Mr. Chair, I find this debate on the extremely important issue of the civil war in Darfur, with all the horrors it entails, to be emotional and difficult.
Every effort possible must be made and implemented to protect against ethnic cleansing, genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Jan Egeland, Kofi Annan's special UN envoy, said recently that since 2004 the three unfortunately distinctive factors that have made this conflict in Darfur so remarkable in the past few years remain the same: the widespread atrocities against civilians, the cleansing of entire regions and the very difficult access for humanitarian relief.
Let me provide a few figures. Darfur has a total population of 6 million. Nearly 3 million people are affected by this conflict and nearly 2 million people have been displaced. There are 230,000 Sudanese refugees in eastern Chad—the number is between 180,000 and 300,000 people. Humanitarian aid on the ground deploys 14,000 workers. The presence of the African Union force charged with maintaining order and security counts 6,500 people. The numbers are only approximate. Although these figures speak volumes, money to feed the displaced persons and to help create other camps is horrendously lacking.
The figures I have state that between 2005 and 2006 the international community cut its commitment considerably. Members will have read, as I did in Saturday's International Herald Tribune, that the World Food Programme does not have enough money to maintain the rations at 2,000 calories a day. And there are 600,000 people the program cannot reach.
In many cases—they number some 600,000—the humanitarian workers no longer have access to certain regions. They need security. We are dealing with a conflict that is as violent as it is complex. How can I sum it up in just 10 minutes?
I will point out quickly that the backdrop is a war between northern and southern Sudan, which lasted over 40 years. When the leaders of northern and southern Sudan reached an agreement, they resolved nothing in the case of Darfur, which is in western Sudan.
At that moment, the war broke out again. The rebels in western Sudan wanted what the south had got and considered themselves entitled to, namely, participation in economic development, participation in political representation and, as people of Darfur, better access to Khartoum. This is an economic, social and political conflict. It is clear, however, that there are also ethnic elements to it.
Why? Because in order to protect itself from the rebels, the Khartoum government armed another militia called the Janjaweed. They are identified as Arabs, but in that country, Arab or non Arab makes no sense. This has developed over the years. It is largely cultural. I have tried to read all I can on the subject.
Still, the Janjaweed have burned the villages of the four or five or six different African tribes. Women and children find themselves at the side of the road with nothing. The area is scorched earth. There are no trees, nothing. Nobody runs away. Nobody hides. The earth is burned for many kilometres.
The rebels are saying that the needs of the people of Darfur have not been met. Time is passing. I mean that the 48 hours that the African Union has given the parties to reach an agreement are 48 crucial hours. That is what I know, and I know it the better for having heard it from the mouth of Javier Solana himself. Why is this crucial? Because if there is no peace, the international community—let us be clear—will be faced with a dramatic situation. If the crimes of all sorts continue, if there is no peace, the only thing that the international community can do will be to literally invade a country, Sudan, which is as large as Europe. Omar al-Bashir will never let himself be pushed around. He is afraid of meeting the same fate as Saddam Hussein or others.
Canada did well to send its UN ambassador to Abuja today. This peace must be given every chance to succeed. Does it mean that, after this peace is concluded, we will not need to send soldiers to Darfur? No. There are 10,000 UN soldiers there at the moment to maintain the agreement between north and south. Also, to ensure that it is possible for refugees to return to their villages, perhaps to rebuild, to ensure that people will be able to learn how to live together again without killing each other, an enormous peacekeeping force will be needed. However there is no question of “peacemaking”. For that, war would have to be declared on Omar al-Bashir.
We are in a situation that is serious, but interesting at the same time. This is the first time that the international community is obliged to try to enforce the responsibility to protect. The first steps in that direction are supported by the existing forces. We are trying to get the parties to make peace themselves. There is no other way. When peace comes from external violence, even if that is sometimes unavoidable, it brings its share of serious consequences which make the future extremely difficult.
I dearly hope, with all my heart and all my being, that these two days can produce a peace. Next, the resources will have to be supplied. The African Union will have to stay there. That in any case is what the United Nations is planning. On September 30, however, the African Union will be reinforced and assisted by the United Nations, which will provide a larger force to ensure that the peace is fully established and that it lasts.
We have a collective responsibility. We cannot get out of this just with resolutions denouncing this or that. These are real people, real women who are being repeatedly raped, and then bayoneted to death. Children are being tortured, and the elderly are among the victims. There is real suffering, people dying of hunger because we are not—