S/PV.5520 Security Council

The tragedy in Darfur has reached a critical moment. It merits the Council’s closest attention and urgent action. It is vital that we all speak candidly about what is happening and about what it will take to bring to an end the suffering of so many millions of people. I am very pleased to see the African Union, the League of Arab States and the Organization of the Islamic Conference represented here today. It is also important that the Government of the Sudan is participating in this meeting. We have all heard the latest deeply dismaying reports of renewed fighting — particularly in north Darfur — among the various factions. Thousands of Sudan Armed Forces troops have been deployed to the area in clear violation of the Darfur Peace Agreement. Even worse, the area has been subjected to renewed aerial bombing. I strongly condemn the escalation. The Government should stop its offensive immediately and refrain from any further such action. The latest clashes have brought even greater misery to a population that has already endured far too much. Once again, people have been displaced. The total number of displaced now stands at 1.9 million. Nearly 3 million people in Darfur depend on international aid for food, shelter and medical treatment. The fighting has made it much, much harder for humanitarian workers to reach them. In July, insecurity prevented the World Food Programme from delivering food to 470,000 people in desperate need. In August, the World Food Programme reached the people in south Darfur, but some 355,000 people in north Darfur remained cut off from food aid, most of them for the third consecutive month. Never since July 2004, when I signed a joint communiqué with the Sudan’s Foreign Minister, has access been so severely limited. Humanitarian workers have continued to be targets of brutal violence, physical harassment and rhetorical vilification. Many of their vehicles have been stolen. Twelve aid workers have lost their lives in the past two months alone — more than in the previous two years. We pay tribute to their sacrifice, but we cannot and must not accept the acts that led to it. Relief personnel must be allowed to do their jobs unhindered and in safety. As access gets harder, the humanitarian gains of the past two years are being rolled back. Unless security improves, we face the prospect of having to drastically curtail an acutely needed humanitarian operation. Can we in conscience leave the people of Darfur to such a fate? Can the international community, having not done enough for the people of Rwanda in their time of need, just watch as this tragedy deepens? Having finally agreed — just one year ago — that there is a responsibility to protect, can we contemplate failing yet another test? Lessons either learned or not, principles either upheld or scorned, this is no time for the middle ground of half measures or further debate. This latest fighting shows utter disregard for the Darfur Peace Agreement. That Agreement created hopes that are being shattered. Current developments defy several of the Council’s resolutions and violate commitments that were made, including the non- deployment of additional Sudanese armed forces. Such action is legally and morally unacceptable. Evidently, those who have ordered this action still believe that there can be a military solution to the crisis in Darfur. Yet, surely, all parties should have understood by now, after so much death and destruction, that only a political agreement in which all stakeholders are fully engaged can bring real peace to the region. As the Council made clear in resolution 1706 (2006), the Darfur Peace Agreement gives us a chance to achieve peace. In the coming days, we in the Secretariat will be meeting senior officials from the Commission of the African Union to finalize a support package for the African Union Mission in the Sudan (AMIS). The Department of Peacekeeping Operations will also convene a meeting of potential troop and police contributors to discuss the expansion of the United Nations Mission in the Sudan to Darfur. The African Union has been very clear about the need for the transition from AMIS to a United Nations peacekeeping operation, on which the Council has decided. The AU has been equally clear about the need for AMIS to continue until then, as well as about the need to resist any attempt to subvert decisions aimed at achieving those vital objectives. The League of Arab States has also offered vital backing for the transition, and has voiced its conviction that AMIS should stay until the end of the year. Indeed, there can be no walking away from AMIS. The AU troops have performed valiantly, in very difficult conditions. They have a vital role to play until a United Nations operation can be put in place, but they still lack the necessary resources. Once again, I call on AMIS’s partners to ensure that it can continue to work during this crucial transition period. But let us be clear: we all know that the Government of the Sudan still refuses to accept the transition, and the Council has recognized that without the Government’s consent the transition will not be possible. Once again, therefore, I urge the Government of the Sudan to embrace the spirit of resolution 1706 (2006), to give its consent to the transition and to pursue the political process with new energy and commitment. The consequences of the Government’s current attitude — yet more death and suffering, perhaps on a catastrophic scale — will be felt first and foremost by the people of Darfur. But the Government itself will also suffer if it fails in its sacred responsibility to protect its own people. It will suffer opprobrium and disgrace in the eyes of all Africa and the whole international community. Moreover, neither those who decide such policies nor those who carry them out should imagine that they will not be held accountable. But my voice alone will not convince the Government. I have tried repeatedly to explain the transition to the Government and to clear up any misconceptions or myths. In public and in private, I have stressed the humanitarian situation and appealed to the Government’s own sense of pragmatism. It is time now for additional voices to make themselves heard. We need Governments and individual leaders in Africa and beyond who are in a position to influence the Government of the Sudan to bring that pressure to bear without delay. There must also be a clear, strong and uniform message from this Council. This is a perilous moment for the people of Darfur, but it is also a decisive moment for the Council itself. For more than two years, the Council has been working to stem the fighting and improve the situation in Darfur. Yet, once again, we find ourselves on the brink of a new calamity. The current situation cannot be sustained. It is time to act. This is seen — not only in Darfur but by people around the world — as a crucial test of the Council’s authority and effectiveness, its solidarity with people in need and its seriousness in the quest for peace. I urge the Council, in the strongest possible terms, to rise to the occasion.

I thank the Secretary-General for his statement. I now give the floor to the representative of the Sudan.

