Not to be outdone, Democratic Party presidential candidate John Kerry responded to Powell saying the United States should take the lead role in ensuring “the immediate deployment of an effective international force to disarm militia” in Darfur. Kerry made the remarks to delegates at the National Baptist Convention being held in New Orleans. The group is among the largest religious organizations of African-Americans. Kerry made a similar call for military intervention in Sudan at the convention of the NAACP.

The day before Powell’s testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, U.S. diplomats to the United Nations circulated a draft resolution that threatened sanctions against Sudan’s oil industry if it did not disarm and arrest pro-government militias that Washington says are responsible for the deaths of thousands non-Arabic-speaking African Sudanese in Darfur. It also calls for the establishment of a UN commission of inquiry to determine whether Khartoum and the militias are responsible for genocide. It calls on UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to report on Sudan’s compliance with the resolution’s demands within 30 days, indicating that sanctions could go into effect at that time. The resolution also demands that Khartoum permit the expansion of an African Union-sponsored “monitoring” force to patrol Darfur. The resolution leaves open the size of the force, but Jan Pronk, the UN special envoy to Sudan, said that it should be at least 5,000 troops, reported the New York Times.

The September 9 London Guardian reported that Khartoum said it would agree to an increased monitoring force as long as its mandate did not include “peacekeeping,” a cover for imperialist intervention. An African Union-sponsored force of nearly 400 soldiers currently operates in Darfur as part of a cease-fire agreement last April between the government and opposition forces.

Negotiations between Khartoum and its armed opponents, held in Nigeria’s capital Abuja, have included proposals to send at least 3,000 troops to Darfur led by Nigeria. The Abuja regime headed by Olusegun Obasanjo has emerged as a key ally of Washington in defense of imperialist oil interests in Africa. Nigeria—the world’s fifth-largest exporter of crude—also heads the 12-member African Petroleum Producers Association. Sudan took in $1 billion in oil revenues in 2002.

Washington’s campaign against Sudan enjoys bipartisan support. The U.S. Congress has already passed a resolution charging Khartoum with genocide. And several prominent Democratic Party politicians, among them Congressman Charles Rangel, have gotten themselves arrested in protests at the Sudanese embassy here demanding military intervention against Khartoum.

Imperialist governments in the European Union also back the threat of sanctions against Sudan but have stopped short of charging Khartoum with genocide. They differ with Washington on how best to advance their imperialist interests in the region and fear that military intervention in Sudan would lead to greater U.S. imperialist dominance of the region at their expense. “We have not discussed specifically the use of the word ‘genocide,’” said EU spokesman Jean-Charles Ellerman-Kingombe. The EU representative characterized Darfur as an “extremely serious” situation that requires a “huge humanitarian aid effort.”

China and Pakistan, both members of the Security Council, have opposed moves to impose sanctions on Sudanese oil. China has also threatened to use its veto against Washington’s newest resolution.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home