from Catherine Bragg--this time, via VOA (http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-03-05-voa55.cfm)...
"U.N. deputy humanitarian chief Catherine Bragg said Sudan's decision to expel 13 aid organizations in north Sudan will have immediate effect on the ability to deliver humanitarian assistance in the whole country, but especially in Darfur, where 4.7 million people receive aid.
"[']We are deeply concerned about the decision of the government of Sudan which will have devastating effect on their own citizens in Darfur,['] she said. [']These agencies are vital implementing partners for the United Nations and account for at least half of the humanitarian capacity in Darfur. It removes 40 percent of the aid workers in Darfur - roughly 6,500 national and international staff.['] [...]
"Catherine Bragg said some aid groups were given only 24 hours to leave. She said the United Nations is now working to assist these agencies in bringing their staff members back from the field to Khartoum, where they will get exit visas to leave the country.
"Also troubling is the way in which the government has gone about expelling the charities.
"[']Sudanese officials also requested some agencies to hand over a list of their assets, and in some cases have begun to gather banking details and confiscated office equipment such as computers, communications equipment and vehicles,['] she said.
"Bragg said the United Nations is deeply concerned about the safety and security of the aid workers and that the government's actions are contrary to the assurances the United Nations received that humanitarian operations would be protected and assistance would continue. More worrying, she said is the situation of those who need their help.
"[']This will have profound implication on the delivery of humanitarian assistance in Darfur and in Sudan,['] said Bragg. [']We are even more deeply concerned about the welfare of the 4.6 million conflict affected people in Darfur. With loss of these NGOs, 1.1 million people will be without food aid, 1.1 million will be without health care, and over 1 million without potable water.[']
"Bragg said the United Nations is looking into contingency plans on how to fill the gaps, including asking the remaining aid groups and the Sudanese government to help, in addition to stepping up its own humanitarian operations."
(Also, HRW has a related new press release [http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/03/05/sudan-expelling-aid-agencies-harms-victims]. And, just in case, the English-language Solidarités statement from earlier today [which may have inadvertently been omitted from the last couple of posts] is at http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900SID/VDUX-7PUNNP?OpenDocument.)
Posted by Eric Jon Magnuson on 03/05/2009 @ 02:49PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
"Do you think something like a silly little warrent would interrupt our well-maintained scheduled of denying people life sustaining aid?" Akuei Bona Malwal continued.
Posted by Karl Horberg on 03/05/2009 @ 02:49PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Human Rights First has issued a related new statement (http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/media/darfur/2009/alert/410).
Also, the AP has a related new semi-feature/semi-round-up (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iZQb2negfyNKgNesbro4mnMW1AHAD96O5BQ80), which contains the following...
"The picture at the Zamzam Camp grew even bleaker Thursday when no aid workers showed up, leaving residents to figure out how they would get life sustaining goods from sorghum seeds to running water and tents for the influx of new refugees.
"[']We are very concerned,['] said Ibrahim Safi, 34, one of 75,000 residents at the camp. [']After God, we only have the organizations.['] [...]
"Back in Zamzam Camp, Safi said he fears all aid groups will be kicked out. His cramped camp just received more than 26,000 new residents who flooded in from the region after fighting in south Darfur, and the influx has already stretched water resources and living facilities.
"[']I don't want to be repressed twice, first from al-Bashir and then the ICC. ... Who is benefiting in both cases? We are the ones losing,['] he said."
And, Mr. Crilly is apparently reporting from North Darfur; his latest Times story (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article5854944.ece) has this...
"The little hospital built from plastic sheeting and wooden poles is not much to look at. Yet it serves 20,000 of Darfur's suffering people, offering life-saving medical care to families who fled their homes with nothing.
"Yesterday it was closed. Its patients were sent home and doctors and nurses told not to turn up for work. [...]
"Outside the hospital- run by the International Rescue Committee until it was ordered out - a mother brushed flies from the face of her daughter. [']My baby is sick,['] Fatima Abdulrahmen said. [']She has a fever and I brought her here and now I don't know what to do. Who will help me now?['] [...]