I would like to congratulate you, Mr. President, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month. I should also like to congratulate your predecessor, the representative of Ghana, on his presidency for the previous month. First of all, I would like to confirm a basic truth, namely, that the Government of the Sudan has always been fully interested in establishing constructive cooperation and objective dialogue with the United Nations in order to ensure peace and stability, for the Sudan has been active and committed in this Organization since it became a member. It played recognized roles within the circles where it was a direct member, including the African Union (AU), the League of Arab States (LAS) and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). It therefore has a number of responsibilities and commitments vis-à-vis this Organization. It is clear that the Sudan is currently host to one of the largest United Nations peacekeeping missions, which was deployed in the Sudan on the basis of an agreement between the two parties within the context of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. The Government of the Sudan is the first party to that Agreement. Dialogue and interaction with the United Nations was, then, governed by the principles of the Charter and respect for sovereignty. At that time, there was no need for the Security Council to hold such continuous meetings. However, with regard to the Council’s approach to the situation in Darfur, things have proceeded down a different path characterized by an imbalanced scale of justice and the lack of the criteria for credibility. There are many testimonies to that, of which we can cite the following. First of all, all Council members are fully aware of the enormous obstacles that faced the latest rounds of the Abuja peace talks — and no one can deny the seriousness or the flexibility of the Government of the Sudan, which was committed to both the success of the negotiations and the achievement of agreement. The Council is also aware of the fact that the Sudanese Government delegation frequently remained at the negotiating table, while the armed movements boycotted the meetings repeatedly. Besides, no one can ignore the concessions made by the Government of the Sudan, without which this agreement would never have been reached. However, the Council’s first presidential statement had no words of praise whatsoever for the role of the Government, not even a strong message warning the parties which did not sign the Agreement. Secondly, before the Darfur Peace Agreement entered into force, there were calls for the deployment of international forces, which is not stipulated by the Agreement. The Security Council and the African Union Peace and Security Council issued two statements in support of the Agreement, in which they called on the parties which did not sign the Agreement to do so. They also threatened to impose sanctions against those trying to undermine the Agreement. Shortly after the signing of the Agreement, those who rejected it announced the setting up of the so- called National Salvation Front, which treacherously attacked the town of Hamrat es-Sheikh in the north of Kurdufah, and openly declared that the objective of the attack was the abortion of the Darfur Peace Agreement. Seeing that we used to believe that the Security Council was eager to protect and implement the Agreement and, above all, to safeguard its own credibility and implement its resolutions — especially 1591 (2005), which stipulated imposing sanctions on all those who hinder the Peace Agreement — we submitted to the Council a documented complaint containing the names of the perpetrators. A copy of the complaint was also sent to the Chairman of the sanctions Committee set up under that resolution. What happened? Two months after the complaint, the Council has not yet made the slightest pronouncement on it. Thirdly, in July, on the sidelines of the Banjul summit of the African Union, the President of the Republic met with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. They agreed on a plan to implement the Darfur Peace Agreement. The Sudanese Government presented a comprehensive and detailed plan to address the situation in Darfur on the basis of the Agreement. That plan includes clear, precise and well-defined guidelines covering all the various political, security, humanitarian and social aspects. We submitted the plan to the Security Council in the hope that it would be considered and recognized as a genuine national effort to address the situation in Darfur wisely and thoughtfully, taking all requirements into account. But what happened? The Security Council has not even considered calling a meeting to examine that plan, knowing that some members of the Council have requested a meeting on the plan. Fourthly, the Government of the Sudan was invited once again to attend the high-level meeting of 8 September. It promised to participate, but it made an official request to the Council to postpone the meeting and to ensure that no measure would be taken before then, in order to ensure that the Sudanese Government could participate with a high-level delegation, because it was keen to fulfil all requirements for serious dialogue with the Council on this issue. It was surprised, however, that the Security Council ignored its request, refusing even to listen to us. Instead, it held its meeting as planned and adopted resolution 1706 (2006). At the meeting on the Sudan on 28 August, at which the draft text of resolution 1706 (2006) was discussed in the absence of the Sudan, certain comments and erroneous conclusions were made, and they formed the basis of the resolution. I should like to comment on that information. Some mentioned that the Sudan refused to attend the meeting. That is not true. The Sudan made highest- level contact, between the President of the Republic and the Secretary-General, during which it requested that the meeting be postponed so that we might further prepare for it and consult with the three regional organizations invited to the meeting. The Secretary- General promised to forward that request to the President of the Council. We followed up by sending a letter to the President of the Council requesting that the meeting be postponed in order to allow us to participate actively and fruitfully, but our request was, unfortunately, not granted. We believe that if the Council had agreed to postpone the meeting it would not have adopted the resolution, which was based on a mistaken conclusion. We wish the meeting could have been held before the resolution was adopted. Secondly, it was said during the meeting that the Darfur Peace Agreement was on the verge of collapse. Yet no one asked why that was so. Some spoke of growing violence in Darfur, the targeting of humanitarian organizations and attacks on African Union forces. Yet no one mentioned who the perpetrators were. Moreover, the criminal act of the National Salvation Front was not condemned. Now, when the Government exercises its legitimate right of self-defence, some speak out about “military escalation” and state that the Darfur conflict will not be settled militarily. Where were those voices when the Sudanese Government was being attacked? What kinds of verdicts are being handed down? Laxity in condemning such aggression encourages the aggressors to continue their attacks, not only against the Government, but also against the forces of Minni Arkoy Minawi — who was a signatory of the Agreement — and against African Union convoys and humanitarian personnel. We all know that this is so. Thirdly, with regard to the Government’s plan to restore stability and protect civilians in Darfur, the discussion focused on military and security aspects and was based on misunderstandings and erroneous conclusions. Had the Government of the Sudan been consulted on these issues, the Council would not have adopted a resolution based on flawed speculation. The Darfur Peace Agreement addresses the integration of 4,000 members of Darfur movements into the Sudanese Armed Forces; every three soldiers of the existing Sudanese Armed Forces would be matched with one from among the movements. All would be deployed in Darfur. A simple calculation shows that the overall force in Darfur would amount to 16,000 troops. Six thousand would be deployed between 1 August and 30 September and the remaining 10,000 between 31 October and 31 December 2006. How can one talk about violations of the Darfur Peace Agreement or an alleged military escalation? During the same period, according to the plan, 3,348 African Union troops would also be deployed. How can it be said that these forces were ignored? The Comprehensive Peace Agreement clearly stipulates that the United Nations Mission in the Sudan is deployed in southern Sudan and other regions affected by the war in the south. There is no such reference in the Darfur Peace Agreement. In adopting resolution 1706 (2006), the Security Council deliberately took hasty measures without preparing the political context with all parties involved in the issue, foremost among them the Sudanese Government, which is the party principally concerned and which firmly believes that this dialogue is a one- way, unilateral dialogue. By acting hastily, the Council chose a confrontational approach, but the Government of the Sudan is always ready to engage in dialogue on this issue, in which it is the main interested party. We will keep the doors open to unlimited and unconditional cooperation with the international community and all peace-loving countries, in conformity with all principles and practices that respect its sovereignty and independence and that take account of its people’s specific characteristics, values and heritage. A lasting peace in Darfur is and will always be a strategic objective of our Government and the overriding will of our people. We will pursue our current efforts to implement the Darfur Peace Agreement and will not rest until peace and security are restored throughout Darfur.

I now give the floor to His Excellency Mr. Yahya Mahmassani, Permanent Observer of the League of Arab States to the United Nations.

I should like at the outset to thank you, Sir, for having invited us to participate in this meeting to discuss the situation in Darfur. I would also like to take this opportunity to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for this month. We greatly value your vast experience and wise leadership of the work of the Council. I would also like to commend your predecessor, the Permanent Representative of Ghana, for having so ably presided over the deliberations of the Council during the month of August. The League of Arab States welcomed the results of the Abuja peace negotiations, which culminated in the signing, on 5 May, of the Darfur Peace Agreement between the Government of the Sudan and the Sudan Liberation Movement. The League of Arab States has also appealed to all parties that did not sign the Agreement to commit to dialogue as the sole means of achieving peace in Darfur. Furthermore, the League of Arab States welcomed the positive steps taken by the Government of the Sudan and the Sudan Liberation Movement to begin the implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement, as well as the related positive developments at all levels. The League of Arab States is coordinating its efforts and cooperating with the African Union in that respect. We call on the armed groups that have not yet signed the Darfur Peace Agreement to halt the military escalation, and we call on the international community to make efforts to prevent any undermining of the Agreement by military means. At the same time, we call for further cooperation and assistance with a view to finding a solution to the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Darfur. Cooperation and dialogue are the only path to a solution to the question of Darfur. Having considered Security Council resolution 1706 (2006), the Council of the League of Arab States stresses the need to secure the consent of the Government of the Sudan before dispatching forces to Darfur so as to ensure that they are not rejected. The Arab League Council also called for cooperation and consultation among the Government of the Sudan, the United Nations, the African Union, the League of Arab States and the members of the Security Council, aimed at arriving at an understanding in the implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement. It also called on the international community to fulfil its commitments to implement the Darfur Peace Agreement.

