Darfur and United Nations bits & pieces
Post
June 19, Globe, China's Wen kicks off African charm offensive in Egypt, Salah Nasrawi, (Source).
June 20, Globe, Sudan's president rejects UN peacekeepers in Darfur, (Source).
June 20, NYT, No. 2 State Department Official Resigns to Join Wall Street Firm, Helene Cooper, (Source).
June 20, Globe, Goldman grabs Washington insider, Barrie McKenna, (Source).
June 24, Globe, Where patience and persistence trump perfection, Allan Rock, Shawn McCarthy, (Source).
June 26, Globe, Forget a UN army, Lewis MacKenzie, (Source).
June 26, Globe, Sudan accuses world body of aiding rebel leader, Mphammed Ali Saeed, (Source).
June 26, Chron, Sudan Lifts Suspension of U.N.'s Work, Edith M. Lederer, Mohamed Osman, (Source).
Monday June 19, 2006, Globe, China's Wen kicks off African charm offensive in Egypt, Salah Nasrawi, (Back).
Prime Minister signs agreements on energy, industry, telecommunications
CAIRO -- China is making inroads into Africa with huge investment projects -- filling the void left by U.S. and European businesses -- as it looks to reap not only financial profits, but political ones as well.
Yesterday, Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao wrapped up a two-day visit to Cairo, the first stop on a regional tour, after signing 10 agreements in the fields of oil, natural gas, telecommunications and industry.
After meeting with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak earlier in the day, Mr. Wen said China was ready to increase investment in Egypt, particularly in the energy and communications sectors.
China also agreed to give Egypt a $50-million (U.S.) loan and a $10-million grant to build a centre to facilitate investment in an industrial area northwest of the Gulf of Suez.
On the political front, Mr. Mubarak assured Mr. Wen of Egypt's policy of recognizing one China, spokesman Suleiman Awwad said, alluding to Taiwan. Other African countries have also yielded to Chinese pressure to shun Taiwan.
Trade between Egypt and China topped $2-billion in 2005 -- a fourfold increase since 2002. And it has 186 projects in Egypt, with a total investment of $220-million.
On Saturday night, Mr. Wen and his Egyptian counterpart, Ahmed Nazif, attended celebrations at the Great Pyramids to mark the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries.
In 1956, Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser recognized China -- making Egypt the first Arab or African nation to do so, in defiance of U.S. efforts to discourage other countries from dealing with the Communist state. The United States established diplomatic ties with China after 29 years on Jan. 1, 1979.
Mr. Wen is expected to sign additional economic agreements during the other stops on his tour.
While critics contend that China's headway into the continent unjustly rewards nations with poor human rights records, an analyst suggests that other factors have greater prominence in Beijing's calculations.
"This is not its concern. Business is," said Khalil al-Anani, a political analyst with al-Siyassah al-Dawliyah, a political quarterly published by the semi-official Al-Ahram daily newspaper. Mr. Al-Anani also noted that China's investments in African countries are mostly in state-run infrastructure projects.
"These are long-term investments into which Western businesses probably do not want to venture," he said.
Other critics have said China's arms exports to some war-torn African nations have helped fuel conflicts, including that in the Darfur region of Sudan, which has claimed at least 180,000 lives and forced more than two million people from their homes over the past three years.
But Chinese officials defend their expanding relations with the African countries as "mutually beneficial."
China's assistant foreign minister He Yafei said Friday, a day before Mr. Wen started his African tour, that Sino-African relations help to improve those nations' human rights records.
In Cairo, Mr. Wen also faced accusations that his country was doing little or nothing to support the Arabs in the conflict with Israel.
"We think that the key solution is to implement the United Nations resolutions and the roadmap peace plan and to encourage both sides to pursue a peaceful settlement on the basis of 'land for peace,' " he said.
Mr. He described his country's relations with the Jewish state as "good and normal and important to both peoples as well as for the Arab world, because these relations help China to work with both parties to achieve peace."
After Mr. Wen's two-day visit to Egypt, he left yesterday for Ghana on a tour that will also take him to Angola, South Africa, Tanzania and Uganda.
Tuesday June 20 2006, Globe, Sudan's president rejects UN peacekeepers in Darfur, (Back).
KHARTOUM, Sudan — Sudan's president vowed Tuesday to never allow UN peacekeepers into Darfur and said he would lead the “resistance” against any foreign force, his strongest rejection yet of the United Nations plan for halting violence in the war-torn region.
Omar al-Bashir's comments were likely to escalate tensions with the United Nations, coming as a joint UN and African Union team was in Sudan to plan for deployment of a possible peacekeeping force.
“This shall never take place,” Mr. al-Bashir said at a news conference alongside South African President Thabo Mbeki. “These are colonial forces and we will not accept colonial forces coming into the country.
“They want to colonize Africa, starting with the first sub-Saharan country to gain its independence. If they want to start colonization in Africa, let them chose a different place.”
U.N. officials want to send a beefed-up peacekeeping force to replace 7,000 African Union soldiers that have largely been unable to stop the fighting in Darfur.
After Sudan's government signed a peace agreement with the main Darfur rebel group May 5, it gave some indications it might allow a U.N. force. But Mr. al-Bashir's government has since backtracked and Tuesday's comments were the president's most direct rejection.
Nearly 200,000 people have been killed and more than 2 million displaced in Darfur since rebel groups made up of ethnic Africans rose up against the Arab-led Khartoum government in early 2003. The government is accused of responding by unleashing Arab militias known as the Janjaweed who have been accused of some of the worst atrocities, but it denies any involvement.
Last month, the U.N. Security Council gave Khartoum a week to accept the U.N. peacekeepers, though it put off the deadline to allow for further diplomatic efforts. A high-level Security Council delegation returned last week from a tour of the region.
The assessment team currently in Sudan is led by the top U.N. peacekeeping official, Undersecretary-General Jean-Marie Guehenno. In response to Mr. al-Bashir's comments, he plans to meet with the president and hold a news conference before returning to New York, where he will report to the Security Council.
“There is a lot of momentum in this process going on now,” U.N. spokeswoman Marie Okabe said. “Let's wait until Guehenno's team comes back and see what he has to say.”
But Mr. al-Bashir has toughened his rhetoric.
Late Monday, he denounced any foreign deployment in Darfur while speaking to his ruling National Congress party. He said he would lead “the resistance against foreign international military intervention if it ever takes place in Darfur,” the state news agency SUNA reported Tuesday.
Sudan has argued that the Darfur conflict is an African problem that should be handled by troops from the continent.
In his comments Tuesday, al-Bashir said that instead of sending U.N. peacekeepers, the United Nations should increase funding for the African Union forces and improve its capabilities.
The AU force has been severely hampered by a lack of manpower, equipment and funding.
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has repeatedly urged Sudan to accept the U.N. force. Sudan has allowed U.N. peacekeepers into southern Sudan to monitor a separate peace deal there.
Mr. Guehenno's staff is still a long way from choosing the troops that would go to Sudan, but officials have studied the possibility of sending only soldiers from African or Muslim countries to avoid the impression that they are colonizers.
It is considered highly unlikely that Britain, Sudan's former colonial master, or any other major power would send troops. The soldiers would probably come from the main U.N. troop contributing countries, which include Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, India, Nigeria and Ghana.
