The United Nations Security Council voted Friday to end its political mission of a few hundred people dedicated to ending the civil war in Sudan. Russia abstained from the unanimous vote to end UNITAMS, the United Nations Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in Sudan. The United States’ and United Kingdom’s ambassadors expressed dismay over the decision to pull out from Sudan but said the move was inevitable, given the Sudanese government’s desire to end the mission’s presence.
Quick Read
- End of UNITAMS Mission in Sudan: The United Nations Security Council voted to terminate the United Nations Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in Sudan (UNITAMS), a political mission focused on ending the civil war in Sudan.
- Russia’s Abstention: Russia abstained from the vote, while other members voted unanimously to end the mission.
- Dismay from the U.S. and U.K.: Ambassadors from the United States and the United Kingdom expressed regret over the decision to withdraw from Sudan, acknowledging it as inevitable due to the Sudanese government’s preference to conclude the mission.
- Concerns of the U.S. Deputy Ambassador: U.S. deputy ambassador Robert Wood expressed concerns that reducing the international presence in Sudan might embolden perpetrators of atrocities.
- Ongoing Conflict in Sudan: The conflict involves the Rapid Support Forces, originating from the Janjaweed militias, which has been clashing with the Sudanese military since mid-April, leading to significant turmoil in the country.
- Humanitarian Impact: The violence has displaced over 6 million people within Sudan and to neighboring countries.
- Continued U.N. Humanitarian Efforts: Despite the end of UNITAMS, various U.N. humanitarian agencies will continue to assist the Sudanese people.
- U.N.’s Continued Commitment: U.N. spokesman Stéphane Dujarric emphasized that the U.N. is not leaving Sudan, despite the closure of UNITAMS.
- Loss of a Stability Tool: The termination of UNITAMS is seen as the loss of an important, though imperfect, instrument for promoting stability in Sudan.
- Expert Analysis: Cameron Hudson, a senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and former U.S. official specializing in Africa, indicated that Sudan might face an extended period without significant U.N. presence.
The Associated Press has the story:
UN ends political mission in Sudan, where world hasn’t been able to stop bloodshed
Newslooks- UNITED NATIONS (AP)
The United Nations Security Council voted Friday to end its political mission of a few hundred people dedicated to ending the civil war in Sudan.
Russia abstained from the unanimous vote to end UNITAMS, the United Nations Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in Sudan. The United States’ and United Kingdom’s ambassadors expressed dismay over the decision to pull out from Sudan but said the move was inevitable, given the Sudanese government’s desire to end the mission’s presence.
While the United States voted in favor of this resolution in order to enable a safe and orderly drawdown, U.S. deputy ambassador Robert Wood said, “we are gravely concerned that a reduced international presence in the Sudan will only serve to embolden the perpetrators of atrocities.”
A paramilitary group known as the Rapid Support Forces, which was born out of the notorious Janjaweed militias, has been at war against the Sudanese military since mid-April, when months of tension exploded into open fighting in the capital, Khartoum, and other urban areas.
The conflict has wrecked the country and forced more than 6 million people out of their homes, either to safer areas inside Sudan or to neighboring countries.
United Nations officials say that the U.N. will keep trying to help Sudanese people with the continuing presence of various humanitarian agencies.
“What is clear and what should be clear to everyone is that the United Nations is not leaving Sudan,” U.N. spokesman Stéphane Dujarric told reporters on Thursday.
But the end of UNITAMS removes a tool, albeit a flawed one, for trying to bring a measure of stability to Sudan, said Cameron Hudson, a former U.S. official specializing in Africa and now a senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
“What we are looking at now is potentially an extended period of time when there is no overarching U.N. presence in the country,” Hudson said Friday.