I give the floor to His Excellency Mr. Abdul Wahab, Permanent Observer of the Organization of the Islamic Conference to the United Nations. Mr. Wahab: On behalf of the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), I would like to extend warm felicitations to you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this eventful month. I would also like to convey the OIC’s appreciation to you and to all the other members of the Security Council for having invited us to take part in this open briefing on the Sudan situation. The OIC welcomes the presence of His Excellency Secretary-General Kofi Annan at today’s meeting, and thanks him sincerely for his important statement. The Organization of the Islamic Conference joins the rest of the international community in condemning the heinous acts of terrorism committed on 11 September five years ago. The OIC reiterates its commitment to combating international terrorism in close cooperation with the rest of the international community. Although Secretary General Ihsanoglu was unable to attend this meeting, he looks forward to participating in the Security Council’s meeting on cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations, which you, Sir, have very kindly scheduled for 20 September. With regard to the Sudan situation, the OIC maintains that any deployment of a United Nations mission on the territory of the Sudan should be subject to the consent of the Government of the Sudan. The OIC Secretary General has been in contact with the Government of the Sudan. Last week, he held a useful discussion with the European Union’s Special Representative for the Sudan, Mr. Pekka Haavisto. Next week, Secretary General Ihsanoglu will be holding detailed consultations on the issue with leaders of the African Union and the League of Arab States here in New York. The OIC will continue to play an active and constructive role on the issue of Darfur at both the political and humanitarian levels, with the cooperation of the Government of the Sudan and in conformity with international legitimacy.

I invite those Council members who would like to make comments or raise questions in response to the briefings that we have heard to so indicate to the Secretariat.

On behalf of the Congolese delegation, I should like to say, Mr. President, delighted we are to see you in the presidential seat, and to congratulate you not only as a seasoned diplomat, but also as the head of a dynamic team — that of Greece, with which we have always had the great pleasure of cooperating. Furthermore, as neighbours, our two missions share the same building, which is always reassuring in these times of insecurity — yet another reason, if reason were needed, to have even more confidence in you, Sir. Your predecessor, Ambassador Nana Effah- Apenteng knows how much, both bilaterally and in the pan-African context, Ghana and Congo have always worked hand in hand, which was made abundantly clear last month. It was just at the end of last month that the Council adopted resolution 1706 (2006) — not, we hoped, to get through by force despite the unexpected obstacles that, it is true, littered the way to the progressive implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement, but hoping to rally to that cause both the sponsors and the protagonists of the crisis. Today is an opportunity for all those who had called for the postponement until today of the consideration of the situation in the Sudan, starting with the Government of the Sudan itself, to join with the Council so as to meet the expectations of the African Union, which reflect other, very specific expectations — that an end be put to the daily sufferings endured by the civilian population in Darfur. In a little more than two weeks’ time, the African Union Mission in the Sudan (AMIS) will reach the deadline of 30 September 2006 — the date set for the handover to a United Nations operation. While resolution 1706 (2006) of 31 August confirmed the commitment of the Security Council in that respect, it also called upon the Sudanese Government to lend its support to facilitate such a transition, in keeping with the modalities set out by the Secretary-General in his report dated 28 July. Congo’s repeated calls for dialogue and cooperation on the part of all interested parties have been motivated solely by the need effectively to meet the requirements of such a United Nations operation, given the coordination requirements set out in the 5 May Darfur Peace Agreement. We welcome the participation in this debate of important partners such as the League of Arab States and the Organization of the Islamic Conference, whose views and assistance have always been very much appreciated by the African Union in the context of the process of achieving conditions leading to lasting peace in the Sudan. The African Union’s 7,000 armed troops have been waiting stalwartly for a decision on deployment policies, with a view to promoting a process geared towards practical solutions with respect to the forces on the ground and to the sorely tested civilian population. In a recent statement made on 5 September last, the African Union’s Peace and Security Council reiterated its position on the reinforcement of AMIS and its cooperation with the United Nations. It reaffirmed in particular its decisions of 10 March, 15 May and 27 June; reiterated its support for AMIS; and called on the parties scrupulously to abide by the ceasefire, guarantee the protection and security of AMIS personnel, and refrain from any action that could undermine the peace process or efforts to implement the Darfur Peace Agreement. The Peace and Security Council also recalled the fact that on 18 September, here in New York, a meeting on Darfur will be held at the ministerial level, in parallel with the sixty-first session of the General Assembly. The African Union is well aware of the importance of the Darfur-Darfur dialogue and consultations as an internal mechanism aimed at clarifying the political and institutional stakes. It therefore accords it a role that the Council, too, would be well advised to support. This would also represent a useful tool for the Sudanese Government and the international community to promote cooperation with a view to establishing a peaceful and democratic Sudan. It is with that fundamental objective in mind that the Sudanese Government is called on to exercise its influence and authority in a manner commensurate with its desire to promote the development and management of Darfur’s resources as well as to address other social issues there. The plan submitted a few weeks ago by the Sudan, while it reflects an increased awareness of the responsibility of the Sudanese leaders to their people, remains insufficient. We would have merely taken note of it if the serious concerns flagged by Africa and the international community had elicited an appropriate response from the Sudanese Government, which was a signatory to the Abuja Peace Agreement. However, the behaviour of the armed factions on the ground has not been in keeping with the spirit or the letter of that Agreement. The situation has gotten so bad that the activities of humanitarian agencies and organizations have been hampered and even obstructed, in a manner that appears deliberate. Every passing day is a lost opportunity for the civilian population, whose situation is becoming ever more precarious and whose health, security and even lives are threatened by the abuses and heinous crimes committed against them by their own Sudanese compatriots. The tragic details have been amply described in the reports of the Secretary-General, particularly the one dated 28 July, as well as in the statement that Mr. Annan made this morning, so I need not reiterate them. The situation in Darfur should have already, several months ago, elicited a specific, concrete response, given the willingness expressed by the international community, particularly in resolution 1679 (2006) of 16 May and resolution 1706 (2006) of 31 August. It is, to say the least, regrettable that, despite the contacts made in Khartoum by the Council and jointly by the African Union and the United Nations, the decisive agreement expected of the Sudanese Government has not yet been forthcoming. Khartoum has in recent times even adopted an attitude of conspicuous rejection of a United Nations operation. The Security Council, however, would be ill- advised to just give up. We urge the Council further to refine its approach to Darfur and not to fail to make further efforts at rapprochement with regional organizations and Governments that may have an influence on the various protagonists. We deem of great importance the debate planned for 20 September to discuss relations with the regional organizations and the United Nations. The Security Council will have to explore, advisedly, the possibilities for action entrusted to it by the Charter, in particular under Chapter VIII. It should be able to draw on other resources offered by bilateral or multilateral diplomacy involving the United Nations and Member States, or the United Nations and intergovernmental or non-governmental organizations, so as to use the full panoply of its capacities for prevention or action. We believe that by further developing such an approach, which does not rule out action on the ground, it would be possible to maximize every opportunity to resolve misunderstandings. In order to do so, it is important for the Council to speak on the basis of consensus, to guarantee the implementation of its decisions, particularly if they are to be operational, and to rally the main protagonists of the situation to its views. If the strengthening of AMIS is at this stage the best way to assess the degree of commitment of the international community to Darfur, it would be wise to take this opportunity to strengthen AMIS. The African Union would welcome such a development. I cannot conclude without noting that today, 11 September, is a day of commemoration of the attacks against the United States. I wish to express the full sympathy of my delegation to the United States delegation and to assure it of our determination to fight against indiscriminate terrorism, which brings death and despair to innocent victims throughout the world.

