Julia Spiegel, Policy Analyst

Lord’s Resistance Army leader Joseph Kony’s failure to sign a peace deal in April drove a nail into the coffin of the Juba peace process—a process that is grinding to an unsuccessful end.^[1] The talks have certainly contributed to northern Uganda’s current state of relative peace and created a mechanism to address tensions between the people in the North and the southern-dominated government in Kampala.

Reading the headlines and watching the news about Sudan can certainly be discouraging. The litany of gloom and doom is well documented. The U.N.-authorized protection force for Darfur is being held up. ^[1] Peace talks for that region are having difficulty getting off the ground. The peace deal in Southern Sudan is in trouble.

President Bush’s announcement today that his administration will begin implementing a set of punitive measures -- its oft-threatened “Plan B” -- against the Sudanese Government could have marked a real turning point in U.S. policy to end what the president calls genocide. Unfortunately, it doesn't.

As part of its continuing effort to crush Darfur's rebellion by attacking civilian populations purported to be supportive of the rebels, the Sudanese regime has again stepped up its aerial bombing campaign, the most definitive tactical advantage the government possesses. Because the regime continues to bomb indiscriminately and because frustrations deepen around glacial forward movement in the peace process and in deploying the proposed A.U.-U.N. hybrid force, voices from across the political spectrum are clamoring for some kind of action. President George W.

Now that the United Nations Security Council has authorized a UN/AU hybrid peacekeeping force for Darfur, problem solved, right?