Without an operable peace agreement, what effect will 1769 really have on Darfur’s future?
(Posted on behalf of Paul Kirby)
First, how sensible is sending 26,000 troops to ‘peacekeep’ when there is no peace agreement? Is there a serious chance of this inflaming the situation and sucking in UN/AU troops? Or should we suspect that they won’t deploy due to delaying tactics?
Second, now that the political noise has been made enough to get a resolution passed is it best if high-level decision-makers forget about the issue? I am thinking principly here about unnecessary meddling and displays of force to show that ‘something is being done’, even if the most intense period of suffering appears to be over. I was at a talk last Thursday with Margie Buchanan-Smith and one of the recent UNEP report authors at the ODI and Margie in particular talked in a non-specific way about fears that the ‘grand game’ would ultimately hurt humanitarian aid efforts. Are such fears justified? And where does a meaningful peace process fit in to all this?
For reports by the United Nations Environment Programme in the Sudan
For reports by the Overseas Development Institute
For “Conflict, camps, and coercion: the ongoing livelihoods crisis in Darfur” by Margie Buchanan-Smith and Susanne Jaspers in Disasters