Intervention into the Darfur crisis

Hartford Web Publishing is not the author of the documents in World History Archives and does not presume to validate their accuracy or authenticity nor to release their copyright.

Fill full the mouth of famine
By John Laughland, Sanders Resarch Associates, 26 July 2004. The US Congress formally decided on 22nd July that “genocide” was occurring in Darfur—“genocide” being an international crime, this is the legal trigger for intervention—no one has so far pointed out that the same genocide was invoked to justify Nato's aggression against Yugoslavia in 1999. The silence is all the more odd, given that Darfur is a region which is rich in oil and through which pipelines are to be constructed.
Sudan: Round Gazillion
By Stephen Gowans, What's Left, 27 July 2004. The United States and Britain are playing the ethnic cleansing and genocide cards. Again. This time in Sudan. And while there may indeed be a genocide going on, it's very unlikely either country cares overly much about ethnic cleansing and the destruction of a people. Sudan has oil—lots of it. China is involved in a consortium developing Sudan's oil and needs to cultivate sources of supply outside the US orbit.
Darfur: The military intervention question
By Wynde Priddy, special to World War 3 Report, 9 August 2004. The conflict, which pits an Arab-identified pastoral class supported by the government against indigenous peasants of the Fur and other local tribes escalated dramatically after the emergence last year of two rebel groups in Darfur, the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM). The rebels demand regional autonomy for remote and impoverished Darfur, which has long been ignored by the Khartoum government. Protesters accuse the UN of providing a cover for the United States to invade and attack Sudan.
US ‘Hyping’ Darfur Genocide Fears
By Peter Beaumont, The Observer, 3 October 2004. American warnings that Darfur is heading for an apocalyptic humanitarian catastrophe have been widely exaggerated by administration officials, it is alleged by international aid workers in Sudan. Washington's desire for a regime change in Khartoum has biased their reports, it is claimed.
Monitor sounds alarm on Darfur
By Katherine Clad, The Washington Times, 11 March 2005. This right-wing paper owned by Rev. Moon says that former Marine Capt. Brian Steidle yesterday relayed his accounts of genocide in Sudan and urged the United States to take immediate action rather than engage in prolonged debate in the United Nations.
The U.S. role in Darfur, Sudan
By Sara Flounders, MichelCollon,info, 7 June 2006. What is fueling the campaign now sweeping the U.S. to “Stop Genocide in Darfur”? Campus organizations have suddenly begun organizing petitions, meetings and calls for divestment. A demonstration was held April 30 on the Mall in Washington, D.C., to “Save Darfur.” Outrage is provoked by media stories. Even a cursory look at the supporters of the campaign shows the prominent role of right-wing evangelical Christians and major Zionist groups to “Save Darfur.”
Save Darfur: Zionist Conspiracy?
By Ned Goldstein, WW4 Report, 2 October 2006. The Sudanese government and critics of the US-based Save Darfur coalition have continued to accuse elements in the Save Darfur movement of having ulterior motives: namely, to benefit Israel—both by diverting attention from Israeli war crimes to those of the Khartoum regime and its supporters in the Arab world, and, more ambitiously to actually destabilize Sudan's Islamist government.
Gaddafi: Oil behind Darfur crisis
News agencies, Al Jazeera, 19 November 2006. Muammar Gaddafi has accused the West of trying to grab Sudan's oil wealth with its plan to send UN troops to Darfur. Western countries and America are not busying themselves out of sympathy for the Sudanese people or for Africa but for oil and for the return of colonialism to the African continent.