• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Conflict in Darfur, Sudan - The Mega Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter SFontaine
  • Start date Start date
Military Brat said:
even the Brits might be forced to disband units due to manning shortages and overdeployment.
No.   The cut is a financial decision and not a reaction to manpower issues.

Military Brat said:
Even if Canada wanted to send a battalion of infantry soldiers, we don't have 'em to send! I'm not an infantry expert but I would suspect an infantry battalion to be close to 1,000 soldiers, maybe more. That is probably just infantry.
You are right, you are no infantry expert.   In a best case senario, your estimate has doubled the number of infantry in a battalion.   A battle group may have more or less infantry than a battalion.
 
McG wrote:
"Don't you think it is a bit arrogant to paint all of Africa based on one shot of video?   Do you even recall where in Africa it was filmed?"

I was reffering to the Militias ie..roving bands of thugs/brigands doing the dirty work for some bad people in or wanting to be in power.
Which are a common factor in most areas of Africa.

Add a little conflict and the wingnuts come out of the woodworks...Seen this in the Balkans also.

I'd like to know what part of Africa you think is so wonderful, and enriched?
There is lots of conflict in Africa, lots of poverty as well...read a book.

IMHO "Peacekeeping" as the CF does it now would be a 'very' high risk situation for he troops involved.

For the record I believe the BBC doc'  was filmed in the Congo, but I could be mistaken.
Also trust me dude you will know when I get arrogant.

Cheers!
P.
 
Any Volunteers?

 

from the July 08, 2004 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0708/p09s01-coop.html

Safeguard Darfur refugees with unarmed UN monitors
By Helena Cobban
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA. - The actions that government-backed militias in Sudan have taken against the Fur and other black African peoples of the Darfur - "home of the Fur" - region over the past year are truly outrageous. So it's easy to pin bad names on the militias and their government sponsors. What's harder, but more necessary, is crafting an effective international response that can stop the atrocities and help the people of Darfur return home and rebuild their lives in safety.

Some Americans have advocated a Kosovo-style military intervention. But military action by outsiders hasn't built long-term peace in Kosovo and is even less likely to do so in Darfur. (Also, there is zero prospect of governments contributing troops for such a mission.) We should look instead at an instrument that worked much better than the Kosovo force and adapt it for Darfur: UNMOVIC, the UN's unarmed but well-equipped Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Commission. It was established to check allegations that Saddam Hussein's Iraq was violating commitments regarding weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Those allegations were fairly flimsy; very few were ever proven. But the prospect of the future massive destruction of human lives, should Iraq reacquire WMD, persuaded the Security Council to invest more than $80 million a year in that MOVIC.

Now, in Darfur, there is solid evidence that 30,000 lives have been lost in recent months. Those losses certainly count as a "massive destruction" of human life. The UN should therefore establish and adequately equip a new MOVIC that would "monitor, verify, and inspect" the Sudanese government's compliance with human rights norms and with the promises it made to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to disarm the militias and return Darfuri refugees home in safety.

"Returning home in safety" is key. The region's three-month rainy season has just started, making life in the makeshift refugee camps more squalid and hazardous. Risk of waterborne diseases rises daily; starvation looms. With roads washed out, distribution of relief supplies is a logistical nightmare. The US Agency for International Development has forecast that over the next nine months, 30 percent of the people in the camps could die.

The UN has been coordinating a massive relief operation for the more than 1 million people chased violently out of their homes but still living inside Darfur, and the 130,000 other Darfuri refugees in neighboring Chad. UN humanitarian affairs chief Jan Egeland launched an urgent appeal for helicopters to deliver needed aid. "I am surprised that many countries produce many more resolutions and declarations than actual hardware for our operation," he said Monday.

The refugees say they want to go home - as soon as they can do so safely. Everyone involved in the relief work agrees that would be the best outcome. Mr. Egeland and others say they hope the refugees can be home planting crops by May or June.

But safety - and equally important, a solid expectation of safety - is the crucial ingredient. That's where the proposal for a "human rights MOVIC" comes in. Such a team would not - as in Kosovo - use military force to return refugees. Instead, it would form a well-coordinated, highly visible - but unarmed - UN presence in Darfur to monitor the government's implementation of commitments to a province-wide disarmament of militias and the safe return of refugees. So far, the "joint implementation mechanism" agreed between Mr. Annan and the Sudanese government looks far weaker than that. All that it mandates are bimonthly meetings between the UN's chief officer in Sudan and the country's foreign minister.

In Iraq, by contrast, when the Security Council got serious about Baghdad implementing its WMD commitments, an appropriately serious MOVIC operation was mounted. That operation, at its height, deployed 202 staffers inside Iraq. They had excellent communications gear, capable cars, helicopters, and a fixed-wing airplane. It's true that Hussein stalled for three years before letting that MOVIC in. But Sudan is far weaker than Hussein. If Security Council members stand together, it's unlikely that Sudan would resist for long. Security Council members could start by giving the UN the helicopters it needs to distribute emergency aid in Darfur. That would send one strong signal of commitment.

The people of Darfur have suffered too long from the failure of their government to exercise basic responsibilities. Now it's time for new ideas and new commitment. A human rights MOVIC would be a good way forward.

