New U.N. chief must take action against Darfur genocide 

Richard S. Williamson
March 6, 2007
Chicago Sun-Times
Original Source: http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/284052,CST-EDT-REF06.article

The top priority for the new U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon should be to end the killing in Darfur. There are doubts about the United Nations. The oil-for-food scandal tarnished the U.N. Management reform has sputtered. The new U.N. Human Rights Council disappoints. Efforts to deal with the threats of Iranian nuclear breakout have been uneven. And terrible carnage continues in Darfur. 
Responsibility for these problems is widespread. The member states and the U.N. Secretariat should work to improve management, machinery and mission. Ban is right to seek the best people and to explore ways to improve the performance of U.N. peacekeeping and political affairs. But the vitality of the U.N. will not be recaptured through modest reforms nor incremental progress. 
Bold leadership reaffirming the hopes and promise of the U.N. ideal is required. 
The U.N. was founded as a mechanism for collective security to maintain peace. It was grounded in human rights values. To regain its luster and warrant the broad support it requires, the U.N. must advance these aspirations. And nowhere are human rights more violated and the inadequacy of peacekeeping more evident than in Darfur, the world's worst humanitarian crisis. 
Tragically, the savagery in Darfur continues. The Arab government in Khartoum and the marauding Janjaweed highwaymen continue their coordinated attacks against black Africans. There is death, rape and destruction. The number of victims of vicious violence rises. Mass atrocities go unaccounted for. Up to 400,000 have died. Two million have been driven into refugee camps and live in desperate conditions. Recent violence has killed humanitarian workers and forced others away. 
In Darfur the unimaginable is commonplace. The genocide is known. It continues. Yet the response is anemic. 
Where is our humanity? What is our responsibility to protect? Why has greed, corruption and caution overcome the moral imperative to stop the savagery? Can anything be done? 
Hindering more robust U.N. action has been African and Islamic solidarity with Khartoum, China's desire to protect its oil concessions, and Russia's interest in protecting its substantial military sales. There has been a failure of principle, priority and political will. Where is the shame? Where is the sense of urgency? 
The U.N. secretary-general is uniquely situated to challenge these impediments. New to his position, Ban is not encumbered by past scandals, compromises, and offenses. He can draw on member states' broad desire that he succeed. 
Ban can relentlessly shine a light on this crisis. He can pressure Khartoum. He can use his good offices to facilitate negotiations. He can offer practical action plans. He can use his platform to prod, and if need be drag, the Security Council to confront the issue. 
Ban can increase the political cost for countries whose avarice or group loyalty now trump their responsibility to protect. 
It is unlikely that Ban can promptly break the gridlock of inaction. Success is not guaranteed. But meaningful progress is possible. 
The cause is just; the fighting required. And in picking up the cause and waging the fight, Ban will be keeping faith with the U.N.'s mission. He will offer hope to the hopeless. And he will give reason to believe the U.N. can play a vital role in matters of consequence. 
Thereby the new secretary-general can lift the U.N. and, more important, give meaning to the words never again.