Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Blair draws up plans to send troops to Sudan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-04 06:35 PM
Original message
Blair draws up plans to send troops to Sudan
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,1266327,00.html

Tony Blair has asked Downing Street and Foreign Office officials to draw up plans for possible military intervention in Sudan, where more than a million refugees are at risk from famine and disease.
...
Three options for military action have been put forward in Downing Street:

· British servicemen to help with the delivery of aid if the humanitarian agencies can no longer cope. At present, the Belgian air force is helping to fly in aid. Britain is using civilian planes because they are cheaper.

· British logistical support for an African Union force of 60 monitors and 300-strong protection force being deployed in the Sudan. The AU force is short of equipment, including helicopters, vital given the poor state of Darfur's roads.

· British troops to protect refugee camps being harassed by marauding militias. This creation of safe zones would be the most risky of the options and would require the agreement of the Khartoum government, which would be reluctant to give it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
IA_Seth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-04 06:40 PM
Response to Original message
1. At least they are willing to help where it is REALLY needed.
And sadly I would guess the British parlaiment will be less likely to approve this aid due to his folly in backing Georgie in Iraq.

Here is to hoping!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Worst Username Ever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-04 06:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. Just curious but
what is the oil situation in Sudan? Do they have it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matilda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-04 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Apparently they have large stocks, but unexploited.
I wonder if Halliburton has looked it over yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Worst Username Ever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-22-04 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. Ah, just like Iraq. Hm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reorg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-22-04 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. KENNETH T. DERR, 67 certainly has:
Retired Chairman of the Board, Chevron Corporation; Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Chevron Corporation, 1989-1999; joined Halliburton Company Board in 2001. (http://www.halliburton.com/about/board_of_dir.jsp)



Oil exploration - a brief history

Oil exploration in Sudan started in 1959, when Italy's Agip oil company was granted concessions in the Red Sea area, carrying out seismic surveys and drilling six wells.

Following Agip into the Red Sea came Oceanic Oil Company, France's Total, Texas Eastern, Union Texas and Chevron. All yielded nothing for the next fifteen years. The only successful results were achieved by Chevron in 1974, 120 km southeast of Port Sudan, where dry gas and gas condensate were found at Basha'ir-1 and Suakin-1 wells.

...

Exploration for oil in southern and southwestern Sudan began in 1975, when the government of Sudan granted Chevron a concession area of 516,000km2 in blocks around Muglad and Melut. Chevron started geological and geophysical surveys in 1976, and drilled its first well in 1977, which was dry. In 1979, Chevron made its first oil discovery in Abu Jabra #1, west of Muglad, where an 8 million barrels reserve and a 1,000 barrels per day (b/d) production rate were estimated. Unity field Chevron's most significant discovery was made in 1980 in the Unity/Talih oilfield, north of Bentiu in Western Upper Nile.

...

Fear and anger about the Central Government’s apparent intention to get complete control of the oil led to increasing resentment in the South. In March 1983, the tensions were sparked by a mutiny in Bor into renewed civil war, and the rebel Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) was founded by Southern army commanders.

...

The Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) began attacks on oil installations almost immediately, as well as on the giant canal project in southern Jonglei, where the French CCI company was operating the world's largest excavator. The canal has never been completed. Chevron's work came to a halt in February 1984, following an attack by the SPLA, in which three of Chevron's employees were kidnapped on the island base at Rub Kona and later killed. Three weeks before the attack, the Chevron spokesman in Khartoum said he was confident that extensive work doing deals with local chiefs, deploying antropologists and other specialists, had the security question "all sewn up". The company misread the fluidity of Southern politics and the limits of the chiefs' powers in the face of guerrilla activity. It seems Chevron was given absolute assurances which meant nothing when put to the test.

Nimeiri tried to recruit and mobilise a local Nuer militia ("Anya-Nya Two") to help defend the Bentiu area against the largely Dinka SPLA. Chevron was not convinced, and closed down its operations. When it resumed in the late 1980s, however, Chevron itself tried supporting a militia of ethnic Baggara (cattle-herding "Arabised northerners") in an attempt to secure the area.

...

In 1988 Chevron decided to resume its activities and developed a six-year exploration and drilling programme set to run until 1994. However, seeing the intensification of the civil war that followed the 1989 NIF coup, Chevron quit Sudan in 1990 and relinquished all its concessions. It had spent more than $1billion.

...

The tax breaks offered by the US government enabled them to cover their losses, and they seem not to have fought very hard to keep their oil concessions, even though they knew other companies were prepared to move in. Oil prices were falling, too, and threatened to fall below the cost of extracting Sudan's oil.

...

(from Sudan Update - Raising the stakes - Oil and conflict in Sudan, 99 p. - with timeline until 1999)

www.sudanupdate.org/REPORTS/Oil/Oil.pdf



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reorg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-22-04 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #2
10. googling sudan +oil +map
i found the following:

http://www.rightsmaps.com/html/sudmap2.html


http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/sudan1103/2.htm


www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/africa/sudan_oil_usaid_2001.pdf (USAID map)


These maps do not reflect recent changes in ownership - I recall having read about the acquisition of some stakes by Indian firms, India also builds a second pipeline.


