Dyepes its a very important topic so
JungleJake
Veritas interesting conspiracy spin :
Ace of Base good debating backed up by the truth.... I think you put a very complex situation in easy view for all
groingrinder please see below for why no matter how much Kofi Annan may or may not in your judgement 'Care' more about money than people he cant do
much about it ... I mean wake up! and please .... The Mobster label could equally be used on Bush...but hey there it actually fits because Bush could
do something about it if he wanted!Like send in the Marines tommorrow... Wheras any SecretaryGeneral of the UN cannot....What you expect him to do? go
on Kofi order in the Aid Workers! I can just see his battle cry now!
'We will fight them in the Aid camps, I offer you nothing but blood sweat and tears....Attack the govt backed rebels now! Aid Workers with your Grain
Sacks! Doctors & Nurses with your bandages and Syringes, Pen Pushers use your Pens... Attack'
Muaddib no disrespect meant but It shows from the information and facts Whats really happening in Darfur. Though I do agree there is some government
duplicity in this situatuation Vis-a-Vis the rebels.
Also IMO I dont think you understand the Structure, Role and Responsibilities of either the UN or its acting Secretary General, even though you hinted
you seemed to in your first post by saying US moves were blocked by the French and Kofi.
To keep it real here as we are talking about real people , civilians suffering-
Yep there is corruption and mismanagemnet in the UN they have made mistakes, what organisation in the world or human hasnt made mistakes?
Kofi cannot order in troops or demand members states of the UN act in a military way under his executive order or request.
The UN is a point of mediation, a meeting place, merging of world powers, but not a world power.
When was the last time anyone saw a judge on the streets arresting 'hoodlums' lol ?
So to shed light on this... its not rocket science..... in this analogy above what weapons would the judge use? What car would he drive? What Radio
would he use? ....to get the 'hoodlums'? see Kofi is the Judge the UN the Judiciary and the Police the Armed Forces.
So if Kofi theoretically had these Leagues of UN soldiers what Tanks food and satellites would he use?
None cos he aint got them and he cant.
The Un does get involved yes in aid, medicine, negotiation, mediation, planning, disaster relief, urban projects. Also it has a Legal Remit. But the
actual military intervention is done by the Security Council.
The main thing the UN does besides its legal, medical and aid operations is to gather unbaised information, measure and monitor and then either just
present the findings or in some cases present findings with recommendations for the Security Councils action. However the UN cannot table a 'motion'
before the Security council, a member state must. A passing of a UN Motion is voted on by the Security Council. mandates authorise use under UN or
international Law. This is the main weakness of the UN as abviously only issues that have a 'friendly' or 'advantageous' nature to the country
voting on, wether to pass a Resolution, that would then give international legal legitimacy to some, or all, of the Security Council's members then
deploying their forces multinationaly.
With repect to Ace of Bases factual information and good sourcing on this particular subject I quote "
- Report of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur
to the United Nations Secretary-General.
Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 1564 of 18 September 2004
Geneva, 25 January 2005
International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur Report to the Secretary-General
Acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, on 18 September 2004 the Security Council adopted resolution 1564 requesting, inter alia, that
the Secretary-General ‘rapidly establish an international commission of inquiry in order immediately to investigate reports of violations of
international humanitarian law and human rights law in Darfur by all parties, to determine also whether or not acts of genocide have occurred, and to
identify the perpetrators of such violations with a view to
ensuring that those responsible are held accountable’. In October 2004, the Secretary General appointed Antonio Cassese (Chairperson), Mohamed
Fayek, Hina Jilani, Dumisa Ntsebeza and Therese Striggner-Scott as members of the Commission and requested that they report back on their findings
within three months. The Commission was supported in its work by a Secretariat headed by an Executive Director, Ms. Mona Rishmawi, as well as a legal
research team and an investigative team composed of investigators, forensic experts, military analysts, and investigators specializing in gender
violence, all appointed by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Commission assembled in Geneva and began its work
on 25 October 2004.
