Talking points that suggest a line of action

Several people have suggested that we need to write clear talking points to share with others and to summarize what we are learning as a community. So I've taken a shot at it below. Your comments are encouraged--as well as alternative or improved versions. Thanks.

In Darfur, a region in western Sudan approximately the size of Texas, over a million people are threatened with torture and death at the hands of marauding militia and a genocidal government. We are bringing our creativity together and finding ways to help.

1. With the US Congress having declared the situation in Sudan a "genocide," action shifts full force to the United Nations Security Council.

2. What is needed by the UN Security Council is approval of an intervention that does not depend upon the cooperation of the Sudanese government, because the government of Sudan cannot be trusted. Sudan needs an action stronger than the sanctions resolution that the US is currently putting forward. UN sanctions could help pave the way for further action later, but are not likely to be adequate.

3. In the end, most observers believe that an independent peacekeeping force needs to be inserted into Darfur in order to protect the genocide victims and the aid workers--and stop the government of Sudan from continuing to wage the war against its people.

4. Both Nigeria and Rwanda have offered to staff such a force, under the auspices of the African Union. This force would be accepted by the people it needs to protect--and could be assembled soon. The peacekeepers could be funded by the industrialized countries that are already pouring in money for assistance, including the US, UK, Germany, France and others

5. The problem is the mandate, and the blocker of a mandate is China. Sudan is even more than a major source of oil for China. Sudan is the center and headquarters of China's oil activities in Africa. China has oil service staging areas in Sudan that serve operations in many other countries. China expects to expand its African operations dramatically. Indeed, one of the strange experiences of reading day after day about Sudan is seeing the size in dollars of the oil exploration and transport contracts that are being let. Literally hundreds of millions of dollars are being invested in Sudanese oil.

One would hope China would put pressure on Sudan to stop the genocide and respect human rights. Unfortunately, China does not respect human rights for its own people, let along Sudan's. So it is not very plausible to imagine Chinese leaders risking their relationships with the leaders of the regime in Sudan, in order to stop a genocide designed to put down a rebellion and eliminate a troublesome population. China has done the same in its recent history.

China then, posses the central problem at the United Nations. And Kofi Annan and Colin Powell of course know this, but they are not talking about it. They are not publicly pressing hard on China, even though it is China that might have some leverage in Khartoum, and it is China that is funding the regime and the genocide.

In a very real sense, the stalemate in the UN is a result of a problem in US/Chinese relations. The US is a great help to the Chinese, and China is becoming the second superpower of the world economy. Unfortunately, the US has not made its relationship with China contingent on Chinese respect for human rights, and/or Chinese willingness to work with the US, the EU, and the UN to solve human rights issues.

This, again, is not so surprising because China is neither a democracy nor a human rights respecter. On the other hand, the weakness of the US' hand with China underscores a severe problem in our relationship with China. We are helping China become a world economic power, but we are not asking in return that it become a positive moral force.

6. A second player blocking action in the UN is Russia, which is the arms dealer to Sudan. The Chinese oil payments are funneled to Russia for aircraft, including helicopters, bombers, and MIG fighters--twelve of which were delivered to Sudan just this week--in a rush order that arrived five months early.

A number of us are working on tactical ideas. I invite you to join with us, by blog comments or email.

7. We need to find fast, effective ways to expose China's and Russia's root involvement in supporting this genocide. We need to band with others to put pressure on both to help stop the genocide rather than tacitly support it. Or at least China and Russia must step out of the way of other nations that want to help.

Update: one more talking point, after a day of conversations with people with knowledge of the UN Security Council situation:

8. There is strong case that as US President, George Bush needs to become even more personally involved in the next two weeks. This in turn suggests that we, as activists, need to keep our emails and calls coming, and direct them at the White House. Bush could, some feel, convince Putin and the Russians to join appropriate action against the Sudanese government, or at least--as indicated above--convince Russia to abstain from using its veto.

Similarly, it would help to have more administration focus on Pakastan--our erstwhile partner in the war on terror.

Russia and Pakastan are seen by some insiders as the most important swing votes. Chin, according to one source, does not like to use its veto and be seen as obstructing the international process. This, plus the spector of Russia abstaining, might cause China to allow a strong UN action plan to be passed.