Tuesday June 20 2006, NYT, No. 2 State Department Official Resigns to Join Wall Street Firm, Helene Cooper, (Back).
WASHINGTON, June 19 — Deputy Secretary of State Robert B. Zoellick said Monday that he would be leaving his post as the State Department's second in command, as expected, to join the Wall Street investment house Goldman Sachs Group Inc. as a managing director.
[photo] Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick attended the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in January 2006.
Bush administration officials said the search was now on to find a replacement for Mr. Zoellick, a six- year administration veteran who spent his first four years as the United States trade representative.
R. Nicholas Burns, the under secretary of state for political affairs, who is the department's third-ranking official, would be the logical front-runner for the job. Administration officials say Robert M. Kimmitt, the deputy Treasury secretary, is also in the running.
Mr. Burns, while close to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, is a career Foreign Service officer whose rise accelerated during the Clinton administration, when he served on the staff of the National Security Council, as State Department spokesman and as ambassador to Greece. He was appointed the American representative to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization during President Bush's first term.
Mr. Kimmitt, a former American ambassador to Germany, served in several posts in the administration of President Bush's father, including under secretary of state for political affairs.
He is widely respected in Washington, but some administration officials worry that Senate confirmation might be made difficult by his role in a decision this year to allow a company owned by the emirate of Dubai to take over operations at five American ports. The company, Dubai Ports, pulled out of the deal after it was denounced by Congressional Republicans as well as Democrats.
The departure of Mr. Zoellick has been widely anticipated. He was considered for Treasury secretary, but President Bush nominated Henry M. Paulson Jr., chairman and chief executive of Goldman Sachs.
During an interview on Friday, Mr. Zoellick said he had wanted the Treasury job but added that he understood why Mr. Bush had made the decision he did. "If it were a choice between Hank Paulson and me, I'd choose Hank Paulson," he said.
As Ms. Rice's deputy, Mr. Zoellick was the primary architect of the administration's policy toward Sudan and particularly the response to the crisis in Darfur. In May at talks in Abuja, Nigeria, he pushed Darfur's rebel leaders to sign a peace accord.
He was known in Sudan for understanding the many facets of the country and its people, reciting tribal names, affiliations and political leanings.
He is widely considered to be one of the administration's most experienced foreign policy hands.
But Mr. Zoellick's years as trade representative are regarded as more notable than his time at the State Department. He successfully managed the start of the world trade negotiations, still under way, that are meant to lower tariffs on manufacturing products and, more significantly, to reduce agriculture subsidies.
Mr. Zoellick also successfully managed the deeply divisive fight in Congress to obtain "fast track" authority for Mr. Bush to negotiate trade pacts that Congress can approve or reject but not amend.
As the trade representative, Mr. Zoellick worked closely with officials from developing countries. One of the first things he did in the job was to reaffirm a late policy shift by the Clinton administration that put the need for access to cheaper AIDS drugs in poor countries above the desires of American drug companies seeking to protect their patents.
Mr. Zoellick said he expected to stay on the job at the State Department until the middle of July.
Tuesday June 20 2006, Globe, Goldman grabs Washington insider, Barrie McKenna, (Back).
Zoellick, the No. 2 at State Department, will take key role in firm's global affairs
WASHINGTON -- Top Bush administration official Robert Zoellick is taking his vast experience in trade and China to Wall Street, joining a long list of Washington insiders to work at investment dealer Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
The news of Mr. Zoellick's impending departure comes just weeks after Goldman Sachs chief executive officer Henry (Hank) Paulson went the other way on Interstate 95 -- leaving the New York-based company to become U.S. Treasury Secretary in Washington.
But Mr. Zoellick, 52, Deputy Secretary of State and former U.S. trade representative, denied reports yesterday that he was quitting the No. 2 job at the State department because he was passed over for the Treasury Secretary job.
"I certainly knew I'd always be a contender [for Treasury Secretary]," he told reporters. "But . . . if I were the President and I had a choice in Hank Paulson, I'd pick Hank Paulson. So there was never any sense of like I must get this or I'm going to do that."
White House spokesman Tony Snow said Mr. Zoellick "has been wanting to pursue opportunities in the private sector for some time and now he's going to do it."
At Goldman Sachs -- the most international of the major U.S. investment dealers -- Mr. Zoellick is expected to help expand foreign markets, chair its international advisory group and represent major investors overseas.
Mr. Zoellick, a cerebral and intense free-market thinker, has made a mark in the Bush administration -- first as the architect of a series of bilateral free-trade deals while he was trade czar, and more recently as the leading adviser on touchy issues, including China and Darfur.
Mr. Zoellick, a frequent foreign traveller, played a key role in striking the recent tentative truce between the main rebel groups in Sudan's war-ravaged Darfur region. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday praised Mr. Zoellick as "an experienced policy maker, a seasoned diplomat, a masterful strategist and an intellectual leader, someone who was known and respected in every foreign capital around the world."
Mr. Zoellick will now exploit that expertise in his second stint at Goldman Sachs, perpetuating what has become a revolving door of officials shuffling between Washington and Wall Street.
After working in the administration of Mr. Bush's father, President George H.W. Bush in the 1980s, Mr. Zoellick worked as a senior adviser for Goldman Sachs. He also served as a vice-president of mortgage finance company Fannie Mae and as president of the Centre for Strategic and International Affairs, a Washington-based think tank.
Over the years he has worked in the White House, State, Treasury and the trade representative's office.
He follows a well-trodden path of top administration officials to do time at Goldman Sachs, and vice versa. Goldman Sachs vice-chairman Robert Hormats was assistant U.S. Secretary of State from 1981 to 1982. The late Robert Fowler, Treasury Secretary under Lyndon Johnson, also went to Goldman Sachs.
More recently, the investment dealer has sent several top executives to Washington, including former treasury secretary Robert Rubin and Stephen Friedman, former White House economic adviser.
Goldman Sachs has become an enthusiastic investor in large infrastructure investments, including privatized airports and ports -- deals that often require sensitive negotiations with national and local governments.
A Goldman Sachs-led consortium is considered the front-runner in the current bidding war for Associated British Ports Holdings PLC. It lost out in an earlier bid to buy BAA PLC, the world's largest operator of airports.
In the Bush administration, Mr. Zoellick was regarded as an innovative thinker who wasn't afraid to challenge the status quo.
But he is also intensely partisan and wasn't shy about speaking his mind.
His appointment is part of a broader reshaping of the executive ranks at Goldman Sachs, triggered by the departure of Mr. Paulson. Lloyd Blankfein, the new chief executive officer, yesterday named Gary Cohn and Jon Winkelried as co-presidents.
Mr. Cohn, 45, is a former commodities trader who spent the past three years overseeing equities. Mr. Winkelried, 46, is an investment banker who ran fixed-income trading for five years.
In Goldman we trust
The announcement yesterday that U.S. deputy secretary of state Robert Zoellick will quit his No. 2 job at the department next month and join Goldman Sachs Group Inc. should come as no surprise. The firm has long had a revolving door to the corridors of U.S. power
Incoming
Mr. Zoellick, 52, will advise the firm on global issues and chair its 25-member international advisory group.
Biography
Confirmed as deputy secretary of state on Feb. 22, 2005.
Before joining the State Department was U.S. Trade Representative from 2001, where he completed negotiations to bring China and Taiwan into the WTO.
