Taking Action

Apparently, Mr. Bolton thinks we should take action without having any idea what the hell is happening, or what action to take:

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton blocked a U.N. envoy on Monday from briefing the Security Council on grave human rights violations in Sudan's Darfur region, saying the council had to act against atrocities and not just talk about them.

Bolton, joined by China, Algeria and Russia, prevented Juan Mendez, Secretary-General Kofi Annan's special adviser for the prevention of genocide, from briefing the council on his recent visit to Darfur, despite pleas from Annan and 11 other council members that Mendez be heard.

"I strongly regret and deplore that Mr. Mendez ... was not authorized to brief the council today as Mr. Kofi Annan had asked," French Ambassador Jean-Marc de la Sabliere told reporters outside the council chambers.

But Bolton said he had objected to the briefing to make the point the council should be "talking more about the steps it can take to do something about the deteriorating security situation" in Darfur. He gave no new proposals.

"How many officials from the secretariat does it take to give a briefing?" he said, noting the council had just concluded a briefing on Darfur from Hedi Annabi, the assistant secretary-general for peacekeeping operations.

Now, the AntiC is firmly on the side of Mr. Bolton's comments that action must be taken. The question is whether the appropriate action is halting the discussion entirely. Bolton's attempts to 'filibuster' the UN Secretariat's committee members sends a signal to Khartoum that the UN has "heard enough" of the Sudan problem without having developed a plan of action. In fact, we're sick and tired of the hanging out, too. Something must be done, immediately. Aid must reach these people. There are millions in southern Sudan who are affected, a million who are locked out from recieving UN aid by the Khartoum government. The nation is in perpetual chaos which has resulted in genocide.

But does Bolton propose a solution to it? or does he come close to aiding it by stifling international discussion and condemnation of the government? Does he presume that the Sudanese government will, simply stop if Bad Mr. American asks them? It's a strange thing Bolton has done; but I doubt he has done it with any interest for the Sudanese in mind. My estimation is that his attempt is solely to undermine the Secretariat and all representatives of his in the interest of pushing an American agenda forward at the expense of an Annan agenda.