John Boonstra over at UN Dispatch writes about the still overlooked and under-reported continuing catastrophe in Darfur. President Bush's recent statements continue the administration's pattern of cynicism and misdirection on Darfur, and the detrimental effects are real and they are horrifying.
The alternative to a slow-deploying UN force was never sending U.S. troops into Darfur; this option was simply never on the table. [...] No, the alternative to U.S. troops in Darfur was, is, and will continue to be putting an effective UN peacekeeping force on the ground there, which the U.S. has been in the most opportunistic position to ensure. By failing to provide more robust support for UN peackeeping, to invest a deeper commitment in Sudan's tortured peace processes, and to exert more concerted pressure on Sudan and its enablers, the U.S. has consistently watched opportunities for peace and protection in Darfur sail by.
As John says, the false dichotomy presented by the administration on Darfur is simply misdirection. The US could use its considerable ability -- which, despite repeated foreign policy screwups, remains -- to make things better, but instead there's a lot of foot-dragging and blaming all sorts of other factors and elements. History will not be kind.