Served during President George H.W. Bush's administration as undersecretary of state for economic and agricultural affairs.
Held posts in the U.S. Treasury Department From 1985 to 1988
Served during the Clinton administration as executive vice-president at Washington-based Fannie Mae, the nation's largest mortgage finance company.
Outgoing
Henry Paulson: Goldman Sachs chief executive officer Henry Paulson, 60, was last month nominated by President George W. Bush to become Treasury Secretary.
Robert Rubin: The former co-chairman of Goldman spent four year as U.S. Treasury Secretary before quitting in 1999.
Stephen Friedman: Another former co-chairman. He was President George W. Bush's chief economic adviser from 2003 to 2004.
Jon Corzine: Another former Goldman leader. He was elected to the U.S. Senate before becoming the governor of New Jersey.
Saturday June 24 2006, Globe, Where patience and persistence trump perfection, Allan Rock, Shawn McCarthy, (Back).
As UN ambassador, Allan Rock learned to work within, not against, the system.
NEW YORK -- Operating in the maddeningly frustrating environment of the UN, Allan Rock has learned over time to celebrate small advances in the battle against geopolitical inertia.
For 2½ years as ambassador to the United Nations, Mr. Rock has not only represented Canada's interests at the world body, but has thrown his considerable energy into personal causes, usually related to violence against women and children in war-ravaged Africa.
Early in his tenure, Mr. Rock would privately echo the concerns of UN critics and mutter about the glacier-like speed of the world body's processes and the naked national interest at play when members blocked efforts to protect civilians in places such as Darfur and northern Uganda.
But as he prepared to end his term at the UN next week, the former Liberal cabinet minister sat down in a one-on-one interview to voice a more nuanced view -- that diplomacy, like politics, is the art of the possible, and perfection can be the enemy of the good.
From the divisive issue of UN reform, to peace in Darfur, to Israel's role at the world body, Mr. Rock argued that by stubbornly standing on principle, countries can stymie the incremental action that is needed to make any progress at all.
Criticized for his impetuous action as a federal cabinet minister, he has learned the art of pragmatism at the UN.
"There cannot ever have been a place where more and better use was made of committees and studies and commissions to slow things down. It's extremely frustrating," Mr. Rock said in an interview.
"But if you choose your spots, if you pick your issues, and focus like a laser on those issues, build coalitions, work with NGOs [non-governmental organizations] and are persistent, you can use the process to make, albeit modest, progress on some of these issues."
His incrementalist approach stands in stark contrast to that of U.S. Ambassador John Bolton, whom other UN representatives view as an ideologue who would rather spark a crisis than compromise a position. In both cases, the ambassadors reflect their countries' approach to multilateralism: Canada as a middle power seeking influence from the margins; the United States as embattled superpower, looking to impose its will.
Next Saturday, Canada Day, Mr. Rock will return home, leaving behind the Park Avenue residence, the Town Car and driver and the diplomatic dinners. After 13 years in public life, he and his wife, Debbie Hanscom, will move to Windsor, Ont., where he will join Sutts, Strosberg, the law firm of his long-time friend, Harvey Strosberg.
But he is not walking away from the UN completely. This fall, at the request of the Secretary-General's special representative for Sri Lanka, he will visit that country to prepare a report on the use of child soldiers.
Mr. Rock arrived at the UN rather reluctantly in January of 2004, after the new prime minister Paul Martin signalled that his former leadership rival would not play a prominent role in a Martin government.
In taking up the assignment, he became one of the few political appointees to serve Canada at the UN -- the last non-diplomat being Stephen Lewis, who was appointed by Brian Mulroney in 1984, after serving as leader of the New Democratic Party in Ontario.
UN watchers say Mr. Rock became an effective advocate within the system, applying his political skills to advance his own causes within Canada's human-security agenda, as well as Ottawa's positions on UN management reform, support for Israel's deeper integration into the UN family and Security Council expansion.
"He proved that a political appointee, with no diplomatic experience, can be quite a refreshing voice and an influential one around the institution," Columbia University professor Ed Luck said.
Mr. Luck credited the Canadian ambassador with succeeding, in the lead-up to last year's leaders summit, in preserving language in their declaration that established the principle that the UN has "responsibility to protect" civilians in countries where their own governments cannot or will not.
Darfur is something of a test case for that principle, and so far, it appears the UN is unwilling, and perhaps unable, to act in the war-ravaged region of Sudan without the agreement of the government in Khartoum.
For critics, Darfur is a glaring example of the UN's impotence and its preoccupation with process over results on the ground.
This spring, Mr. Rock participated in negotiations in Abuja, Nigeria, that led to a fragile peace agreement between the government of Khartoum and the main rebel faction in Darfur. While the agreement was widely criticized, Mr. Rock defended the effort.
And then, in a nod to pragmatism, he noted that without Khartoum's agreement for a peacekeeping force, the UN would have to "fight its way in" to Darfur, and there is little appetite among members for going to war there.
Monday June 26 2006, Globe and Mail, Lewis MacKenzie, Forget a UN army, (Back).
Retired major-general Lewis MacKenzie was the first commander of United Nations peacekeeping forces in Sarajevo.
A collection of well-meaning academics and security experts recently proposed the creation of an international rapid reaction force that could be deployed within 48 hours of a green light from the United Nations. It's a bad idea.
In 1945, at the founding conference for the UN in San Francisco, it was agreed that the military resources of the self-appointed permanent five members of the Security Council - the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, China and, shortly thereafter, France - would be available as required by the UN.
The original film produced by the UN to sell the concept of the new world body to the public shows the military commanders of the Perm 5 in an art deco headquarters on a hill discussing an emerging international threat in a faraway country. Within days, a UN force of 200,000 soldiers, 4,000 aircraft, 1,000 ships and one atomic bomb are launched in the direction of the threat, returning a few weeks later having sorted out the bad guys in the interests of mankind.
The military commanders of the Perm 5 were to regularly meet under the title Military Staff Committee. That was 61 years ago, and the committee has yet to have its first meeting at the commander-in-chief level.
That brings us to this month, when academics and security experts raised the idea of a standing professional UN army numbering 15,000 military, police and civilian staff, including logistics and nation-building specialists. Details of the concept are found in the book A United Nations Emergency Peace Service: To Prevent Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity, which was presented at the UN.
The authors opine that such a force would accelerate the UN's glacial response to the myriad of peace and security problems that cry out for intervention, and they cite Rwanda and Darfur as prime examples. They suggest that the UN force could be on its way to a trouble spot within 48 hours and perhaps even be pre-deployed to nip an emerging crisis in the bud before it blossoms.
As attractive as the concept might sound, it will not improve the UN's record of untimely and inadequate crisis intervention.
The popular myth and chronic excuse offered when the UN fails to respond to an obvious security crisis is a lack of resources. In reality, this is merely a convenient way to let the Security Council's Perm 5 off the hook and mask the dominant role played by their own national self-interests.
When the Security Council authorizes interventions, it might not be easy finding the necessary soldiers. But the $150 (U.S.) per soldier per day paid by the UN to the governments of the contributing countries has certainly helped find a good many of the 80,000 troops currently deployed around the world. In the vast majority of cases, the soldiers actually stand by for months waiting to deploy on a particular mission while the Security Council "is seized of the crisis" but can't get an authorizing resolution watered down enough to satisfy all of the Perm 5 members.