Mr. President, may I start by expressing my deep appreciation to you for your efforts to convene this meeting. This meeting provided the parties with a useful platform for exchanges and cooperation on the question of the Sudan. We wish also to thank the Secretary-General for his presence and for his statement. We appreciate the efforts made by the Secretary- General to address the question of Darfur. We support the proposal and the constructive initiative to hold a high-level dialogue on the Sudan. We welcome the presence of the representatives of the Sudanese Government, the African Union (AU), the League of Arab States and the Organization of the Islamic Conference, three of whom made statements at this meeting. The Darfur issue is now the focus of the international community’s attention and a priority on the agenda of the Security Council; the international community has been working tirelessly to resolve it. The African Union has sent the largest mission ever to Darfur to undertake an arduous peacekeeping task. Humanitarian workers from the United Nations and other relevant organizations have swiftly delivered relief supplies to refugees in the Darfur region to alleviate the humanitarian situation there. Relevant regional organizations and various countries have also lent a helping hand or contributed advice and ideas. The fundamental goal of their efforts is to help the Sudanese Government restore peace in Darfur, assist the local population and ultimately achieve peace throughout the Sudan. Since the Security Council’s adoption of resolution 1706 (2006), China has been closely following developments related to the Sudanese issue, particularly the situation in Darfur. We have noted that although the parties disagree about how to address the Darfur issue, they have a consensus on at least two points. First, the United Nations should take over the tasks now undertaken by the African Union Mission in the Sudan (AMIS). That is a recommendation of the Secretary-General and the collective position of the AU; it is also a pragmatic solution. Secondly, we should continue to seek the consent and cooperation of the Sudanese Government regarding the deployment of United Nations peacekeeping troops. Although that Government has not accepted resolution 1706 (2006), the door to dialogue should remain wide open. On the basis of that consensus, China maintains that the members of the international community should continue to strengthen coordination and cooperation. They should continue to seek to dispel the Sudanese Government’s suspicions and concerns regarding the deployment of United Nations troops; they should also swiftly take measures to ease the security and humanitarian situation in Darfur. At this point, we can proceed on two fronts. First, we should adopt measures to strengthen AMIS. The AU Peace and Security Council will soon hold a meeting of ministers for foreign affairs in New York. At that time, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Sudan will also be present for the General Assembly session. On the basis of full consultation, the parties can make appropriate arrangements for the future of AMIS and for its mandate. Secondly, we must provide emergency humanitarian relief and funding to remove the very real obstacles to humanitarian assistance. We have noted that Under-Secretary-General Egeland has often appealed to the parties to honour their pledges regarding assistance. The parties should heed that appeal and honour their commitments as soon as possible. China has worked in a consistent, active and responsible manner to advance the peace process in the Sudan, devoting great attention to finding an appropriate solution to the problems of Darfur. We have often pointed out to the Sudan that the only objective of the United Nations in taking over the task of AMIS is to help the Sudan implement the Darfur Peace Agreement. That is also the broad consensus of the international community. We hope that the Government of the Sudan will proceed from the perspective of its long-term development and take a flexible approach. At the same time, we consider that the Security Council should respect the views of the national Government in question and that no United Nations peacekeeping operation should be imposed. Moreover, we must pay heed to the influence and the roles of the relevant regional organizations. We believe that if all the parties take a frank and pragmatic approach, enhance mutual trust and cooperation and broaden their perspective, we will certainly be able to achieve an outcome that is satisfactory to everyone. As this meeting is being held on the fifth anniversary of 11 September 2001, the Chinese delegation would like to express its sympathy to the United States Mission and to the Government and the people of the United States.

We congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month and thank you for convening this meeting on Darfur. Once again, we express our gratitude to the delegation of Ghana for its presidency last month. We are delighted to have the Secretary-General among us for this important debate on the situation in Darfur and on the implementation of resolution 1706 (2006), which the Security Council adopted on 31 August 2006. We thank him for his sobering statement on the situation in Darfur. We also thank the representatives of the Sudan, the League of Arab States and the Organization of the Islamic Conference for their statements, which cast a ray of hope with respect to the Sudan and the international community addressing the crisis in Darfur. The situation in Darfur is at a crossroads and needs urgent, decisive initiatives to advance the implementation of the stalled Darfur Peace Agreement. The humanitarian situation on the ground is deteriorating further, access is restricted and the security situation of humanitarian workers is getting riskier by the day. The political situation is at a stalemate, as there is no progress in persuading the non-parties to sign up to the Agreement; instead, they have become more fractured and belligerent. Tension is building between the Government and the armed groups as the Government is deploying a massive military force to strike at the rebels at any time. We heard this morning that aerial attacks have actually been carried out in response to attacks from the rebels. A situation of dangerous escalation is again developing and should be contained. In our view, a military solution to the current situation can only add to the misery and suffering of the people and complicate the already fragile political and security situation in Darfur. It was the failure of a military approach to the Darfur crisis that necessitated the N’Djamena Ceasefire Agreement and, subsequently, the peace process in Abuja. The Sudan should know better the futility of military approaches to political problems after the longest civil war in Africa, in southern Sudan. Sudan has actually taught us and demonstrated to us the value and virtue of negotiated peaceful solutions to protracted political crises with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement negotiated at Naivasha and Nairobi. The deadline for the African peacekeeping mission is drawing near. Resources to keep the force there are drying up. The Sudanese Government has signalled that the African Union Mission in the Sudan (AMIS) can leave when its mandate expires later this month. That is a most frightening scenario. Never before has the international community abandoned a humanitarian and political crisis on the scale of what exists in Darfur. We cannot leave the people of Darfur alone. The situation demands international action with the full participation of the Sudan. We have before us resolution 1706 (2006), which has been rejected by the Sudan because of a perceived mistrust of the presence of a United Nations force in Darfur to implement the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA). We are intrigued by that argument, because the presence of the United Nations in Darfur is not going to be any different from the Organization’s presence in southern Sudan, except in size and composition. There is an urgent need, at this hour, for the African Union and the United Nations to re-engage the Government of the Sudan in exploring mutually reassuring approaches to implement the Council’s resolution. Tanzania has full trust in the ability and resourcefulness of the Secretary-General to find ways to break the impasse. It would be helpful to initiate urgent consultations with the Government of the Sudan and the African Union, together with the other stakeholders and facilitators who were involved in the negotiations leading up to the Abuja Agreement, on how to find creative and acceptable ways to implement the Agreement. We were gratified to hear this morning from the representative of the Sudan that the Government of the Sudan is open to consultation and dialogue with the United Nations on the need to implement the Darfur peace process. In the meantime, an urgent initiative should be undertaken to extend the mandate of the African Union and to mobilize the resources needed to cover the cost of the African Union Mission in the Sudan between the end of September and the end of the year. Depending upon the outcome of the political consultations we have just suggested, the United Nations should continue to put in place the basic logistical requirements for what would be an acceptable multinational force to go to Darfur on terms agreeable to the Sudan, but under the auspices of the United Nations. We hope those ideas will contribute to finding a way out of the current political impasse and the deteriorating security situation. Let me also add my voice in extending condolences to the people and the Government of the United States on the fifth anniversary of the bombing of the Twin Towers, and in recalling the dangers posed by international terrorism. Mr Churkin (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): The difficult situation that continues to prevail in Darfur, as well as in the process of settling that situation, continues to give rise to legitimate concerns among the members of the Security Council and the entire international community, primarily as regards further exacerbation of the humanitarian situation and a new outbreak of violence. Recent events have shown that the Sudanese leadership has adopted a policy of independently seeking a solution to the problem of Darfur without the involvement of United Nations peacekeepers in that process. Let me be frank: we do not agree with that position. The decisions of the Security Council and the African Union must be implemented. The use of force to stabilize the situation in Darfur will lead to an impasse. The Russian Federation has always believed that any Security Council decision pertaining to peacekeeping must take into account the views of the host Government. Unfortunately, the hastily adopted resolution 1706 (2006) — which was adopted without ongoing consultations with the Government of the Sudan and on which Russia abstained while supporting it in substance — has led to a counter-productive heightening of emotions. Russia has adopted a position of principle with regard to the desirability of employing United Nations forces and resources in Darfur in order to achieve lasting peace there. It must be done on the basis of cooperation with the leadership of the Sudan and in close consultation with the African Union, the League of Arab States and the Organization of the Islamic Conference. Such cooperation must be based on the Secretary-General’s proposal, namely, a gradual approach to involving the United Nations in the affairs of Darfur, the basic elements of which are the speedy and substantial reinforcement of the African Union Mission in the Sudan and its eventual transfer to United Nations leadership. Today’s meeting provides an opportunity for first-hand assessments. We welcome the overall positive attitude of the leadership of the African Union. We hope that the Government of the Sudan will establish full-scale cooperation with the African Union and its Mission in Darfur. Despite the well-known problems of which we are aware, it is playing an important stabilizing role there. It is also one of the guarantors preventing the resumption of large-scale bloodshed. In that regard, we believe it would be desirable to bring about the extension of the mandate of the African Union Mission to the end of the year. We are convinced that there are still real chances to continue the search for a peaceful resolution to the problem of Darfur. The Security Council must continue to lend political support to efforts in that regard; it should use its authority to strengthen the dialogue among the African Union, the United Nations and the Sudanese leadership. There is no alternative to continuing that dialogue and bringing it to a successful outcome. Russia will continue to do everything it can to make progress in that regard, including through contacts with the Sudan. In conclusion, I too would like, on this anniversary of the terrorist attack against New York, to express my solidarity and support to the delegation of the United States to the United Nations, as well as to the entire American people.