"In El Fasher, capital of North Darfur, government officials began the process of seizing millions of pounds in assets belonging to the charities. Men with dark glasses and clipboards arrived at the Oxfam office to begin itemising equipment. They left with laptops, desktop computers and satellite phones, choking off communication. There was a similar scene at the French agency Action Contre La Faim. [']We are due to start distributing food to the camps in a fortnight,['] one worker said. [']Who else is going to do this and stop people starving? Words cannot describe what is happening.[']
"Charities reported that their bank accounts were being frozen. Doctors with Médicins sans Frontières were trying to contain two deadly outbreaks of meningitis before being expelled. Their clinics have closed.
"In Abu Shouk, home to about 50,000 people, men dressed in dusty jalabayas were hammering at a water pump. This should be the work of water and sanitation engineers from Oxfam. [']We don't know how to fix it,['] said one man wielding a foot-long spanner, [']but we are thirsty.[']
"In neighbouring Al Salaam the umdas - or chiefs - gathered to discuss the news. Adam Mahmoud, the chief umda, gestured one way and then the next as he pointed out the International Rescue Committee hospital, latrines dug by Oxfam, feeding centres and camp administrative offices, all run by foreign charities. All are closed.
"[']If these organisations leave then there is no doubt that we will all suffer again,['] he said. [']It will be a disaster.[']"
Posted by Eric Jon Magnuson on 03/05/2009 @ 04:36PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Read Nicholas kristof's blog in the New York Times website. He has a different perspective.
Posted by Eliza Goodpasture on 03/05/2009 @ 04:37PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Michael, thank You this brief history explained a lot to Me about this subject. I had the wrong idea completely
Posted by Charlie Reed on 03/06/2009 @ 03:43AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Four of the expelled NGOs are crucial partners of the World Food Program -- Save the Children US, Action Contre la Faim, Solidarites and CARE. Therefore this move will have a severe impact on WFP life-saving operations, particularly in Darfur, where the four NGOs distributed WFP food to 1.1 million people and 5,500 malnourished children and mothers receiving supplementary feeding. WFP has information on its operations in Darfur and overall in Sudan (http://www.wfp.org/stories/almost-6-million-sudanese-await-wfp-support-2009-0)
Posted by Peter Smerdon on 03/06/2009 @ 03:57AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Okay the cleaner typo free version:
I'm so grateful for the international aid organizations and the resources and work they provide throughout the world. BUT, one things really disturbs me:
"The picture at the Zamzam Camp grew even bleaker Thursday when no aid workers showed up, leaving residents to figure out how they would get life sustaining goods from sorghum seeds to running water and tents for the influx of new refugees.
"[']We are very concerned,['] said Ibrahim Safi, 34, one of 75,000 residents at the camp. [']After God, we only have the organizations.['] [...]"
If these organizations have been in country for YEARS why hasn't there been a system set up to educate the people about what to do in just such a scenario?? It shouldn't be "After God, we only have the organizations." There should be SOME SORT of plan the people have been educated to put into place to mitigate the damages from loss of resources as best they can until more aid is let through. I know. I know. It's a HUGE blow to have resources cut off. And that the resources are already hugely lacking when there is good aid. But, I still feel there should be SOME SORT OF ACTION the local people could be taught to do until more aid gets through, instead of just depending on aid. Let's teach them to depend on their own ingenuity. This would greatly help the problem too even when there is aid. Are there research programs going on that explore how to use the natural resources of the region to create make-shift tents and/or shelters for example? At least SOMETHING until more get through??
Just thoughts. I've always loved the proverb: "Give a man a fish and feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and feed him for life."
Perhaps I'm ill informed and there are such programs in place. But I haven't read about it here. I've only read that these people have NOTHING but God and NGOs. The human being is remarkable. A community of human beings even more so. Why isn't that a resource we use? Themselves! The ingenuity that they all must learn they possess??
