Genocide, massale verkrachtingen, 200.000 doden, and counting...

[e.ouwehand1]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Mark Giebels heeft op donderdag, 2 feb 2006 om 06:46 (Europe/Amsterdam) 
het volgende geschreven:

> REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl
>
> Las ik gisteren nog in mijn krantje..

je hebt helemaal gelijk mark.
dit is het echte nieuws.
niet van vandaag of gisteren, maar van de laatste maanden.

> Control over Darfur's skies can be established quickly from
> France's air bases in Chad, which are already equipped for
> operations by tactical fighters. There is also a wealth of tactical
> air power available from NATO air forces. A former U.S. Air Force
> chief of staff, General Merrill McPeak, told the Washington Post a
> year ago that the assets needed to conduct such a mission are a
> mere 12 to 18 fighter aircraft, 4 AWACS/AEW control aircraft, and
> some additional support planes and personnel. This option has yet
> to be embraced by NATO, but the need has now been articulated by
> Annan.

we hebben toch net een bos laten kappen voor bruikbare vliegtuigen met 
de juiste technologie?
en frankrijk is niet zo bang voor de usa.
dus een aanbod van onze awacs lijkt me nu gepast?
maar d66 gaat niet over dat ministerie.
dus zou het meer dan een politiek correct gebaar zijn?
de parlementaire burokratie heeft beperkingen. :_(
het is dat ik zo bang ben voor een despoot, maar soms ...

gr elma

ff plagiëren van een medebewonderaar van de grote orwell:

> Dirkie
> Fear, the mother of morality!

> Dirkie
> When the state is the only employer, dissent means
> starvation.
> G. Orwell


