UN: Security Council expands mandate of un mission in sudan to include darfur, adopting resolution 1706 by vote OF 12 IN favour, with 3 abstaining (31 August 2006)
Invites Consent of Sudanese Government; Authorizes Use of `All Necessary Means' To Protect United Nations Personnel, Civilians under Threat of Physical Violence ... Acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, the Council authorized UNMIS to use all necessary means as it deemed within its capabilities: to protect United Nations personnel, facilities, installations and equipment; to ensure the security and freedom of movement of United Nations personnel, humanitarian workers, assessment and evaluation commission personnel; to prevent disruption of the implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement by armed groups, without prejudice to the responsibility of the Government of the Sudan; to protect civilians under threat of physical violence; and to seize or collect arms or related material whose presence in Darfur was in violation of the Agreements and the measures imposed by resolution 1556, and to dispose of such arms and related material as appropriate.
...
Acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, the Council authorized UNMIS to use all necessary means as it deemed within its capabilities: to protect United Nations personnel, facilities, installations and equipment; to ensure the security and freedom of movement of United Nations personnel, humanitarian workers, assessment and evaluation commission personnel; to prevent disruption of the implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement by armed groups, without prejudice to the responsibility of the Government of the Sudan; to protect civilians under threat of physical violence; and to seize or collect arms or related material whose presence in Darfur was in violation of the Agreements and the measures imposed by resolution 1556, and to dispose of such arms and related material as appropriate.
So, who is committing the 20k troops? Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
The Security Council ... 1. Decides, without prejudice to its existing mandate and operations as provided for in resolution 1590 (2005) and in order to support the early and effective implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement, that UNMIS' mandate shall be expanded as specified in paragraphs 8, 9 and 12 below, that it shall deploy to Darfur, and therefore invites the consent of the Government of National Unity for this deployment, and urges Member States to provide the capability for an expeditious deployment;
1. Decides, without prejudice to its existing mandate and operations as provided for in resolution 1590 (2005) and in order to support the early and effective implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement, that UNMIS' mandate shall be expanded as specified in paragraphs 8, 9 and 12 below, that it shall deploy to Darfur, and therefore invites the consent of the Government of National Unity for this deployment, and urges Member States to provide the capability for an expeditious deployment;
Is this "invitating the consent" of the Sudanese government anything other than courteous language? Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
The Security Council ... 16. Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, (i) Decided that UNMIS is authorised to take the necessary action, in the areas of deployment of its forces and as it deems within its capabilities, to protect United Nations personnel, facilities, installations and equipment, ensure the security and freedom of movement of United Nations personnel, humanitarian workers, joint assessment mechanism and assessment and evaluation commission personnel, and, without prejudice to the responsibility of the Government of Sudan, to protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violance. ...
16. Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, (i) Decided that UNMIS is authorised to take the necessary action, in the areas of deployment of its forces and as it deems within its capabilities, to protect United Nations personnel, facilities, installations and equipment, ensure the security and freedom of movement of United Nations personnel, humanitarian workers, joint assessment mechanism and assessment and evaluation commission personnel, and, without prejudice to the responsibility of the Government of Sudan, to protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violance. ...
UN: resolution 1706 (2006)
The Security Council ... 12. Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations: (a) Decides that UNMIS is authorized to use all necessary means, in the areas of deployment of its forces and as it deems within its capabilities: -- to protect United Nations personnel, facilities, installations and equipment, to ensure the security and freedom of movement of United Nations personnel, humanitarian workers, assessment and evaluation commission personnel, to prevent disruption of the implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement by armed groups, without prejudice to the responsibility of the Government of the Sudan, to protect civilians under threat of physical violence, -- in order to support early and effective implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement, to prevent attacks and threats against civilians, -- to seize or collect, as appropriate, arms or related material whose presence in Darfur is in violation of the Agreements and the measures imposed by paragraphs 7 and 8 of resolution 1556, and to dispose of such arms and related material as appropriate;
12. Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations: (a) Decides that UNMIS is authorized to use all necessary means, in the areas of deployment of its forces and as it deems within its capabilities: -- to protect United Nations personnel, facilities, installations and equipment, to ensure the security and freedom of movement of United Nations personnel, humanitarian workers, assessment and evaluation commission personnel, to prevent disruption of the implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement by armed groups, without prejudice to the responsibility of the Government of the Sudan, to protect civilians under threat of physical violence, -- in order to support early and effective implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement, to prevent attacks and threats against civilians, -- to seize or collect, as appropriate, arms or related material whose presence in Darfur is in violation of the Agreements and the measures imposed by paragraphs 7 and 8 of resolution 1556, and to dispose of such arms and related material as appropriate;
Civilians and humanitarian operations will not be protected except by National Islamic Front genocidaires
I am not a lawyer and would appreciate it if someone sho is took a look a these things. It seems to me the mandate of UNMIS is robust, it can use force at its own discretion to protect civilians under Chapter VII,, and it can also use force to deploy over the objections of the Khartoum government. What am I missing? Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
I mean if civilians die as a result. Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
So UNMIS has the mandate, but not the ressources to make a real difference...? Atlantic Review - A press digest on transatlantic affairs edited by three German Fulbright Alumni
perhaps we are mixing up the mandate for Darfur with the one for Southern Sudan. I was emailed that UNSC resol 1706 is the first chapter VII resolution for darfur. That's why the opposition from Khartoum. Atlantic Review - A press digest on transatlantic affairs edited by three German Fulbright Alumni
What I am trying to understand is, once a resolution is under Chapter VII, what does Khartoum's opposition mean? UNMIS is authorised already to deploy by force.