We too would like to thank the Secretary-General for his briefing on the situation in Darfur. The observations we have heard today and the disturbing news we receive from Darfur every day confirm that the situation in Darfur has continued to deteriorate since the adoption of resolution 1706 (2006). We have witnessed another wave of attacks on civilians, humanitarian workers and United Nations and African Union (AU) personnel. Looting and gender-based violence have also been on the rise, increasing the suffering of the people of Darfur and threatening another round of massive displacements. We agree with the Secretary-General that the situation of civilians in Darfur is desperate and that there is an urgent need for immediate action by the international community to stop the violence and alleviate the suffering of the increasing number of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) to whom there is no humanitarian access. When the Security Council visited IDP and refugee camps in Darfur and eastern Chad we witnessed the inhumane conditions in which refugees and IDPs were living and we heard horrific stories about their suffering. The people of Darfur desperately urged us to help them to end their plight. The international community is obliged to do this without further delay. We believe that resolution 1706 (2006) provides a good basis for action by the international community to protect civilians on the ground and to facilitate the implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement. The African Union Mission in the Sudan (AMIS) must urgently be strengthened. We also need to immediately start the preparations for the transfer to a United Nations-led operation, which will have a robust mandate, as envisaged in resolution 1706 (2006). However, we are very concerned about the reaction of the Sudanese Government as regards resolution 1706 (2006), as well as about its statements threatening to eject African Union peacekeepers. We believe that the absence of AU forces would lead to the further deterioration of the security situation and to the escalation of the conflict in Darfur. In that regard, we agree with the Secretary-General that if there is no AU or United Nations presence and if the number of people suffering or being killed continues to grow, the Sudanese authorities will be placing themselves in a situation where the leadership may be held collectively and individually responsible for what happens to the population in Darfur. The Government of the Sudan should understand that a United Nations-led operation in support of the effective implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement is the only viable option for reaching lasting and sustainable peace in Darfur. It should also understand, based on previous experience in dealing with the crisis situation in the South of Sudan, that the United Nations is not an invading or occupying force, but an impartial broker that is there to help the Sudanese people solve the conflict and to assist the Government in exercising its responsibility to protect all its citizens. The United Nations has always respected the sovereignty and territorial integrity of its Members. It has, however, a responsibility, which was confirmed by our leaders in last year’s world summit outcome document, to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. We must not allow another Rwanda or Srebrenica, where the international community watched helplessly while innocent civilians were slaughtered, to happen again. In that regard, we are also very much disturbed by the recent steps of the Government of the Sudan to pursue a military solution in Darfur, which is in violation not only of the Darfur Peace Agreement, but also of the Security Council’s resolutions. We believe that the Darfur Peace Agreement is the best tool for advancing the peace process and for addressing the root causes of the conflict in Darfur. However, it should not become a pretext for military action against those who have reservations against it or those who refused to sign it. The years of protracted conflict in Darfur have proved that there is no military solution to the crisis there. We therefore urge the Government of the Sudan to immediately stop its military campaign and engage in a political dialogue with the non- signatories. In conclusion, we would like to call on the Government of the Sudan to start complying with resolution 1706 (2006) and to engage in a constructive discussion with the United Nations on its speedy implementation, avoiding further escalation of the conflict and the destabilization of the whole region. In that regard, we regret that the representatives of the Sudanese Government missed yet another opportunity to have a meaningful discussion today with the Security Council on the ways to resolve the crisis in Darfur, with the United Nations support and assistance offered in resolution 1706 (2006). Finally, we hope that the whole international community, and especially such regional organizations as the League of Arab States, the African Union and the Organization of the Islamic Conference, of which the Sudan is a member, will use their influence and bilateral political dialogue to convince the Government of the Sudan that an active United Nations assistance and engagement in the peace process in Darfur is in the best interests of all Sudanese people.

We thank you, Sir, for convening this meeting, Sir, on the conflict in Darfur, which, unfortunately, is overshadowed by deeply concerning circumstances. We also recognize the participation of the representative of the Sudan. We welcome him to our meeting and rejoice that his Government has finally responded positively to our invitation. Finally, we thank the representatives of the African Union, the League of Arab States and the Organization of the Islamic Conference for their participation and statements at this meeting and for the unwavering interest they have demonstrated in the search of a solution to this crisis, which we believe has gone on too long. Only a few hours after the adoption of resolution 1706 (2006), which Argentina cosponsored, the Government of the Sudan again rejected the United Nations operation in Darfur with familiar arguments and continued putting into effect its plan of action, with particular emphasis on the military and security chapter. The news from Darfur is very alarming, including new waves of attacks against the civilian population, humanitarian workers and even members of the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS). Together with the renewed violence and suffering, there are indications that call into question the presence of AMIS after the expiration of its mandate on 30 September. As my delegation has already indicated on previous occasions, the objective of this Council and of the United Nations as a whole in getting involved in the situation in Darfur is clear — we want to work with the Government of the Sudan and join efforts to assist in the implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement and in the protection of the civil population of the region. We urge the Government of the Sudan and all the Sudanese to understand that this is the aim we are pursuing. Argentina wants the Government in Khartoum to understand that, along with the responsibility of each individual State to protect its own population, the international community has a responsibility to help States exercise that obligation. In the context of the crisis in Darfur, the only way to protect its civil population is through the presence of peacekeeping troops in the region — neutral and impartial troops that would neither constitute an occupation force nor limit the sovereignty or the territorial integrity of the Sudan. In other words, we are trying to protect the lives and security of millions of innocent civilians, since the Government of the Sudan cannot do so. Allow me to be clear here. There is no such thing as a military solution to the conflict. As this Council has already repeatedly stated, the solution must be found through peaceful means in the framework of the Darfur Peace Agreement. Only in total respect for this Council’s resolutions, the decisions of the African Union and the Darfur Peace Agreement can we achieve those objectives. Therefore, we fully support the adopted approach of immediately reinforcing AMIS, and at a later stage — no later than 31 December, as established in the resolution — the assumption by this Organization of AMIS’ responsibility. Without a doubt, we need the Sudan to agree and cooperate with that approach; without its agreement, it would be very difficult, not to say impossible, to fulfil the proposed objectives. It is also necessary for the international organizations most directly involved to collaborate with their efforts in the same regard. We cannot and must not remain paralyzed in the face of a situation that calls for immediate action. Every passing day means more lives lost and greater suffering for a people who have already suffered too much. It is necessary to renew our commitment to finding a solution to the crisis if we do not want to continue to see the constant and persistent violation of human rights on a scale that the international community cannot tolerate without taking action to put an end to it. We urge all actors present here to cooperate in a constructive spirit in order collectively to put an end to the crisis in Darfur and to help establish the basis of a more just society in which all the Sudanese can live in freedom and peace. In conclusion, my delegation offers the people of the United States our condolences on this fifth anniversary of the terrible terrorist attack on this city in 2001.