"¢ Helena Cobban is working on a book about violence and its legacies.


Thought not.

Maybe Foreign Affairs or the NGOs can find some.



 
UNMOVIC is a bad example.  It would be better to look at MONUC in the Congo.  The military observes can act as a barometer of the local population in a way that contingent troops cannot.  Think of them like community police (or even the NWMP in the old Canadian west) that do not do arrests.  They are an excellent source of HUMINT.  They can investigate complaints, ceasefire violations, human rights violations, and the unusual.  They can provide a link to local authority figures and they know who the authority really is (ie: is it the mayor, the tribe chief, or the medicine man?).

Military observer forces typically work in conjunction with contingent forces.  When the observes get into trouble, or need "a big stick" they have someone to call.  However, the nonthreatening nature of an observer can allow them to get to places that contingent soldiers would not be allowed.

If you do not think the CF has people on these kinds of missions, you should do a search on Op REPTILE, Op CROCODILE, or Op JADE (to name just a few).
 
Correction, I am not going to deploy on OP SAFARI, someone decided to shitcan it at the last second....as per usual
there are now less than 5 Canadian ppl going to Sudan, however, most notably, BGen Greg Mitchell (commander of SHIRBRIG and an RCR infantry officer) will be on the ground, presumably as the deputy commander.
 
291er

Do you know what the terms of the intervention are yet?  Is it an observer mission? Or will SHIRBRIG have a more active role?

I hear that the African Union is also talking about ponying up some troops.
 
More of an observer capabilility, the GoS is hesitant to have any troops at all of course......the AU is sending some 300 troops to theDarfur region, but thats a whole different cup of tea.  Our mission involves strictly the Govt of Sudan (GoS) and the Sudanese Peoples Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A).  SHIRBRIG can only have so active a role........don't forget this is a UN mission, hence the ROE's are very complex and complicated. No bang bang sticks authorized for us at this point in the game.....
 
Best of luck to thems as are going.
 
"No bang bang sticks authorized for us at this point in the game....."

Silly question...How are you supposed to protect yourself if the poop hits the fan?

Cheers!
P.
 
They'll have UN hats on! We all know the scum of the earth respect that.
 
I couldn't find it again on the military pics board, but there was a report there of a "peacekeeper" killed in Africa not long ago.
Shot in the back by an Africa Guard..for no reason.

P.
 
Pugnacious said:
I couldn't find it again on the military pics board, but there was a report there of a "peacekeeper" killed in Africa not long ago.
Shot in the back by an Africa Guard..for no reason.
Again ready to paint all of Africa with one incident?
 
Just a note
Anyone who has an idea of what my trade does must be a little inquisitive and wondering if I broke OPSEC perhaps.
We were going there totally on the books, not doing any spooky stuff.....
 
Pugnacious,

Supposedly we will have some sort of guards with us....presumedly troops from some other feeder nation of SHIRBRIG.....could be a good thing considering a lot of them have somewhat "looser" RoE's.
 
291er said:
Just a note
Anyone who has an idea of what my trade does must be a little inquisitive and wondering if I broke OPSEC perhaps.
We were going there totally on the books, not doing any spooky stuff.....

I can vouch you never broke OPSEC, so no worries 291er.
 
Now if anyone wants some really hot stuff on this subject, mull on this.....
Secretary of State Colin Powell visits Sudan at the same time as Secretary General Annan to view the crisis in Darfur.  It came out yesterday that the village they had visited had apparently been "sanitized" by GoS officials and military.  I would suspect that orders for this came from President El-Bashir himself (also an ex-military man who gained power via a coup d'etat). 

The US has been putting intense pressure on the UN Security Council for them to get active in the Sudan and this issue is apparently of personal concern to President Bush.  Mainly, because he feels that the Southern Sudanese (generally represented by the SPLM/A) are Christians fighting against a Govt which wishs to "Islamize" them.  Although the SPLM/A's leader John Garang (Ex-Colonel in the Sudanese Army and by birth a Dinka) is Christian, a great majority of the locals in the South are mainly local indigenous religions.  It's reported that about 5% of the population is actually Christian.

Let's not forget as well that Sudan was known for harbouring terrorists, Usama Bin Laden lived there for a few years, and it was only recently taken off the U.S. "hit list" of such countries including Iran, Syria, etc. 

A few more aspects to this situation.........let's hope it opens up some more discussion  :warstory:

291er sends.....
 
Where did you read that? Seems like an attempt to make President Bush look like a religious nut, again.

Oh and McG.. I don't see how you can get that out of Pugnaciou's post. He just mentioned another incident where a UN worker was murdered in Africa. He didn't say "ALL AFRICANS ARE SAVAGE MONSTERS BECAUSE SOME UN WORKER GOT SHOT IN THE BAC"
 
SFontaine said:
Oh and McG.. I don't see how you can get that out of Pugnaciou's post. He just mentioned another incident where a UN worker was murdered in Africa.
Then why is it relevant to this thread on the Sudan?
 
He was pointing out how even if you're in the UN a lot of the Militias in Africa are savages who don't give a crap about you or your organization. These ones in Sudan are undoubtly the same way, considering all the ethnic cleansing and such.
 
Back
Top