A peacekeeping mission under Chapter VI (like UNIFIL) presumably cannot deploy without the consent of the host nation, but presumably a Chapter VII mandate allows that? Is Khartoum calling the UNSC's bluff? "Oh, yeah? Well, show us how you're going to 'use all necessary means' to deploy against our wishes."
In any case, contrary to expectations, the UNSC hasn't failed to provide a Ch.VII resolution on Darfur, and neither Russia nor China vetoed it. So, in whose court is the ball now? [in Spanish we'd say "on whose roof...?"] Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
I guess, the ball is on the international community's court/roof. Approval for deployment is not needed, but it is desired, because the risks for the UN troops would be smaller and more countries are likely to committ troops to UNMIS.
If Khartoum agrees to a UN deployment, then it is basically giving up its support the genocidaires and UNMIS does not have to fight. It'a some sort of vicious circle principle, if you know what I mean.
Has any country volunteered to send UN troops?
Someone by the blog name Sudanese Thinker writes this:
"10,000 people in Darfur protested against the UN's plan to come in. Surprise to all of you who think all Darfurians will welcome UN troops with wide open arms. Many desperate ones want them but there are others who don't. To sum it up, let me present to you an updated version of my famous straight forward equations. Darfur previously = Disaster Darfur now = Worsening disaster Darfur - AU troops = Big fat disaster Darfur - AU troops + Sudanese troops = I have no freaking clue Darfur + UN troops = Bigger disaster Darfur + UN troops + Al Qaeda = HUGE disaster Darfur + UN troops + Al Qaeda + Sudanese Islamists = One big ass GIGANTIC Disaster Darfur + AU troops reinforced by UN & NATO = HUGE improvements." http://www.sudanesethinker.com/2006/09/07/darfur-the-continuing-dilemma/
To sum it up, let me present to you an updated version of my famous straight forward equations.
Darfur previously = Disaster
Darfur now = Worsening disaster
Darfur - AU troops = Big fat disaster
Darfur - AU troops + Sudanese troops = I have no freaking clue
Darfur + UN troops = Bigger disaster
Darfur + UN troops + Al Qaeda = HUGE disaster
Darfur + UN troops + Al Qaeda + Sudanese Islamists = One big ass GIGANTIC Disaster Darfur + AU troops reinforced by UN & NATO = HUGE improvements." http://www.sudanesethinker.com/2006/09/07/darfur-the-continuing-dilemma/
Another of his posts starts with this:
"Iraq Has Arrived Many of the things I predicted are now coming true. Iraqi style instability has arrived in Khartoum and a bigger one is to be expected in Darfur real soon especially if the UN steps in. Sudan is currently mourning the death of beheaded editor Mohamed Taha. Yes, that's right beheaded! This is probably the first time in the history of Sudan something like this happens. The man was kidnapped from his house and found later with his head next to his body. That's murder Iraqi al-Qaeda style." http://www.sudanesethinker.com/2006/09/07/iraq-has-arrived/
Many of the things I predicted are now coming true. Iraqi style instability has arrived in Khartoum and a bigger one is to be expected in Darfur real soon especially if the UN steps in.
Sudan is currently mourning the death of beheaded editor Mohamed Taha. Yes, that's right beheaded! This is probably the first time in the history of Sudan something like this happens. The man was kidnapped from his house and found later with his head next to his body. That's murder Iraqi al-Qaeda style." http://www.sudanesethinker.com/2006/09/07/iraq-has-arrived/
So what are we doing? Which countries shall be persuaded to send troops to Darfur? Who dares it? Who cares about black people?
I thought our discussion here got quite interesting after first discussing amount of suffering and the UN resolutions, we started to move on to about what to do. However, no most participants seem to have gone...
Can we continue the discussion here? Or shall I transform this comment into a new post and also ask the following questions?:
What kind of action shall we advocat? What exactly should the international community do?
Donate more to aid agencies isn't enough, because the agencies can't do their work freely in the current (in)security situation.
Shall we only call for more divestment and diplomatic pressure on Khartoum to let 17,000 UN troops in? Is that number of troops enough for the huge territory of Sudan? What countries shall provide the troops?
How shall they protect the civilians in Darfur?
What are the Darfur and military experts suggesting?
Shall we ask the international community to send more money and ressources to the African Union? Is the African Union willing and capable to fight and disarm the Janjaweed and their supporters?
The consensus seems to be that the AU hasn't done enough and can't do enough (why?) and that UN troops are needed, but I don't quite understand, why the UN would do a better job. The countries with most military and peace enforcement experience are not volunteering to send troops to the UN, are they? What exactly should the UN troops do?
What kind of pressure can we and Western governments put on Khartoum to accept a UN force? Atlantic Review - A press digest on transatlantic affairs edited by three German Fulbright Alumni
I am still a little confused about how "Chapter VII" is not 'enough pressure'. How can the UNSC up the ante even more? The UNSC is saying "we'll come in with 20k troops by force if necessary". Khartoum is saying "I dare you". So what, now? Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
a) Sudan has the responsibility during all circumstances for the protection of civilians.
b) UNAMIS is of course also bound by international law to abide by humanitarian law
c) There is a legal basis for intervention
d) The invitation of Sudan is solely a diplomatic opening
However: There seem to be some legal discussions wheter the resolution is a clear chapter VII or more like chapter VI and a half. There is a trend, as seen in Lebanon and other, that one use the wordings and language of a chapter VII mission but in a VI resolution. Apparently the deal is, that this gives the force the possibility of pulling out if the missions turns out to be a disaster. That is a lot more difficult with a chapter VII mission, since you are almost legally bound to finish the job.
I am sorry that I am not able to give a clear answer. I am investigating more, and will hopefully return with a clear answer. If there is one.
For me though, it seems like a clear chapter VII. Andreas The Oslo Blog - www.akiaby.dk
