E-MAIL THIS LINK
To: 

WashPost: Bush should be tougher on Sudan
EFL - Lead editorial
TWO WEEKS AGO, Sudan’s government agreed to a humanitarian cease-fire in Darfur... The cease-fire, however, has not been honored. Sudan’s Islamic and Arab government has a long history of denying humanitarian access to civilians as part of its long war with Christian and animist Africans in the south. It is applying those same tactics to Darfur, whose people, though Islamic, share the southerners’ aspiration for regional autonomy...
And the bad luck to be living on top of several kajillion barrels of oil ...
A final breakthrough may be announced in the next week or two. Although this progress owes much to international pressure -- and in particular, the Sudanese government’s fear that, after the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush administration was serious about punishing rogue states —
[a sort of WaPo ’attaboy’ for Bush]
the United States and its allies seem reluctant to apply more pressure on the Darfur issue... They worry that excessive pressure will cause Sudan’s government to pull out of talks with the south
[and here they critized Bush for being too nuanced]
or that Sudan will refuse to permit U.N.-authorized monitors to implement an eventual north-south deal. But Sudan should not be allowed to get away with denying U.N. officials visas and refusing to live up to its cease-fire promises. If it can do that with impunity, it will assume that it has no need to live up to any promises it makes in a north-south settlement.
once again the WashPost surprizes - critizing Bush for being soft on Islamicist Sudan- in its lead editorial yet
Posted by: mhw 2004-04-26
http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=31533