UK, France soften UN text on new Darfur force

By Evelyn Leopold
July 24, 2007
Reuters
Original Source: http://africa.reuters.com/wire/news/usnN24436659.html

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Britain and France softened a U.N. resolution Tuesday that would authorize up to 26,000 troops and police in Darfur by dropping a threat of further measures against Sudanese obstructing peace efforts.
But Sudan's ambassador, Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem, still objected to the revised U.N. Security Council draft.
It's very ugly. It's worse than the first one, he said, prompting Andrew Natsios, the visiting U.S. special envoy for Sudan, to say that Khartoum should not have veto power.
No date is set for a vote although the sponsors hope for adoption this week.
Estimated to cost more than $2 billion in the first year, the operation is an effort to quell violence in Sudan's western region where more than 2.1 million people have been driven from their homes and an estimated 200,000 have died.
The new text, obtained by Reuters, also sets a target date of Dec. 31 to transfer authority from the African Union to a combined AU-UN force that would operate in Sudan's Darfur region, although full deployment is expected to take a year.
But the draft leaves intact a tough mandate, Sudan's biggest complaint, that would allow the use of force to ensure the security of the mission's personnel and humanitarian workers and to protect civilians under threat of physical violence as well as to seize or collect arms.
The resolution is under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which makes it mandatory. It would allow the mission to use all necessary means, a euphemism for a use of force, as it deems within its capabilities.
'IRAQI SCENARIO'
Sudan's Abdalhaleem said, The way they put this resolution will make the force fight the Sudanese army, adding the draft retained the same inflammatory language, the same condemnation.
They want to transport the Iraqi scenario to us.
Among the changes in the text is deleting a provision on a threat of further measures, a code word for sanctions, against rebels or the government if they obstruct a peace process.
The draft also drops a call for an interim report by a panel of experts, who have reported on violations of U.N. resolutions and made proposals for sanctions.
Specifically, the text would authorize up to 19,555 military personnel and 6,400 civilian police. It calls on member states to finalize their contributions within 90 days of adoption. Sudan has agreed to the troop numbers.
British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry, said the language of the resolution was more conciliatory towards Sudan. He said that African members of the council -- South Africa, Ghana and Congo Republic -- supported the draft.
But a unanimous vote is far from assured. Qatar, the only Arab member of the council, reflected Khartoum's position. Its ambassador, Nassir Abdulaziz al-Nasser, said that without Khartoum's agreement the resolution could not be implemented.
Indonesia's ambassador, Rezlan Jenie, agreed, saying, We would like to have the cooperation from Sudan, and cooperation only comes when they give the consent of the deployment.
Natsios said he opposed any U.S. units in Darfur because politically right now in Darfur it would create the wrong impression (and) would be used in terms of the Sudanese government. But he said Washington would contribute to air transport to get troops to Darfur.
Infantry troops are expected to be drawn mainly from African nations. The new operation, called the United Nations-African Union mission in Darfur, or UNAMID, will absorb the 7,000 African Union troops currently in Darfur.
Engineers and headquarters personnel are expected to be drawn from other nations.
(Additional reporting by Claudia Parsons)