I thank you, Sir, for convening this debate, in accordance with the wish expressed by the Council last month. I also thank the Secretary-General for his participation in this meeting, and in particular for his enlightening statement early in the debate. Allow me first to recall the importance that my delegation attaches to the Abuja Agreement, the conclusion of which was welcomed unanimously by our Council and the entire international community, which indicated their readiness to contribute to its implementation. The Abuja Agreement remains our common reference point and the direction towards which all efforts should be directed with a view to restoring peace and stability in Darfur. It is therefore now more desirable than ever that the movements that have not yet signed the Agreement rally to it, and that all the people of Darfur be brought in so they can discuss their common problems together. My delegation is therefore particularly concerned about the fact that the military option is still being pursued by some rebel movements that have not signed the Abuja Agreement, and about indications that that Sudanese authorities are preparing to relaunch military operations. Such options, as Council members have already stressed, cannot restore peace and stability to Darfur today any more than they could in the past. They will only further prolong the terrible suffering that the population has endured since the beginning of the conflict more than three years ago. In contravening Council resolutions, decisions taken by the African Union Peace and Security Council and the Abuja Agreement they can only thwart the major efforts that the United Nations is prepared to make to restore peace to Darfur. Resolution 1706 (2006) is a continuation of earlier efforts by the Security Council to support the implementation of the Abuja Agreement. In my delegation’s view, the resolution was adopted for two reasons. The first reason was the deteriorating humanitarian and security situation in Darfur, which has been of great concern in recent months, as the Secretary-General has just reminded us. The worsening situation compromises the implementation of the Agreement. Several hundred thousand civilians are threatened by the intensification of the fighting and the worsening of conditions for humanitarian access that has been seen in recent months. The Council cannot resign itself to the continuation of a conflict that has given rise to the most serious violations of human rights which could destabilize neighbouring countries and which are forcing millions of people to rely on international assistance for their survival. The second reason that the Council took the decision — and I think we should remember this — was because the African Union asked it to do so. The request was made before the signing of the Abuja Agreement, and it has since been reaffirmed by several decisions taken by the African Union Peace and Security Council. The United Nations, which has steadfastly supported the political and military efforts of the African Union to restore peace to Darfur, had a duty to respond positively to that request. The Sudan must now accept the deployment of the operation that we have decided to set up. It owes that to its population, which — as has been noted today several times — it has the responsibility to protect, if necessary with the assistance of the international community. I do not need to remind Council members that that responsibility is set out in the 2005 World Summit Outcome document and in resolution 1674 (2006). The Sudan owes it to the African Union and to the United Nations, whose only objective is to help to restore peace to Darfur and to provide for the effective protection of the civilian population there, while respecting its sovereignty and territorial integrity. I believe it essential that the same language be used in communicating with the Government of National Unity of the Sudan by all Council members and by all of the regional organizations concerned. For its part, France will continue its efforts to make sure that that message — a message of responsibility, dialogue and cooperation — is fully understood by the Sudanese authorities. I would like to conclude by recalling the consequences of the conflict for the stability of the region, including its consequences for the humanitarian situation across the border as seen in the situation in the camps in Chad. Resolution 1706 (2006) deals with these issues, and we look forward to the Secretary- General’s proposals about ways to improve the security situation in the Chad camps and the contribution that might be made by the United Nations to monitor the border area in the territory of Chad.

I would like, first, to thank you, Mr. President, for having organized this debate. I would also like to thank the Secretary-General for his presence and for his statement on the situation in Darfur, which is, indeed, very alarming. The Japanese delegation also welcomes the participation of the representatives of the Government of the Sudan, as well as of the African Union, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the League of Arab States at this Council meeting, and thanks them for their statements. Their presence and their participation in the debate today is important as we look at the grim situation facing Darfur and consider how the international community can improve the situation there and promote the implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreements (DPA) following the adoption of resolution 1706 (2006) on 31 August. It is disturbing that the achievement of those two common goals — improving the situation on the ground and promoting the implementation of the DPA — appears, unfortunately, to be becoming more problematic, by all accounts. The Secretary-General’s statement made that abundantly clear once again. The position of the Government of the Sudan is centrally important in addressing those problems. But there are other key actors whose voices must also be heard. We therefore attach importance to today’s briefings and exchanges, not least in order to promote dialogue and to arrive at a better understanding in a climate where such essential things seem sorely lacking. The worsening security situation on the ground in Darfur and the well-documented continuing atrocities and large-scale humanitarian disaster affecting people in the millions are matters of deep concern to all of us. We are also disturbed that this deplorable situation continues to create conditions that could lead to serious consequences that threaten peace and security in the entire subregion. In the face of this harsh reality, it must be emphasized once again that the implementation of the DPA needs to be accelerated and that parties non-signatory to the accord need to be brought on board. All the efforts of the international community, including those organizations represented at this meeting, must be redoubled towards that end. It was precisely in order to find a way out this dire situation that resolution 1706 (2006) was adopted at the end of August, after considerable consultations and exchanges involving all parties, including the African Union and the Government of the Sudan. We consider that the transition from the African Union Mission in the Sudan (AMIS) to an expanded United Nations Mission in the Sudan (UNMIS) is the only realistic solution to address the situation. We see no other realistic option — certainly not a military solution. It is clear that, in order to achieve the envisaged transition from AMIS to a United Nations peacekeeping mission, it is critically important to secure the consent and cooperation of the Government of the Sudan. As the Government of the Sudan unfortunately does not yet appear to have acknowledged that, we would like to urge it to reconsider its position, taking into account resolution 1706 (2006). At the same time, the international community must respond — as called for by the resolution — to the urgent need for prompt support for maintaining the African Union forces on the ground, as well as to the enormous humanitarian requirements. It is also necessary to ensure that there is no security vacuum during the transition. To that end, we call for much closer cooperation between the African Union and the United Nations. In this context, we will follow with interest the discussions of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union at its meeting to be held on 18 September. With regard to the plan for the restoration of stability and the protection of civilians in Darfur presented to the Council by the Government of the Sudan, we listened carefully to the statement by the representative of the Sudan, and we have also taken note of the analysis and comments of the Secretary- General. As has been observed, some of the proposals are in line with the Darfur Peace Agreement. For example, we note in the plan some welcome proposals, including measures for ending violence against women and children and an information campaign for the Darfur Peace Agreement, which we expect will be elaborated further through consultations between the Government of the Sudan and the United Nations. But on the other hand, there are other issues that can clearly not be considered compatible with the Darfur Peace Agreement. The proposed unilateral deployment of Sudanese troops to Darfur is worrying, and, as pointed out, would be in breach of past resolutions and would contravene both the letter and the spirit of the Darfur Peace Agreement. In conclusion, Japan would like once again to urge the Government of the Sudan to exercise prudence in dealing with this matter and to reconsider its position, keeping in mind the decision of the Council in resolution 1706 (2006). Japan believes that the Council should adopt an attitude of continuing the necessary dialogue and consultations with the Government of the Sudan to that end. Finally, on this sad anniversary day, my delegation joins other delegations in expressing our sympathy to the people of the United States and our solidarity with them in fighting terrorism.

