[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 66 (Tuesday, April 24, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4911-S4912]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                 DARFUR

  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, today I wish to talk about the ongoing 
genocide in Darfur, and this administration's inexcusable failure to do 
all it can to stop the violence there. We all understand the monumental 
challenge we face in ending the violence in Darfur, but this 
administration's behavior and recent statements on this issue suggest 
that it simply does not know when to stop talking and when to start 
acting. And all the while innocent people continue to needlessly die 
under our watch.
  Last fall, the President's Special Envoy for Darfur, Andrew Natsios, 
announced that if the Sudanese Government did not accept a U.N.-African 
Union peacekeeping force by January 1, the administration would 
implement punitive measures as part of its Plan B.
  Well here we are today. Over 100 days have passed since January 1. 
And what do we have to show for it? No U.N.-African Union peacekeeping 
force on the ground in Sudan. And no Plan B.
  Meanwhile the death toll has risen. Over the course of the conflict, 
200,000 people have been killed; 2.5 million displaced. Families and 
villages have been decimated; women and girls have been raped.
  Fighting has infected Sudan's neighbors, leaving scores dead along 
the Sudan-Chad border. One U.N. official recently described the scene 
of dead bodies in the area as ``shocking and apocalyptic.''
  So much death and destruction, 2\1/2\ years after this administration 
stated that genocide was indeed occurring in Darfur. More than 100 days 
after Mr. Natsios's deadline, the killings continue.
  Earlier this month, Mr. Natsios testified before the Foreign 
Relations Committee on Darfur and Plan B. His testimony only deepened 
my concerns about the administration's Darfur paralysis.
  When asked repeatedly by Senator Menendez to answer yes or no as to 
whether genocide was occurring in Darfur, he did not answer yes. 
Instead his response was that the violence has abated in Darfur and 
that the rebel groups were also engaging in killings. His answer was 
incredibly disturbing to me and to other members of the committee.
  Now I understand Mr. Natsios's desire to convey the complexity of the 
situation and the complicity of various parties on the ground, but the 
fact is that the primary party responsible for the killings is the 
Sudanese Government and its Janjaweed proxies. For Mr. Natsios to be 
unable to state that genocide is occurring in clear terms seems to me a 
classic example of missing the forest for the trees. It also raises a 
question of credibility. After all, how can this administration stop a 
genocide when its special envoy won't even fully acknowledge it?
  Mr. Natsios also stated that although the President is supposedly 
angry about the situation in Darfur and has recently proposed certain 
sanctions, he has acceded to a request by U.N. Secretary-General Ban 
Ki-Moon to delay any implementation of Plan B for another two to four 
weeks to give the Secretary-General time to convince the Sudanese 
Government to accept a peacekeeping force.
  Now 2 to 4 weeks may seem like nothing in the context of protracted 
and complex diplomatic negotiations, but this is no treaty that is 
being negotiated. There are lives at stake every day here and we just 
cannot afford to take a ``wait and see'' approach.
  Recent reports suggest that the Sudanese Government has agreed to a 
hybrid force but based on its previous track record, I will believe it 
when I see some additional boots on the ground. In the meantime, a 
pause on the administration's part is simply unacceptable.
  And so I believe that even as the modalities of a peacekeeping force, 
that may or may not materialize, are worked out, the administration 
must begin implementing certain elements of Plan B immediately. Not 4 
weeks from now. Not 2 weeks from now. Immediately.
  Select punitive measures as described by Mr. Natsios at the hearing 
include imposing personal sanctions on certain members of the rebel 
groups and the Sudanese Government; curbing the Sudanese Government's 
access to oil revenues; and increasing penalties on companies operating 
in Sudan.
  There is nothing revolutionary about these measures. They were leaked 
to the public and have been under discussion for some weeks. The 
question in my mind is not so much about whether we should implement 
them but why haven't we already implemented them.
  As chairman of the Banking Committee and a senior member of the 
Foreign Relations Committee, I am absolutely willing to work with the 
administration to put these measures into force and look forward to 
some clear answers from the administration on this.
  Now let me be clear about what I mean in saying we should go ahead 
and implement elements of Plan B. I fully appreciate the sensitivities 
of our diplomatic efforts related to Darfur. I fully agree with the 
importance of working this issue through the U.N. in a multilateral 
manner. But if there are certain steps that the United States can take 
on its own account and indeed was supposed to take over 100 days ago to 
pressure the Sudanese Government, then what are we waiting for?
  The time has come to delink certain elements of Plan B from our 
broader multilateral strategy to pressure Khartoum. The time has come 
to act where and when we can. This administration has shown no 
compulsion in acting unilaterally in the past. It did so by invading 
Iraq with disastrous consequence. Why does it continue to keep one foot 
on the side lines 4 years into this genocide when it not only has the 
ability but also the moral responsibility to act?
  Moreover, we must not stop at implementing long overdue sanctions 
whose credibility has been called into question because they have yet 
to be implemented. We must also consider a more robust role for NATO 
forces, including their deployment to Sudan if the Sudanese Government 
continues to obstruct a hybrid peacekeeping force.
  Even if the Sudanese Government consents to the U.N.-AU force, the 
United Nations may fail to muster the requisite troops within an 
acceptable period of time. In such a scenario, we should consider the 
deployment of an interim NATO force with U.S. participation. At a 
minimum, NATO forces, which already provide logistical support to the 
African Union mission, should enforce a no-fly zone in Darfur pursuant 
to U.N. Resolution 1591 to prevent military flights over Darfur.
  Naturally, special attention will have to be paid in any operation to 
the security of refugee camps and aid workers but to those who say that 
military action will make things worse, I have only one thing to say: 
we are already at rock bottom.
  The authorization of force is one of the most critical decisions a 
member of Congress has to make, especially if it entails sending our 
brave men and women into harm's way on the ground. U.S. participation 
however in any such action, even in a limited capacity, is critical to 
showing the world that America is not just about fighting the war 
against terrorism but also is willing to fight against injustice and 
mass murder. That we are prepared to fight for the principles of 
respect for human dignity and life, and not just talk about them.
  In advocating certain measures outside the framework of the United 
Nations, I do not intend to dismiss the critical role that the U.N. and 
other countries can play. The fact is that the U.S. has limited 
leverage over Sudan and we need all the help we can get. We must work 
within the U.N. system, and also press other key countries that deal 
with Sudan such as India and China to do their part. China in 
particular has a crucial role to play in changing Khartoum's behavior.
  But even as we assess the role and responsibilities of others, we 
must never forget our own. We must lead by example. Over the past few 
years, I have

[[Page S4912]]

voted for legislation sanctioning the Government of Sudan. I have 
delivered floor statements and attended hearings on Darfur, where 
witness after witness has testified to the ongoing atrocities. I have 
sent letters to the Chinese, the Russians, the Arabs and others urging 
them to use their clout with Sudan.
  Yet after all such actions and deliberations by members of this body 
and after all the punitive authorities granted to this administration, 
to see it temporizing and regressing to a point where we are debating 
whether genocide is even occurring is utterly unacceptable.
  The time for action is now, not in a few weeks. We are at rock bottom 
and the administration needs to deliver on its threats and translate 
its rhetoric into action. We must do everything in our power to end the 
genocide in Darfur immediately.

                          ____________________