UN’s Annan Urges Swift Sanctions Action On Darfur

UNITED NATIONS, Feb 1, 2005 (AP) – U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Tuesday urged swift action to stop the killing in Sudan ‘s Darfur region, but the Security Council was divided about sending the case to the International Criminal Court or setting up an entirely new tribunal to handle the case.

Annan’s call for the council to consider imposing sanctions on Darfur came a day after a U.N.-appointed panel concluded Sudan ‘s government and allied militias had likely committed crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur, but not genocide as the U.S. claims.

Annan, along with several council diplomats, stressed that the debate over whether genocide had occurred in Sudan wasn’t nearly as important as taking action to stop the killings, torture, rape and other atrocities in Darfur that were outlined in the commission’s report.

“What is vital is that these people are indeed held accountable,” Annan said in a statement. “Such grave crimes cannot be committed with impunity. That would be a terrible betrayal of the victims, and of potential future victims in Darfur and elsewhere.”

But deciding what to do could expose new rifts within the U.N. Security Council, still battered after fierce debate over handling Saddam Hussein and the fallout from the Iraq war. While all agree that Sudan ‘s government and the Janjaweed militia it backs must be dealt with swiftly, debate is raging over how to do it.

Several European nations want the case referred to the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands, as the commission report recommends. On Tuesday, France reiterated its support for the court. The day before, the U.K.’s Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry had said Britain believed the case was “tailor made” for the court.

But the U.S., long an opponent of the court, is pushing for a different approach. In Washington, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher rejected any role for the ICC and called for the establishment of a U.N. and African Union tribunal that would be based in Arusha, Tanzania to prosecute alleged perpetrators.

He called this proposal a better way of ensuring accountability for the crimes in Darfur. Boucher also said the ICC lacks jurisdiction because the crimes committed in Darfur predate its establishment.

In addition, he said the U.S. has made clear in consultations with other council members that it is “time to move toward sanctions” on Darfur.

“We have raised a number of measures, including oil sanctions and targeted sanctions with other council members, and we’ll continue the discussion of those,” he said.

But China, which has major oil interests in Sudan , strongly opposes sanctions and insists that the dispute in Darfur be resolved diplomatically.

Diplomats on all sides stressed it was far too early to say what the Security Council would do.

The U.S. could exercise its veto and reject a referral to the ICC, or it could concede defeat and abstain.

Sudan on Tuesday denied the accusations in the report, and a day earlier, Foreign Minister Mustafa Osman Ismail claimed a victory of sorts, highlighting that the report did not find genocide had been committed.

Even so, there was widespread consensus – among Security Council members, human rights groups, and even critics of the United Nations – that the report went far enough in its condemnation of Sudan and the Janjaweed.

The five-lawyer panel detailed a host of violations, including the government’s failure to protect civilians from rebel attack, use of disproportionate force and attacks meant to force people to flee their homes.

It blamed the government for joining in the attacks and for complicity with the Janjaweed militia while accusing rebels of massive violence.

In Washington, two Republican members of the U.S. Congress Tuesday urged Annan to resign in protest if the U.N. fails to take aggressive steps to stop the violence in the Darfur region of Sudan .

“We cannot wait any longer for credible action in Darfur,” said Sen. Sam Brownback. “The time is now for the secretary-general, Kofi Annan, to lead or leave.”

Rep. Frank Wolf said he does not blame Annan for the violence in Darfur and called the decision not to declare that genocide had taken place a matter of semantics. He said Annan’s resignation could jolt the Security Council into imposing sanctions and taking other steps to pressure the Sudanese government.

“Resigning out of protest is an act of great moral leadership,” Wolf said.

Annan, who was resting at home in New York after a trip to Africa over the weekend, wasn’t available for comment. But his spokesman, Fred Eckhard, quickly dismissed the idea.

“I think it’s wrong to assume that he could somehow force them to take a course of action, and should he not be successful he would be obliged to step down,” Eckhard said. “I think that’s inconsistent with the (U.N.) charter.”