>
> A no-flight zone is key
> Kurt Bassuener International Herald Tribune
>
> WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 2006
>
>
> SARAJEVO, Bosnia and Herzegovina Last month the African Union took
> the groundbreaking step of acknowledging that its more than
> 7,000-man force in Darfur, western Sudan, was incapable of stopping
> the Khartoum government from its continued brutalization of the
> civilian population, and that it would support being relieved by a
> larger, stronger United Nations force, as mooted by the UN
> secretary general, Kofi Annan.
>
> Annan said an effective force would require state-of-the-art
> equipment to prevent the murders, rapes, and mass displacement that
> have long been hallmarks of Khartoum's war in Darfur.
>
> Annan recognizes that air power is essential if Darfur's civilians
> are to be protected from their own government and the janjaweed
> raiders to whom it has outsourced conduct of its genocidal policy.
> The African Union force's lack of tactical air power has long
> limited its ability to conduct its mission, which remains under
> threat of Sudan's air superiority.
>
> The AU command confronted Khartoum with documentation of its use of
> air power against the civilian population last autumn, with
> photographs of an attack committed by its air force on the Abu
> Shoek refugee camp. Such attacks will continue so long as they
> remain possible.
>
> The ability to protect civilians will remain crippled until an
> international protection force has complete air superiority over
> Darfur, denying flight to the Sudanese air force. Such a no-flight
> operation would also have the ability to provide close air support
> to that force and conduct air strikes on targets as requested by
> the force commander.
>
> The current AU force is vulnerable to retaliatory strikes by the
> Sudanese air force. Having air superiority would deter further
> attacks on civilians on the ground, as well as prevent them from
> the air. In addition, such a no-flight zone would assist both the
> protection force and humanitarian assistance by providing real-time
> aerial surveillance of Darfur, an area the size of France. A
> no-flight zone is also essential to bridging a transition from the
> underpowered AU mission to a stronger UN force.
>
> Control over Darfur's skies can be established quickly from
> France's air bases in Chad, which are already equipped for
> operations by tactical fighters. There is also a wealth of tactical
> air power available from NATO air forces. A former U.S. Air Force
> chief of staff, General Merrill McPeak, told the Washington Post a
> year ago that the assets needed to conduct such a mission are a
> mere 12 to 18 fighter aircraft, 4 AWACS/AEW control aircraft, and
> some additional support planes and personnel. This option has yet
> to be embraced by NATO, but the need has now been articulated by
> Annan.
>
> If NATO is serious about its assistance effort in Darfur, it should
> offer air cover to the currently mandated AU force immediately. By
> so doing, it would preclude the requirement to get UN Security
> Council approval, bypassing likely resistance from Russia and
> China, which are both deeply economically engaged with the Khartoum
> regime.
>
> A no-flight zone would limit Khartoum's ability to prevent an
> effective UN follow-on force. In fact, establishing a NATO
> no-flight zone to serve the ongoing African Union mission would
> make more likely the fielding of a UN-mandated ground force capable
> of protecting Darfur's population.
>
> There remains an appalling policy vacuum on the part of the United
> States and Europe toward Darfur. Assistance by NATO and the EU to
> the AU force has never included the air power that could so rapidly
> change the situation on the ground.
>
> If the West is serious about stopping the mayhem in Darfur and
> offering real protection to the uprooted civilian population, it
> needs to summon the fortitude to cease treating Darfur as
> collateral damage of the Iraq war and other policies that create
> friction with the Muslim world, and offer the sort of assistance
> that only it can provide - both in the air, and on the ground.
>
> (Kurt Bassuener is a senior associate at the Democratization Policy
> Council, a trans-Atlantic initiative for accountability in
> democracy promotion.)
>
> ------
>
> A genocide that America can help to stop
> By Kenneth H. Bacon The New York Times
>
> WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 2006
>
>
> WASHINGTON How can the United States best use its monthlong turn as
> president of the UN Security Council, which it assumes Wednesday?
> It could start by devoting itself to ending the violence in the
> Darfur region of western Sudan - violence that President George W.
> Bush has characterized as genocide.
>
> There is precedent for such action. The last time the United States
> assumed the rotating presidency of the 15-member Security Council,
> it made a real contribution to peace in the region.
>
> John Danforth, then the ambassador to the United Nations, brought
> the entire Security Council to Kenya to pressure the government in
> Khartoum and the insurgents in the south to end their 21-year civil
> war. The tactic worked. Shortly afterward, Khartoum and the Sudan
> People's Liberation Movement signed a comprehensive peace
> agreement.
>
> Unfortunately, that agreement did nothing to end a separate
> conflict in Darfur, where government-backed Arab militias, in
> response to insurgent attacks, have driven more than 2.2 million
> people, primarily African farmers, from their land and bombed,
> burned and pillaged hundreds of villages. By some estimates, more
> than 200,000 people have died in the last three years.
>
> John Bolton, the current American ambassador to the United Nations,
> has called for bold action in Darfur but has provided no real
> leadership for more effective moves to stop the violence.
>
> Bolton should follow Danforth's example and schedule a meeting of
> the Security Council in Darfur. This would focus the world's
> attention on a war in which civilians are the primary targets and
> directly involve the Council in the push toward peace.
>
> Even if Bolton can't pull off the trip, he can still focus the
> council on Sudan. His first priority should be strengthening the
> woefully inadequate peacekeeping forces there.
>
> Right now, there are 7,000 African Union peacekeepers in the
> region. But this force is simply insufficient to do the job. Only
> by sending UN troops can we possibly bring some measure of peace
> and stability to Darfur.
>
> This won't be easy. Details about the size, mandate and cost of a
> new UN force in Darfur need to be worked out; opposition from
> Khartoum's allies, Russia and China, which can veto any Security
> Council action, may need to be overcome. But as Security Council
> president, Bolton should push for enough peacekeepers - possibly
> backed by Western air power - to prevent attacks against civilians.
>
> Bolton, who has called for stronger enforcement of arms embargoes
> against Sudan, should demand the release of an unpublished UN study
> listing those countries that ship weapons to rebels and
> Khartoum-backed militias. Then the council should use this
> information to punish sanctions scofflaws.
>
> The United States has a vexing and inconsistent record on Sudan.
> Periods of engagement have been followed by longer, and troubling,
> periods of inaction. Now, with a month to lead the Security
> Council, the United States has a chance to show the world that we
> can do more than just talk about genocide.
>
> (Kenneth H. Bacon is the president of Refugees International.)
>
> Mark Giebels
>
>
> -- 
>
> **********
> Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst 
> (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
> Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het 
> tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
> Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het 
> tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
> Het on-line archief is te vinden op: 
> http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
> **********
>

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********