EDITORIAL: Rice’s stance on Darfur could be problematic

‘ ‘ ‘ President-elect Barack Obama announced yesterday his pick for ambassador to the United… ‘ ‘ ‘ President-elect Barack Obama announced yesterday his pick for ambassador to the United Nations, Susan E. Rice. ‘ ‘ ‘ A fervent advocate of taking ‘dramatic action,’ as she has said, against mass killings throughout the world, Rice will provide the future Obama administration with a foreign policy outlook quite different from Obama’s, who has placed much emphasis on diplomacy throughout the presidential campaign. ‘ ‘ ‘ Rice served on the National Security Council during the Clinton administration and was a key player in the U.S. response to the 1998 al-Qaida bombing of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. She also has had experience dealing with the aftermath of the Rwandan genocide in 1994. ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘I swore to myself that if I ever faced such a crisis again, I would come down on the side of dramatic action, going down in flames if that was required,’ said Rice in the The Atlantic Monthly in 2001. ‘ ‘ ‘ Last year, Rice testified before Congress in support of a U.S.-led military campaign or naval obstruction to compel the Sudanese government to end the genocide in the country’s Darfur region. ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ Rice’s experience in the field of foreign policy is laudable. Jerry Fowler, president of the Save Darfur Coalition, and Strobe Talbott, former deputy secretary of state and current president of the Brookings Institution, praised her appointment, according to The New York Times. ‘ ‘ ‘ These past eight years, the Bush administration has largely ignored the situation in Darfur. Obama’s decision to appoint Rice sends the clear message that this will change during his presidency and that the genocide will be a key concern to the Obama administration. ‘ ‘ ‘ This is a’ step in the right direction, as it will finally bring Darfur into the United States’ focus. However, we are concerned that Rice may take it too far. ‘ ‘ ‘ In the current climate, direct military action in Darfur could be problematic, not only for the United States, which is already militarily and financially invested in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also for the people of Darfur. ‘ ‘ ‘ Rice’s appointment will make Darfur a primary concern for the United States. ‘ ‘ ‘ But after years of neglect from the Bush administration, it is doubtful that the United States fully understands the situation in Sudan. For this reason, diplomatic efforts to end the genocide must precede any military action. ‘ ‘ ‘ The United States must make a concerted effort to encourage divestment from companies that support the Sudanese government. The United States must work diligently and consistently with African nations to end the genocide. Military action should be taken only if all diplomatic means have been exhausted. Otherwise, the situation in Darfur could become worse.