Also interesting:

"... the United States faces a global competitor-China-that has an active place in Sudan's oil sector and has been pursuing a toehold elsewhere in the continent's oil wealth. Chinese participation in Africa has been accompanied in some cases by Chinese military delegations selling arms, a situation of some concern given the proclivity towards ethnic and political strife in some key oil producing countries in the region. East Asia frequently pulls one million bpd from West Africa to feed its growing appetite for high quality West African crude. ..."

http://www.saudi-us-relations.org/newsletter2004/saudi-relations-interest-01-06.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2Design Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-04 06:42 PM
Response to Original message
3. maybe they will pull troops from iraq to go where it really is needed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-22-04 03:38 AM
Response to Original message
5. Interesting timing of this "bone" ...
... just a sop to the more humanitarian members of parliament?

Once you figure in the "20,000 armed forces jobs" that will go in the
next few years, you will realise that there will have to be one of two
positions adopted in the near future:
1) Dump the US support (pull out of Iraq & Afghanistan + refuse Iran)
2) Dump the humanitarian work (all of the other countries)

Given Blair's arse-crawling over the years, which option do you really
think he will take?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x700156

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ze_dscherman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-22-04 05:07 AM
Response to Original message
6. Downing street has denied this plan exists
According to German Spiegel online - no other link found yet.

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,309843,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gottaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-22-04 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Blair himself said they were "premature"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gottaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-22-04 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
8. Sudan would pull troops out of Darfur if Britain sent forces--Ismail
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reorg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-04 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. How does this fit in with their genocidal intent?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gottaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-04 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Do you want a real debate about this?
Their obligation as a government is to provide for the security of their citizens. Does such a diplomatic gesture suggest to you a strong concern for protecting the citizens of Darfur? Please, elaborate if you will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reorg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. I would not equate lack of concern with genocide
Like all governments, the GOS certainly is not overly concerned with the well-being of all their citizens, particulary not of those who would rise up in arms against them or those they suspect of supporting the insurgents.

Which is not to say that insurgents may not be justified in what they're doing.

However, the motivation and facts around the outbreak of violence in Darfur seem conspicuously absent in ALL editorials and news reports in recent months, including those you cite here so frequently.


What we hear instead is how evil those Sudanese Arabs are willing to act, and how the warm light of humanity will begin to shine if and when the US or the Europeans will send some troops.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gottaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:34 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Speaking of facts and motivations
Do you suppose the wide circulation of the Black Book prompted authorities to contemplate a final solution?

Self-defense is a legitimate concern of governments. However, when a government reaches the point where it considers millions of people to be enemies of the state simply on the basis of their membership in a ethnic or racial group, it has crossed a line. There is nothing righteous about eradicating whole groups of people.

Light of humanity? Sarcasm duly noted, but since you raise the issue, yes, I suppose that Enlightenment thinking does inform the Occident's concern to some degree. Is it your position that nations should regard the ideas of the European Enlightenment as inimical to their best interests?

The countries that are contemplating humanitarian intervention are doing so because they are in a position to do so. Being among the wealthiest nations with the strongest militaries, they have the capacity and arguably the obligation to prevent genocide.

You know as well as I do that the Europeans and the US would rather not have to act in such circumstance, that the ideal situation would be one in which the government of Sudan took charge and put an end to the depredations against the Darfuris. And it would be better if the African Union and/or the Arab League had the capacity and willingness to protect them, with the cooperation of Khartoum. But that isn't happening. Sudan is failing in its responsibility to protect its citizens. As Kofi Annan reportedly told the Sudanese, "if they do the right thing, if they protect their population and bring the situation under control, nobody would meddle and they would come under no pressure, so the solution is really in their hands if they think the outside world is meddling" (Sudan Sanctions).


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gottaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. more facts and motivations, from none other than Julie Flint
Driven to Despair

You may be pleased to learn that she mentions the fact, as you have, that the SLA has attacked the Sudanese government, and there are allegations of civilian casualties at the hands of the SLA.

She has a pretty good explanation for why human rights organizations haven't fully investigated those claims: They've been denied access by the government of Sudan. Hmmm.

And for your convenience, a link to an English translation of The Black Book: Imbalance of Power and Wealth in Sudan, courtesy of the JEM.

Finally, on the notion of "bringing humanity out of the darkness," Bashir now claims to be doing just that, just as he claims that "his government's concern for Darfur was first and foremost because of the responsibility it felt for the people before God and not aid agencies or other countries." My, my. Oh, and he also claims that the pressure being put on his government is meant "to derail the growth of Islam in the country" (Beshir accuses world of targetting Islam in Sudan).

Perhaps you can explain to me, since I can't really make sense of Bashir, how exactly does the mass murder of a million muslims contribute to the growth of Islam?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gottaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 08:50 AM
Response to Original message
16. Australia considering sending troops to Sudan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC