While Iraq was being debated, many people asserted that the UN had become irrelevant and nothing more than a lawyer filled debating club. This was defended by many who believed that the UN was capable of filling the role needed by a world organization that could help resolve disputes and prevent war. Unfortunately, I am ever increasing of the mind that they are wrong, evidenced by such things as the Oil for Food scandal and refusal to put any teeth behind their resolutions. And their latest blunder, their unwillingness to label the death, rape and torture of thousands of people because they are not Arab as a genocide just reinforces that belief.
A UN-appointed commission of inquiry concluded on Monday that violence in Sudan’s western region of Darfur did not amount to genocide, but that mass killings of civilians had occurred in the strife-torn area.
What does this mean? Lest you think that by this decision, detailed in a 176 page report, means that no genocide was committed let me point you to this quote:
“The crucial element of genocidal intent appears to be missing, at least as far as the central government authorities are concerned,” the five-member commission said. “There may have been genocidal acts in Darfur and some individuals may be found guilty of genocidal intent.”
So, there were genocidal acts and some individuals may be found guilty of genocidal intent, but there was no genocide.
I’m glad that they’ve cleared that up. I mean, if there had been actual genocide going on, the UN might have actually had to DO something about the situation. Now that we know that there isn’t we can all go back to quietly ignoring the situation.
Yes, my indignation is high on this point, even more so by the further knowledge that much of the area where the ‘non-genocide’ took place was not even visited by the 5 person panel or their associates.
There are hundreds of mass graves that the commission did not go to,” he said, adding the decision to stop short of a genocide finding was political because the international community did not want to take action in Darfur.
Abdel Wahed Mohamed al-Nur, leader of the main rebel group, the Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM), said he was sure in time the international community would come to realize that there had been genocide in Darfur.
Of course, there is a very real reason that the UN has decided against calling a duck a duck. If they had done so, there would be automatic actions that would have to take place, including the cutting off of selling military equipment to Sudan as well as economic embargos and sanctions. If that happens then China will not be able to purchase oil from them and it would put a damper on their economic growth.
In the end, I imagine that this will finally come to a close and the proper actions taken to end this genocide and put those responsible for it behind bars. Unfortunately, because of the actions (or inactions) of the UN, it will mean that more people are going to die first.