Posted by Laura McNamara on 03/06/2009 @ 09:48AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Laura, in addition to what Michael and Natasha stated, the majority of refugees and women and children who have no protection from the RAPING and MURDERING if they venture out of their safe areas. This situation will not work with a simple fix of education from NGOs; yes, it is important -- but the Darfuri people are suffering genocide, i.e., annihilation. We need to establish a no-fly zone and serious diplomacy at least.
Posted by Victoria Protsman on 03/06/2009 @ 10:56AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Laura,
tell me what you would do if you were in a camp (prison) without access to anything that sustains life (except air) and were totally dependent on whatever was brought to you to live? How would you provide for yourself and your loved ones? I don't think a sitdown hunger strike would help their situation. So give an example of your ingenuity, remember you can't give them land, farm animals, weapons, stores or juice stands, no permanent housing. Schooling might be possible, but freedom to move back to their homes is not an option, where and how would their eduacation help. This is genocide, not temporary inconvenience.
Posted by Sally Mason on 03/06/2009 @ 11:18AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Humanitarian relief operations (and their respective NGOs) are different from development NGOs. The organizations here are, I would guess, there simply for relief, and not development -- which is where the education comes in. And, as Alanna Shaikh (writer for the http://globalhealth.education.org) has often said, relief efforts rarely turn into development efforts.
Posted by Adrienne Michetti on 03/10/2009 @ 12:01AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Laura, I'm not an expert like Michael is, but it's hard to farm when you don't have access to water or seed or good land. It's hard to maintain one when under persistant attack by militias. Ditto, herding animals. And there's no supermarket to go to, no farm supply depot, no malls, no big box stores, nor employers who would pay them to have money to spend if there were.
No food, no water, harassed and exhausted, you can be as ingenious as you like and your options will be few. These people used to be able to take care of themselves when they were in their original communities and then their traditional means for doing so were stolen from them. Now they're packed into refugee camps like sardines, huddling together for safety.
Anyway, take away my computer and internet connection and I'm practically useless as a human being. I've certainly got no place looking down on these people.
Posted by Natasha Chart on 03/06/2009 @ 10:39AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Thanks for the replies everyone. I do want to clear something up though. I'm not advocating that these people should simply be able to survive out of ingenuity when their government is stripping everything they've ever known from them and giving them nothing in return. I'm just saying that as we've been helping them, have we done ANYTHING to prepare them with any kind of procedure to put into place, any sort of practices to initiate, should the unfortunate circumstances occur that aid doesn't get through - LIKE NOW.
Victoria, this would be in addition to establishing no-fly zones and serious diplomacy and resestablishing aid ASAP.
Sally, in this instance I didn't mean general education. I meant eductation specifically targeted at teaching people how to survive as long as possible without aid. How, exactly, I'm not sure. That's why I asked if there was any thought, research, programs as such going on. Also, there just might be more than just air:
In 2007, Boston scientists claimed "that a vast underground lake the size of Lake Erie had been discovered beneath the barren soil of northern Darfur": http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/weekinreview/22polgreen.html
also see: http://www.ssrc.org/blogs/darfur/2008/04/21/water-under-the-desert-blessing-or-curse/
But then again, that lake might not even be there:"However, following calls for 1000 wells to be drilled immediately, some expressed skepticism about whether this lake is still there, stating based on rainfall levels and rock types in the area the ancient lake probably dried up thousands of years ago." (http://desertification.wordpress.com/2007/08/02/darfur-and-other-conflicts-over-natural-resources-technorati-the-seminal/)
Anyway, I was simply trying to raise the issue of teaching locals about "improved resource management." Be that management of the very few resources they have naturally or the resources they've been given from aid organizations. Is there something in place, I want to know, for locals to take control and manage what resources they have left in a more strict method, until the international community succeeds in getting more supplies through. We have vast amounts of aid workers being forced out of the country. I'm sure these workers were managing the situation. Even native aid workers are being forced out. But what if the actual villagers were taught how to manage the resources that came all the while. Wouldn't that help - locals stepping in to fill the roles aid workers filled because they had been taught to do it - until more aid got through? Perhaps that is going on... but I haven't seen much on the subject.
But, "The Case for Drought Preparedness" is along the lines of what I was thinking:
http://www.ssrc.org/blogs/darfur/2008/12/17/the-case-for-drought-preparedness/
In the midst of all this disheartening news, I guess it would be nice to hear some reports where objectives like that of Oxfam for example - "Training hundreds of volunteers to educate others about sanitation and personal hygiene and to maintain and protect water and sanitation facilities" - were working. Reports of how locals continue to maintain their and protect what little water resources they have left as they await further international aid, for example. Perhaps reports of a semi-positive in such a negative situation would help further draw international support as well, since it would be further evidence of how much of a necessary impact these orgs were making.
And Natasha, your value as a human being extends well beyond that of a computer and the internet. I can assure of that! Nor was I looking down at anyone by any means. I'm sorry you inferred that.
I'll be totally up front with the fact that "I don't know" the answers to the questions I posed. That's why I asked.
Posted by Laura McNamara on 03/06/2009 @ 01:33PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I'm unlcear. What makes us think that if we wait to prosecute this guy for a year, he wont just do the same thing again when the time comes?
Why isnt the UN dedicating peace keeping troops to keep relief agencies protected, doing their work, serving the people?
Anyone have any ideas for a way to keep both justice and aid work?
Posted by Auricia Tama-Sweet on 03/07/2009 @ 09:34AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The underlying problem is we play politics while people suffer and die.
There is only one solution. Stay rigidly focused on the law.
One of the great potentials of democracy is the separation of powers.
If you read the Rome Statute it is quite specific and would only ever be a threat to countries that feared they could not govern successful without the need to perform atrocities.
Too long has the excuse of weakening sovereignty been used by those without moral conviction.
If we are to protect, not only the peoples of darfur but all people, by providing world peace we need at some point to hold all atrocities equally to account to an independant focused law.
A law for peace and security that has no hidden agenda or political ambition. That law, or at least its beginning, is the ICC's Rome Statute. Read it and use it in your commentaries. Make the law , not the politics, the center of attention.
The UN in 2005 gave the ICC jurisdiction over Sudan which has lead to the Arrest.
Therefore the UN has a moral obligation to the people of Darfur.
It's time for the UN to show character and quiclky restore aid to Darfur by any means necessary.
It's time for law and the ICC to provide justice , focus, hope and unity.
Politics by nature is divides, as in divide and conquer.
Lets work the path of Hope and Unity not Fear and division.
All members of the UN who ask for the 12 month stay in precedings should be asked to provide a legal reason for their position after examing the law and the charges.
With a moral responsibilty to the people of Darfur the UN membership should not be allowed to respond otherwise to the charges.
We should all urge our leaders to sign the ICC statute.
Peace
Posted by Rob Beasley on 03/12/2009 @ 09:05PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Just a quick one, that I think Laura raises an important point -- both about the sustainability of aid agency projects, as well as the question of whether anyone thought through all the possible consequences, and prepared adequate contingency plans,
Michael
Posted by Michael Bear on 03/10/2009 @ 03:03PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Thanks for the support Michael. Someone mentioned a difference between relief orgs and developmental orgs. I didn't know there was a difference! And he said developmental orgs are far and few between. Good... I know how I can best contribute and what I need to develop then! :)
Posted by Laura McNamara on 03/10/2009 @ 03:13PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
she said... sorry Adrienne!
Posted by Laura McNamara on 03/10/2009 @ 03:19PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
What does Darfur have? Something must be very valuable to the US, UK and others. Is it OIL? Land and natural resources are ALL that matters in Darfur; the human beings on the land a just COLLATERAL DAMAGE. Why are the Developed Nations not stepping up to the plate? Who controls Africa? Its obviously not Africa. Why doesn't Africa have a united military force for the people, by the people? What's going on? Africa is still the RICHEST continent on the planet, but many Africans live like prehistoric peoples. Shame on the rest of us...
Posted by leatrice brantley on 03/10/2009 @ 03:40PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.