In 1945, when the Perm 5 gave themselves a veto whereby any one of them could thwart approval of any resolution dealing with peace and security issues, they didn't stop there. It is a little advertised fact that their vetoes also apply to the procedures that govern the conduct of the Security Council - in other words, the rules dealing with membership, voting and the use of the veto.
To suggest that the existence of a UN army would have helped stop the genocide in Rwanda or could be used to take on the current genocide in Darfur is naive. The stumbling block for both was and is not a lack of resources but rather a lack of commitment beyond national self-interests by some of the Perm 5 members. In the case of Rwanda, there were no self-interests strong enough to authorize intervention; in Darfur, the self-interests of at least two members (related to oil production) mean their vetoes stand in the way of any forceful action. If a UN army did exist, it would still be sitting on its hands far away from Darfur.
I would not be the least bit surprised if the Security Council itself would veto any attempt to create a UN army. If one exists, there would be pressure to use it - and the Perm 5 wouldn't like being backed into a decision-making corner.
If the international community is serious about dealing with security crises as they develop, forget the overworked idea of creating a UN army and concentrate on changing the rules governing the self-appointed 1945 "superpower" club. Adding more members, permanent without the veto and rotating, would just extend debate time. Until the veto is jettisoned and majority rules - as in all other Security Council issues except peace and security and procedure - nothing will change.
Monday June 26 2006, Globe, Sudan accuses world body of aiding rebel leader, Mphammed Ali Saeed, (Back).
KHARTOUM -- The UN's bid to gain backing for its Darfur peacekeeping plan suffered a fresh blow yesterday when the Sudanese government accused the world body of providing cover for a rebel leader who has rejected a recent peace deal.
A demonstration was also organized in Khartoum during which thousands of young people backing the regime chanted slogans against the world body and its plans to deploy peacekeepers backed by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to the war-torn western region.
The ministry said it has suspended all United Nations operations in Darfur until further notice, except those of the World Food Program and the UN Children's Fund.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Jamal Mohammed Ibrahim said UN envoy Jan Pronk has been summoned today to give an explanation of a helicopter ride alleged to have been given to Darfur rebel leader Suleiman Jammus.
The ministry said Mr. Jammus, a member of a dissident faction of the rebel Sudan Liberation Movement, was taken Saturday from the main Darfur town of El-Fasher to the state of South Kordofan.
"It was clear that the act was planned to take place behind the back of the Sudanese authorities," Mr. Ibrahim said in a statement issued late Saturday.
Mr. Ibrahim said the rebel leader had his face covered during the transfer, calling it a clear indication that the UN officials travelling on the same flight were trying to hide the man from government authorities.
The Foreign Ministry said it considered the incident "a flagrant violation of the country's sovereignty and a violation of the agreement under which the UN operates in Sudan."
UN spokeswoman Radhia Achouri could not confirm that the rebel leader had indeed travelled on a UN flight and refused to comment on Khartoum's outraged reaction.
Mr. Jammus belongs to the wing of the SLM that opposes the fragile peace agreement signed between Minni Minawi's faction and Khartoum in Nigeria last month. His holdout faction condemned the UN suspension, saying Khartoum was determined to continue killing the people of Darfur.
Rebel spokesman Jaffer Monro called for the world body to expedite the deployment of UN peacekeepers.
The United Nations wants to replace the cash-strapped 7,000-strong African Union contingent that has attempted in vain to maintain peace in Darfur over the past two years. The plan, supported by the United States, has met fierce opposition from Sudanese President Omar al-Beshir, who has warned against any unilateral deployment.
The world body has stressed that it never intended to send troops without Khartoum's consent, but has warned that improved security in Darfur is vital for the success of the May 5 peace deal.
After completing a mission aimed at getting Khartoum's support for a UN deployment, undersecretary-general for peacekeeping operations Jean-Marie Guehenno reported no breakthrough.
Monday June 26, 2006, Chron, Sudan Lifts Suspension of U.N.'s Work, Edith M. Lederer, Mohamed Osman, (Back).
UNITED NATIONS — The Sudanese government has lifted its partial suspension of United Nations work in conflict-wracked Darfur, the U.N. said Monday.
[photo] Sudan's President Omar El-Bashir delivers a speech before the signing a cease-fire agreement by head of the Islamic Courts Union delegation Mohamed Ali Ibrahim and Somalia's foreign minister Abdallah Sheikh Ismail, both unseen, during a signing ceremony that was attended by Somalia's transitional President Abdullahi Yusuf and Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa in Khartoum Sudan Thursday, June 22, 2006. Somalia's foreign minister and a representative of the faction that controls the country's capital signed an agreement that calls for an immediate cease-fire and recognizes the interim government.
The government ordered the suspension, except for humanitarian activities, after the United Nations in El Fasher in North Darfur permitted a U.N. helicopter on Saturday to transport a rebel leader from one of the armed groups "bent on wrecking peace," according to a Foreign Ministry statement quoted Sunday by the official news agency SUNA.
The Sudanese government signed an agreement May 5 with one rebel faction of the Sudan Liberation Army but another faction of that group and the Justice and Equality Movement have refused to sign the accord.
U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said the U.N. Mission in Khartoum reported Monday that "all these restrictions that had been called for by the government have now been removed."
"The crux of the matter was related to flight manifests, and the regulation by which the U.N. needs to communicate to the Sudanese authorities the manifest on its flights within Sudan," he said. "I think there were some issues with a particular flight and we're looking into it."
Dujarric refused to say whether a rebel leader had been aboard a U.N. flight. The U.N. Mission in Sudan "said it would look into this issue of the flight manifest," he said.
The flap came as tensions between the U.N. and Khartoum have been building over the deployment of a U.N. peacekeeping force in the troubled western region of Sudan. The U.S. and the U.N. want U.N. peacekeepers to take over from an African Union force. But last week, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir vowed he would never allow that.
According to a statement by the Sudanese Foreign Ministry on Sunday, Sulieman Jamous, the leader of a Sudan Liberation Army faction who did not sign the May 5 Darfur Peace agreement, purportedly flew from El Fasher to Kordufan on a U.N. helicopter.
The ministry's order affected all U.N. operations in Sudan except activities carried out by the U.N. children's agency, UNICEF, and the World Food Program.
"I don't think it had any specific effect on the (U.N.) operations due to the short time lag between the announcement and the fact that the situation's now been reversed," Dujarric said.
The Darfur conflict began in early 2003 when members of ethnic African tribes rose in revolt against the Arab-led Khartoum government. Sudan's government is accused of responding by unleashing Arab militias known as the janjaweed who have been blamed for the worst atrocities. Khartoum denies any involvement, but has committed to disarm the janjaweed under the peace deal.
Nearly 200,000 people have died since the conflict began, some 2 million have been rendered homeless, and the fighting has spilled across the border into Chad.
On Friday, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said he plans to meet the Sudanese president at upcoming African Union summit to press for a U.N. takeover of peacekeeping from the African organization.
The African Union has said it cannot handle a long-term peacekeeping operation and wants its 7,000-strong force replaced by U.N. peacekeepers. The U.N. has envisioned taking over in early 2007 and wants to beef up the poorly equipped AU force in the interim. But the handover is contingent on approval by the Sudanese government.
