02/03/2006

The UN Security Council today issued a Presidential Statement directing the Secretary-General and the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations to start planning for the transition from African to UN control of the mission in Darfur, Sudan. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton delivered the statement, as the U.S. holds the presidency of the Security Council for the month of February.

It has become increasingly clear that the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) in Darfur, while performing to the best of its capabilities, does not have the capacity to handle the continuing violence there, nor the expertise to undertake a long-term peacekeeping operation. Like other regional peacekeeping missions before it, such as the West African missions in Liberia and Sierra Leone, it is time for the AMIS monitoring mission to be transformed into a UN peacekeeping mission, with significant additional external resources. The presidential statement is significant for recognizing this necessity and taking the initial step to make it happen.

The language of the statement, however, which makes no mention of a possible mandate, appears to reflect a lack of consensus within the Security Council. The situation in Darfur requires a UN mission that is more robust than AMIS, a need that has been strongly expressed by Secretary-General Kofi Annan, and Jan Pronk, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General in Sudan. Any future UN mission in Darfur must have a strong mandate that focuses on the protection of civilians, and which authorizes the use of force if necessary under Chapter VII.

The statement also appears to hesitate before the real need for substantial additional support to any mission in Sudan. As written, it calls for the use and re-allocation of existing troops and resources. In order for the UN Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) to be successful, the Security Council must recognize the need for increased troop numbers and additional equipment because UNMIS will have to address not only the situation in Darfur, but also fulfill its original purpose: to oversee the peace agreement in southern Sudan. The situation in the south is still volatile, with reports of Ugandan Lord’s Resistance Army insurgent activity and inter-tribal fighting. Thus, pulling UN forces and resources from southern Sudan to meet the needs in Darfur would be extremely dangerous.

We must not sacrifice peace in the south of Sudan in order to end the violence in Darfur. The U.S., as well as other countries with the capacity, must enable the UN to carry out both missions. Donors must be ready to increase financial contributions, as well as provide additional troops and equipment, in order to support an expanded mission.

As momentum and energy is focused on how to transform AMIS into a UN mission, it is imperative that support for AMIS continues. Refugees International is encouraged that the statement “emphasizes the importance of maintaining strong support for AMIS until any eventual transition is completed.” But without clear commitment from the main donors, including the U.S., these are empty words. Funding for AMIS’s operations will run out in March, and any transition to a UN mission is expected to take from 6-9 months. The U.S. has been unable to find the $50 million it had promised to the African Union in 2005. Will the U.S. stand by and allow a security vacuum to develop? While the Security Council debates the range of options on how to transform AMIS into a UN mission, it remains only African Union troops that are providing the small pockets of security for the displaced people of Darfur.