- Reaction score
- 6,468
- Points
- 1,360
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/24by7panews/tm_objectid=14484371%26method=full%26siteid=50143%26headline=british%2dsoldiers%2d%2don%2dstandby%2d%2dfor%2dsudan-name_page.html
L
LanceaLot
Guest
Yes, but I think Peacemakers are getting more experienced in these matters and the issue in Sudan is fairly clear. I feel this is why we have a Peace force in the first place, so we should act if we can.
- Reaction score
- 6,468
- Points
- 1,360
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBFDFHV0YD.html
Starting all over again? :'(
Starting all over again? :'(
Y
Yard Ape
Guest
Do you mean you believe this is why we have an army?LanceaLot said:
F
Figure11
Guest
I notice that Rwanda seems determined to make a name for itself on the African stage these days. In addition to their Sudanese deployment, they also appear to be heavily entrenched in the DRC. Is this some kind of concerted effort to bury 1994, or are they emerging as a new African fire brigade?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Rwanda has been helping out in some cases, however, DROC is not one of them. In the news lately we've seen lots of reports of Rwanda sponsoring rebel attacks in Congo. Burundi and Rwanda have it out for the Congolese and it doesn't look good.
On another note, the CF contribution to OP SAFARI (Sudan) is now increasing by a few ppl, myself included, I guess we'll see what happens.
On another note, the CF contribution to OP SAFARI (Sudan) is now increasing by a few ppl, myself included, I guess we'll see what happens.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Not really bigger....I've been dagging for this since Jan so we knew it was coming. It'll likely be the same size as OP CROCODILE, they've put in a proposal for a few more admin types to support the BGen, but I don't believe the DCDS has signed off on it yet.
Thanks Slim, will do.
Thanks Slim, will do.
S
Stone
Guest
I have personal interest in this situation a good friend of mine has volunteer to be among the first to be send over if Canada does get involived in Sudan. I hate hearing what is going on over there but right now Canada's forces are stretched so thin that I don't think that we could get enough man power at this time to make much of a difference without putting a lot of innocent soldier lives a risk. If we have the funding and the man power to maintain a strong base I am all for sending Canadian peace keepers over there but not if we are just going to mess around and fight a battle with our hands tied behind out back. They have openly said that if the U.N. gets involved that they are going to be targeted. They need the suport of the other countries before they get involves. The US's interests still remain in Iraq and that is where a lot of there ground forces remain and will be for a while so they are not of much use at this time, they are running short and have been foced to call up their reserves. I believe that something needs to be done, as a soldier myself I would be willing to go and do what I can to help but I don't want to see Canada running in there not knowing what they are getting into. Africa has been ignored far too long and something should have been done a long time ago, now that things are getting out of hand the rest of the world is paying attention, but it may be too late.
- Reaction score
- 6,468
- Points
- 1,360
U.N. Sees Danger of New War in Central Africa Following Massacre
By Edith M. Lederer Associated Press Writer
Published: Aug 19, 2004
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Citing dangers of renewed war between Hutus and Tutsis, a senior U.N. official urged central African leaders Thursday to mete out "justice not revenge" against extremists responsible for a massacre.
Undersecretary-General Jean-Marie Guehenno told reporters after briefing the U.N. Security Council that threats of retaliatory action by Burundi, Congo and Rwanda following the mass killing of at least 160 refugees at a U.N. camp in Burundi could lead to renewed fighting.
"I think there is a real danger of violence, of a spiral of violence," Guehenno said. "We do call on all actors at the moment to exert maximum restraint. This horrific massacre at Gatumba (camp) must not lead to a cycle of revenge. There has to be justice, not revenge."
A decade of violence between the region's majority Hutus and minority Tutsis has wracked central Africa, including the 1994 Rwandan genocide, a continuing civil war in Burundi that started in 1993, and two invasions of Congo by Rwanda and Burundi in attempts to root out Hutu militias.
Retaliatory violence could undo peace efforts in Congo, where a 1998-2003 civil war involved fighters from five countries and left more than 3 million people dead, most through strife-induced hunger and disease.
