My pastor mentioned the situation in Darfur last Sunday, and blasted Britain, Canada and the US for doing nothing. I mentioned to him that the US had proposed a resolution sanctioning the Sudanese government but was vetoed by the French, who, surprise surprise, have massive oil interests in the region.
More commentary on the situation today.
Salient point: the Sudanese government considers any international intervention an act of war, and is in fact opposed to any meaningful contribution from the African Union troops already on the ground.
We can set up refugee camps all we like; all they do is serve to gather the undesirables in one place so they can be slaughtered, a la Srebrenica or Rwanda (guess who gave the order for Romeo Dallaire’s UN troops to stand down there — Kofi Annan himself).
The best solution, of course, would be for the US (or France, as in Cote d’Ivoire) to invade and occupy. But contrary to popular opinion, the US is really not interested in empire-building.
Of course I’m not bitter or cynical about this at all . . . I’m just wondering what good it does to call attention to the situation from the pulpit when the only solution is massive military action and a resumption of the White Man’s Burden.