(Back)
June 20, Globe, Sudan's president rejects UN peacekeepers in Darfur, (Source).
June 20, NYT, No. 2 State Department Official Resigns to Join Wall Street Firm, Helene Cooper, (Source).
June 20, Globe, Goldman grabs Washington insider, Barrie McKenna, (Source).
June 24, Globe, Where patience and persistence trump perfection, Allan Rock, Shawn McCarthy, (Source).
June 26, Globe, Forget a UN army, Lewis MacKenzie, (Source).
June 26, Globe, Sudan accuses world body of aiding rebel leader, Mphammed Ali Saeed, (Source).
June 26, Chron, Sudan Lifts Suspension of U.N.'s Work, Edith M. Lederer, Mohamed Osman, (Source).
Monday June 19, 2006, Globe, China's Wen kicks off African charm offensive in Egypt, Salah Nasrawi, (Back).
Prime Minister signs agreements on energy, industry, telecommunications
CAIRO -- China is making inroads into Africa with huge investment projects -- filling the void left by U.S. and European businesses -- as it looks to reap not only financial profits, but political ones as well.
Yesterday, Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao wrapped up a two-day visit to Cairo, the first stop on a regional tour, after signing 10 agreements in the fields of oil, natural gas, telecommunications and industry.
After meeting with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak earlier in the day, Mr. Wen said China was ready to increase investment in Egypt, particularly in the energy and communications sectors.
China also agreed to give Egypt a $50-million (U.S.) loan and a $10-million grant to build a centre to facilitate investment in an industrial area northwest of the Gulf of Suez.
On the political front, Mr. Mubarak assured Mr. Wen of Egypt's policy of recognizing one China, spokesman Suleiman Awwad said, alluding to Taiwan. Other African countries have also yielded to Chinese pressure to shun Taiwan.
Trade between Egypt and China topped $2-billion in 2005 -- a fourfold increase since 2002. And it has 186 projects in Egypt, with a total investment of $220-million.
On Saturday night, Mr. Wen and his Egyptian counterpart, Ahmed Nazif, attended celebrations at the Great Pyramids to mark the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries.
In 1956, Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser recognized China -- making Egypt the first Arab or African nation to do so, in defiance of U.S. efforts to discourage other countries from dealing with the Communist state. The United States established diplomatic ties with China after 29 years on Jan. 1, 1979.
Mr. Wen is expected to sign additional economic agreements during the other stops on his tour.
While critics contend that China's headway into the continent unjustly rewards nations with poor human rights records, an analyst suggests that other factors have greater prominence in Beijing's calculations.
"This is not its concern. Business is," said Khalil al-Anani, a political analyst with al-Siyassah al-Dawliyah, a political quarterly published by the semi-official Al-Ahram daily newspaper. Mr. Al-Anani also noted that China's investments in African countries are mostly in state-run infrastructure projects.
"These are long-term investments into which Western businesses probably do not want to venture," he said.
Other critics have said China's arms exports to some war-torn African nations have helped fuel conflicts, including that in the Darfur region of Sudan, which has claimed at least 180,000 lives and forced more than two million people from their homes over the past three years.
But Chinese officials defend their expanding relations with the African countries as "mutually beneficial."
China's assistant foreign minister He Yafei said Friday, a day before Mr. Wen started his African tour, that Sino-African relations help to improve those nations' human rights records.
In Cairo, Mr. Wen also faced accusations that his country was doing little or nothing to support the Arabs in the conflict with Israel.
"We think that the key solution is to implement the United Nations resolutions and the roadmap peace plan and to encourage both sides to pursue a peaceful settlement on the basis of 'land for peace,' " he said.
Mr. He described his country's relations with the Jewish state as "good and normal and important to both peoples as well as for the Arab world, because these relations help China to work with both parties to achieve peace."
After Mr. Wen's two-day visit to Egypt, he left yesterday for Ghana on a tour that will also take him to Angola, South Africa, Tanzania and Uganda.
Tuesday June 20 2006, Globe, Sudan's president rejects UN peacekeepers in Darfur, (Back).
KHARTOUM, Sudan — Sudan's president vowed Tuesday to never allow UN peacekeepers into Darfur and said he would lead the “resistance” against any foreign force, his strongest rejection yet of the United Nations plan for halting violence in the war-torn region.
Omar al-Bashir's comments were likely to escalate tensions with the United Nations, coming as a joint UN and African Union team was in Sudan to plan for deployment of a possible peacekeeping force.
“This shall never take place,” Mr. al-Bashir said at a news conference alongside South African President Thabo Mbeki. “These are colonial forces and we will not accept colonial forces coming into the country.
“They want to colonize Africa, starting with the first sub-Saharan country to gain its independence. If they want to start colonization in Africa, let them chose a different place.”
U.N. officials want to send a beefed-up peacekeeping force to replace 7,000 African Union soldiers that have largely been unable to stop the fighting in Darfur.
After Sudan's government signed a peace agreement with the main Darfur rebel group May 5, it gave some indications it might allow a U.N. force. But Mr. al-Bashir's government has since backtracked and Tuesday's comments were the president's most direct rejection.
Nearly 200,000 people have been killed and more than 2 million displaced in Darfur since rebel groups made up of ethnic Africans rose up against the Arab-led Khartoum government in early 2003. The government is accused of responding by unleashing Arab militias known as the Janjaweed who have been accused of some of the worst atrocities, but it denies any involvement.
Last month, the U.N. Security Council gave Khartoum a week to accept the U.N. peacekeepers, though it put off the deadline to allow for further diplomatic efforts. A high-level Security Council delegation returned last week from a tour of the region.
The assessment team currently in Sudan is led by the top U.N. peacekeeping official, Undersecretary-General Jean-Marie Guehenno. In response to Mr. al-Bashir's comments, he plans to meet with the president and hold a news conference before returning to New York, where he will report to the Security Council.
“There is a lot of momentum in this process going on now,” U.N. spokeswoman Marie Okabe said. “Let's wait until Guehenno's team comes back and see what he has to say.”
But Mr. al-Bashir has toughened his rhetoric.
Late Monday, he denounced any foreign deployment in Darfur while speaking to his ruling National Congress party. He said he would lead “the resistance against foreign international military intervention if it ever takes place in Darfur,” the state news agency SUNA reported Tuesday.
Sudan has argued that the Darfur conflict is an African problem that should be handled by troops from the continent.
In his comments Tuesday, al-Bashir said that instead of sending U.N. peacekeepers, the United Nations should increase funding for the African Union forces and improve its capabilities.
The AU force has been severely hampered by a lack of manpower, equipment and funding.
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has repeatedly urged Sudan to accept the U.N. force. Sudan has allowed U.N. peacekeepers into southern Sudan to monitor a separate peace deal there.
Mr. Guehenno's staff is still a long way from choosing the troops that would go to Sudan, but officials have studied the possibility of sending only soldiers from African or Muslim countries to avoid the impression that they are colonizers.
It is considered highly unlikely that Britain, Sudan's former colonial master, or any other major power would send troops. The soldiers would probably come from the main U.N. troop contributing countries, which include Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, India, Nigeria and Ghana.
Tuesday June 20 2006, NYT, No. 2 State Department Official Resigns to Join Wall Street Firm, Helene Cooper, (Back).
WASHINGTON, June 19 — Deputy Secretary of State Robert B. Zoellick said Monday that he would be leaving his post as the State Department's second in command, as expected, to join the Wall Street investment house Goldman Sachs Group Inc. as a managing director.
[photo] Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick attended the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in January 2006.
Bush administration officials said the search was now on to find a replacement for Mr. Zoellick, a six- year administration veteran who spent his first four years as the United States trade representative.
R. Nicholas Burns, the under secretary of state for political affairs, who is the department's third-ranking official, would be the logical front-runner for the job. Administration officials say Robert M. Kimmitt, the deputy Treasury secretary, is also in the running.
Mr. Burns, while close to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, is a career Foreign Service officer whose rise accelerated during the Clinton administration, when he served on the staff of the National Security Council, as State Department spokesman and as ambassador to Greece. He was appointed the American representative to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization during President Bush's first term.
Mr. Kimmitt, a former American ambassador to Germany, served in several posts in the administration of President Bush's father, including under secretary of state for political affairs.
He is widely respected in Washington, but some administration officials worry that Senate confirmation might be made difficult by his role in a decision this year to allow a company owned by the emirate of Dubai to take over operations at five American ports. The company, Dubai Ports, pulled out of the deal after it was denounced by Congressional Republicans as well as Democrats.
The departure of Mr. Zoellick has been widely anticipated. He was considered for Treasury secretary, but President Bush nominated Henry M. Paulson Jr., chairman and chief executive of Goldman Sachs.
During an interview on Friday, Mr. Zoellick said he had wanted the Treasury job but added that he understood why Mr. Bush had made the decision he did. "If it were a choice between Hank Paulson and me, I'd choose Hank Paulson," he said.
As Ms. Rice's deputy, Mr. Zoellick was the primary architect of the administration's policy toward Sudan and particularly the response to the crisis in Darfur. In May at talks in Abuja, Nigeria, he pushed Darfur's rebel leaders to sign a peace accord.
He was known in Sudan for understanding the many facets of the country and its people, reciting tribal names, affiliations and political leanings.
He is widely considered to be one of the administration's most experienced foreign policy hands.
But Mr. Zoellick's years as trade representative are regarded as more notable than his time at the State Department. He successfully managed the start of the world trade negotiations, still under way, that are meant to lower tariffs on manufacturing products and, more significantly, to reduce agriculture subsidies.
Mr. Zoellick also successfully managed the deeply divisive fight in Congress to obtain "fast track" authority for Mr. Bush to negotiate trade pacts that Congress can approve or reject but not amend.
As the trade representative, Mr. Zoellick worked closely with officials from developing countries. One of the first things he did in the job was to reaffirm a late policy shift by the Clinton administration that put the need for access to cheaper AIDS drugs in poor countries above the desires of American drug companies seeking to protect their patents.
Mr. Zoellick said he expected to stay on the job at the State Department until the middle of July.
Tuesday June 20 2006, Globe, Goldman grabs Washington insider, Barrie McKenna, (Back).
Zoellick, the No. 2 at State Department, will take key role in firm's global affairs
WASHINGTON -- Top Bush administration official Robert Zoellick is taking his vast experience in trade and China to Wall Street, joining a long list of Washington insiders to work at investment dealer Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
The news of Mr. Zoellick's impending departure comes just weeks after Goldman Sachs chief executive officer Henry (Hank) Paulson went the other way on Interstate 95 -- leaving the New York-based company to become U.S. Treasury Secretary in Washington.
But Mr. Zoellick, 52, Deputy Secretary of State and former U.S. trade representative, denied reports yesterday that he was quitting the No. 2 job at the State department because he was passed over for the Treasury Secretary job.
"I certainly knew I'd always be a contender [for Treasury Secretary]," he told reporters. "But . . . if I were the President and I had a choice in Hank Paulson, I'd pick Hank Paulson. So there was never any sense of like I must get this or I'm going to do that."
White House spokesman Tony Snow said Mr. Zoellick "has been wanting to pursue opportunities in the private sector for some time and now he's going to do it."
At Goldman Sachs -- the most international of the major U.S. investment dealers -- Mr. Zoellick is expected to help expand foreign markets, chair its international advisory group and represent major investors overseas.
Mr. Zoellick, a cerebral and intense free-market thinker, has made a mark in the Bush administration -- first as the architect of a series of bilateral free-trade deals while he was trade czar, and more recently as the leading adviser on touchy issues, including China and Darfur.
Mr. Zoellick, a frequent foreign traveller, played a key role in striking the recent tentative truce between the main rebel groups in Sudan's war-ravaged Darfur region. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday praised Mr. Zoellick as "an experienced policy maker, a seasoned diplomat, a masterful strategist and an intellectual leader, someone who was known and respected in every foreign capital around the world."
Mr. Zoellick will now exploit that expertise in his second stint at Goldman Sachs, perpetuating what has become a revolving door of officials shuffling between Washington and Wall Street.
After working in the administration of Mr. Bush's father, President George H.W. Bush in the 1980s, Mr. Zoellick worked as a senior adviser for Goldman Sachs. He also served as a vice-president of mortgage finance company Fannie Mae and as president of the Centre for Strategic and International Affairs, a Washington-based think tank.
Over the years he has worked in the White House, State, Treasury and the trade representative's office.
He follows a well-trodden path of top administration officials to do time at Goldman Sachs, and vice versa. Goldman Sachs vice-chairman Robert Hormats was assistant U.S. Secretary of State from 1981 to 1982. The late Robert Fowler, Treasury Secretary under Lyndon Johnson, also went to Goldman Sachs.
More recently, the investment dealer has sent several top executives to Washington, including former treasury secretary Robert Rubin and Stephen Friedman, former White House economic adviser.
Goldman Sachs has become an enthusiastic investor in large infrastructure investments, including privatized airports and ports -- deals that often require sensitive negotiations with national and local governments.
A Goldman Sachs-led consortium is considered the front-runner in the current bidding war for Associated British Ports Holdings PLC. It lost out in an earlier bid to buy BAA PLC, the world's largest operator of airports.
In the Bush administration, Mr. Zoellick was regarded as an innovative thinker who wasn't afraid to challenge the status quo.
But he is also intensely partisan and wasn't shy about speaking his mind.
His appointment is part of a broader reshaping of the executive ranks at Goldman Sachs, triggered by the departure of Mr. Paulson. Lloyd Blankfein, the new chief executive officer, yesterday named Gary Cohn and Jon Winkelried as co-presidents.
Mr. Cohn, 45, is a former commodities trader who spent the past three years overseeing equities. Mr. Winkelried, 46, is an investment banker who ran fixed-income trading for five years.
In Goldman we trust
The announcement yesterday that U.S. deputy secretary of state Robert Zoellick will quit his No. 2 job at the department next month and join Goldman Sachs Group Inc. should come as no surprise. The firm has long had a revolving door to the corridors of U.S. power
Incoming
Mr. Zoellick, 52, will advise the firm on global issues and chair its 25-member international advisory group.
Biography
Confirmed as deputy secretary of state on Feb. 22, 2005.
Before joining the State Department was U.S. Trade Representative from 2001, where he completed negotiations to bring China and Taiwan into the WTO.
Served during President George H.W. Bush's administration as undersecretary of state for economic and agricultural affairs.
Held posts in the U.S. Treasury Department From 1985 to 1988
Served during the Clinton administration as executive vice-president at Washington-based Fannie Mae, the nation's largest mortgage finance company.
Outgoing
Henry Paulson: Goldman Sachs chief executive officer Henry Paulson, 60, was last month nominated by President George W. Bush to become Treasury Secretary.
Robert Rubin: The former co-chairman of Goldman spent four year as U.S. Treasury Secretary before quitting in 1999.
Stephen Friedman: Another former co-chairman. He was President George W. Bush's chief economic adviser from 2003 to 2004.
Jon Corzine: Another former Goldman leader. He was elected to the U.S. Senate before becoming the governor of New Jersey.
Saturday June 24 2006, Globe, Where patience and persistence trump perfection, Allan Rock, Shawn McCarthy, (Back).
As UN ambassador, Allan Rock learned to work within, not against, the system.
NEW YORK -- Operating in the maddeningly frustrating environment of the UN, Allan Rock has learned over time to celebrate small advances in the battle against geopolitical inertia.
For 2½ years as ambassador to the United Nations, Mr. Rock has not only represented Canada's interests at the world body, but has thrown his considerable energy into personal causes, usually related to violence against women and children in war-ravaged Africa.
Early in his tenure, Mr. Rock would privately echo the concerns of UN critics and mutter about the glacier-like speed of the world body's processes and the naked national interest at play when members blocked efforts to protect civilians in places such as Darfur and northern Uganda.
But as he prepared to end his term at the UN next week, the former Liberal cabinet minister sat down in a one-on-one interview to voice a more nuanced view -- that diplomacy, like politics, is the art of the possible, and perfection can be the enemy of the good.
From the divisive issue of UN reform, to peace in Darfur, to Israel's role at the world body, Mr. Rock argued that by stubbornly standing on principle, countries can stymie the incremental action that is needed to make any progress at all.
Criticized for his impetuous action as a federal cabinet minister, he has learned the art of pragmatism at the UN.
"There cannot ever have been a place where more and better use was made of committees and studies and commissions to slow things down. It's extremely frustrating," Mr. Rock said in an interview.
"But if you choose your spots, if you pick your issues, and focus like a laser on those issues, build coalitions, work with NGOs [non-governmental organizations] and are persistent, you can use the process to make, albeit modest, progress on some of these issues."
His incrementalist approach stands in stark contrast to that of U.S. Ambassador John Bolton, whom other UN representatives view as an ideologue who would rather spark a crisis than compromise a position. In both cases, the ambassadors reflect their countries' approach to multilateralism: Canada as a middle power seeking influence from the margins; the United States as embattled superpower, looking to impose its will.
Next Saturday, Canada Day, Mr. Rock will return home, leaving behind the Park Avenue residence, the Town Car and driver and the diplomatic dinners. After 13 years in public life, he and his wife, Debbie Hanscom, will move to Windsor, Ont., where he will join Sutts, Strosberg, the law firm of his long-time friend, Harvey Strosberg.
But he is not walking away from the UN completely. This fall, at the request of the Secretary-General's special representative for Sri Lanka, he will visit that country to prepare a report on the use of child soldiers.
Mr. Rock arrived at the UN rather reluctantly in January of 2004, after the new prime minister Paul Martin signalled that his former leadership rival would not play a prominent role in a Martin government.
In taking up the assignment, he became one of the few political appointees to serve Canada at the UN -- the last non-diplomat being Stephen Lewis, who was appointed by Brian Mulroney in 1984, after serving as leader of the New Democratic Party in Ontario.
UN watchers say Mr. Rock became an effective advocate within the system, applying his political skills to advance his own causes within Canada's human-security agenda, as well as Ottawa's positions on UN management reform, support for Israel's deeper integration into the UN family and Security Council expansion.
"He proved that a political appointee, with no diplomatic experience, can be quite a refreshing voice and an influential one around the institution," Columbia University professor Ed Luck said.
Mr. Luck credited the Canadian ambassador with succeeding, in the lead-up to last year's leaders summit, in preserving language in their declaration that established the principle that the UN has "responsibility to protect" civilians in countries where their own governments cannot or will not.
Darfur is something of a test case for that principle, and so far, it appears the UN is unwilling, and perhaps unable, to act in the war-ravaged region of Sudan without the agreement of the government in Khartoum.
For critics, Darfur is a glaring example of the UN's impotence and its preoccupation with process over results on the ground.
This spring, Mr. Rock participated in negotiations in Abuja, Nigeria, that led to a fragile peace agreement between the government of Khartoum and the main rebel faction in Darfur. While the agreement was widely criticized, Mr. Rock defended the effort.
And then, in a nod to pragmatism, he noted that without Khartoum's agreement for a peacekeeping force, the UN would have to "fight its way in" to Darfur, and there is little appetite among members for going to war there.
Monday June 26 2006, Globe and Mail, Lewis MacKenzie, Forget a UN army, (Back).
Retired major-general Lewis MacKenzie was the first commander of United Nations peacekeeping forces in Sarajevo.
A collection of well-meaning academics and security experts recently proposed the creation of an international rapid reaction force that could be deployed within 48 hours of a green light from the United Nations. It's a bad idea.
In 1945, at the founding conference for the UN in San Francisco, it was agreed that the military resources of the self-appointed permanent five members of the Security Council - the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, China and, shortly thereafter, France - would be available as required by the UN.
The original film produced by the UN to sell the concept of the new world body to the public shows the military commanders of the Perm 5 in an art deco headquarters on a hill discussing an emerging international threat in a faraway country. Within days, a UN force of 200,000 soldiers, 4,000 aircraft, 1,000 ships and one atomic bomb are launched in the direction of the threat, returning a few weeks later having sorted out the bad guys in the interests of mankind.
The military commanders of the Perm 5 were to regularly meet under the title Military Staff Committee. That was 61 years ago, and the committee has yet to have its first meeting at the commander-in-chief level.
That brings us to this month, when academics and security experts raised the idea of a standing professional UN army numbering 15,000 military, police and civilian staff, including logistics and nation-building specialists. Details of the concept are found in the book A United Nations Emergency Peace Service: To Prevent Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity, which was presented at the UN.
The authors opine that such a force would accelerate the UN's glacial response to the myriad of peace and security problems that cry out for intervention, and they cite Rwanda and Darfur as prime examples. They suggest that the UN force could be on its way to a trouble spot within 48 hours and perhaps even be pre-deployed to nip an emerging crisis in the bud before it blossoms.
As attractive as the concept might sound, it will not improve the UN's record of untimely and inadequate crisis intervention.
The popular myth and chronic excuse offered when the UN fails to respond to an obvious security crisis is a lack of resources. In reality, this is merely a convenient way to let the Security Council's Perm 5 off the hook and mask the dominant role played by their own national self-interests.
When the Security Council authorizes interventions, it might not be easy finding the necessary soldiers. But the $150 (U.S.) per soldier per day paid by the UN to the governments of the contributing countries has certainly helped find a good many of the 80,000 troops currently deployed around the world. In the vast majority of cases, the soldiers actually stand by for months waiting to deploy on a particular mission while the Security Council "is seized of the crisis" but can't get an authorizing resolution watered down enough to satisfy all of the Perm 5 members.