A Burundian Hutu rebel group, the National Liberation Forces, claimed responsibility for the attack last Friday night on Gatumba, which sheltered Congolese Tutsis known as Banyamulenge who had fled fighting in their troubled country. The rebels later claimed they were searching for Burundi army supporters in the camp but Guehenno said they didn't deny involvement "in the atrocities that were committed in Gatumba."
Burundi and Rwanda on Tuesday threatened to send troops into neighboring Congo to hunt down the militiamen who attacked the camp from bases in eastern Congo. The Burundian army chief accused Congolese soldiers of participating in the massacre.
A renegade Congolese army commander, a Tutsi whose troops briefly seized a key city in eastern Congo last June, also threatened Tuesday to oust the "government that slaughters its own people." Congo's interim government responded, saying it wanted to resolve the situation diplomatically, but was ready "to react" if Burundian or Rwandan troops crossed the border.
Guehenno called the threats of military action "very dangerous" and warned that they "could lead to terrible disasters."
AP-ES-08-19-04 2140EDT
By Edith M. Lederer Associated Press Writer
Published: Aug 19, 2004
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Citing dangers of renewed war between Hutus and Tutsis, a senior U.N. official urged central African leaders Thursday to mete out "justice not revenge" against extremists responsible for a massacre.
Undersecretary-General Jean-Marie Guehenno told reporters after briefing the U.N. Security Council that threats of retaliatory action by Burundi, Congo and Rwanda following the mass killing of at least 160 refugees at a U.N. camp in Burundi could lead to renewed fighting.
"I think there is a real danger of violence, of a spiral of violence," Guehenno said. "We do call on all actors at the moment to exert maximum restraint. This horrific massacre at Gatumba (camp) must not lead to a cycle of revenge. There has to be justice, not revenge."
A decade of violence between the region's majority Hutus and minority Tutsis has wracked central Africa, including the 1994 Rwandan genocide, a continuing civil war in Burundi that started in 1993, and two invasions of Congo by Rwanda and Burundi in attempts to root out Hutu militias.
Retaliatory violence could undo peace efforts in Congo, where a 1998-2003 civil war involved fighters from five countries and left more than 3 million people dead, most through strife-induced hunger and disease.
A Burundian Hutu rebel group, the National Liberation Forces, claimed responsibility for the attack last Friday night on Gatumba, which sheltered Congolese Tutsis known as Banyamulenge who had fled fighting in their troubled country. The rebels later claimed they were searching for Burundi army supporters in the camp but Guehenno said they didn't deny involvement "in the atrocities that were committed in Gatumba."
Burundi and Rwanda on Tuesday threatened to send troops into neighboring Congo to hunt down the militiamen who attacked the camp from bases in eastern Congo. The Burundian army chief accused Congolese soldiers of participating in the massacre.
A renegade Congolese army commander, a Tutsi whose troops briefly seized a key city in eastern Congo last June, also threatened Tuesday to oust the "government that slaughters its own people." Congo's interim government responded, saying it wanted to resolve the situation diplomatically, but was ready "to react" if Burundian or Rwandan troops crossed the border.
Guehenno called the threats of military action "very dangerous" and warned that they "could lead to terrible disasters."
AP-ES-08-19-04 2140EDT
Figure11 said:
Rwanda's RDF (Rwandan Defense Force - a complete misnomer as the Rwandans never defend when they can attack) actually made a name for themselves quite a while ago. It's mainly because they have the best army in Central Africa, bar none. They invented the "African Blitzkreig" with their lighting march across the breadth of the Congo to Kinshasa, and despite being a light infantry army with few weapons heavier than 20mm cannon, and 80mm mortars, fought the larger, better equipped armies of Zimbabwe and Angola to a standstill when they intervened to save the DRC. For a tiny, impoverished country, suffering from the after-effects of genocide, Rwanda under the RPF has consistently punched far above her weight.
Unlike most other African nations, the Rwandans practice excellent small unit tactics, and they don't brutalize their soldiers, rather training along western lines, and developing a strong esprit de corps. Their officers are also well schooled (Rwanda spent a lot of resources getting them trained in the best US and UK military academies in the late 90's) and practice a doctrine of rapid concentration, overwhelming local force and decisive battle that comes as a shock to many of their more haphazard foes. While they're fundamentally still a guerilla army, they've adopted a lot western doctrines. There is also the fact that Paul Kagame (now President, but still with great sway over the military) is a bona fide military genius. In fact, on the entire African continent only the South Africans match them for professionalism.
