Turn on thread page Beta

Motion to send Peacekeeping Force into Darfur. watch

  • View Poll Results: Motion to send a U.N. Peacekeeping force into the Darfur Region of Sudan.
    Yes
    84.21%
    No
    5.26%
    Abstain
    10.53%

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    so what happens if the government, having not given permission for this force, decide to attack the peacekeepers? do we then fire upon the Sudan military.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, of course, what else should they do? Though if the Sudanese government has any sense whatsoever they would would not fire on the peacekeepers.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think it would be wise for Sudan with the size of their military to attack UN Peacekeepers.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Sudan hasn't always acted wisely... Didn't their gov't engineer the famine in the first place?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Yes but attacking UN peacekeepers would actually threaten themselves, rather than the people.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Singapore supports this motion, but stresses that the primary responsibility of peace keeping should be left to representatives of the Africa Union. UN peacekeepers should only play a supporting role in the region.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Knogle)
    Singapore supports this motion, but stresses that the primary responsibility of peace keeping should be left to representatives of the Africa Union. UN peacekeepers should only play a supporting role in the region.
    This was the plan but now the African Union is running out of funds and can no longer support the 7,000 AU troops in the region.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Then the UN should pump funds into the African Union BUT these funds must be strictly regulated. We all know where the funds will end up in once we turn a blind eye (i.e. the politicians' pockets).
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    The UN has already put $600 million towards the AU for the Darfur crisis, but their mission alone is just not proving sustainable.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Nepal feels that a UN presence is vital. The AU is neither an efficient nor an economically sustainable method of resolving disputes in the Darfur region.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    India, as stated before, believes that a UN peacekeeping forces is vital, if only to stop the imminent war between The Sudan and Chad.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Iceland would like to support the motion. getting NATO-troops into dafur seems to us like a good way to support peace. even though we are a member of the NATO, we are unable to send any people into dafur, since we do not have an army on our own. So we have to stick to the UStroops , who are based in our country and who can be seen as our defence(kinda)
    Offline

    13
    Sri Lanka will support this motion, however our own troops must remain in the domestic arena due to increased violence on the island.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Motion Carried to the Security Council
 
 
 
Poll
Are you chained to your phone?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.