In 1945, when the Perm 5 gave themselves a veto whereby any one of them could thwart approval of any resolution dealing with peace and security issues, they didn't stop there. It is a little advertised fact that their vetoes also apply to the procedures that govern the conduct of the Security Council - in other words, the rules dealing with membership, voting and the use of the veto.
To suggest that the existence of a UN army would have helped stop the genocide in Rwanda or could be used to take on the current genocide in Darfur is naive. The stumbling block for both was and is not a lack of resources but rather a lack of commitment beyond national self-interests by some of the Perm 5 members. In the case of Rwanda, there were no self-interests strong enough to authorize intervention; in Darfur, the self-interests of at least two members (related to oil production) mean their vetoes stand in the way of any forceful action. If a UN army did exist, it would still be sitting on its hands far away from Darfur.
I would not be the least bit surprised if the Security Council itself would veto any attempt to create a UN army. If one exists, there would be pressure to use it - and the Perm 5 wouldn't like being backed into a decision-making corner.
If the international community is serious about dealing with security crises as they develop, forget the overworked idea of creating a UN army and concentrate on changing the rules governing the self-appointed 1945 "superpower" club. Adding more members, permanent without the veto and rotating, would just extend debate time. Until the veto is jettisoned and majority rules - as in all other Security Council issues except peace and security and procedure - nothing will change.
Monday June 26 2006, Globe, Sudan accuses world body of aiding rebel leader, Mphammed Ali Saeed, (Back).
KHARTOUM -- The UN's bid to gain backing for its Darfur peacekeeping plan suffered a fresh blow yesterday when the Sudanese government accused the world body of providing cover for a rebel leader who has rejected a recent peace deal.
A demonstration was also organized in Khartoum during which thousands of young people backing the regime chanted slogans against the world body and its plans to deploy peacekeepers backed by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to the war-torn western region.
The ministry said it has suspended all United Nations operations in Darfur until further notice, except those of the World Food Program and the UN Children's Fund.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Jamal Mohammed Ibrahim said UN envoy Jan Pronk has been summoned today to give an explanation of a helicopter ride alleged to have been given to Darfur rebel leader Suleiman Jammus.
The ministry said Mr. Jammus, a member of a dissident faction of the rebel Sudan Liberation Movement, was taken Saturday from the main Darfur town of El-Fasher to the state of South Kordofan.
"It was clear that the act was planned to take place behind the back of the Sudanese authorities," Mr. Ibrahim said in a statement issued late Saturday.
Mr. Ibrahim said the rebel leader had his face covered during the transfer, calling it a clear indication that the UN officials travelling on the same flight were trying to hide the man from government authorities.
The Foreign Ministry said it considered the incident "a flagrant violation of the country's sovereignty and a violation of the agreement under which the UN operates in Sudan."
UN spokeswoman Radhia Achouri could not confirm that the rebel leader had indeed travelled on a UN flight and refused to comment on Khartoum's outraged reaction.
Mr. Jammus belongs to the wing of the SLM that opposes the fragile peace agreement signed between Minni Minawi's faction and Khartoum in Nigeria last month. His holdout faction condemned the UN suspension, saying Khartoum was determined to continue killing the people of Darfur.
Rebel spokesman Jaffer Monro called for the world body to expedite the deployment of UN peacekeepers.
The United Nations wants to replace the cash-strapped 7,000-strong African Union contingent that has attempted in vain to maintain peace in Darfur over the past two years. The plan, supported by the United States, has met fierce opposition from Sudanese President Omar al-Beshir, who has warned against any unilateral deployment.
The world body has stressed that it never intended to send troops without Khartoum's consent, but has warned that improved security in Darfur is vital for the success of the May 5 peace deal.
After completing a mission aimed at getting Khartoum's support for a UN deployment, undersecretary-general for peacekeeping operations Jean-Marie Guehenno reported no breakthrough.
Monday June 26, 2006, Chron, Sudan Lifts Suspension of U.N.'s Work, Edith M. Lederer, Mohamed Osman, (Back).
UNITED NATIONS — The Sudanese government has lifted its partial suspension of United Nations work in conflict-wracked Darfur, the U.N. said Monday.
[photo] Sudan's President Omar El-Bashir delivers a speech before the signing a cease-fire agreement by head of the Islamic Courts Union delegation Mohamed Ali Ibrahim and Somalia's foreign minister Abdallah Sheikh Ismail, both unseen, during a signing ceremony that was attended by Somalia's transitional President Abdullahi Yusuf and Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa in Khartoum Sudan Thursday, June 22, 2006. Somalia's foreign minister and a representative of the faction that controls the country's capital signed an agreement that calls for an immediate cease-fire and recognizes the interim government.
The government ordered the suspension, except for humanitarian activities, after the United Nations in El Fasher in North Darfur permitted a U.N. helicopter on Saturday to transport a rebel leader from one of the armed groups "bent on wrecking peace," according to a Foreign Ministry statement quoted Sunday by the official news agency SUNA.
The Sudanese government signed an agreement May 5 with one rebel faction of the Sudan Liberation Army but another faction of that group and the Justice and Equality Movement have refused to sign the accord.
U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said the U.N. Mission in Khartoum reported Monday that "all these restrictions that had been called for by the government have now been removed."
"The crux of the matter was related to flight manifests, and the regulation by which the U.N. needs to communicate to the Sudanese authorities the manifest on its flights within Sudan," he said. "I think there were some issues with a particular flight and we're looking into it."
Dujarric refused to say whether a rebel leader had been aboard a U.N. flight. The U.N. Mission in Sudan "said it would look into this issue of the flight manifest," he said.
The flap came as tensions between the U.N. and Khartoum have been building over the deployment of a U.N. peacekeeping force in the troubled western region of Sudan. The U.S. and the U.N. want U.N. peacekeepers to take over from an African Union force. But last week, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir vowed he would never allow that.
According to a statement by the Sudanese Foreign Ministry on Sunday, Sulieman Jamous, the leader of a Sudan Liberation Army faction who did not sign the May 5 Darfur Peace agreement, purportedly flew from El Fasher to Kordufan on a U.N. helicopter.
The ministry's order affected all U.N. operations in Sudan except activities carried out by the U.N. children's agency, UNICEF, and the World Food Program.
"I don't think it had any specific effect on the (U.N.) operations due to the short time lag between the announcement and the fact that the situation's now been reversed," Dujarric said.
The Darfur conflict began in early 2003 when members of ethnic African tribes rose in revolt against the Arab-led Khartoum government. Sudan's government is accused of responding by unleashing Arab militias known as the janjaweed who have been blamed for the worst atrocities. Khartoum denies any involvement, but has committed to disarm the janjaweed under the peace deal.
Nearly 200,000 people have died since the conflict began, some 2 million have been rendered homeless, and the fighting has spilled across the border into Chad.
On Friday, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said he plans to meet the Sudanese president at upcoming African Union summit to press for a U.N. takeover of peacekeeping from the African organization.
The African Union has said it cannot handle a long-term peacekeeping operation and wants its 7,000-strong force replaced by U.N. peacekeepers. The U.N. has envisioned taking over in early 2007 and wants to beef up the poorly equipped AU force in the interim. But the handover is contingent on approval by the Sudanese government.
(Back)
Home