« Previous · Home · Next »
Darfur Crisis: Chad fighting increases
By Charlie
There has been a major battle in eastern Chad, with continuing heavy fighting, a rebel group says.
The Rally of Forces for Change (RFC) says government forces attacked them at dawn 150km north of the town of Abeche. No casualty figures were given.The latest clashes come 24 hours after the rebels seized a number of army officers and vehicles.
This bleak picture coincides with a prediction that the European Union peacekeeping force (Eufor) being put together for Chad "risks becoming engulfed in the region's conflicts".
The timetable for Eufor's deployment, initially planned for January 2008, is already slipping because of difficulties in obtaining the attack helicopters needed.
Insiders now say it is unlikely to be operational before May 2008.
Some of the contributor nations have expressed their alarm at rebel statements saying the Eufor will be treated as an "occupying force" and targeted for attack.
Like it or not, George Clooney, but the only way to stop the Darfur crisis, and the cross-border wars that it has spawned, is to put combat troops on the ground. Having served with European coalition troops in the past, I believe that in a peace-keeping or peace-enforcement mission, this deployment may stabilize the area. If it is a counter-insurgency mission that will require heavy combat, training or indigenous allies, and integration into civilian population centers –amid IEDs, RPGs, and enemy information ops, I wonder if EUFOR will be able to handle it. So I guess it is wise to wait for those attack helicopters…
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://op-for.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1407
Comments
Post a comment
Potential comment conditions listed here. Oh, and you may use basic HTML for formatting.
I've always maintained that until a stabilizing force is put into place in the Darfur region, this will continue.
What really rattles my chain, however, is that all these hollywood types wring their hands and cry over the genocide in Darfur, and that we must do something about it - while at the same time they condemn coalition efforts to do the very same thing in Iraq.
This leads me to the conclusion that Darfur is simply the flavor-of-the-month for these hypocrites, and that they have about as much real concern for the people of Darfur as they appear to have for members of the US Armed Forces - namely, none.
It's easy to condemn genocide and urge action (especially when it isn't your butt that's on the line).
So ask Georgie boy: Why Darfur, and why NOT Iraq?
GregS