In order to discharge its mandate, the Commission endeavoured to fulfil four key tasks: (1) to investigate reports of violations of international
humanitarian law and human rights law in Darfur by all parties; (2)
to determine whether or not acts of genocide have occurred; (3) to identify the perpetrators of violations of international humanitarian law and human
rights law in Darfur; and (4) to suggest means of ensuring that those responsible for such violations are held accountable. While the Commission
considered all events relevant to the current conflict in Darfur, it focused in particular on incidents that occurred between February 2003 and
mid-January 2005.
The Commission engaged in a regular dialogue with the Government of the Sudan throughout its mandate, in particular through meetings in Geneva and in
the Sudan, as well as through the work of its
investigative team. The Commission visited the Sudan from 7-21 November 2004 and 9-16 January 2005, including travel to the three Darfur States. The
investigative team remained in Darfur from November 2004 through January 2005. During its presence in the Sudan, the Commission held extensive
meetings with representatives of the Government, the Governors of the Darfur States and other senior officials in the capital and at provincial and
local levels, members of the armed forces and police, leaders of rebel forces, tribal leaders, internally displaced persons, victims and witnesses of
violations, NGOs and United Nations representatives.
The Commission submitted a full report on its findings to the Secretary-General on 25 January 2005.
The report describes the terms of reference, methodology, approach and activities of the Commission and its investigative team. It also provides an
overview of the historical and social background to the conflict in Darfur. The report then addresses in detail the four key tasks referred to above,
namely the 3 Commission’s findings in relation to: i) violations of international human rights and humanitarian law by all parties; ii) whether or
not acts of genocide have taken place; iii) the identification of perpetrators; and iv) accountability mechanisms. These four sections are briefly
summarized below. I. Violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law In accordance with its mandate to ‘investigate
reports of violations of human rights law and international humanitarian law’, the Commission carefully examined reports from different sources
including Governments, inter-governmental organizations, United Nations bodies and mechanisms, as well as nongovernmental organizations.
The Commission took as the starting point for its work two irrefutable facts regarding the situation in Darfur. Firstly, according to United Nations
estimates there are 1,65 million internally displaced persons
in Darfur, and more than 200,000 refugees from Darfur in neighbouring Chad.
Secondly, there has been large-scale destruction of villages throughout the three states of Darfur. The Commission conducted independent
investigations to establish additional facts and gathered extensive information on multiple incidents of violations affecting villages, towns and
other locations across North, South and West Darfur. The conclusions of the Commission are based on the evaluation of the facts gathered or verified
through its investigations. Based on a thorough analysis of the information gathered in the course of its investigations, the Commission established
that the Government of the Sudan and the Janjaweed are responsible for serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law amounting
to crimes under international law. In particular, the Commission found that Government forces and militias conducted indiscriminate attacks, including
killing of civilians, torture, enforced disappearances, destruction of villages, rape and other forms of sexual violence, pillaging and forced
displacement, throughout Darfur. These acts were conducted on a widespread and systematic basis, and therefore may amount to crimes against humanity.
The extensive destruction and displacement have resulted in a loss of livelihood and means of survival for countless women, men and children. In
addition to the large scale attacks, many people have been arrested and detained, and many have been held incommunicado for prolonged periods and
tortured. The vast majority of the victims of all of these violations have been from the Fur, Zaghawa, Massalit, Jebel, Aranga and other so-called
‘African’ tribes.
In their discussions with the Commission, Government of the Sudan officials stated that any attacks carried out by Government armed forces in Darfur
were for counter-insurgency purposes and were conducted on the basis of military imperatives. However, it is clear from the Commission’s findings
that most attacks were deliberately and indiscriminately directed against civilians. Moreover even if rebels, or persons supporting rebels, were
present in some of the villages – which the Commission considers
likely in only a very small number of instances - the attackers did not take precautions to enable civilians to leave the villages or otherwise be
shielded from attack. Even where rebels may have been present in
villages, the impact of the attacks on civilians shows that the use of military force was manifestly disproportionate to any threat posed by the
rebels.