However, the RDF is too large for the state to support, and without external funds it'll have to demobilize eventually. Rwanda's de-facto occupation of the rich lands of the eastern Congo is almost entirely driven by its need to use the resources there to support its military. To date they've been VERY leery of UN participation (understandable given their history) but they may see it as a legitimate way of getting paid. After all, they could stand to gain a great deal of financial support for acting as "UN mercs" on the behalf of the consciences of wealthy nations.
The RDF are primarily a fast striking force quite adept at using speed and terror. They may not be the best suited to the delicate work of peacekeeping, but they certainly have the capacity to learn. And even with only 150 troops on the ground, there's still no force in Sudan that can match them man for man. They have a fearsome reputation in Africa and it remains to be seen if any of the Janjeweed decide to try their luck.
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,101
- Points
- 1,160
What are the roots of the conflict in Sudan?
DAVID HOWELL
Journal Staff Writer
EDMONTON
Printed in the Edmonton Journal Friday 10 Sept 04
In February 2003, violence erupted in the Darfur region of north-western Sudan, leading to what the United Nations now calls the world's worst humanitarian crisis.
Two rebel factions ,drawn largely from black African tribes, rose up against the Arab-dominated national government. The Sudanese government is accused of backing the Arab militiamen, known as the Janjaweed, in a scorched-earth campaign to quell the rebellion.
The United Nations estimates 30,000 people have been killed in the Darfur conflict Another 1.2 million have been internally displaced. Some 200,000 have fled the country and are living in refugee camps in neighbouring Chad.
Last week, retired Canadian Gen. Romeo Dallaire, who led the ill-fated United Nations peacekeeping mission during the 1994 Rwandan massacre, blasted Western countries for â Å“lame and obtuseâ ? response to the Darfur crisis. The world's powers and the UN have learned little from Rwanda, he said.
Andy Knight is a professor of political science at the University of Alberta, specializing in international relations and UN issues. Rob Huebert is associate director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies at the University of Calgary The Journal asked for their thoughts on Darfur.
What is at the root of the Darfur conflict?
â Å“Essentially, the Darfur conflict was about land resources and water resources,â ? Knight said. Desertification has resulted in the shrinkage of the fertile land in that area. There was less and less fertile land to be tilled, and people living on those lands were primarily black Africans. The Arabs, who moved from place to place, had cattle and migrated seasonally between the dry season and the wet season. The Arabs began to make claims on the last remaining fertile lands in Darfur. This started conflicts. When war broke out in 2003, the government did not have sufficient military presence in Darfur. It got Arab tribal groups to give them militiamen to work with government soldiers in the region.â ?
Who are the Janjaweed?
â Å“They are mostly Arab tribesmen, herders,â ? Knight said. â Å“In the Darfur region, they are young, on horse back or on camels, and usually armed with AK-47 assault rifles. They are usually recruited into the militia by the heads of tribes who... brainwash recruits into thinking they are protecting their land.â ?
How are the black African people in Darfur suffering because of the conflict?
â Å“They are losing basically all of their possessionsâ â€their possessions are burned or destroyed, their villages are burned or destroyed,â ? Knight said. â Å“There is an attempt at 'deracialization,' a fancy word for a policy of deliberate rape of African women by Arab men. Amnesty International has reported on this. There is also a huge humanitarian problem because of the famine, and the UN is trying to address it. Humanitarian workers are not getting access to these people; they are being interfered with by militia groups.â ?
Why hasn't the Sudanese government taken the action dictated by the Security Council?
â Å“The government has said all along that it is not supporting the Janjaweed,â ? Knight said. â Å“That's false. They claim they are disarming militia groups, but they are not disarming the Janjaweed. Also, the government, because it is Islamic, has been able to get the support of the Arab League and most Islamic countries at the UN. Islamic countries are supporting the Sudanese government, despite claims of genocide and ethnic cleansing.â ?
How many troops could Canada send as part of an effort to restore peace?
â Å“It's a guesstimate, but about 600 troops,â ? Huebert said. â Å“We possibly could scrape something together, but it would come at the very real cost of family time that these people desperately need, and (at the cost of) training. In other words, it would fall on one of the units just coming back from finishing up in Bosnia or Afghanistan. We constantly do not have the number of troops for our foreign policy.â ?
Could Canada send officers to lead a peacekeeping effort?
â Å“You get to be in command when you provide the troops; you get command when you have the commitment,â ? Huebert said. 'That's why we had the command in Afghanistan because we had the bulk of the troops. The international community says if you're willing to pay the piper, you get to call some of the tune. â Å“They'll rely on some Canadian expertise, but quite frankly, a whole lot of other people have expertise too, nowadays, because a lot of other people are doing peace-support operations.â ?
How else could Canada help?
â Å“Well, we can talk,â ? Huebert said. â Å“With someone like a RomeoDallaire (speaking out it keeps Canadian attention on the issue. When Dallaire starts saying it, people say, 'Holy cow, there are all sorts of similarities to Rwanda.' Canadian political leaders can do their part for keeping the issue on the world's agenda. â Å“The problem, of course, is we're seen as hypocrites if we don't have the resources to back it up.â ?
dhowell@thejournal.canwest.com
:bullet:
Powell calls Sudanese crisis genocide' for the first time
Knight Ridder with files from Can West News Service
WASHINGTON
Printed in the Edmonton Journal Friday 10 Sept 04
U.S. Secretary of State Cohn Powell declared for the first time Thursday that the wave of atrocities in Sudan's Darfur region constitutes genocide, a finding the Bush administration hopes will increase world pressure on Sudanese rulers to end the crisis.
Powell, speaking to a Senate panel, said Sudan's government is complicating the brutal campaign of racial eradication carried out by Arab militias known as the Janjaweed against black non- Arabs in Darfur.
After reviewing a report by teams of investigators, â Å“we concluded â †I con duded â †that genocide has been committed in Darfur, and that the government of Sudan and the Janjaweed bear responsibility, and that genocide may still be occurring,â ? he told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Powell's announcement ends a months-long debate within the U.S. government over the issue, a debate heavily coloured by the world's failure to deal with the genocide in Rwanda a decade ago.
But it's unclear what practical effect it will have. Powell acknowledged that â Å“no new action is dictated by this determination.â ? The Bush administration isn't considering direct military intervention. Instead, it's pushing Sudan to accept the deployment of roughly 4,000 African Union troops and police to protect Darfur's non-Arab population.
In months of interviews across Darfur scores of Sudanese have described to Knight Ridder horrific atrocities committed by the Janjaweed and Sudanese soldiers. A nearly identical picture was painted by the U.S. State Department report, which was based on interviews with 1,136 refugees in neighbouring Chad.
The report, released Thursday, said 67 percent of refugees reported witnessing aerial bombardment by Sudanese government aircraft; 61 per cent reported the killing of a family member; 16 per cent reported rape; and 33 per cent reported hearing racial epithets.
The Canadian government won't join the United States in calling recent atrocities in western Sudan acts of genocide. A spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew said Canada was reluctant to do the same because the government remains concerned about the definition of genocide and whether the events in Darfur meet it.
â Å“Genocide is defined in a fair1y narrow manner legally,â ? said Sebastien Theberge, Pettigrew's director of communications, reached in Paris on Thursday.
:bullet:
DAVID HOWELL
Journal Staff Writer
EDMONTON
Printed in the Edmonton Journal Friday 10 Sept 04
In February 2003, violence erupted in the Darfur region of north-western Sudan, leading to what the United Nations now calls the world's worst humanitarian crisis.
Two rebel factions ,drawn largely from black African tribes, rose up against the Arab-dominated national government. The Sudanese government is accused of backing the Arab militiamen, known as the Janjaweed, in a scorched-earth campaign to quell the rebellion.
The United Nations estimates 30,000 people have been killed in the Darfur conflict Another 1.2 million have been internally displaced. Some 200,000 have fled the country and are living in refugee camps in neighbouring Chad.
Last week, retired Canadian Gen. Romeo Dallaire, who led the ill-fated United Nations peacekeeping mission during the 1994 Rwandan massacre, blasted Western countries for â Å“lame and obtuseâ ? response to the Darfur crisis. The world's powers and the UN have learned little from Rwanda, he said.
