U.N. approves peacekeepers for Darfur

by John Sullivan

The United Nations Security Council voted unanimously yesterday to authorize the deployment of up to 26,000 peacekeepers to try to stop the violence in Darfur, in western Sudan, where some 200,000 people have been killed in four years of conflict.

The resolution will create the world's largest peacekeeping operation, costing about $2 billion in its first year and drawing on military and police forces from the African Union and the United Nations, a United Nations spokeswoman said.

Though the resolution was toned down after objections from Sudan's government, it will allow the peacekeeping troops to use force to prevent attacks on themselves, to protect civilians and aid workers, and to support putting in place a peace agreement.

The United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, described the mission as "historic and unprecedented."

"You are sending a clear and powerful signal of your commitment to improve the lives of the people of the region and close this tragic chapter in Sudan's history," he told the Security Council.

The approval of the resolution, No. 1769, was widely expected and occurred after months of diplomatic wrangling. A breakthrough took place in June, when Sudan's government, after long resistance, agreed to allow United Nations peacekeepers to enter Darfur.

The Darfur conflict has been marked by brutal intertribal violence in which the Sudanese government has armed Arab militias to fight the non-Arab insurgents. That ethnic warfare has spilled into neighboring states and forced aid agencies to limit their work among some 2.5 million people who have been displaced by the fighting.

The resolution now calls for a peacekeeping mission to begin no later than October, and cites Chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter, under which the Security Council is permitted to authorize the use of force to carry out the mandate.

Most of the peacekeepers are supposed to be drawn from African nations, and would include a beleaguered force of some 7,000 soldiers already in Darfur from the African Union, placing it under a unified command and control with the United Nations force.

The resolution authorizes a maximum of 19,555 military personnel and 6,432 civilian police officers. It does not spell out what role would be played by major powers, including the United States.

As the resolution was approved Tuesday, the American ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, issued a stern warning to President Omar Hassan al-Bashir of Sudan to cooperate.

"If Sudan does not comply with this resolution, the United States will move for the swift adoption of unilateral and multilateral measures," Mr. Khalilzad said in a statement. "Now Sudan faces a choice," he said. "Sudan can choose the path of cooperation or defiance."

Sudan's ambassador to the United Nations, Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem Mohamad, told reporters that he was "comfortable" with the resolution and that the use of Chapter 7 powers was limited.

In a speech before the General Assembly, Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Britain also urged strong support for peacekeeping in Darfur, calling the war "the greatest humanitarian disaster the world faces today."

Mr. Brown, who took office in June, asked member nations to support the resolution, calling for the deployment of the peacekeeping force as part of efforts to achieve a cease-fire. Mr. Brown, who noted that the measure also had the support of the United States, called for an end to aerial bombing of civilians, and for greater effort to support peace talks and reconstruction.

"But we must be clear that if any party blocks progress and the killings continue, I and others will redouble our efforts to impose further sanctions," Mr. Brown said, according to a transcript of his speech.

"The message for Darfur is that it is a time for change."

Mr. Brown, who held two days of meetings with President Bush this week, devoted most of his speech to a proposal for world leaders to work to reduce poverty in line with the United Nations' Millennium Development Goals, which call for action by 2015 to address poverty, and education and environmental problems.

Seven years after the world's nations pledged to meet the goals, Mr. Brown said, "It is already clear that our pace is too slow; our direction too uncertain; our vision at risk."

He said that while there had been some success in improving global health and education, the world was far from meeting the goals set in 2000, particularly on poverty and the environment.

The New York Times