DARFUR

A Thin Coat of Blue

More than six months after the United Nations formed a peacekeeping force in Darfur, little has happened on the ground.

Newsweek Web Exclusive
Jul 7, 2008 | Updated: 2:12  p.m. ET Jul 7, 2008

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Gessho @ 07/11/2008 12:39:14 PM

    Most of these African forces are no better, if not worse, in professionalism and capability than the forces they are intended to defend against. That picture says it all. Looks like three guys in South Central LA chillin' on th street corner.

  • Posted By: Akmatic @ 07/09/2008 1:39:18 PM

    The UN is incredibly useless b/c most of it's members either have ZERO backbone to do what needs to be done or they're incapable of doing anything b/c their membership is more of a status aspect vs them actually bringing anything useful to the table.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 07/08/2008 10:00:20 PM

    Excuse me. Under the title, where the word "force" is used.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 07/08/2008 9:58:41 PM

    I guess the word "force" in the title is where the article started to go wrong. She sort of slipped downhill from there.

  • Posted By: rif2422 @ 07/08/2008 7:02:49 PM

    Ummmm, It's called the Useless Nations for a reason. hahahaha, thats what you get when you have a bunch of europeans unwilling/uncaring about anyone else. Standard liberal policy, talk a lot but refuse to get your hands dirty. Hey whatever, let's sing kumbaya maybe throw some money at the problem and imagine nothing bad is happening. Maybe what they really need is a good medicare/welfare program it works here right?

  • Posted By: R Lawrence @ 07/08/2008 6:55:33 PM

    In the history of the United Nations it has been ineffective on every peace keeping mission that it has undertaken. It is a world body that just does not have the ability to solve conflicts and in many examples, it has made matters worse. The UN is an organization that has a purpose and is certainly a forum that contributes to world dialoge regarding global issues including wars and promotes solutions to conflicts but it just is not effective at peace creation or keeping peace. It is good at addressing desaster relief, organizing global research and addressing development but it falls short on many other of its mandates, goals and tasks. I suggest that the world's nations (UN membership) needs to reassess the mission of the organization and redesign it so that it strenthens its abilities at what it is really good at and divest itself of those aspects of it's current mission that it really is not effective at. Conflict Resolution from the perspective of mediation and facilitation of peace is good but it will never be effective at stoping wars or keeping peace. The UN mission should be a forum for global dialogue regarding the environment, promoting democracy, economic development, global health, education, and desaster relief.

  • Posted By: GreatDane @ 07/08/2008 1:30:24 PM

    "....little has happened on the ground...." my immediate mental response was: "And your point is.....? Why is this considered news?...."

  • Posted By: Marquette70 @ 07/08/2008 12:55:31 PM

    It is the UN, what do you expect?

  • Posted By: ndrock @ 07/07/2008 4:41:52 PM

    'the UN has always been a do nothing force. In theory it should work, but then a lot of theory is flawed.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse