This from BBC:
The African Union has agreed to more than double the number of its peace monitors in the war-torn Sudanese region of Darfur.
By September, the force should be 7,700-strong, which could be further increased to 12,000, an official said.
There are currently just 2,200 troops, with another 1,000 expected next month, to monitor an area the size of France.
The UN's Sudan envoy says the peacekeepers have made a difference where they are present but they are too few to cover such a large area.
Jan Pronk also submitted a report saying that 12,000 troops were needed in Darfur by early next year - but they should have a stronger mandate.
**GOI Comment: I am glad that the number of peace keepers is going to increase but it is still too low. 7-12,000 is too small to monitor an area the size of France. We need former colonial states such as France to send troops to help buffer this area. I would also like to see U.S. troops but that probably will not happen because we are so over-extended in Iraq. Hopefully though we can see soldiers from the UK and other European countries such as Italy. The U.N. is making a difference for those who claim that the United Nations never makes a difference.
The problem in Sudan is that the government in Khartoum has said it would take "logistical and financial" support from NATO but not the presence of non-African troops.
The bottom line is that we have to act and act quickly in Sudan to prevent another Rwanda and further genocide. As peaceful countries we have a responsibility to help countries such as Sudan and Congo from sliding down the slope of peace and stability. This is why I believe that we should stay in Iraq until they can take care of themselves (even though I opposed the war to begin with) because I believe in "You broke it, you fix it."
---End of Transmission---