Quote:
Originally posted by Mike F@Sep 19 2004, 05:11 PM
I have to admit that I'm baffeled as to why you see this as UN ineffectiveness and contrary to the US's position.
The US backed resolution passed 11-0 and while some countries abstained none used their veto as had been threatened by China. In response Sodanese gov't officials said they "would try to comply with the resolution meant to force Khartoum to rein in ethnic Arab militias".
Not only that, but, as you can read here, "Mr Annan, who made his unusual intervention on Thursday, is meanwhile adding to the pressure by personally dispatching the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, as well as his special envoy on genocide, Juan Mendes, to Khartoum this weekend"
So why is it that the US should be considering doing anything unilaterally right now?
|
Even though they passed the resolution, it will be some time before the UN actually does anything active to separate the sides.
At some point or the other an organization like the UN has to act decisively instead of like a debate club.
While they're debating sanctions, more people are going to die there.