I wish to commend you, Mr. President, for convening this meeting on the situation in Darfur. The Ghana delegation wishes to thank Mr. Kofi Annan, the Secretary-General, for his presence and for the statement that he delivered at this meeting. We also join other delegations in remembering the several thousand people who perished on 11 September 2001, and we share with the Government and the people of the United States their grief and sadness on this occasion. We take this opportunity to express our appreciation for the presence of the representatives of the African Union, the League of Arab States, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the Government of National Unity of the Republic of the Sudan. We trust that their participation in today’s meeting will bring new dynamism into the peace process and will further strengthen the resolve of the international community to seek a comprehensive, peaceful and speedy resolution of the crisis in Darfur, in accordance with the Darfur Peace Agreement of 5 May 2006 and relevant Security Council resolutions. In that connection, we wish to stress the goodwill and spirit of international partnership that underlie resolution 1706 (2006), and we call for the timely and full implementation of that resolution in order to alleviate the suffering of the people of Darfur. In view of the volatile situation on the ground, only the expansion of the United Nations Mission in the Sudan into Darfur can best guarantee the safety of the millions of displaced Sudanese and preserve the sovereignty, unity and stability of the country for the benefit of all its citizens. We further express our full confidence and trust in the assurances that have been repeatedly given to the Sudanese Government, that the proposed deployment of a United Nations mission in Darfur is a humanitarian mission and a call to partnership, not confrontation. We therefore urge the Government to open the doors of Darfur to the existing United Nations Mission in the Sudan so that together we can halt the chaos and death and create real opportunities for a better life for all of the Sudanese people.

My delegation thanks the Secretary-General for his report on Darfur (S/2006/591 and S/2006/591/Add.1). The period covered by the report has seen significant developments — some of them positive — that should be taken into account by the Security Council. These include, in particular, the Darfur Peace Agreement and the renewal of diplomatic relations between the Sudan and Chad. Legal and judicial measures have been taken by the Government of the Sudan to prosecute those who have committed crimes against humanity. Decisions have also been taken with respect to power- sharing, wealth-sharing, and violations of human rights. Yet, although the Darfur Peace Agreement was signed by the Sudanese Government and was welcomed by the international community, some parties have refused to sign it. Because of those factions, violence has resumed, especially in the north, on the borders with Chad. That poses a threat to peace and security, as well as to the future of the Agreement. It is also an obstacle to the provision of humanitarian assistance by international organizations and non- governmental organizations. All of this constitutes a threat to peace and security in Darfur and throughout the region. It seems clear to us that the true obstacle to lasting peace comes from the activities of those factions which refuse to sign the Darfur Peace Agreement and reject it. From the very outset, our position has not changed; all of our statements in the Security Council on the African Union Mission in the Sudan (AMIS) demonstrate our support for that mission. AMIS has done excellent work; this reflects the concern of African Union members to find a solution to the problem of Darfur. We reiterate that we must increase financial and logistical support to AMIS, making use of the resources of the United Nations. That request received no favourable response until the report of the Secretary-General was issued, requesting all financial and logistical support necessary for AMIS, so that it would not fail due to a lack of such support. The Security Council has been clear on that, and the General Assembly should follow up by providing that support, if we truly want to ensure peace and security in Darfur and throughout the region. The Government of the Sudan has put forward a comprehensive plan of action for Darfur that includes many positive elements. However, the Security Council has completely ignored it and has not studied it seriously. On the contrary, the plan was ignored in resolution 1706 (2006). Once again, we call on Council members to study the plan and to reach an agreement with the Government of the Sudan on the situation in Darfur. We hope for a successful initiative that will open diplomatic channels to dialogue. We must avoid the threat of sanctions, which would undoubtedly complicate matters. The situation prevailing in Darfur requires consultations in good faith and a determination to persuade — and to create a climate conducive to successful negotiations and true peace in Darfur. Finally, I join those who have offered their condolences to the delegation of the United States on the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks of 2001.

We, too, would like to thank the Secretary-General for the information that he has provided us and to welcome the representatives of the League of Arab States, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the African Union and the Government of the Sudan and to thank them for participating in this debate. We would like also to thank all of those who have used their best offices to persuade the highest authorities of the Government of the Sudan to accept a handover from the African Union Mission in the Sudan (AMIS) to a United Nations peace operation. We regret that the Government of the Sudan is resisting understanding that the objective of the peace operation in Darfur would be only to work in cooperation with its authorities to implement the peace and security agreements and to protect the population of Darfur, which has no protection at the present time. Developments in the field show that this is urgent. Deterioration in the security conditions and restricted access to humanitarian aid mean that millions of people are at serious risk and on the verge of a humanitarian disaster. Given the situation, we believe that the United Nations cannot ever abdicate its ethical responsibility to protect and defend human rights when Governments cannot or do not wish to protect their own peoples. In that context, we believe that the Security Council, should, as a priority, ensure the implementation of resolution 1706 (2006), specifically to promote the effective implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement and protection of civilians. Given developments in the field, we deem it important that the Security Council, on the basis of resolution 1706 (2006), take the following urgent measures. First, it must seek an early deployment of the United Nations Mission in the Sudan (UNMIS) in Darfur, which means continuing dialogue with the Government of the Sudan. Today we heard the representative of the Sudan say that his Government is prepared to engage in dialogue. We hope that this state of affairs will continue. The second step would be an immediate reinforcement of AMIS. The African Union should continue to play an important role in the area. The third measure would be to achieve a lasting and viable ceasefire agreement, in compliance with the commitments contained in the Darfur Peace Agreement, specifically chapter III, and all previous peace agreements. The fourth measure — perhaps the most important — concerns the humanitarian question. The international community must continue to seek appropriate means of cooperation and of securing financial support in order to protect the civilian population. We must accept the fact that Darfur poses an enormous challenge that the Security Council has so far not been able to resolve. However, my delegation hopes that, with the support of the Government of the Sudan, regional organizations and the international community, we will be able to bring about peace and stability to Darfur, on the basis of a political approach and through dialogue. In that context, we support several elements of the assessment of the Secretary-General with regard to the plan presented by the Sudan for Darfur. Finally, my delegation, too, would like to convey to the people and the Government of the United States our solidarity on this anniversary date and our continuing support in the fight against terrorism.

