Tuesday, September 05, 2006

Sudan to the African Union:

Get out so that we can get on with killing the infidels in the south. From the Boston Globe:

“Many observers believe Sudan has dug in against UN deployment in the vast
western region because it fears the force will hunt down officials and government allies suspected of war crimes for atrocities allegedly committed by nomadic Arab tribes on Darfur's ethnic African communities.”
Well, that’s a bit of a false worry – The UN doesn’t exactly excel at capturing the bad guys, or doing something with them once they’re caught (didn’t Milosevic die of bordom?). The more likely concern with any kind of UN intervention is corruption (and this example isn’t even Oil for Food!) and sexual abuse.

“The removal of the AU peacekeepers would increase chances for a surge of
bloodshed in the arid region, where fighting stemming from long standing
disputes over land and water has killed about 200,000 people since 2003 and
chased an estimated 2.5 million people from their homes.”

“Sudan's military is now reportedly waging a major offensive in Darfur involving
thousands of soldiers and militiamen backed by warplanes.”

J. Peter Pham & Michael I. Krauss provide a summary and overview of both the Darfur crisis and UN fecklessness in TCS Daily.

Another Rwanda on the way. No doubt, soon enough we’ll be treated to all of the post-slaughter hand wringing and ‘never again’ speeches. The most feasible short run scenario is to begin seriously arming those that remain in the south, so that they may have at least a slight chance of defending themselves. Nobody else is likely to do it.

If civilization can’t muster the interest and energy to intervene in this type of case, our long term prospects (and perhaps the short term ones as well) are not good.