DISASTER IN DARFUR - UCSB Department of History - University of ...

28
acts of genocide have been carried out in Darfur and by whom, but "there is no specific
action in the form of sanctions," no provisions for enforcement.[Written Remarks]
Secretary Powell hopes for "the possibility of sanctions" particularly on petroleum that
would, of course, ensure a veto by the Chinese who are dependent on imported oil and
have no intention of jeopardizing their large and productive concession in the Sudan.
After a week of intense negotiations with members of the Security Council by
Ambassador, John Danforth, the United States submitted its carefully drafted second
resolution on Darfur, co-sponsored by Germany, Romania, Spain, and the United
Kingdom that was adopted by the Security Council on 18 September 2004 by a vote of
eleven of zero with Algeria, China, Pakistan, and Russia abstaining. The principal
articles of Resolution 1564 on Darfur "declared its [UN] grave concern that the
Government of the Sudan has not fully met its obligations noted in Resolution 1556"
(Article 1), the first Darfur resolution of 31 July, and endorsed "the African Union [AU]
to enhance and augment its monitoring mission" (Article 2) but remained silent about any
"peacekeepers" which the Sudan government has adamantly opposed in Darfur.
Finally, Article 12 of the resolution requested the Secretary-General to "rapidly establish
an international commission of inquiry…to determined also whether or not acts of
genocide have occurred and to identify the perpetrators…" In the event that the Sudan
does not comply with Resolution 1556 [31 July] "or this resolution" the Security Council
"shall consider taking additional measures…such as to effect Sudan's petroleum sector"
(Article 14), scrupulously avoiding any mention of sanctions. [See: Security Council
Resolution 1564 on Darfur, United Nations, 19 September 2004]. Not surprisingly, the
GoS condemned the resolution, and Mutrif Siddiq, undersecretary in the Sudan Foreign