DEMARCHE DELIVERED: DARFUR - SECURITY COUNCIL

UNCLAS ADDIS ABABA 002122

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ET KPKO PREL AU SU
SUBJECT: DEMARCHE DELIVERED: DARFUR - SECURITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION ON UN PEACEKEEPING

REF: STATE 123408


1. DCM delivered reftel demarche to Ambassador Sahlework
Zewde, Director of African Affairs, Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, on July 31. Responding that an October 1 date for
the transition of AMIS to the UN would not be easy,
Ambassador Sahlework raised the concerns of Sudan's
non-acceptance of rehatting; the difficulty of implementing
the DPA, particularly with regard to the non-signatories who
have Eritrean support; and the fact that funds raised from
the pledging conference are sufficient to take AMIS through
December 2006. DCM emphasized that given the deteriorating
security situation on the ground, an early transition to an
UNMIS force with a strong mandate is required.


2. Ambassador Huddleston also delivered the demarche during
an August 1 meeting with African Union Peace and Security
Council (PSC) representatives PSC Director Geofrey Mugumya,
Head of the African Standby Force Maj General Ishaya Isah
Hassan, Technical Advisor Dr. Aim Kamubudzi, and Conflict
Management Director El-Ghassim Wane. Ambassador Huddleston
emphasized that the worsening humanitarian situation in
Darfur at this point, and commended the AU on their work in
Sudan and urged full AU support for turning over AMIS to the
UN by October 1st. What is needed now, she said, is a
stronger, more sustainable UN force.


3. Wane replied that the June 27 PSC meeting in Banjul
endorsed a UN transition on October 1, and that from the AA
perspective, the sooner the transition happens the better.
He admitted that the AU is frustrated by the Government of
Sudan,s reluctance to allow an UNMIS mission in Darfur as
well as the UN stated timeframe of a January 1, 2007,
transition. Wane said that if AMIS is expected to continue
until December 31, the AU will need more financial support
from the international community. The PSC will most likely
convene in early September to discuss 1) a timeline outlining
when the current funding will deplete (Wane speculated that
because of the donor pledging conference AMIS could possibly
fund troops until mid-October); and 2) the willingness of the
GOS to accept UNMIS in Darfur. Wane outlined possible risks
if the AMIS were to leave Sudan without a solid UNMIS in
place: current initiatives could unravel; massive numbers of
IDPs could be on the run; and UNMIS may have to begin a peace
keeping operation from scratch.


5. Speaking candidly, Wane said that his personal worry was
that the transition will take longer than predicted because
of the GOS reluctance and the current UN and international
community preoccupation with the situation in Lebanon. He
said that Sudan does not want an expanded role for the UN out
of fear that it will be "a puppet" for the U.S. and Israel.
Wane added that he personally believes the AU did not engage
the GOS enough on its resistance to the AMIS transition to
UNMIS. He reflected that if the AU can secure funding for
six months and mobilize technical support from the UN and
NATO, this would buy time to engage politically with Sudan.


6. Ambassador Huddleston responded that AMIS must continue
until the transfer to UNMIS because no one wants to see the
situation worsen. To that end, she stated, the reason the
U.S. is pushing for an October 1 transition is to put
pressure on the UN and the GOS to create a smooth and fast UN
transition. She pointed out and Wane argeed that rehatting
AMIS would allow the UN to meet the time table of October.
HUDDLESTON