Andy Knight is a professor of political science at the University of Alberta, specializing in international relations and UN issues. Rob Huebert is associate director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies at the University of Calgary The Journal asked for their thoughts on Darfur.
What is at the root of the Darfur conflict?
â Å“Essentially, the Darfur conflict was about land resources and water resources,â ? Knight said. Desertification has resulted in the shrinkage of the fertile land in that area. There was less and less fertile land to be tilled, and people living on those lands were primarily black Africans. The Arabs, who moved from place to place, had cattle and migrated seasonally between the dry season and the wet season. The Arabs began to make claims on the last remaining fertile lands in Darfur. This started conflicts. When war broke out in 2003, the government did not have sufficient military presence in Darfur. It got Arab tribal groups to give them militiamen to work with government soldiers in the region.â ?
Who are the Janjaweed?
â Å“They are mostly Arab tribesmen, herders,â ? Knight said. â Å“In the Darfur region, they are young, on horse back or on camels, and usually armed with AK-47 assault rifles. They are usually recruited into the militia by the heads of tribes who... brainwash recruits into thinking they are protecting their land.â ?
How are the black African people in Darfur suffering because of the conflict?
â Å“They are losing basically all of their possessionsâ â€their possessions are burned or destroyed, their villages are burned or destroyed,â ? Knight said. â Å“There is an attempt at 'deracialization,' a fancy word for a policy of deliberate rape of African women by Arab men. Amnesty International has reported on this. There is also a huge humanitarian problem because of the famine, and the UN is trying to address it. Humanitarian workers are not getting access to these people; they are being interfered with by militia groups.â ?
Why hasn't the Sudanese government taken the action dictated by the Security Council?
â Å“The government has said all along that it is not supporting the Janjaweed,â ? Knight said. â Å“That's false. They claim they are disarming militia groups, but they are not disarming the Janjaweed. Also, the government, because it is Islamic, has been able to get the support of the Arab League and most Islamic countries at the UN. Islamic countries are supporting the Sudanese government, despite claims of genocide and ethnic cleansing.â ?
How many troops could Canada send as part of an effort to restore peace?
â Å“It's a guesstimate, but about 600 troops,â ? Huebert said. â Å“We possibly could scrape something together, but it would come at the very real cost of family time that these people desperately need, and (at the cost of) training. In other words, it would fall on one of the units just coming back from finishing up in Bosnia or Afghanistan. We constantly do not have the number of troops for our foreign policy.â ?
Could Canada send officers to lead a peacekeeping effort?
â Å“You get to be in command when you provide the troops; you get command when you have the commitment,â ? Huebert said. 'That's why we had the command in Afghanistan because we had the bulk of the troops. The international community says if you're willing to pay the piper, you get to call some of the tune. â Å“They'll rely on some Canadian expertise, but quite frankly, a whole lot of other people have expertise too, nowadays, because a lot of other people are doing peace-support operations.â ?
How else could Canada help?
â Å“Well, we can talk,â ? Huebert said. â Å“With someone like a RomeoDallaire (speaking out it keeps Canadian attention on the issue. When Dallaire starts saying it, people say, 'Holy cow, there are all sorts of similarities to Rwanda.' Canadian political leaders can do their part for keeping the issue on the world's agenda. â Å“The problem, of course, is we're seen as hypocrites if we don't have the resources to back it up.â ?
dhowell@thejournal.canwest.com
:bullet:
Powell calls Sudanese crisis genocide' for the first time
Knight Ridder with files from Can West News Service
WASHINGTON
Printed in the Edmonton Journal Friday 10 Sept 04
U.S. Secretary of State Cohn Powell declared for the first time Thursday that the wave of atrocities in Sudan's Darfur region constitutes genocide, a finding the Bush administration hopes will increase world pressure on Sudanese rulers to end the crisis.
Powell, speaking to a Senate panel, said Sudan's government is complicating the brutal campaign of racial eradication carried out by Arab militias known as the Janjaweed against black non- Arabs in Darfur.
After reviewing a report by teams of investigators, â Å“we concluded â †I con duded â †that genocide has been committed in Darfur, and that the government of Sudan and the Janjaweed bear responsibility, and that genocide may still be occurring,â ? he told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Powell's announcement ends a months-long debate within the U.S. government over the issue, a debate heavily coloured by the world's failure to deal with the genocide in Rwanda a decade ago.