The Commission is particularly alarmed that attacks on villages, killing of civilians, rape, pillaging and forced displacement have continued during
the course of the Commission’s mandate. The Commission considers that action must be taken urgently to end these violations.
4 While the Commission did not find a systematic or a widespread pattern to these violations, it found credible evidence that rebel forces, namely
members of the SLA and JEM, also are responsible for serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law which may amount to war
crimes. In particular, these violations include cases of murder of civilians and pillage.
II. Have acts of genocide occurred?
The Commission concluded that the Government of the Sudan has not pursued a policy of genocide. Arguably, two elements of genocide might be deduced
from the gross violations of human rights perpetrated by Government forces and the militias under their control. These two elements are, first, the
actus reus consisting of killing, or causing serious bodily or mental harm, or deliberately inflicting conditions of life likely to bring about
physical destruction; and, second, on the basis of a subjective
standard, the existence of a protected group being targeted by the authors of criminal conduct. However, the crucial element of genocidal intent
appears to be missing, at least as far as the central Government
authorities are concerned. Generally speaking the policy of attacking, killing and forcibly displacing members of some tribes does not evince a
specific intent to annihilate, in whole or in part, a group distinguished on racial, ethnic, national or religious grounds. Rather, it would seem that
those who
planned and organized attacks on villages pursued the intent to drive the victims from their homes, primarily for purposes of counter-insurgency
warfare.
The Commission does recognise that in some instances individuals, including Government officials, may commit acts with genocidal intent. Whether this
was the case in Darfur, however, is a determination that
only a competent court can make on a case by case basis. The conclusion that no genocidal policy has been pursued and implemented in Darfur by the
Government authorities, directly or through the militias under their control, should not be taken in any way as detracting from the gravity of the
crimes perpetrated in that region. International offences such as
the crimes against humanity and war crimes that have been committed in Darfur may be no less serious and heinous than genocide. "
End of Quote for full Document
PDF UN REPORT ON DAFUR CRISIS 25JAN2005
So as is plain from the above the UN was asked to do its job in Oct 2004 and investigate the Crisis, It did this and presented the report in Jan2004
that stated that genocidal acts had taken place However the remit and scope of the report does not have authourity to 'class' it as genocide.
However It would take a court to give it that name in international law..... but hey trust me the UN Court will do it in due time. The report calls
for action brings the evidence to the Security Council members and calls for action!
However that is all it can do on the issue. And for anyone to use the argument it has been blocked is a little silly as America or britian or russsaia
etc could all do it unilateraly now and have real 'legal right' to do it, but trust me they would find what this report states is happening, no
missing WMD here.
If America (based on its recent military and legal and moral prescedent in invading Iraq pre emptively) or any other Major global player wanted to
intervene of course in a humanitarian role in the Massacre taking place, right now as I write and you read this, could do so because of that
precedent and the legitimacy provided by the report its startling truths of the facts and its reccomendations. To be honest its justification would
actually in international legal law be stronger than the case was of Iraq, on purely humanitarian edicts.
So its not down to any Cheese Eating Surrender Monkies or any hoodlum secretary generals at the UN or the Brits or even the equally crazy neocons.
It seems obvious to me besides actually Stopping the killing and raping and pillaging of communities...what else have the big players got to gain? any
Oil? any really buddy neighbours on the borders? do we need a pipeline there? any big business or money to protect?
I bet If any of us to could say yes to the the above action would be underway now!
Infact can anyone name a international operation at all that has fulfilled just the role of humanitarianism or peace? with no gains or current
interests in the area by the intervening parties?
Simple As! but it helps to look at history and and be non biased.
A long post but genocidal acts actually happening now deserve the truth and debate.
Please spare a thought for the innocent civilians. I sincerely hope and will shout for an end to this horrible reality for soo many in the Darfur
Region now.
MischeviouslyDefendingHumanity
[edit on 4-6-2005 by MischeviousElf]