Yet again, we have heard a deeply disturbing account of the security and humanitarian situation in Darfur. All indicators point towards a sharp downward spiral and a looming manmade humanitarian catastrophe. In order to prevent this from happening, there is a vital need to, first, achieve immediately improved security and humanitarian access, and, secondly, work persistently towards sustained security in order for the people of Darfur to gradually return to normal life. In essence, this is an issue of how to attain drastically improved security in Darfur in the short and medium term. Twelve days ago, the Council adopted resolution 1706 (2006) authorizing a United Nations peace support operation in Darfur and immediate support to a strengthening of the African Union Mission in the Sudan (AMIS). Denmark co-sponsored the resolution, as we are strongly in favour of all its elements. We deeply regret Khartoum’s immediate reactions to resolution 1706 (2006) as they have been reported to us. The international community — and indeed the Council — have shown exceptional patience with the Government of the Sudan. We have pursued dialogue, travelled to the Sudan, invited the Government to our meetings, and, not least, provided assurances that any Government having good intentions for its citizens should readily be able to accept. Still, we are faced with Government rejection and uncertainty for the people of Darfur beyond 30 September. We must spare no effort to prevent yet another genocide from taking place on the African continent. The horrors of Rwanda still haunt our minds and can only serve to strengthen our resolve. The moral credibility of the Security Council is indeed challenged by this extended crisis. Through bilateral contacts with key partners in Africa and beyond, and together with our partners in the European Union, we have stepped up efforts to convince the Government of the Sudan that there is no viable alternative to a United Nations mission in Darfur. We must ensure that all obstacles are removed and that the objectives of a robust peace support operation in Darfur — as set out in resolution 1706 (2006) — are achieved. All channels of dialogue with Khartoum — direct and indirect — must be kept open and used to their fullest. This can very soon become a race against time. If agreement is not achieved within the next few weeks, we will all — including the Government of the Sudan — be left with only a few not very attractive options. Friends of the Government of the Sudan have over the past couple of weeks voiced support for the position that the people of Darfur are best served by a continuation of AMIS alongside the implementation of the Government’s own plan of “stability and protection” in Darfur. We beg to disagree. Facts on the ground speak their own language, and, in the words of Mr. Egeland, who spoke before the Council two weeks ago, we are “at a point where even hope may escape us and the lives of hundreds of thousands could be needlessly lost”. Let me put it simply: True friends will assist the Government — any Government — in fulfilling its most important purpose: to protect its own citizens from starvation, violence and death, regardless of ethnicity, cultural differences or religion. It has been said many times over that there is no military solution to the crisis in Darfur, only a political one. The non-signatories to the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) — and their supporters on the ground — cannot be wiped out through military action. One important lesson learned from 20 years of conflict between the north and the south is that the Government has to engage with its adversaries. The non-signatories to the DPA are still part of the N’Djamena ceasefire agreements and should as such be included in the ceasefire monitoring mechanisms. A political process to address the concerns of non-signatories and to get them to participate in the Darfur Peace Agreement must be re-established, supported and maintained. At the moment, both sides appear entirely focused on military solutions. Through outside encouragement and pressure, all parties must show more flexibility and remain open to compromises. As an avid supporter of international justice and the rule of law, Denmark firmly believes that all those responsible must and will be held accountable. The instrument of sanctions is still on the table, as underscored in resolution 1706 (2006). In our view, if the Sudanese Government presses on with its current plans in Darfur, broader political and economic sanctions should not be ruled out. While sanctions are intended to encourage and push for wise political decisions that will respect and implement Security Council decisions, it should never be forgotten that, ultimately, accountability is also an aspect of this crisis. By adopting resolution 1593 (2005) and referring the situation in Darfur to the International Criminal Court, the Council has already shown that it will not accept impunity for serious crimes against humanity. Again, we must show that we have learned our lessons from Rwanda and that those responsible for the continuation of this crisis will eventually have to face the consequences of their actions. A week from today, the African Union Peace and Security Council will meet here in New York to take a definite decision on the mandate of AMIS. AMIS has done a commendable job, and the African Union demonstrated leadership and readiness to apply pressure on peers when it concluded the Abuja talks. The decision to be taken next Monday is difficult and will require the same kind of leadership by the African Union. By adopting resolution 1706 (2006), the Security Council provided a concrete basis on which AMIS would be transferred to the United Nations. Denmark firmly believes that a robust United Nations force in Darfur is a prerequisite for keeping the Darfur Peace Agreement alive. Furthermore, failure to keep the DPA alive would not only put the Comprehensive Peace Agreement at risk, but also have grave regional repercussions — a scenario that is certainly not in the interests of anyone. To conclude, let me also express, on behalf of the Government of Denmark, my condolences to the United States and to the American people on the horrendous terrorist attacks that took place in the United States five years ago today.

I shall now make a statement in my national capacity. I wish to express my sincere thanks for the kind words addressed to me and to my fellow members of the Greek delegation by other Council members. Many thanks to the Secretary-General for the statement he made earlier, which accurately depicts the critical situation in Darfur. Today’s discussion has once again highlighted the need for the Security Council to act immediately to avert an unprecedented humanitarian crisis with potential spillover effects on the whole region. I welcome the participation of the African Union (AU), the League of Arab States and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). During the past few weeks, we have been witnessing the serious deterioration of both the humanitarian situation and the security situation. On the one hand, the Government of the Sudan is building up its military forces for a possible wider offensive. As we have stated on other occasions in the Council, any attempt to implement the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) by force will inevitably aggravate the situation. On the other hand, the non-signatories of the DPA appear determined to seek a military showdown with the Government. It is therefore no surprise that the political process has stalled and that no serious political dialogue is taking place between the two sides. The situation just described, compounded by the already dire humanitarian situation, has brought Darfur to the brink of total collapse, touching what some have called the Rwanda threshold. Tellingly, during the past few weeks, the number of gross violations of human rights, including rapes, has risen to emergency levels. The number of internally displaced persons has risen by 50,000, while humanitarian access has been severely restricted owing to the fact that humanitarian workers are targeted; in July alone, nine humanitarian workers were killed. The members of the Security Council stand united in believing that that situation is unacceptable and that it must be urgently addressed. The response by the Council, but also by the international community as a whole, should involve persuading Khartoum to accept a United Nations deployment, reviving the African Union Mission in the Sudan (AMIS) and applying pressure on the non-signatories to participate in the DPA. Eleven days ago, the Council adopted resolution 1706 (2006), which provides for the expansion of the mandate of the United Nations Mission in the Sudan (UNMIS) to Darfur. Regrettably, the Government of the Sudan has not accepted the resolution and continues to publicly oppose it. The ongoing diplomatic efforts should continue and intensify so that the Government of the Sudan is persuaded to reverse its decision. In that respect, consultations with other stakeholders, such as the AU, the Arab League and the OIC, are also particularly important. The main objective of resolution 1706 (2006) is to protect civilians in Darfur and to assist the people of Sudan in implementing the DPA, thus contributing to the restoration of peace and national reconciliation in the country. Therefore, any fears as to the real objectives of the resolution are unfounded and should be dispelled. In addition, the presence and the reinforcement of AMIS are of the utmost importance, not only to address the present crisis, but also to prepare for a United Nations deployment in January 2007. In that context, we look forward to the decisions to be taken by the AU Peace and Security Council on 18 September here in New York. Finally, in the coming weeks, efforts should be made to persuade the non-signatories to get on board and sign the DPA. The DPA, despite its shortcomings, is the only agreement on the table that includes the vital components for a long-term solution of the Darfur crisis. It must therefore be implemented in its entirety, not selectively. We believe that the Council must intensify its efforts to resolve the present crisis and use all the tools at its disposal, including the mechanism provided for in resolution 1591 (2005). At the same time, all members with influence should spare no effort to bring about a solution, which should be directed primarily at saving lives and ensuring the necessary humanitarian access to those in need. I now resume my functions as President of the Security Council. There are no further speakers inscribed on my list. The Security Council has thus concluded the present stage of its consideration of the item on its agenda.