But it's unclear what practical effect it will have. Powell acknowledged that â Å“no new action is dictated by this determination.â ? The Bush administration isn't considering direct military intervention. Instead, it's pushing Sudan to accept the deployment of roughly 4,000 African Union troops and police to protect Darfur's non-Arab population.
In months of interviews across Darfur scores of Sudanese have described to Knight Ridder horrific atrocities committed by the Janjaweed and Sudanese soldiers. A nearly identical picture was painted by the U.S. State Department report, which was based on interviews with 1,136 refugees in neighbouring Chad.
The report, released Thursday, said 67 percent of refugees reported witnessing aerial bombardment by Sudanese government aircraft; 61 per cent reported the killing of a family member; 16 per cent reported rape; and 33 per cent reported hearing racial epithets.
The Canadian government won't join the United States in calling recent atrocities in western Sudan acts of genocide. A spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew said Canada was reluctant to do the same because the government remains concerned about the definition of genocide and whether the events in Darfur meet it.
â Å“Genocide is defined in a fair1y narrow manner legally,â ? said Sebastien Theberge, Pettigrew's director of communications, reached in Paris on Thursday.
:bullet:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
News Release
Canadian Forces Personnel to Deploy to Sudan
NR-04.052 - July 23, 2004
OTTAWA â “ A new Canadian Forces operation, known as Operation SAFARI , began this month with the deployment of two CF personnel to Sudan. Major James Simiana, a Public Affairs Officer, and Warrant Officer Robert Moug, a Staff Officer, will support the United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMISUD) as members of the international advance party from the United Nations Stand-By High-Readiness Brigade (SHIRBRIG).
â Å“Canada is committed to the UN objective of bringing a lasting peace to southern Sudan,â ? said Chief of the Defence Staff General Ray Henault. â Å“Through their professionalism and efforts, CF personnel deploying on Op SAFARI will undoubtedly be an invaluable contribution to the advance party.â ?
Currently, Canada maintains a contribution of 10 CF members (three permanent and seven non-permanent) at SHIRBRIG headquarters. In December 2003, Brigadier-General Greg Mitchell of Canada took command of SHIRBRIG for a period of two years.
It is expected that following a UN Security Resolution and peace accord agreement, Canada may contribute a small number of troops in addition to the advanced party already deployed to Sudan. The advance party is being formed at the request of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan.
SHIRBRIG was established in 1996 as a non-standing multinational high-readiness brigade based on the UN Stand-by Arrangement System. On a case-by-case basis, member countries decide whether to participate in specific missions. Current full participants in SHIRBRIG include Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden. Chile, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Jordan and Senegal are observers
Canadian Forces Personnel to Deploy to Sudan
NR-04.052 - July 23, 2004
OTTAWA â “ A new Canadian Forces operation, known as Operation SAFARI , began this month with the deployment of two CF personnel to Sudan. Major James Simiana, a Public Affairs Officer, and Warrant Officer Robert Moug, a Staff Officer, will support the United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMISUD) as members of the international advance party from the United Nations Stand-By High-Readiness Brigade (SHIRBRIG).
â Å“Canada is committed to the UN objective of bringing a lasting peace to southern Sudan,â ? said Chief of the Defence Staff General Ray Henault. â Å“Through their professionalism and efforts, CF personnel deploying on Op SAFARI will undoubtedly be an invaluable contribution to the advance party.â ?
Currently, Canada maintains a contribution of 10 CF members (three permanent and seven non-permanent) at SHIRBRIG headquarters. In December 2003, Brigadier-General Greg Mitchell of Canada took command of SHIRBRIG for a period of two years.
It is expected that following a UN Security Resolution and peace accord agreement, Canada may contribute a small number of troops in addition to the advanced party already deployed to Sudan. The advance party is being formed at the request of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan.
SHIRBRIG was established in 1996 as a non-standing multinational high-readiness brigade based on the UN Stand-by Arrangement System. On a case-by-case basis, member countries decide whether to participate in specific missions. Current full participants in SHIRBRIG include Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden. Chile, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Jordan and Senegal are observers
Similar threads