Finally, there is work for Bush to do with the African leaders, helping them see that an intervention by the AU in Sudan would be an expression of their strength and political maturity as a group. It would reinforce their collective sovereignty--even as it demonstrates that the sovereignty of an individual government will be suspended when it acts criminally against its own people. This would be a very good precident to set in within the African Union, and perhaps only Bush himself can sell this idea to the leaders involved.

Resource: excellent current summary from The Scotsman.

Update: strong, comprehensive CNN piece on Congress declaring a genocide in Darfur, Sudan.

Comments

[Tim]

I agree with what you wrote about China, but strongly suggest that you drop the point about China and oil, or at the very least not lead with it. Whatever the merits of the matter, when people read about countries doing something because of oil, I'd bet that 80% immediately think "conspiracy theorists".

I think that China's reluctance to have anyone look at its human rights record in China and Tibet is by itself enough motivation to explain their obstinacy at the Security Council.

Other than that, it looks good. My only additional comment is make it edit it to make it shorter.

[Immanul Rant]

Bush really needs to show leadership to help resolve this issue. Bush needs to endorse the US Congress declaration as a first step. I agree that Bush may be able to influence China and Russia on this issue.
The other comment is that work needs to be done to convince Arab/Islamic leaders to help with Sudan as well. The danger is that intervention by the US, Britain etc could be seen as another Iraq.

[Jim Moore]

I certainly agree with Immanul that Bush needs to be more directly involved. The head Washington person for a major human rights organization told me essentially this on Friday, and he believes that if Bush becomes involved, Bush can win over Russia and get China to go along.

On the subject of oil, Tim, I think I understand your concern--but I think oil is a major part of this--check out ME and Ophelia, which is going even deeper into the complexities in Sudan--Ingrid, who writes it, has some very detailed material on oil. Of course I also agree that the Chinese are vulnerable on human rights issues, of course.

in any case, thanks, both of you, for helping out!

oh yea, and I agree about making it shorter, but as Winston Churchill said, (paraphrased from memory) "If you want me to talk for five minutes I will need a few days. If you want me to talk for half an hour, I can probably do that tomorrow. If you want me to talk for a few hours, I can start right now...

[The Commissar]

Great website.

I have Trackbacked to it. Please note that my site is satirical, and "reactionary" is tongue-in-cheek.

Keep up the good work.

[Joe Katzman]

France also has significant oil interests in Sudan, and (surprise, surprise!) is blocking even efforts toward sanctions. More here:

http://windsofchange.net/archives/005284.php
http://instapundit.com/archives/016849.php

While some oil-related charges are indeed lunatic conspiracy theories (of which the "Afghan pipeline" trope is probably the most insane), if there really is a clear connection that makes sense then publicizing it is almost an obligation. I knew China had interests, for instance, but not the depth of those interests until I hit this page.

If there are international bad actors trying to make a buck off of genocide, that's something people ought to know as they decide what weight to place on "international opinion" from those sources.

[LOTARA OMOO THOMAS]

HELLO SUDAN GOVERNMENT,IAM SO SORRY WHY ARE YOU KILLING YOURSELF? THE GOVERMENT SHOULD SIT DOWN AND MAKE SOME TALKS CONSANING WHAT IS GOING ON.PEASE WE ARE BECOME ASH,WE ARE LOSING GOOD RENERATION TO COME AFTER US,THE MORE YOU CONTIOUS TO FIGHT,THE WE WILL BE TOO PERMITIVE.THE WORLD IS GROWING,BUT WE ARE LETING OUR COUNTRY DOWN.WE HAVE TO THINK OF TO OVER COME OUR SETRATION.SUDAN IS AGRATE COUNTRY IN AFRICA AND SO RICH IN HUMMAN RESOUCES AND KNOW IN THE WORLD.THANK YOU ALL GOD BLESS SUDAN.

[Jim Moore]

Thanks for posting. As you may have seen, I promoted your post to the front page, so it can reach the widest possible audience. Thanks so much, Jim

[Maria]

What does China think about Sundan having peacekeepers?

[Maria]

What does China think about Sundan having peacekeepers?

[jack3_av]

секс чаты без секс геи фото видео порно видео ролики онлайн бесплатно смотреть бесплатно видео порно малолетки фото частное голые