Darfur

via wsj

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has been raising the alarm about Darfur--and he also visited there this week--but not until two weeks ago did the Security Council call for an immediate halt to the fighting. This being the U.N., the resolution was toothless. Permanent members China and France are worried about jeopardizing their business interests in Sudan. Pakistan and Algeria, which hold temporary seats, refuse to impose sanctions on a fellow Muslim nation even as it is engaged in the mass killing of Muslims.

Rather, the event that finally caught the attention of the government in Khartoum was the Bush Administration's threat last month to impose serious sanctions on Sudan and refuse visas to Sudanese officials. The next day Sudan's president went on state radio to say he had ordered a "complete mobilization" to disarm the warring parties in Darfur. We'll see. This regime is not known for keeping its promises.

The ostensible reason for Europe's reluctance to pressure Sudan on Darfur is fear of torpedoing a peace deal between Khartoum and the south, where government forces have been slaughtering and enslaving Christian and animist Africans. But Europe's concern is rich with hypocrisy. That conflict, in which some two million people have died, has been going on for 21 years--while Europe watched.

Again, it was the U.S. that finally did something. The Bush Administration, under the leadership of special envoy John Danforth (soon to be ambassador to the U.N.), deserves most of the credit for brokering the deal.

A better measure of Europe's concern about Darfur was evident at the recent European Union summit, where one has to turn to page 18 of the summit conclusions to find a small paragraph about Darfur. The most forceful language the EU could muster was "deep concern" regarding Sudan's "humanitarian crisis," as if what is happening in Darfur is a tragic act of nature rather than a rampage by murderous, ruthless men.